One of the roles of qualitative enquiry is the utilization of qualitative methods for the development, refinement or modification of concepts. Yet, to date, there are no criteria for evaluating the adequacy of a concept. In this paper, the anatomy of a concept is presented, methods of concept analysis critiqued, and criteria for evaluation of the level of maturity of a concept suggested. Evaluation of criteria include assessment of: the definition of the concept, the characteristics of the concept, the conceptual preconditions and outcomes, and the conceptual boundaries. The authors argue that evaluation of a concept must necessarily precede concept development research (using a Wilsonian-derived method, a critical analysis of the literature, or qualitative enquiry) and precede more formal research procedures (such as operationalization or identification of the variables).

The analysis and resulting model offers an inclusive view of ethical sensitivity that addresses some of the limitations with prior conceptualizations.

No abstract

The newly developed interdisciplinary conceptualization advances the concept toward maturity, that is, a more refined, pragmatic and higher-order concept. The refined concept of trust transcends the contextual boundaries of each discipline in a truly interdisciplinary scientific fashion.

The strength of a discipline is reflected in the development of a set of concepts relevant to its practice domain. As an evolving professional discipline, nursing requires further development in this respect. Over the past two decades in North America there have emerged three different approaches to concept analysis in nursing scholarship: Wilsonian-derived, evolutionary, and pragmatic utility. The present paper compares and contrasts these three methods of concept in terms of purpose, procedures, philosophical underpinnings, limitations, guidance for researchers, and ability to contribute to nursing knowledge and disciplinary advancement. This work extends prior criticisms of concept analysis methods, especially as formulated by Morse and colleagues, by promoting further critical discussion regarding the direction and effectiveness of nursing efforts to meet the basic needs of disciplinary development. Its central thesis is that nursing concept analysis must advance beyond the Wilsonian-derived methods of Walker and Avant by devoting greater attention to understanding the domain of concepts to be analysed and deriving features from these contexts.