Literature DB >> 11886220

Faking a difference: evidence-based nursing and the illusion of diversity.

Gary Rolfe1.   

Abstract

Whilst it is desirable for the dominant paradigm (discourse) in any discipline to be seen to be encouraging diversity, I will argue in this paper that the result of real diversity is to decentralize power and strengthen the challenges to that discourse. It is therefore in the interests of the dominant discourse (if it wishes to remain dominant) to act to neutralize the power of its competitors by forcing them to conform to the rules of the dominant discourse. In this way, the illusion of diversity is maintained, but its power for radical change is greatly diluted. In deconstructing some of the most influential 'texts' (in the broader sense of the term) of evidence-based nursing, I have attempted to show that the usual way of divesting competing discourses of their power is through an assimilation into the dominant discourse in the name of diversity. However, such assimilation is, in reality, more akin to an aggressive takeover bid which maintains the rules, values and culture of the dominant discourse. For example, when qualitative bids for research funding are judged according to the rules of quantitative research, that is, according to their generalizability, sample size, and so on, the outcome is inevitably to their disadvantage. Simply by agreeing to play, any competing discourse accepts the rules of the game that are designed to deny fair competition. The rhetoric of diversity therefore masks a strategy for maintaining power which can only be challenged by (Lyotard's notion of) the philosopher, who attempts to expose the inequality inherent in it. Copyright 2002 Harcourt Publishers Ltd.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 11886220     DOI: 10.1054/nedt.2001.0736

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Nurse Educ Today        ISSN: 0260-6917            Impact factor:   3.442


  3 in total

1.  Empirical research in bioethical journals. A quantitative analysis.

Authors:  P Borry; P Schotsmans; K Dierickx
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 2.903

2.  Comparability work and the management of difference in research synthesis studies.

Authors:  Margarete Sandelowski; Corrine I Voils; Julie Barroso
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  2006-10-09       Impact factor: 4.634

3.  Defining and Designing Mixed Research Synthesis Studies.

Authors:  Margarete Sandelowski; Corrine I Voils; Julie Barroso
Journal:  Res Sch       Date:  2006
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.