Cultural models of healing and health: An ethnography of professional nurses and healers

Cultural models of the domains healing and health are important in how people understand health and their behavior regarding it. The biomedicine model has been predominant in Western society. Recent popularity of holistic health and alternative healing modalities contrasts with the biomedical model and the assumptions upon which that model has been practiced. The holistic health movement characterizes an effort by health care providers and others such as nurses to expand the biomedical model and has often incorporated alternative modalities. This research described and compared the cultural models of healing of professional nurses and alternative healers. A group of nursing faculty who promote a holistic model were compared to a group of healers using healing touch. Ethnographic methods of participant observation, free listing and pile sort were used. Theoretical sampling in the free listings reached saturation at 18 in the group of nurses and 21 in the group of healers. Categories consistent for both groups emerged from the data. These were: physical, mental, attitude, relationships, spiritual, self management, and health seeking including biomedical and alternative resources. The healers had little differentiation between the concepts health and healing. The nurses, however, had more elements in self management for health and in health seeking for healing. This reflects the nurse's role in facilitating the shift in locus of responsibility between health and healing. The healers provided more specific information regarding alternative resources. The healer's conceptualization of health was embedded in a spiritual belief system and contrasted dramatically with that of biomedicine. The healer's models also contrasted with holistic health in the areas of holism, locus of responsibility, and dealing with uncertainty. The similarity between the groups and their dissimilarity to biomedicine suggest a larger cultural shift in beliefs regarding health care. ^

An examination of the cross-cultural reliability and construct validity of a measure of loneliness

Loneliness is a pervasive, rather common experience in American culture, particularly notable among adolescents. However, the phenomenon is not well documented in the cross-cultural psychiatric literature. For psychiatric epidemiology to encompass a wide array of psychopathologic phenomena, it is important to develop useful measures to characterize and classify both non-clinical and clinical dysfunction in diverse subgroups and cultures.^ The goal of this research was to examine the cross-cultural reliability and construct validity of a scale designed to measure loneliness. The Roberts Loneliness Scale (RLS-8) was administered to 4,060 adolescents ages 10-19 years enrolled in high schools along either side of the Texas-Tamaulipas border region between the U.S. and Mexico. Data collected in 1988 from a study focusing on substance use and psychological distress among adolescents in these regions were used to examine the operating characteristics of the RLS-8. A sample stratified by nationality and language, age, gender, and grade was used for analysis.^ Results indicated that in general the RLS-8 has moderate reliability in the U.S. sample, but not in the Mexican sample. Validity analyses demonstrated that there was evidence for convergent validity of the RLS-8 in the U.S. sample, but none in the Mexican sample. Discriminant validity of the measures in neither sample could be established. Based on the factor structure of the RLS-8, two subscales were created and analyzed for construct validity. Evidence for convergent validity was established for both subscales in both national samples. However, the discriminant validity of the measure remains unsubstantiated in both national samples. Also, the dimensionality of the scale is unresolved.^ One primary goal for future cross-cultural research would be to develop and test better defined culture-specific models of loneliness within the two cultures. From such scientific endeavor, measures of loneliness can be developed or reconstructed to classify the phenomenon in the same manner across cultures. Since estimates of prevalence and incidence are contingent upon reliable and valid screening or diagnostic measures, this objective would serve as an important foundation for future psychiatric epidemiologic inquiry into loneliness. ^