New patterns for epistemic engagement in nursing

An exploratory study into the policy and practices of non-knowledge
  • Karen Jense
  • Bjørg Christiansen
Part of the The Knowledge Economy and Education book series (KNOW, volume 6)

Abstract

This chapter examines knowledge work carried out by practising nurses with a focus on their efforts to develop, validate and secure knowledge. It takes as a point of departure that the logic of science comes forward in new ways and seeks to focus attention on the safeguarding of professional knowledge as a core responsibility.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Böschen, S.K., Kastenhofer, L., Marschall, I., Rust, J., Soentgen, & Wehling, P. (2006). Scientific cultures of non-knowledge in the controversy over genetically modified organisms (GMO). The cases of molecular biology and ecology. GAIA, 15, 294–301.Google Scholar
  2. Böschen, S.K., Kastenhofer, I., Rust, J., Soentgen, & Wehling, P. (2010). Scientific non-knowledge and its political dynamics. The cases of agrobiotechnology and mobile phoning. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 35, 783–811.Google Scholar
  3. Christiansen, B., Carlsten, T.C., & Jensen, K. (2009). Fagutviklingssykepleieren som brobygger mellom forskning og klinisk praksis. Sykepleien Forskning, 4(2).Google Scholar
  4. Dagens medisin. (2009). Sjokkert over fagprosedyrer [Shocked by clinical procedures]. Article in a professional journal reporting from a study of clinical procedures in Norwegian hospitals. Retrieved 01.07.2011 from http://www.dagensmedisin.no/nyheter/sjokkert-over-fagprosedyrer/.
  5. Dæhlen, M. & Seip, Å.M. (2009). Sykepleiernes kompetanse: Etter- og videreutdanning, verdsetting og motivasjon [Nurses’ competences: continuing education, further education, values and motivation]. (Report 36). Oslo: FaFo.Google Scholar
  6. Edwards, A. (2010). Being an expert professional practitioner: The relational turn in expertise. Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Eiring, O. Guideline epidemic? The proliferation of local clinical guidelines in Norway. Retrieved 10.10.112011 from http://www.kunnskapssenteret.no/Publikasjoner/Guideline+epidemic%3F+The+proliferation+of+local+clinical+guidelines+in+Norway.13548.cms.
  8. Featherstone, M. & Venn, C. (2006). Problematizing global knowledge and the new encyclopaedia project. Theory, Culture and Society, 23(2–3), 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Freeman, A.R., McWilliam, C.L., MacKinnon, J.R., DeLuca, S., & Rappoli, S.G. (2009). Health professionals’ enactment of their accountability obligations: Doing the best they can. Social Science & Medicine, 69(7), 1063–1071.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Frickel, S., et al. (2010). Undone science: Charting social movement and civil society challenges to dominant scientific practice. Science, Technology and Human Values, 35(4), 444–473.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gibbons, M. et al. (1994). The new production of knowledge. The dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  12. Gross, M. (2007). The unknown in process. Dynamic connections of ignorance, nonknowledge and related concepts. Current Sociology, 55(5), 742–759.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Guile, D. (2009). Conceptualizing the transition from education to work as vocational practice: Lessons from the UK’s creative and cultural sector. British Educational Research Journal, 35(3), 259–270.Google Scholar
  14. Harris M., Vanderboom, C., & Hughes, R. (2009). Nursing-sensitive safety and quality outcomes: The taming of a wicked problem? Applied Nursing Research, 22(2), 146–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Holeman, G., Aart, E., van Vliet, M., & Achtenberg. T., 2006. Promotion of evidence-based practice by professional nursing associations: literature review. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 53(6), 702–709.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Karseth, B. & Nerland, M. (2007). Building professionalism in a knowledge society: Examining discourses of knowledge in four professional associations. Journal of Education and Work, 20(4), 335–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kastenhofer, K. (2010). Risk assessment of emerging technologies and post normal science. The European Journal of Social Science Research Science, Technology, & Human Values 36(3), 307–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kempner, J., Merz, J.F., & Bosk, C.L. (2011), Forbidden knowledge: Public controversy and the production of nonknowledge. Sociological forum, 26, 475–500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Knorr Cetina, K. (1999). Epistemic cultures: How the sciences make knowledge. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Knorr Cetina, K. (2001). Objectual practice. In T. Schatzki, K. Knorr Cetina, & E. von Savigny (Eds.), The practice turn in contemporary theory (pp. 175–188). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  21. Knorr Cetina, K. & Preda, A. (2001). The epistemisation of economic transactions. Current Sociology, 49(4), 27–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Knorr Cetina, K. (2002). Transitions in post-social knowledge societies. In E. Ben Rafael & Y. Sternberg (Eds.), Identity, culture, and globalisation (pp. 611–628). Leiden: Brill Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  23. Knorr Cetina, K. (2006). Knowledge in a knowledge society: Five transitions. Knowledge, Work and Society, 4(3), 23–41.Google Scholar
