慈善基金会的话语与护理的未来:第二部分:RWJF护理倡议未来的批判性话语分析。

IF 1.6 4区 医学 Q2 NURSING Advances in Nursing Science Pub Date : 2023-04-01 DOI:10.1097/ANS.0000000000000451
Shawn M Kneipp, Mary K Canales, Denise J Drevdahl
{"title":"慈善基金会的话语与护理的未来:第二部分:RWJF护理倡议未来的批判性话语分析。","authors":"Shawn M Kneipp,&nbsp;Mary K Canales,&nbsp;Denise J Drevdahl","doi":"10.1097/ANS.0000000000000451","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Critical social scholarship highlights the power philanthropic foundations wield on the collective agency of groups, yet analyses specific to nursing are absent in the literature. In this second of a 2-part series, we employed critical discourse analysis to examine how control of enunciative privilege in Robert Wood Johnson Foundation's (RWJF) 2010 and 2020-2030 Future of Nursing (FON) initiatives challenge nursing's ability to enact its collective agency, particularly through professional nursing organizations. Findings are discussed within the context of nursing's self-regulatory privileges, history, and agentic obligations that are bestowed on the discipline by the greater public for the public good.</p>","PeriodicalId":50857,"journal":{"name":"Advances in Nursing Science","volume":"46 2","pages":"169-187"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Philanthropic Foundations' Discourse and Nursing's Future: Part II: A Critical Discourse Analysis of RWJF Future of Nursing Initiatives.\",\"authors\":\"Shawn M Kneipp,&nbsp;Mary K Canales,&nbsp;Denise J Drevdahl\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/ANS.0000000000000451\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Critical social scholarship highlights the power philanthropic foundations wield on the collective agency of groups, yet analyses specific to nursing are absent in the literature. In this second of a 2-part series, we employed critical discourse analysis to examine how control of enunciative privilege in Robert Wood Johnson Foundation's (RWJF) 2010 and 2020-2030 Future of Nursing (FON) initiatives challenge nursing's ability to enact its collective agency, particularly through professional nursing organizations. Findings are discussed within the context of nursing's self-regulatory privileges, history, and agentic obligations that are bestowed on the discipline by the greater public for the public good.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50857,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Advances in Nursing Science\",\"volume\":\"46 2\",\"pages\":\"169-187\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Advances in Nursing Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/ANS.0000000000000451\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"NURSING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in Nursing Science","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/ANS.0000000000000451","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

批判性的社会学术强调了慈善基金会对群体集体代理的影响力,但文献中没有具体的护理分析。在2部分系列的第2部分中,我们采用批判性话语分析来研究罗伯特·伍德·约翰逊基金会(RWJF) 2010年和2020-2030年护理未来(FON)倡议中对发声特权的控制如何挑战护理制定其集体代理的能力,特别是通过专业护理组织。研究结果在护理的自我调节特权、历史和代理义务的背景下进行了讨论,这些义务是由更大的公众为了公共利益而赋予这一学科的。
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
Philanthropic Foundations' Discourse and Nursing's Future: Part II: A Critical Discourse Analysis of RWJF Future of Nursing Initiatives.

Critical social scholarship highlights the power philanthropic foundations wield on the collective agency of groups, yet analyses specific to nursing are absent in the literature. In this second of a 2-part series, we employed critical discourse analysis to examine how control of enunciative privilege in Robert Wood Johnson Foundation's (RWJF) 2010 and 2020-2030 Future of Nursing (FON) initiatives challenge nursing's ability to enact its collective agency, particularly through professional nursing organizations. Findings are discussed within the context of nursing's self-regulatory privileges, history, and agentic obligations that are bestowed on the discipline by the greater public for the public good.

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
2.80
自引率
6.20%
发文量
93
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Consistently ranked as one of the most-read and most assigned journals by faculties of graduate programs in nursing, Advances in Nursing Science (ANS) is intellectually challenging, innovative and progressive, and features articles from a wide range of scholarly traditions. The journal particularly encourages works that speak to the need for global sustainability and that take an intersectional approach, recognizing class, color, sexual and gender identity, and other dimensions of human experience related to health. Articles in ANS are peer-reviewed and chosen for their pioneering perspectives and for their significance in contributing the evolution of the discipline of nursing.
期刊最新文献
Exploring Research Trends on Digital Health in Nursing Science in Korea: A Topic Modeling Approach. Nursing Professional Identity: A Critical Review of the Concept Amidst COVID-19. Bibliometric Analysis (2000-2024) of Research on Artificial Intelligence in Nursing. Capturing Intersections of Discrimination: Quantitative Analysis of Nursing Students' Experiences. Empowering Nurses Through Data Literacy and Data Science Literacy: Insights From a State-of-the-Art Literature Review.
×
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