JAN FORUM
Response to two JAN Forum commentaries on A critique of concept analysis, P. Draper, (2014). Journal of Advanced Nursing, 70: 1207–1208. I am very pleased that my editorial A critique of concept analy-
included in publications that report the results of intervention
sis (Draper 2014) has attracted the attention of Professors
testing or instrument development’. Claims for impact without
Knafl and Deatrick (2014) and Professor Morse (2014). We
evidence to support them are no claims at all.
may hold a range of opinions and disagree over specific issues,
My editorial has prompted a debate, and I am grateful to
but the fact they have taken the trouble to comment in writing
distinguished colleagues for their critical response. I suggest
encourages me to believe that we have started a debate worth
that between us we have identified three key questions. How
pursuing.
can we expose nursing approaches to concept analysis to wider
One thing on which we all agree is that concepts are important.
interdisciplinary thinking and critique? How can we improve
In response to my observation that concept analysis seems to be
the rigour of our methods? And how can we demonstrate the
an exclusively nursing preoccupation, Professor Morse points out
impact of concept analysis on research and, most importantly
that for many years anthropologists used structured methods to
of all, on clinical practice? I hope that my editorial and the
think about concepts. As nurses, we are likely to be interested in a
responses it has prompted will lead to these questions being
different range of concepts from professional and academic col-
addressed more widely.
leagues in other disciplines, but it is important that our theories
Peter Draper RN PhD NTF PFHEA Senior Lecturer in Nursing
and methods of concept analysis are informed by the widest possible exposure to critical disciplines beyond nursing. Professor Morse clearly agrees with my concerns about the
Faculty of Health and Social Care, University of Hull, UK
rigour of concept analysis though she points out that I illus-
E-mail: [email protected]
trate my point by referring to a small sample of 10 publications. I agree that this sample is too small conclusively to prove my point – but I believe it is large enough show that the question needs asking: as a profession, are we confident that our methods of concept analysis are as transparent, robust, and defensible as are the methods of systematic literature review? Knafl and Deatrick (2014) take issue with my argument concerning evidence of impact on practice. In passing, I did not argue that there is no evidence of a potential impact on practice, simply that I had not been able to find it. I am still open to persuasion on this one – but not by the argument that, ‘since
References Draper P. (2014) A critique of concept analysis. Journal of Advanced Nursing 70(6), 1207–1208. Knafl K.A. & Deatrick J.A. (2014) Commentary on: Draper P. (2014) Editorial: a critique of concept analysis. Journal of Advanced Nursing 70, 1207–1208. Journal of Advanced Nursing 70(12), 2968. Morse J.M. (2014) The Baby and the Bathwater. Journal of Advanced Nursing 70(12), 2969.
conceptual work is often the starting point. . . it may not be
2970
© 2014 John Wiley & Sons Ltd
This document is a scanned copy of a printed document. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material.
Response to two JAN Forum commentaries on A critique of concept analysis, P. Draper, (2014). Journal of Advanced Nursing, 70: 1207–1208. I am very pleased that my editorial A critique of concept analy-
included in publications that report the results of intervention
sis (Draper 2014) has attracted the attention of Professors
testing or instrument development’. Claims for impact without
Knafl and Deatrick (2014) and Professor Morse (2014). We
evidence to support them are no claims at all.
may hold a range of opinions and disagree over specific issues,
My editorial has prompted a debate, and I am grateful to
but the fact they have taken the trouble to comment in writing
distinguished colleagues for their critical response. I suggest
encourages me to believe that we have started a debate worth
that between us we have identified three key questions. How
pursuing.
can we expose nursing approaches to concept analysis to wider
One thing on which we all agree is that concepts are important.
interdisciplinary thinking and critique? How can we improve
In response to my observation that concept analysis seems to be
the rigour of our methods? And how can we demonstrate the
an exclusively nursing preoccupation, Professor Morse points out
impact of concept analysis on research and, most importantly
that for many years anthropologists used structured methods to
of all, on clinical practice? I hope that my editorial and the
think about concepts. As nurses, we are likely to be interested in a
responses it has prompted will lead to these questions being
different range of concepts from professional and academic col-
addressed more widely.
leagues in other disciplines, but it is important that our theories
Peter Draper RN PhD NTF PFHEA Senior Lecturer in Nursing
and methods of concept analysis are informed by the widest possible exposure to critical disciplines beyond nursing. Professor Morse clearly agrees with my concerns about the
Faculty of Health and Social Care, University of Hull, UK
rigour of concept analysis though she points out that I illus-
E-mail: [email protected]
trate my point by referring to a small sample of 10 publications. I agree that this sample is too small conclusively to prove my point – but I believe it is large enough show that the question needs asking: as a profession, are we confident that our methods of concept analysis are as transparent, robust, and defensible as are the methods of systematic literature review? Knafl and Deatrick (2014) take issue with my argument concerning evidence of impact on practice. In passing, I did not argue that there is no evidence of a potential impact on practice, simply that I had not been able to find it. I am still open to persuasion on this one – but not by the argument that, ‘since
References Draper P. (2014) A critique of concept analysis. Journal of Advanced Nursing 70(6), 1207–1208. Knafl K.A. & Deatrick J.A. (2014) Commentary on: Draper P. (2014) Editorial: a critique of concept analysis. Journal of Advanced Nursing 70, 1207–1208. Journal of Advanced Nursing 70(12), 2968. Morse J.M. (2014) The Baby and the Bathwater. Journal of Advanced Nursing 70(12), 2969.
conceptual work is often the starting point. . . it may not be
2970
© 2014 John Wiley & Sons Ltd
This document is a scanned copy of a printed document. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material.
