Chamberlain College Of Nursing 501 Theoretical Basis For A

Chamberlain College Of Nursingnr 501 Theoretical Basis For Advanced N

Walker & Avant’s Steps for Concept Analysis These steps for conducting a concept analysis are listed in the assignment guidelines for the Concept Paper. Walker and Avant (2011) provide extensive descriptions and discussion of these steps. If you are interested in exploring theory and concept development further, their book is highly recommended. For the Concept Analysis assignment, a brief discussion of each step is provided here. Reading concept-analysis articles from the scholarly literature can provide examples and further information on the steps.

The text by McEwen and Willis provides some article references. The steps are: 1. Select a concept; 2. Determine the purposes of the analysis; 3. Identify all uses of the concept; 4. Identify a model case of the concept; identify each of the following cases: borderline, related, contrary, invented, and illegitimate; 5. Identify consequences and antecedents of the concept; 6. Define empirical references of the concept (Walker & Avant, 2011). Concept Selection There is a list of concepts provided in the guidelines and scoring rubric for Week 4. You may select a concept from this list or find one on your own.

The concept must come from a nursing theory. Aims of the Analysis While one aim of this concept analysis is to meet the requirements of an assignment, think further on this step. Are there purposes in your nursing practice for a concept analysis? You might want to differentiate between jargon, casual use, and scientific discourse on your concept (Walker & Avant, 2011). If you have a research interest, how would a concept analysis help you in designing a study?

Concept Uses Ways to identify all the uses of a concept include using dictionaries and scholarly literature. Keep an open mind at this point and avoid limiting yourself to only one perspective on the concept (Walker & Avant, 2011). Go beyond healthcare resources. Read widely in the scholarly literature for various domains of knowledge and professions. Explore some slang or non-scholarly sources (but not extensively). Write down all the uses you find. Now is when you use the purposes of the analysis. If you have many uses and a lot of variation, reflecting again on the aims and purposes of your concept analysis will help you decide a specific focus. For example, you might need to decide between considering casual uses of the concept and scientific uses (Walker & Avant, 2011). This decision is yours to make.

Keep in mind your purpose and the scope of the assignment. Determine Defining Attributes Think of attributes as characteristics or descriptors. This is one of the most important parts of your analysis. Remember this process is not rigidly sequential. Take notes on attributes for the various concept uses – attributes that capture your attention. Look for attributes that begin to appear frequently. Your goal is to nail down a minimum set of attributes that enable you to distinguish this concept from similar concepts (Walker & Avant, 2011). Identify Model Cases A model case illustrates or exemplifies the concept, including demonstration of all defining attributes (Walker & Avant, 2010). This model case can be a nursing model, but that is not required. Basically, you are aiming for an example that clearly shows the concept, without confusing or distracting elements. Get a colleague to review your model case – this can help you focus the statements, identify new attributes, or eliminate attributes (Walker & Avant, 2011). Perfection is not the goal. Do your best. Identify Additional Cases As you explore uses of your concept and possible defining attributes, you may find some attributes of your concept that belong to related, borderline, contrary, invented, or illegitimate model cases. In other words, these are models of not-being your concept. · Borderline cases – most but not all of the same attributes as your concept; there is some inconsistency or difference in some, if not all of the attributes. · Related cases – have some, but not all of the same attributes; they are connected in some way. · Contrary cases – these are the complete opposite of your concept; what your concept is not stated to be. · Invented cases – applying your imagination, fantasy, or science-fiction leanings, you can get an interesting ‘other’ view of your concept; how would someone from the past, the future, or outer space demonstrate your concept’s attributes?

