A scoping review of emotions and related constructs in simulation-based education research articles.

IF 2.8 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Advances in simulation (London, England) Pub Date : 2023-09-16 DOI:10.1186/s41077-023-00258-z
Byunghoon Tony Ahn, Meagane Maurice-Ventouris, Elif Bilgic, Alison Yang, Clarissa Hin-Hei Lau, Hannah Peters, Kexin Li, Deuscies Chang-Ou, Jason M Harley
{"title":"A scoping review of emotions and related constructs in simulation-based education research articles.","authors":"Byunghoon Tony Ahn, Meagane Maurice-Ventouris, Elif Bilgic, Alison Yang, Clarissa Hin-Hei Lau, Hannah Peters, Kexin Li, Deuscies Chang-Ou, Jason M Harley","doi":"10.1186/s41077-023-00258-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>While acknowledgement of emotions' importance in simulation-based education is emerging, there are concerns regarding how education researchers understand the concept of emotions for them to deliberately incorporate emotionally charged scenarios into simulation-based education. This concern is highlighted especially in the context of medical education often lacking strong theoretical integration. To map out how current simulation-based education literature conceptualises emotion, we conducted a scoping review on how emotions and closely related constructs (e.g. stress, and emotional intelligence) are conceptualised in simulation-based education articles that feature medical students, residents, and fellows.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The scoping review was based on articles published in the last decade identified through database searches (EMBASE and Medline) and hand-searched articles. Data extraction included the constructs featured in the articles, their definitions, instruments used, and the types of emotions captured. Only empirical articles were included (e.g. no review or opinion articles). Data were charted via descriptive analyses.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 141 articles were reviewed. Stress was featured in 88 of the articles, while emotions and emotional intelligence were highlighted in 45 and 34 articles respectively. Conceptualisations of emotions lacked integration of theory. Measurements of emotions mostly relied on self-reports while stress was often measured via physiological and self-report measurements. Negative emotions such as anxiety were sometimes seen as interchangeable with the term stress. No inferences were made about specific emotions of participants from their emotional intelligence.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our scoping review illustrates that learners in simulation-based education are most often anxious and fearful. However, this is partially due to medical education prioritising measuring negative emotions. Further theoretical integration when examining emotions and stress may help broaden the scope towards other kinds of emotions and better conceptualisations of their impact. We call for simulation education researchers to reflect on how they understand emotions, and whether their understanding may neglect any specific aspect of affective experiences their simulation participants may have.</p>","PeriodicalId":72108,"journal":{"name":"Advances in simulation (London, England)","volume":"8 1","pages":"22"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10505334/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in simulation (London, England)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s41077-023-00258-z","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: While acknowledgement of emotions' importance in simulation-based education is emerging, there are concerns regarding how education researchers understand the concept of emotions for them to deliberately incorporate emotionally charged scenarios into simulation-based education. This concern is highlighted especially in the context of medical education often lacking strong theoretical integration. To map out how current simulation-based education literature conceptualises emotion, we conducted a scoping review on how emotions and closely related constructs (e.g. stress, and emotional intelligence) are conceptualised in simulation-based education articles that feature medical students, residents, and fellows.

Methods: The scoping review was based on articles published in the last decade identified through database searches (EMBASE and Medline) and hand-searched articles. Data extraction included the constructs featured in the articles, their definitions, instruments used, and the types of emotions captured. Only empirical articles were included (e.g. no review or opinion articles). Data were charted via descriptive analyses.

Results: A total of 141 articles were reviewed. Stress was featured in 88 of the articles, while emotions and emotional intelligence were highlighted in 45 and 34 articles respectively. Conceptualisations of emotions lacked integration of theory. Measurements of emotions mostly relied on self-reports while stress was often measured via physiological and self-report measurements. Negative emotions such as anxiety were sometimes seen as interchangeable with the term stress. No inferences were made about specific emotions of participants from their emotional intelligence.

Conclusions: Our scoping review illustrates that learners in simulation-based education are most often anxious and fearful. However, this is partially due to medical education prioritising measuring negative emotions. Further theoretical integration when examining emotions and stress may help broaden the scope towards other kinds of emotions and better conceptualisations of their impact. We call for simulation education researchers to reflect on how they understand emotions, and whether their understanding may neglect any specific aspect of affective experiences their simulation participants may have.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
基于模拟的教育研究文章中情绪及相关构念的范围检讨。
背景:虽然人们逐渐认识到情绪在模拟教育中的重要性,但教育研究人员如何理解情绪的概念,以便他们有意识地将充满情绪的场景纳入模拟教育中,这一点令人担忧。在医学教育往往缺乏强有力的理论整合的背景下,这一问题尤为突出。为了描绘当前基于模拟的教育文献是如何将情感概念化的,我们对以医学生、住院医生和研究员为特征的基于模拟的教育文章中如何将情感和密切相关的构念(例如压力和情商)概念化进行了范围审查。方法:范围综述是基于通过数据库检索(EMBASE和Medline)和手工检索文章确定的近十年发表的文章。数据提取包括文章中的结构、它们的定义、使用的工具和捕获的情绪类型。只包括实证文章(例如,没有评论或观点文章)。数据通过描述性分析绘制图表。结果:共纳入文献141篇。88篇文章强调了压力,而45篇和34篇文章分别强调了情绪和情商。对情绪的概念化缺乏理论的统一性。情绪的测量主要依赖于自我报告,而压力通常通过生理和自我报告测量来测量。焦虑等负面情绪有时被视为与压力一词可互换使用。没有从参与者的情绪智力来推断他们的特定情绪。结论:我们的范围回顾表明,基于模拟的教育中学习者最常感到焦虑和恐惧。然而,这部分是由于医学教育优先考虑衡量负面情绪。在研究情绪和压力时,进一步的理论整合可能有助于拓宽其他类型情绪的范围,并更好地概念化它们的影响。我们呼吁模拟教育研究人员反思他们是如何理解情绪的,以及他们的理解是否会忽视模拟参与者可能拥有的情感体验的任何特定方面。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊最新文献
Massive open online course: a new strategy for faculty development needs in healthcare simulation. Changing the conversation: impact of guidelines designed to optimize interprofessional facilitation of simulation-based team training. Speech recognition technology for assessing team debriefing communication and interaction patterns: An algorithmic toolkit for healthcare simulation educators. Effectiveness of hybrid simulation training on medical student performance in whole-task consultation of cardiac patients: The ASSIMILATE EXCELLENCE randomized waitlist-controlled trial. Using simulation scenarios and a debriefing structure to promote feedback skills among interprofessional team members in clinical practice.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1