Moral Resilience in Nursing Education: Exploring Undergraduate Nursing Students Perceptions of Resilience in Relation to Ethical Ideology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Moral resilience has recently been proposed as one strategy to address moral distress in nurses and nursing students. Central to nursing students' capacity for moral resilience is how they understood and enact resilience with an element of realism, suggesting an ethical, ideological influence. Resilience is shown to differ significantly across students, and possibly because of a disconnect between a students' perceived resilience and their ethical ideology. Yet, resilience seldom has been explored in relation to ethical ideology. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to explore self-reported resilience in relation to ethical ideology in undergraduate nursing students, compare differences in scores, and explore relationships between study variables and selected demographic characteristics. METHODS: A descriptive cross-sectional research design was followed. An online encrypted survey was conducted among a convenient sample of nursing undergraduates who met the eligibility criteria and provided implied informed consent. This study complied with ethical principles outlined in the Canadian Tri-Council Policy Statement for research with human subjects. Ethical approval was secured from the University's Research Ethics Board. Data were analyzed using mean scores, standard deviations, independent sample t-test, variance analysis with post hoc-testing, and Pearson correlation to explore differences in perceptions and associations between study and selected demographic variables. RESULTS: Undergraduate students have a high level of self-reported resilience. Statistically significant differences in self-reported resilience across selected demographic variables were observed. The association between resilience and ethical ideology was not significant. Ethical relativism was significantly correlated with age and year of study. CONCLUSION: Findings suggest that faculty cultivating resilience in nursing students pays attention to gender's influence discourses in students' perceptions of resilience and ethical ideology and provides students with opportunities for ethical self-reflection and dialogue to critically examine their ethical ideological perspectives and the influence these may have on moral resilience development. Implications for future research are discussed.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
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 | 0.006 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".