Exploring the Justificational Status of Assertions Made About Nursing’s Collective Beliefs

Nursing publications frequently reference groups (e.g. the group nurses). The nature and capabilities of group agents or collective subjects, and the relationship between nursing as a group and nurses as individuals is, however, rarely made explicit in these publications. Following Alvin Goldman, questions pertaining to groups can be classified as metaphysical or epistemic. Metaphysical questions take two forms. First, we might ask about the ontological status of group agents. For example, to what extent, if at all, do group agents exist and act independently of their constituent members? Second, we can ask whether group agents have psychological states or properties that can, for example, be formulated as propositional attitudes and, if they can, in what ways are group attitudes correlated with or tied to those of individual group members? In this presentation, having recognised the potential reality of group ontological and psychological being, I examine an under researched element of social epistemology. Specifically, the potential of non-individualist reliabilism (social process reliabilism) to justify doxastic group beliefs (i.e. statements such as “nurses believe that”) are considered. It is suggested that this issue has concrete implications for how we think about nursing.

Improving the Psychometric Utility of the Hypomania Checklist (HCL-32): a Rasch Analysis Approach

Background The HCL-32 is a widely-used screening questionnaire for hypomania. We aimed to use a Rasch analysis approach to (i) evaluate the measurement properties, principally unidimensionality, of the HCL-32, and (ii) generate a score table to allow researchers to convert raw HCL-32 scores into an interval-level measurement which will be more appropriate for statistical analyses. Methods Subjects were part of the Bipolar Disorder Research Network (BDRN) study with DSM-IV bipolar disorder (n=389). Multidimensionality was assessed using the Rasch fit statistics and principle components analysis of the residuals (PCA). Item invariance (differential item functioning, DIF) was tested for gender, bipolar diagnosis and current mental state. Item estimates and reliabilities were calculated. Results Three items (29, 30, 32) had unacceptable fit to the Rasch unidimensional model. Item 14 displayed significant DIF for gender and items 8 and 17 for current mental state. Item estimates confirmed that not all items measure hypomania equally. Limitations This sample was recruited as part of a large ongoing genetic epidemiology study of bipolar disorder and may not be fully representative of the broader clinical population of individuals with bipolar disorder. Conclusion The HCL-32 is unidimensional in practice, but measurements may be further strengthened by the removal of four items. Re-scored linear measurements may be more appropriate for clinical research.