• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

虚假的友善、关心和象征性暴力。

Fake kindness, caring and symbolic violence.

机构信息

University of Victoria.

Université de Montréal.

出版信息

Nurs Ethics. 2024 Sep;31(6):1041-1049. doi: 10.1177/09697330231209290. Epub 2023 Oct 25.

DOI:10.1177/09697330231209290
PMID:37878059
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11437688/
Abstract

The article starts by offering a definition of fake kindness focused on the dissociation between the behavioural components of kindness and the intent to sincerely pay some heed to the needs of others. Using the sociological theory of Pierre Bourdieu, this definition is then used to articulate how fake kindness can be conceptualized as a specific form of symbolic violence. Such a view allows explanations as to how and why the prevalence and effectiveness of fake kindness vary according to microsociological norms and values. The generic definition and conceptualization of fake kindness as a form of symbolic violence are then used to discuss how nursing's enthrallment with the concept of caring and its operationalization as a moral compass likely fosters the growth of fake kindness within the profession. In this view, the institutional enforcement of propriety and well-behaved professionalism is more likely to lead to toxic environments than to healthy workplaces. We hope that being able to understand how professional norms and institutional rules are sometimes turned into social tools to enforce obedience and existing hierarchies can empower victims of those phenomena to resist them more effectively. It might also contribute to increasing the awareness of well-meaning nurses or people in position of authority who have been socialized in environments where fake kindness is normalized.

摘要

本文首先对虚假善意进行了定义,重点关注善意的行为成分与真诚关注他人需求的意图之间的脱节。然后,利用皮埃尔·布迪厄的社会学理论,将这一定义用于阐述虚假善意如何可以被概念化为一种特殊形式的象征性暴力。这种观点可以解释为什么以及为什么虚假善意的流行和有效性会根据微观社会学规范和价值观而有所不同。然后,使用虚假善意作为象征性暴力的一种形式的通用定义和概念化来讨论护理专业对关怀概念的迷恋及其作为道德指南针的实施方式如何可能在该专业中助长虚假善意的发展。在这种观点中,制度上对礼貌和行为端正的专业精神的执行更有可能导致有毒的环境,而不是健康的工作场所。我们希望能够理解专业规范和制度规则有时如何变成社会工具,以执行服从和现有的等级制度,这可以使这些现象的受害者更有效地抵制它们。它也可能有助于提高那些在虚假善意被视为正常的环境中被社会化的善意护士或处于权威地位的人的意识。

相似文献

1
Fake kindness, caring and symbolic violence.虚假的友善、关心和象征性暴力。
Nurs Ethics. 2024 Sep;31(6):1041-1049. doi: 10.1177/09697330231209290. Epub 2023 Oct 25.
2
Marginalization and symbolic violence in a world of differences: war and parallels to nursing practice.差异世界中的边缘化与象征性暴力:战争及与护理实践的相似之处
Nurs Philos. 2004 Apr;5(1):41-53. doi: 10.1111/j.1466-769X.2004.00165.x.
3
Caring for quality of care: symbolic violence and the bureaucracies of audit.关注医疗质量:象征性暴力与审计官僚机构
BMC Med Ethics. 2015 May 8;16:23. doi: 10.1186/s12910-015-0006-z.
4
Understanding the importance of kindness in nursing practice.理解友善在护理实践中的重要性。
Nurs Stand. 2023 Jan 4;38(1):27-34. doi: 10.7748/ns.2022.e12082. Epub 2022 Dec 22.
5
The effectiveness of mindfulness based programs in reducing stress experienced by nurses in adult hospital settings: a systematic review of quantitative evidence protocol.基于正念的项目在减轻成人医院环境中护士所经历压力方面的有效性:定量证据协议的系统评价
JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2015 Oct;13(10):21-9. doi: 10.11124/jbisrir-2015-2380.
6
The meaning of caring as described by nurses caring for a person who acts provokingly: an interview study.护士照顾行为挑衅者时所描述的关怀的意义:一项访谈研究。
Scand J Caring Sci. 2004 Mar;18(1):3-11. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-6712.2004.00256.x.
7
Nursing rituals: doing ethnography.护理仪式:进行人种志研究。
NLN Publ. 1993 Aug(19-2535):269-310.
8
Insights into Registered Nurses' professional values through the eyes of graduating students.从毕业学生的视角看注册护士的职业价值观。
Nurse Educ Pract. 2016 Mar;17:86-90. doi: 10.1016/j.nepr.2015.11.002. Epub 2015 Nov 23.
9
The art of stained glass: metaphor for the art of nursing.彩色玻璃艺术:护理艺术的隐喻。
Nurs Inq. 1995 Dec;2(4):221-3. doi: 10.1111/j.1440-1800.1995.tb00150.x.
10
A moral profession: Nurse educators' selected narratives of care and compassion.一种道德职业:护理教育工作者选择的关怀和同情叙事。
Nurs Ethics. 2019 Feb;26(1):105-115. doi: 10.1177/0969733016687163. Epub 2017 Jan 18.

引用本文的文献

1
Deconstructing Professionalism as Code for White (Power): Authenticity as Resistance in Nursing.解构专业主义即编码白人(权力):护理中的真实性即反抗。
Nurs Philos. 2025 Jan;26(1):e70002. doi: 10.1111/nup.70002.

本文引用的文献

1
Paying the Caring Tax: The Detrimental Influences of Gender Expectations on the Development of Nursing Education and Science.支付关爱税:性别期望对护理教育和科学发展的不利影响。
ANS Adv Nurs Sci. 2020 Jul/Sep;43(3):266-277. doi: 10.1097/ANS.0000000000000319.
2
Organisational antecedents, policy and horizontal violence among nurses: An integrative review.组织前因、政策与护士间的横向暴力:综合述评。
J Nurs Manag. 2018 Nov;26(8):972-991. doi: 10.1111/jonm.12623. Epub 2018 Aug 31.
3
Does the emphasis on caring within nursing contribute to nurses' silence about practice issues?护理中对关怀的强调是否导致护士对实践问题保持沉默?
Nurs Philos. 2017 Jul;18(3). doi: 10.1111/nup.12150. Epub 2016 Oct 3.
4
Cognition and the compassion deficit: the social psychology of helping behaviour in nursing.认知与同情缺失:护理中助人行为的社会心理学
Nurs Philos. 2014 Oct;15(4):274-87. doi: 10.1111/nup.12047. Epub 2014 Jan 22.
5
Is academic nursing being sabotaged by its own killer elite?学术护理是否正被其自身的“杀手精英”破坏?
J Adv Nurs. 2013 Jan;69(1):1-3. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2012.06108.x.
6
Bullying, harassment, and horizontal violence in the nursing workforce: the state of the science.护理工作队伍中的欺凌、骚扰和横向暴力:科学现状
Annu Rev Nurs Res. 2010;28:133-57. doi: 10.1891/0739-6686.28.133.
7
An end to angels.天使的终结。
Am J Nurs. 2005 May;105(5):62-9. doi: 10.1097/00000446-200505000-00031.
8
Whither nursing? Reflections on fate and futurity.护理何去何从?对命运与未来的思考。
Contemp Nurse. 2003;16(1-2):3-8.
9
Caring as a slave morality: Nietzschean themes in nursing ethics.作为奴隶道德的关怀:护理伦理中的尼采主题。
J Adv Nurs. 2002 Oct;40(1):25-35; discussion 42-4. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2648.2002.02337.x.