  24. Knorr Cetina, K. (2007). Culture in global knowledge societies: Knowledge cultures and epistemic cultures. Interdisciplinary Science Reviews, 32(4), 361–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Laiho, A. (2010). Academisation of nursing education in the Nordic countries. Higher Education, 60, 641–656.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Merton, R. (1987). Three fragments from a sociologist’s notebook: Establishing the phenomenon, specified ignorance, and strategic research materials. Annual Review of Sociology, 13, 1–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Moen, A. & Nes, S. (2010). Consolidating work descriptions – Creating shared knowledge objects. In A. Moen, A.I. Mørch, & S. Paavola (Eds.), Collaborative knowledge creation: Practices, tools, and concepts. Retrieved 01.07.2011 from http://www.knowledgepractices.info/wiki/index.php?title=Chapter_15_-_Consolidating_Work_Descriptions_-_Creating_Shared_Knowledge_Objects
  28. Nerland, M. & Jensen, K. (2010). Objectual practice and learning in professional work. In S. Billett (Ed.), Learning thorough practice: models, traditions, orientations and approaches (pp. 82–103). London: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Nes, S. & Moen, A. (2010). Constructing standards: A study of nurses negotiating with multiple modes of knowledge, Journal of Workplace Learning, 22(6), 376–393.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Nieminen, P. (2008). Caught in the science trap? A case study of the relationship between nurses and ‘their’ science. In J. Välimaa & O.H. Ylijoki (Eds.). Cultural Perspectives on Higher Education. London: Springer.Google Scholar
  31. Nasjonalt nettverk for kunnskapsbaserte fagprosedyrer (August 2011). Norwegian Knowledge Centre for the Health Services (NOKC). Retrieved July 2011, from http://www.helsebiblioteket.no/microsite/Fagprosedyrer.
  32. Nowtny, H., Scott, P., & Gibbons, M. (2001). Re-thinking science: knowledge and the public in an age of uncertainty. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  33. Proctor, R.N. (1995). Cancer wars: How politics shapes what we know & don’t know about cancer. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  34. Purkis, M.E. & Bjornsdottir, K. (2006). Intelligent nursing: Accounting for knowledge as action in practice. Nursing Philosophy, 7, 247–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Rowley, E. & Waring, J. (2011). A socio-cultural perspective on patient safety. London: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  36. Sackett, D.L. (2000). Evidence-based medicine: How to practice and teach EBM. (2nd ed.). Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone.Google Scholar
  37. Savage, J. & Moore, L. (2004). An ethnographic study of practice nurses, accountability and multidisciplinary team decision-making in the context of clinical governance Retrieved from http://www.rcn.org.uk/_data/assets/pdf_file/0008/78605/002249.pdf.
  38. Smithson, M. (2008). Social theories of ignorance. In R.N. Proctor & L. Schiebinger (Eds.), Agnotology. The making and unmaking of ignorance (pp. 209–229). Stanford, CA: Stanford University PressGoogle Scholar
  39. Star, S.L. (1991). Power, technology and the phenomenology of conventions: On being allergic to onions. In J. Law (Ed.), A sociology of monsters: Essays on power technology, and domination (pp. 26–56). London: Routlegde.Google Scholar
  40. Stromme, H., Bjoro, K., Bredal, I.S., & Borgen, K. (2009). We couldn’t have done it without the librarians! Evidence-based practice at a large Norwegian University Hospital. Paper presented to The Tenth International Congress on Medical Librarianship, Brisbane, Australia, 31.08–04.09.2009. Retrieved from http://espace.library.uq.edu.au/view/UQ:179779.
  41. Van Achterberg, T., Holeman, G., van de Ven, M., Grypdonck, M., Eliëns, A., & van Vliet. M. (2006). Promoting evidence-based practice: the roles and activities of professional nurses’ associations. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 53(5), 605–612.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Vareide, P.K., Hofseth C., Norvoll, R., & Rome, K. (2001) Stykkevis og helt – Sykepleieres arbeidsoppgaver, kompetense og yrkesidentitet i sykehus. Oslo. SINTEF Rapport. STF78 AO13506.Google Scholar
  43. Vogel, A. & Kaghan, W.N. (2001). Bureaucrats, brokers, and the entrepreneurial university. Organizations, 8, 358–354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Weinstein, D. & Weinstein, M. (1978). The sociology of nonknowledge: A paradigm. In R.A. Jones (Ed.), Research in the sociology of knowledge, sciences and art, vol. 1 (pp. 151–166). New York: JAI Press.Google Scholar
  45. Wingender, N.B. (1995). Fem svaner i flok: sygeplejerskers samarbejde i Norden 1920–1995. SSN: Aarhuus Stiftstrykkerie.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Sense Publishers 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Karen Jense
    • 1
  • Bjørg Christiansen
  1. 1.University of OsloNorway

Personalised recommendations