Critical theory: critical methodology to disciplinary foundations in nursing.
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Increasingly in the nursing literature, theorists have examined the use of critical theory in nursing (especially as understood by Habermas) and many have advocated it as a research approach to guide knowledge development in nursing. There has been limited analysis, however, of critical theory's broader foundational implications for the discipline of nursing. Part of the difficulty stems from a failure to differentiate between the implications of Habermas's earlier work on knowledge interests and his later theory of communicative action. In this paper, Habermas's critical theory is explored along two dimensions: as a metatheoretical account of a methodology of critical theory as a research tradition; and as a theory of communicative action whose dialogical and normative assumptions have profound implications for a postfoundationalist grounding of nursing as a discipline and professional practice. The authors argue that critical theory is necessary for nursing and may be sufficient as a paradigmatic philosophical base for the discipline.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it