Premium
Incompatible skills and ideologies: the impediment of gender attributions on nursing research
Author(s) -
Hicks Carolyn
Publication year - 1999
Publication title -
journal of advanced nursing
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.948
H-Index - 155
eISSN - 1365-2648
pISSN - 0309-2402
DOI - 10.1046/j.1365-2648.1999.01057.x
Subject(s) - ideology , scrutiny , psychological intervention , psychology , attribution , relevance (law) , social psychology , empirical research , nursing research , nursing , medicine , epistemology , philosophy , politics , political science , law
Incompatible skills and ideologies: the impediment of gender attributions on nursing research The evidence‐based care culture requires that ritualistic treatment interventions are subjected to scientific scrutiny, with the ultimate intention that clinical practice should have empirical rather than historical justification. Despite initiatives to increase research output, there is evidence for a continued research/practice rift. One explanation for this that has relevance for the present paper is the perceived conflict between the skills and ideologies associated with clinical nursing and research. More specifically, it would seem that the characteristics demanded by high quality nursing are diametrically opposed to those required by research, such that research activities may be perceived to be inappropriate within the traditional nursing role. Formal gender‐role schemata may also contribute to the theory–practice gap, insofar as nursing embodies qualities that are essentially female‐associated, while research requires attributes associated with masculinity. These conceptualizations are derived from two studies based on central trait theory, which involved participants in making assumptions about a range of qualities of hypothetical candidates for a nursing post, who were described either as a good researcher or a good clinician. The hypothetical candidates in the first study were female, but in the second were male; in both cases the participant raters were female. It is, however, conceivable that rater‐gender impacts upon assumptions of personal and professional attributes of clinical and research nurses. In order to investigate this contention, the present paper manipulated the gender of the raters, whilst replicating the previous studies in every other way. Analysis of the data using a series of 3‐way ANOVAS suggested that there were some significant effects of rater and candidate gender, as well as of clinical/research descriptors, especially in terms of ascribed kindness, compassion, ambition and success. The results are discussed in relation to gender role stereotypes and nursing research.