Paley John
8 Farm Place, Henton, Chinnor, Oxon OX39 4AD, United Kingdom.
Nurse Educ Today. 2015 Mar;35(3):468-73. doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2014.08.014. Epub 2014 Sep 2.
Philip Darbyshire has apparently gained the impression that I used 'gee-whiz' social psychology to 'absolve poor or negligent practice from any hint of personal responsibility and accountability'. In this reply, I first discuss the fundamental attribution error, which Darbyshire trivialises as the 'fundamental arrogance error' and a piece of 'linguistic puffery'. Second I examine Darbyshire's rather naive view of causation. Third, I suggest that, on a more defensible view of causality, situations as causes do not absolve nurses from 'any hint' of personal responsibility, but they do set limits to responbility, even if Darbyshire finds this morally incovenient. Finally, I argue that the focus on individual accountability should give way to a public health model of containment and prevention. I conclude with some remarks on 'outsider disbelief'.
菲利普·达比希尔显然觉得我运用了哗众取宠的社会心理学来“免除不良或疏忽行为的任何个人责任与问责暗示”。在本回复中，我首先讨论基本归因错误，达比希尔将其轻视地称为“基本傲慢错误”以及一种“语言夸张”。其次，我审视达比希尔相当天真的因果观。第三，我认为，从更站得住脚的因果关系观点来看，情境作为原因并不能免除护士的任何个人责任暗示，但它们确实会对责任加以限制，即便达比希尔觉得这在道德上不便接受。最后，我主张对个人问责的关注应让位于一种遏制与预防的公共卫生模式。我以关于“局外人的怀疑”的一些评论作为结论。
