Men in Nursing: A Qualitative Examination of Students’ Stereotypes of Male Nurses through the Framework of Social Role Theory and Stereotype Content Model
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
Driven by overwhelming numerical dominance of women in the role of nurses, nursing profession over the last two centuries has been largely scripted with gendered characterizations. However, nuances that shape the language and wording choices that are evoked when describing the stereotypes targeting male nurses remain relatively unexplored. Our current research examined the way 117 female non-nursing and nursing students in Canada characterized male nurses using open-ended self-report measures and thematic qualitative analyses. We contribute to the literature on nursing, gender, and stereotypes by analyzing the personal attitudes and stereotypes held by young female students toward male nurses. Social role theory and the stereotype content model provided the theoretical underpinnings to explore and explain emergent stereotypes and stereotype content. Our findings suggest that students generate more communal, high-warmth characteristics for male nurses than agentic characteristics, suggesting possible paternalistic prejudice toward men in nursing.
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 | 0.007 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 it