Identifying Nursing Concepts: Are We Similar?

Abstract

PURPOSE. The purpose of this article was to define and describe the fundamental aspects of similarity with application to the use of nursing terminologies.

DATA SOURCES. Data were obtained from Google, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), PsychINFO, and PubMed using the keywords “similarity views,”“similarity,”“concepts and categorization,” and other published sources.

DATA SYNTHESIS. Three prominent similarity views were compared, contrasted, and applied to the use of nursing diagnoses.

CONCLUSIONS. Each view has intentions (requirements) that guide the categorization of information to concepts and influence naming of nursing concepts.

IMPLICATIONS. By understanding similarity, nurse educators and technology designers can influence how nursing concepts are represented.

Keywords

Diagnostic accuracy nursing terminology similarity

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Alliance for Nursing Informatics . (2009). Alliance for nursing informatics statement to the national committee for vital and health statistics (NCVHS) hearings on “meaningful use” of health information technology. Retrieved July 1, 2009, from http://www.himss.org/content/files/NCVHS_ANIMeaningfulUse050409.pdf

American Association of School Librarians Association for Educational Communications and Technology . (1998). Information literacy standards for student learning: Standards and indicators. Retrieved June 15, 2009, from http://www.ala.org/ala/mgrps/divs/aasl/guidelinesandstandards/informationpower/InformationLiteracyStandards_final.pdf

American Nurses Association . (2006). ANA recognized terminologies and data element sets. Retrieved April 3, 2009, from http://nursingworld.org/npii/terminologies.htm

Benner

(1984). From novice to expert: Excellence and power in clinical nursing practice. Menlo Park, CA: Addison-Wesley.

Benner

Tanner

Chesla

(1996). Expertise in nursing practice. Caring, clinical judgment, and ethics. New York: Springer Publishing Company.

Bourne

D. L.

Dominowski

R. L.

Loftus

E. F.

(1979). Cognitive processes. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Bruner

J. S.

Goodnow

Austin

(1956). A study of thinking. New York: Wiley.

Bulechek

Butcher

Dochterman

(2008). Nursing interventions classification (NIC). St. Louis, MO: Mosby Elsevier.

Chi

Feltovich

Glaser

(1981). Categorization and representation of physics problems by experts and novices. Cognitive Science, 5, 121–152.

10.

Clark

Brennan

(1991). Grounding in communication. In Resnick

Levine

Teasley

(Eds.), Perspectives on socially shared cognition (pp.127–149). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

11.

Falan

(2007). Similarity discernment in general and nursing representations. Dissertation Abstracts International, 68(2), 1–233. (UMI No. 3253265).

12.

Glendon

Ulrich

(2005). Using games as a teaching strategy. Journal of Nursing Education, 44, 338–339.

13.

Howard

Collins

DiCarlo

(2002). “Survivor” torches “who wants to be a physician?” in the educational games ratings war. Advances in Physiology Education, 26, 30–36.

14.

Institute of Medicine . (2000). To err is human: Building a safer health system. Retrieved March 3, 2009, from http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?isbn=0309068371

15.

Johansen

Palmeri

(2002). Are there representational shifts during category learning? Cognitive Psychology, 45(4), 482–553.

16.

Lunney

(2008). Critical need to address accuracy of nurses' diagnoses. Online Journal of Issues in Nursing, 13(1). Retrieved February 18, 2010, from http://www.nursingworld.org/MainMenuCategories/ANAMarketplace/ANAPeriodicals/OJIN/TableofContents/vol132008/No1Jan08/ArticlePreviousTopic/AccuracyofNursesDiagnoses.aspx

17.

Lunney

(2009). Critical thinking to achieve positive health outcomes: Nursing case studies and analyses. Ames, IA: Wiley-Blackwell.

18.

Mangram

Horan

Pearson

Silver

Jarvis

(1999). Guideline for prevention of surgical site infection. Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology, 20(4), 247–278.

19.

Medin

Schaffer

(1978). Context theory of classification learning. Psychological Review, 85(3), 207–238.

20.

Moorhead

Johnson

Maas

Swanson

(2008). Nursing outcomes classification (NOC). St. Louis, MO: Mosby Elsevier.

21.

Mulder

Swaak

Kessels

(2002). Assessing group learning and shared understanding in technology-mediated interaction. Educational Technology & Society, 5(1), 35–47.

22.

NANDA-I . (2009). NANDA-I nursing diagnoses: Definitions and classifications 2009–2011. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.

23.

National Research Council . (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience and school. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

24.

Nosofsky

(1986). Attention, similarity, and identification–categorization relationship. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 115(1), 39–57.

25.

Ogershok

Cottrell

(2004). The pediatric board game. Medical Teacher, 26, 514–517.

26.

Shafto

(2003). Development of categorization and reasoning in the natural world: Novices to experts, naive similarity to ecological knowledge. Retrieved February 23, 2005, from http://louisville.edu/psychology/shafto/files/shaftoc03_fish.pdf

27.

Smith

E. E.

Medin

(1981). Categories and concepts. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

28.

The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language . (2000). Similarity. The American Heritage Dictionary of the English language (4th ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company. Retrieved July 22, 2009, from http://education.yahoo.com/reference/dictionary/entry/similarity

29.

The Conference Board, Inc . (2006). Are they really ready to work? Employers' perspective on the basic knowledge and applied skill of new entrants to the 21st century U.S. workforce. Retrieved January 15, 2010, from http://www.21stcenturyskills.org/documents/FINAL_REPORT_PDF09-29-06.pdf

30.

Thurstone

(1927). A law of comparative judgment. Psychological Review, 34, 273–286.

31.

Tversky

(1977). Features of similarity. Psychological Review, 84, 327–352.