A path analytic model of ethical conflict in practice and autonomy in a sample of nurse practitioners

Nursing Ethics

Volumn 12, Issue 3, 2005, Pages 305-316

  Ulrich, Connie M ^a,b   Soeken, Karen L ^c  

^a University of Pennsylvania ^*  (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND   (United States)

Author keywords

Context sensitive theoretical frameworks; Ethics research; Nurse practitioners; Path analysis

Indexed keywords

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ARTICLE; CLINICAL PRACTICE; CONFLICT; CONTINUING EDUCATION; FAMILY MEDICINE; HUMAN; HYPOTHESIS; MANAGED CARE; MAXIMUM LIKELIHOOD METHOD; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; MEDICAL ETHICS; MEDICAL PRACTICE; NURSE PRACTITIONER; ORGANIZATION; PEDIATRICS; PHILOSOPHY OF MEDICINE; PRIMARY MEDICAL CARE; THEORETICAL MODEL; UNITED STATES;

BIOETHICS AND PROFESSIONAL ETHICS; EMPIRICAL APPROACH; HEALTH CARE AND PUBLIC HEALTH;

ADULT; AGED; CONFLICT (PSYCHOLOGY); FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MANAGED CARE PROGRAMS; MARYLAND; MIDDLE AGED; MODELS, NURSING; NURSE PRACTITIONERS; NURSE'S ROLE; NURSING METHODOLOGY RESEARCH; ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE; PROFESSIONAL AUTONOMY; QUESTIONNAIRES; REGRESSION ANALYSIS;

EID: 17844374055     PISSN: 09697330     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1191/0969733005ne792oa     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Hamric AB. Relationships between moral perspectives of care and justice, selected individual and contextual factors, and nurse activism in a sample of practicing nurses [Dissertation]. Baltimore, MD: University of Maryland, 1996.
2. Ketefian S. Moral reasoning and ethical practice in nursing: measurement issues. Nurs Clin North Am 1989; 24: 509-21.
3. Killen AR. Morality in perioperative nurses: relationships among moral motivation, moral character, moral action, and nurse and patient outcomes [Dissertation]. Boston, MA: Boston College, 1998.
4. Penticuff JH. Conceptual issues in nursing research. J Med Philos 1991; 16: 235-38.
5. Ulrich C, Soeken K, Miller N. Ethical conflict associated with managed care: views of nurse practitioners. Nurs Res 2003; 52: 168-75.
6. Cassidy V. Ethical responsibilities in nursing: research findings and issues. J Prof Nurs 1991; 7: 112-18.
7. Lützén K. Nursing ethics into the next millennium: a context-sensitive approach for nursing ethics. Nurs Ethics 1997; 4: 218-26.
8. Aday LA, Begley CE, Lairson DR, Slater CH. Evaluating the healthcare system: effectiveness, efficiency, and equity, second edition. Chicago, IL: Health Administration Press, 1998.
9. Beauchamp TL, Childress JF. Principles of biomedical ethics, fourth edition. New York: Oxford University Press, 1994.
10. Buchanan A. Principal/agent theory and decision-making in healthcare. Bioethics 1988; 2: 317-33.
11. Cooper TL. The responsible administrator, fourth edition. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 1998: 169.
12. Pellegrino E. Managed care at the bedside: how do we look in the moral mirror? Kennedy Inst Ethics J 1997; 7: 321-30.
13. Ulrich C, Soeken K, Miller N. Predictors of autonomy in nurse practitioners: effects of organizational, ethical, and market characteristics. J Am Acad Nurs Pract 2003; 15: 319-27.
14. Asch DA, Jedrziewski K, Christakis NA. Response rates to mail surveys published in medical journals. J Clin Epidemiol 1997; 50: 1129-36.
15. Dillman DA. Mail and telephone surveys. New York: Wiley, 1978.
16. Dillman DA. Mail and internet surveys: the tailored design method, second edition. New York: Wiley, 2000.
17. Trinkoff A, Storr C. Collecting substance use data with an anonymous mailed survey. Drug Alcohol Depend 1997; 48: 1-8.
18. Ferrell OC, Skinner SJ. Ethical behavior and bureaucratic structure in marketing research organizations. J Marketing Res 1988; 25: 103-109.
19. Fraedrich JP. The ethical behavior of retail managers. J Bus Ethics 1993; 12: 207-18.
20. Dempster, JS. Autonomy in practice: conceptualization, construction, and psychometric evaluation of an empirical instrument [Dissertation]. San Diego, CA: University of San Diego California, 1990.
21. McDaniel C. Development and psychometric properties of the ethics environment questionnaire. Med Care 1998; 35: 901-14.
22. Forysth DR. A taxonomy of ethical ideologies. J Pers Soc Psychol 1980; 39: 175-84.
23. HMO county surveyor [Database]. Minneapolis, MN: Interstudy, 2000.
24. Joreskog KG, Sorbom D. Lisrel 8: structural equation modeling with the simplis command language. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1993.
25. Stevens J. Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences, third edition. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum Associates, 1996.
26. Jones TM. Ethical decision making by individuals in organizations: an issue-contingent model. Acad Manage Rev 1991; 16: 366-95.
27. Raines ML. Ethical decision making in nursing: relationships among moral reasoning, coping style, and ethics stress. J Nurs Adm Law Ethics Regul 2000; 2: 29-41.
28. Donelan K, Blendon RJ, Lundberg GD et al. The new medical marketplace: physician views. Health Aff 1997; 16: 139-48.
29. Freeman VG, Rathore SS, Weinfurt KP, Schulman KA, Sulmasy DP. Lying for patients: physician deception of third-party payers. Arch Intern Med 1999; 159: 2263-70.
30. Sulmasy D, Bloche G, Mitchell J, Hadley J. Physicians' ethical beliefs about cost-control arrangements. Arch Intern Med 2000; 160: 649-57.
31. Yarcheski A, Mahon NE. A causal model of positive health practices: the relationship between approach and replication. Nurs Res 1989; 28: 88-93.
32. Munro B. Statistical methods for health care research, third edition. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott, 1997.