Commitment to the nursing profession: an exploration of factors which may explain its variability
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The purpose of the study was to determine factors which may explain variability in the degree of commitment to their profession among nurses in British Columbia. A common theme in the literature on commitment to nursing is that it is a powerful force which shapes a nurse's career. As such, it is the responsibility of the nursing profession to understand the nature of commitment. This in part can be accomplished by having knowledge about factors which explain variability in the commitment of nurses to their profession. Review of the literature revealed the factors to be personal and work-related. Based on the work of Alluto and Hrebiniak, a five-part questionnaire was pilot tested, then mailed to a stratified random sample of four hundred nurses living in the Greater Vancouver District. Of this number 256 (64%) were returned. The total number of usable questionnaires following, a process of elimination was 217 (54.2%). Data analysis took place in three stages. The principal findings were as follows. First, an analysis of the sub-tests revealed them to be internally consistent with the exception of the Professional Actions sub-test. The reliability estimates of the five sub-tests ranged from r = .93 to r = .52. Second, analysis of the demographic data revealed a sample closely resembling the population of interest. Third, a stepwise multiple regression analysis produced an R² of 23%. Four variables entered the regression equation. Of these, three were personal variables: professional orientation, marital status and basic education. The fourth, a work-related variable, was work satisfaction. Thus, it was found that certain personal and work-related variables did explain variability in commitment, accounting for 23% of the total , variability. This, however, leaves a large portion of the variability unexplained. Of the 77% remaining, 7% is due to random error (as indicated by the reliability estimate of the Commitment Index r = .93). In view of the findings in the present study and similar findings in the studies by Alluto and Hrebiniak, other untested variables which may explain variability in commitment need to be researched. In addition to new variables, a change in methodology using path analysis instead of the linear model is also recommended.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».