MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4306291769 · doi:10.17483/2368-6669.1328

Professional Identity Formation: A Concept Analysis

2022· article· en· W4306291769 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Kathryn Halverson, Deborah Tregunno, Ivana Vidjen

Bibliographic record

VenueQuality Advancement in Nursing Education - Avancées en formation infirmière · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicNursing education and management
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIdentity (music)PsychologyIdentity formationProcess (computing)Social psychologyEpistemologySelf-conceptComputer scienceAestheticsPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: Becoming and being a nurse is vaguely conceptualized, so it is important for nurses to understand the defining attributes, antecedents, consequences, model cases, and empirical referents of professional identity with the aim of better understanding the process of its formation. Method: Walker and Avant’s (2005) method is used to guide this concept analysis of professional identity. Findings: The analysis indicated that formation of professional identity in nursing consists of three main themes: individual characteristics, becoming a nurse, and professional identity. This article explores our understanding of the concept in relation to the current literature, and a research study conducted with new graduate nurses on their experiences of becoming and being nurses. Conclusions: An enhanced understanding of professional identity and its formation in the context of nursing practice could help to improve retention of new nurses, and address the academic-practice gap by informing how nursing education and practice settings can better prepare and support new graduates in becoming and being nurses. Implications: A model case, borderline case, and contrary case of professional identity are provided and supported by examples from new graduate nurses describing their experiences of becoming and being a nurse. Understanding professional identity can inform nursing education, policy, practice, and future research.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.641
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.003
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.410
Teacher spread0.382 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQuality Advancement in Nursing Education - Avancées en formation infirmièreSame topicNursing education and managementFrench-language works237,207