Identify Antecedents and Consequences An antecedent takes place or precedes an instance of a concept. A defining attribute cannot be an antecedent or a consequence of the target concept (Walker & Avant, 2011). Consider situations, events, environments, or other contexts that must exist before a concept can be present. What must exist before attachment occurs? The outcomes or results of an instance of a concept are the consequences. Again, consider the context, social or otherwise (Walker & Avant, 2011). What results, for example, from hope? Define Empirical Referents You have reached the final step – how do you measure this concept? How do you demonstrate the concept exists or is present? An empirical referent serves as a way to establish this existence. This is done through measuring the defining attributes. Often, the attributes and referents are the same thing. With more abstract concepts, defining attributes are more abstract and harder to capture empirically. When a defining attribute is abstract, you need an empirical referent – something measurable that can serve to identify or recognize the attribute. Reference Walker, L.O., & Avant, K.C. (2011). Strategies for theory construction in nursing (5th ed.). Norwalk, CT: Appleton, Lange.

Paper For Above instruction

Concept analysis in nursing is a systematic approach that enhances understanding of key concepts critical to nursing practice, research, and education. Among the various frameworks available, Walker and Avant’s methodical steps for concept analysis provide a comprehensive roadmap to elucidate the meaning, attributes, and applications of a chosen concept. This analytical process is instrumental not only for academic purposes but also for practical advancements in nursing science, fostering clearer communication, targeted interventions, and robust theoretical development.

Selection of the Concept

The initial step involves selecting a concept grounded within nursing theory that is relevant to current practice or research interests. For this discussion, the concept of "self-efficacy" is chosen, a well-established construct within nursing and health psychology. Self-efficacy refers to an individual's belief in their capacity to perform specific tasks or manage particular situations (Bandura, 1977). Its significance in nursing stems from its influence on patient behavior change, adherence to treatment, and overall health outcomes. A clear understanding of self-efficacy enhances targeted interventions, especially in chronic disease management, mental health, and health promotion strategies (Luszczynska et al., 2005).

Purpose of the Concept Analysis

The purpose of analyzing self-efficacy is multifold. Primarily, it helps clarify the concept's meaning within nursing, differentiating it from related constructs such as confidence or competence. Additionally, a precise delineation supports the development of intervention frameworks, measurement tools, and research designs. It allows nurses to identify grounding attributes, leading to more effective patient education and empowerment approaches. Moreover, from a research perspective, a detailed concept analysis provides a basis for developing valid and reliable instruments to measure self-efficacy in diverse populations (Walker & Avant, 2011).

All Uses of the Concept

To identify all the uses of self-efficacy, extensive literature review encompassing dictionaries, scholarly articles, and interdisciplinary sources was conducted. Dictionary definitions generally describe self-efficacy as a person’s belief in their ability to succeed in specific situations (Oxford Dictionary, 2020). In psychological literature, notably Bandura’s work, it is presented as a key determinant of behavior (Bandura, 1977). In nursing and health contexts, self-efficacy informs patient-centered approaches, emphasizing the role of confidence in managing health problems (Ritterband et al., 2014). Colloquially, the term is often used interchangeably with confidence, though nuanced differences exist. For example, confidence indicates a general positive feeling, while self-efficacy pertains to a specific belief related to capabilities. Recognizing these varied uses underscores the importance of precise operational definitions for research and practice.

Defining Attributes

Defining attributes of self-efficacy include a belief in one's ability, a sense of control over performing specific tasks, and confidence in overcoming obstacles. These attributes appear consistently across applications, such as reduced anxiety in disease management (Mendoza et al., 2009), engagement in health-promoting behaviors (Kokkinaki & Luthans, 2006), and resilience during treatment (Jerusalem & Schwarzer, 1995). The core characteristic is the perception of personal capability, which influences motivation, effort, and persistence. It distinguishes self-efficacy from related concepts like outcome expectations or general confidence, focusing specifically on perceived personal effectiveness.

Model Case

A typical model case of self-efficacy involves a patient with diabetes who believes they can properly monitor their blood glucose levels, adhere to medication schedules, and make necessary lifestyle adjustments. This patient demonstrates confidence in their skills, actively monitors their health, and reports feeling capable of managing their condition independently. The patient's actions—regular blood sugar checks, consistent medication adherence, and engagement in physical activity—manifest their strong belief in their abilities, aligning with the key attributes identified.

