Negotiating dyadic identity between caregivers and care receivers
Negotiating dyadic identity between caregivers and care receivers
复制标题
DOI：
10.1111/j.1547-5069.2003.00021.x
复制
发表时间：
2003-01-01
影响因子：
3.4
通讯作者：
Theis, SL
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Coeling, HV;Biordi, DL;Theis, SL
目的：描述的方式，照顾者（CG）和他们的护理接收者（CR）谈判的二元规则，影响弓的护理经验“适合”他们的生活，并建议理论的基础上data.Design：这个定性研究的一部分，一个更大的，NIH资助的研究60护理二人组和他们使用的喘息护理在美国中西部地区。这项分析的样本包括60个非正式的CG和CR在他们的家庭环境。方法：在社区护理人员和社区康复者的家中进行访谈，其中一名研究者对社区护理人员的护理经历进行访谈，另一名研究者对社区康复者进行访谈。定性内容分析被用来分析data.Findings：CG和CR二元身份发展的理论，制定在这项研究中，表明，一个相互同意的照顾二元身份时，双方谈判的一套规则，他们的行为在一起的browving和照顾接收关系。未能就这些二元规则达成一致可能会导致护理过程中的紧张。根据对双重身份的沉浸程度，确定了双重关系的三种原型：（a）双方完全和相互接受的将身份沉浸到护理过程中;（B）保留个人身份，同时接受护理或接受角色;（c）一方或双方拒绝角色。谈判是重要的，在这些二元护理关系，因此，需要注意协助CG和CR发展谈判技巧。需要更多的研究来证实和扩展这一理论的CG和CR二元身份的发展，并探讨谈判过程和结果之间的联系。
Purpose: To describe the ways in which caregivers (CGs) and their care receivers (CRs) negotiate the dyadic rules that influence bow the care experience "fits into" their lives and to suggest theory based on the data.Design: This qualitative study was part of a larger, NIH-funded study of 60 care dyads and their use of respite care in the Midwestern United States. The sample for this analysis included 60 informal CGs and CRs in their home settings. Data collection for the larger study began in 1994 and continued through 1998.Methods: CGs and CRs were interviewed in their homes with one researcher interviewing the CG regarding the care experience while another researcher interviewed the CR. Qualitative content analysis was used to analyze the data.Findings: The theory of CG and CR dyadic identity development, formulated in this study, indicates that a mutually agreed-upon care dyadic identity is developed when both parties negotiate a set of rules about their conduct together in the caregiving and care receiving relationship. Failure to agree on these dyadic rules may result in strain in the care process. Three archetypes of dyadic relationships were identified, based on the degree of immersion into a dyadic identity: (a) complete and mutually accepted immersion of an identity into the care process by both parties, (b) retention of personal identities while also accepting the caregiving or care-receiving roles, and (c) rejection of the roles by one or both parties.Conclusions: Negotiation was important in these dyadic care relationships, and thus attention to assisting CGs and CRs to develop negotiation skills is needed. More research is needed to substantiate and expand this theory of CG and CR dyadic identity development, and to examine linkages between negotiated processes and outcomes.