NURSING THEORY AND CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT OR ANALYSIS
Enhancing methodological clarity: principle-based concept analysis
Janice Penrod PhD RN
Assistant Professor, College of Health and Human Development; and Assistant Professor, College of Medicine, Pennsylvania
State University, Pennsylvania, USA
Judith E. Hupcey EdD CRNP
Assistant Professor, College of Health and Human Development; and Assistant Professor, College of Medicine, Pennsylvania
State University, Pennsylvania, USA
Accepted for publication 3 September 2004
Correspondence:
Janice Penrod,
College of Health and Human Development,
Pennsylvania State University,
203 HHDE University Park,
PA 16802,
USA.
E-mail: [email protected]
PENROD J. & HUPCEY J.E . (2005)PENROD J. & HUPCEY J.E . (2005) Journal of Advanced Nursing 50(4), 403–409
Enhancing methodological clarity: principle-based concept analysis
Aims. The aim of this paper is to operationalize the principle-based method of
concept analysis.
Background. While nursing has embraced the use of concept analysis as a valid and
significant entrée into an area of research, methodological development has created
strategies of inquiry that vary in purpose and in the nature of their findings.
Discussion. We propose that, as the primary utility of concept analysis is to
determine the existing state of the science so that further work may be strategically
and appropriately planned, the method described as principle-based concept ana-
lysis is superior in providing evidence to support subsequent inquiry into the concept
of interest.
Three problematic issues are discussed in an effort to clarify and procedurally
explicate the strategies employed in this approach: selecting disciplinary literatures
for inclusion in the analysis; conceptually-driven sampling issues; and within- and
across-discipline analytic techniques.
Conclusion. In this form of concept analysis, each principle contributes to an
understanding of the strengths and limitations of the present state of the concept in
the scientific literature. We believe that this perspective will enable nursing to begin
to harness the power of concept analysis for advancing science rather than simply
imagining what a concept could be or constructing what we believe it should be.
Keywords: concept analysis, principle-based concept analysis
Introduction
Nursing has traditionally valued processes of concept analysis
for the identification of concepts suitable for subsequent
research and as a means to determine the appropriate
methodologies for investigating the concept of interest. For
example, it is commonly asserted that concepts that are not
well defined or integrated in theoretical formulations are best
suited to qualitative studies, while clearly defined and
operationalized concepts are more amenable to quantitative
study (Morse & Field 1995). Although multiple methods of
concept analysis are available, all methods are not equal in
producing analytic results that serve researchers in processing
subsequent methodological decisions for research that
extends the science of nursing.
The purpose of this paper is to operationalize the principle-
based method for concept analysis using criteria put forward
by Morse and colleagues (Morse 1995, Hupcey et al. 1996,
Morse et al. 1996a, 1996b) to produce findings that are
useful in determining subsequent methods for advancing a
concept. In addition, problematic issues discovered through
use of this principle-based method in our own work,
� 2005 Blackwell Publishing Ltd 403
supervision of doctoral students, and peer review of manu-
scripts describing the application of this method are
addressed. We conclude that the evaluation of findings
derived through a thoughtful application of a principle-based
analysis provides insights into appropriate pathways for
advancement of a concept and, therefore, towards greater
utility in nursing science and practice.
Understanding concepts
We will present a brief summary to orient readers to our
understanding of concepts as empirically-based abstractions
of reality or truth. We believe that truth transcends the
contextual experience of human existence, and that the
collective exposition of that truth reveals our best estimate of
probable truth. Thus, probable truth (as revealed in the
scientific literature) is the foundation of concept analysis.
Concepts may be described as ordinary or everyday
(meaning a cognitive formation that results through natural
human processes that occur through being in the world with
others) or scientific (meaning abstractions that are developed
into more precise meaning units that, when linked together,
propositionally form a theoretical representation of empi-
rically-experienced reality). We assert that while the every-
day meaning of concepts may contribute to scientific
understanding, ordinary concepts (with implicit meaning)
are inadequate for scientific inquiry. In turn, analytic
techniques used in scientific endeavours must focus on
scientific concepts. Should the scientific concept not capture
the everyday notion of the concept (termed an inconsistency
or gap in understanding), further development of the
concept is indicated. This is done through scientific inquiry
into the empirical derivation of the concept, not carte
blanche acceptance and integration of contextual everyday
meaning.
Nursing science is concerned with complex human beha-
viour within a continually changing trajectory of health. The
concepts of interest to nursing are multifaceted, highly
integrated, and at times manifest differently at different
points along the health trajectory. Thus, a tapestry analogy
(developed with reference to Hemple 1966) aptly captures
our perspectives of the complexity of concept–theory linkages
in nursing science. In this analogy, theory is represented as a
tapestry of interwoven, knotted conceptual threads. This
analogy reinforces the importance of theoretical context in
processes of concept analysis. We assert that the power of
concept analysis is to identify the existing theoretical strands
that define a concept of interest and ultimately to tie and
re-tie the conceptual knots to form a stronger, more coherent
tapestry of theory. Theory (i.e. the tapestry) is strengthened
as the individual strands (i.e. concepts) are clarified and
developed.
Thus, as the state of a concept is first fully understood and
subsequently advanced, so is the science advanced (Penrod
1999, September). We propose that well-developed concepts
advance the discipline of nursing beyond the realm of purely
theoretical science. Clearly-developed, empirically-based con-
cepts are the basis of useful theory in nursing. Well-developed
theory has the potential to guide clinical practice to new
levels of human interaction that promote health and well-
being. We believe that such praxis theory (that is, theory that
produces thoughtful action) demands the primary attention
of nurse scholars.
Morse et al. (1996b) and colleagues have proposed the
term ‘maturity’ to label a concept’s level of development.
What can a label of the level of maturity tell us about the
state of the science surrounding a developing concept? Level
of maturity ranges on a continuum from immature to mature,
yet few descriptive labels are available to describe the
variations among these levels. In addition, assignment of an
evaluative label of maturity does little to inform scientists of
gaps or limitations in understanding. Rather than relying on a
label of maturity, we assert that careful evaluation of the state
of the science represents scholars’ best estimates of probable
truth surrounding the concept at that point in time. The
caveat to this statement is the evolutionary nature of science –
as science evolves, so does the evidence available to support
the criteria-based evaluation of a concept. Therefore, concept
analysis is not a static product.