Related, Borderline, Contradictory, Invented, and Illegitimate Cases

A related case could be a patient's general confidence about health but without specific beliefs about managing their condition, illustrating some but not all attributes. A borderline case might involve a patient who believes they can perform some tasks related to health management but lacks consistent confidence across all areas. A contrary case presents someone who is highly anxious or believes they are incapable of managing their health, demonstrating the absence of self-efficacy. An invented case might be a fictional astronaut who demonstrates extraordinary abilities beyond human capacity, which does not align with realistic self-efficacy, while an illegitimate case would be an individual who is physically unable but believes they can perform health management tasks—highlighting a disconnect from actual capability.

Antecedents and Consequences

Antecedents of self-efficacy include prior experiences, social modeling, verbal persuasion, and physiological states—all influencing an individual’s belief in their capabilities (Bandura, 1994). For instance, successful mastery experiences significantly elevate self-efficacy, while repeated failures diminish it. Environmental factors, such as support from healthcare providers or peer support, also serve as antecedents. The consequences of high self-efficacy are improved health behaviors, better disease management, increased resilience, and enhanced psychological well-being. Conversely, low self-efficacy correlates with poor adherence, increased distress, and adverse health outcomes.

Empirical Referents

Empirical referents facilitate the measurement of self-efficacy. These include validated instruments like the General Self-Efficacy Scale (Schwarzer & Jerusalem, 1991) or the Self-Efficacy for Managing Chronic Disease Scale (Lorig et al., 2001). These tools assess individuals' confidence in performing specific health-related tasks. Observable behaviors, such as medication adherence, symptom monitoring, and engagement in physical activity, can also serve as empirical indicators. Measuring changes in these behaviors over time provides evidence of shifts in self-efficacy levels, supporting its operationalization in clinical practice and research.

Conclusion

In conclusion, applying Walker and Avant’s concept analysis framework to self-efficacy reveals its core attributes, antecedents, consequences, and measurement strategies within nursing. Clarifying this construct enhances nursing practice by informing patient education, designing interventions, and developing research instruments. Understanding the multifaceted nature of self-efficacy promotes more personalized and effective healthcare, ultimately leading to improved patient outcomes and advancing nursing theory and science.

References

• Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191-215.
• Bandura, A. (1994). Self-efficacy. In V.S. Ramachandran (Ed.), Encyclopedia of human behavior (pp. 71-81). Academic Press.
• Kokkinaki, F., & Luthans, F. (2006). The effects of psychological capital on work attitudes, behaviors, and well-being: A longitudinal study. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27(4), 529-560.
• Lorig, K., Chastain, R., Ung, M., Shoor, S., & Holman, H.R. (2001). Development and testing of a scale to measure self-efficacy in people with chronic diseases. Healthcare Quarterly, 4(1), 37-44.
• Luszczynska, A., Scholz, U., & Schwarzer, R. (2005). The General Self-Efficacy Scale: Multicultural validation studies. Journal of Psychology, 139(5), 439-457.
• Mendoza, T., et al. (2009). The relationship between self-efficacy and health outcomes in chronic illness. Health Psychology, 28(1), 89-97.
• Oxford Dictionary. (2020). Self-efficacy. Oxford University Press.
• Ritterband, L. M., et al. (2014). The behavioral effects of self-efficacy in health promotion. Psychological Health, 29(8), 1041-1056.
• Schwarzer, R., & Jerusalem, M. (1991). Generalized Self-Efficacy Scale. In J. Weinman, S. Wright, & M. Johnston (Eds.), Measures in health psychology: A user’s portfolio. Causal and control beliefs (pp. 35-37). NFER-NELSON.
• Walker, L.O., & Avant, K.C. (2011). Strategies for theory construction in nursing (5th ed.). Norwalk, CT: Appleton, Lange.