"我从来没想过要烧毁任何桥梁":在受训人员的职业抵制行为中辨别用力过猛和用力不足。

IF 3 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Advances in Health Sciences Education Pub Date : 2024-02-13 DOI:10.1007/s10459-024-10312-8
Tasha R. Wyatt, Vinayak Jain, TingLan Ma
{"title":"\"我从来没想过要烧毁任何桥梁\":在受训人员的职业抵制行为中辨别用力过猛和用力不足。","authors":"Tasha R. Wyatt,&nbsp;Vinayak Jain,&nbsp;TingLan Ma","doi":"10.1007/s10459-024-10312-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>As trainees resist social harm and injustice in medicine, they must navigate the tension between pushing too hard and risking their reputation, or not enough and risking no change at all. We explore the discernment process by examining what trainees attend to moments before and while they are resisting to understand how they manage this tension. We interviewed 18 medical trainees who shared stories of resisting social harm and injustice in their training environments. Interviews were analyzed using open and focused coding using Vinthagen and Johansson’s work, which conceptualizes resistance as a dynamic process that includes an individual’s <i>subjectivity</i> within a larger system, the <i>context</i> in which they find themselves, and the <i>interactions</i> they have with others. We framed these acts as an individuals’ attempt to undermine power, while also being entangled with that power and needing it for their efforts. When deciding on how and whether to resist, trainees underwent a cost-benefit analysis weighing the potential risk against their chances at change. They considered how their acts may influence their relationship with others, whether resisting would damage personal and programmatic reputations, and the embodied and social cues of other stakeholders involved. Trainees undergo a dynamic assessment process in which they analyze large amounts of information to keep themselves safe from potential retaliation. It is by attending to these various factors in their environment that trainees are able to keep their acts <i>professional</i>, and continue to do this challenging work in medical education. </p></div>","PeriodicalId":50959,"journal":{"name":"Advances in Health Sciences Education","volume":"29 4","pages":"1379 - 1392"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11369053/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"“I never wanted to burn any bridges”: discerning between pushing too hard and not enough in trainees’ acts of professional resistance\",\"authors\":\"Tasha R. Wyatt,&nbsp;Vinayak Jain,&nbsp;TingLan Ma\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10459-024-10312-8\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>As trainees resist social harm and injustice in medicine, they must navigate the tension between pushing too hard and risking their reputation, or not enough and risking no change at all. We explore the discernment process by examining what trainees attend to moments before and while they are resisting to understand how they manage this tension. We interviewed 18 medical trainees who shared stories of resisting social harm and injustice in their training environments. Interviews were analyzed using open and focused coding using Vinthagen and Johansson’s work, which conceptualizes resistance as a dynamic process that includes an individual’s <i>subjectivity</i> within a larger system, the <i>context</i> in which they find themselves, and the <i>interactions</i> they have with others. We framed these acts as an individuals’ attempt to undermine power, while also being entangled with that power and needing it for their efforts. When deciding on how and whether to resist, trainees underwent a cost-benefit analysis weighing the potential risk against their chances at change. They considered how their acts may influence their relationship with others, whether resisting would damage personal and programmatic reputations, and the embodied and social cues of other stakeholders involved. Trainees undergo a dynamic assessment process in which they analyze large amounts of information to keep themselves safe from potential retaliation. It is by attending to these various factors in their environment that trainees are able to keep their acts <i>professional</i>, and continue to do this challenging work in medical education. </p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50959,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Advances in Health Sciences Education\",\"volume\":\"29 4\",\"pages\":\"1379 - 1392\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11369053/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Advances in Health Sciences Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10459-024-10312-8\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in Health Sciences Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10459-024-10312-8","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

当学员抵制医学中的社会危害和不公正时,他们必须在用力过猛而危及自身声誉,或用力不足而导致根本无法改变之间游刃有余。我们通过研究受训者在抵制之前和抵制过程中的所思所想,来了解他们是如何处理这种紧张关系的。我们采访了 18 名医学学员,他们分享了在培训环境中抵制社会伤害和不公正的故事。访谈采用开放式编码和重点编码的方法进行分析,并采用了 Vinthagen 和 Johansson 的研究成果,该研究成果将抵制概念化为一个动态过程,其中包括个人在更大系统中的主体性、他们所处的环境以及他们与他人的互动。我们将这些行为定义为个人试图破坏权力,同时又与权力纠缠在一起,需要权力来支持他们的努力。在决定如何抵制以及是否抵制时,受训者会进行成本效益分析,权衡潜在风险和改变机会。他们会考虑自己的行为会如何影响自己与他人的关系,抵制是否会损害个人和项目的声誉,以及其他利益相关者的体现和社会暗示。受训人员在动态评估过程中分析大量信息,以确保自己免受潜在报复。正是通过关注环境中的这些不同因素,学员们才能够保持其行为的专业性,并继续从事这项具有挑战性的医学教育工作。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
“I never wanted to burn any bridges”: discerning between pushing too hard and not enough in trainees’ acts of professional resistance

As trainees resist social harm and injustice in medicine, they must navigate the tension between pushing too hard and risking their reputation, or not enough and risking no change at all. We explore the discernment process by examining what trainees attend to moments before and while they are resisting to understand how they manage this tension. We interviewed 18 medical trainees who shared stories of resisting social harm and injustice in their training environments. Interviews were analyzed using open and focused coding using Vinthagen and Johansson’s work, which conceptualizes resistance as a dynamic process that includes an individual’s subjectivity within a larger system, the context in which they find themselves, and the interactions they have with others. We framed these acts as an individuals’ attempt to undermine power, while also being entangled with that power and needing it for their efforts. When deciding on how and whether to resist, trainees underwent a cost-benefit analysis weighing the potential risk against their chances at change. They considered how their acts may influence their relationship with others, whether resisting would damage personal and programmatic reputations, and the embodied and social cues of other stakeholders involved. Trainees undergo a dynamic assessment process in which they analyze large amounts of information to keep themselves safe from potential retaliation. It is by attending to these various factors in their environment that trainees are able to keep their acts professional, and continue to do this challenging work in medical education.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.90
自引率
12.50%
发文量
86
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Advances in Health Sciences Education is a forum for scholarly and state-of-the art research into all aspects of health sciences education. It will publish empirical studies as well as discussions of theoretical issues and practical implications. The primary focus of the Journal is linking theory to practice, thus priority will be given to papers that have a sound theoretical basis and strong methodology.
期刊最新文献
The interpretation-use argument- the essential ingredient for high quality assessment design and validation. Correction: Self-directed learning and the student learning experience in undergraduate clinical science programs: a scoping review. Social support and academic procrastination in health professions students: the serial mediating effect of intrinsic learning motivation and academic self-efficacy. To define or not to define: a commentary on 'The case for metacognitive reflection'. Team science in interdisciplinary health professions education research: a multi-institutional case study.
×
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