4.7 Article

Identity change and the human dissection experience over the first year of medical training

期刊

SOCIAL SCIENCE & MEDICINE
卷 60, 期 7, 页码 1637-1647

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2004.08.035

关键词

medical education; professional identity; human dissection; repertory grids; gross anatomy; UK

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The aim of this study is to explore identity change in medical students over their first year of medical training, particularly in relation to their experience of human dissection. Each of our four participants completed two repertory grids at the end of term one and, again, towards the end of term three. One grid tapped their identity construction, and the other, their experience of human dissection. Our participants were optimistic about becoming similar to a doctor they admired and, towards the end of term three, began to develop a stable identity as a medical student. Their identity constructs involved three common themes: dedication, competence, and responsibility. However, the data also revealed negative reactions to the demands of training, such as feeling driven and stressed. Three major themes were apparent in their experience of human dissection: involvement, emotional coping, and ability. Our participants' dedication to their studies was reflected in their appreciation of the need to become involved actively in the process of dissection but some experienced an erosion of their self-confidence and perceived some of their colleagues to have lost much of their enthusiasm for learning. Emotional coping could be an additional challenge within this context and their reaction tended to reflect distancing processes previously identified in the literature. In all, we see a development of a vulnerable sense of professionalism alongside a frustration of losing out potentially on wider aspects of personal development due to the high work demands. (C) 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据