chapter 1 THE STRUCTURE OF ConTEMPoRARY NURSING KNOWLEDGE ‘The contents of this book represent a celebration of nursing as a distinct discipline, and ths chapter leys the groundwork for the remainder of the book. Here, a structural holarchy of contemporary nursing knowledge is, identfied and described. Each component of the structure—metaparadigm, philosophies, conceptual models, theories, and empirical indicators—is defined and its functions are delineated. in adcition, the distinctions among the components are discussed, with spacial emphasis placed on the differences between conceptual models and theories and the need to view and use those two knowledge components in different ways, Overview and Key Terms The structural olerchy aiferentiates the various componenis of contemporary nursng krowledye foczrcing to ther lave: of aoet ‘Wilber holarchy i usesto denote comnone within themselves but also part of ele er whos. In this case, the lager whole 's cont nursing knowledge. Thus, each component cf contemporary nursing knowledge is @ coma aso isa par of a larger whole, The components of the holarchy of contemporary nursing knoweage a here. Each cormponert is fined ana desened in detal in tis chapter. STRUCTURAL Hi jon Word View focal Interaction Word Vi jlaneous Acton Workl View of Nursing Knowedge rand Theory Midsie-Range Theory4 part ove Sraucrune avo Use oF Nunsiwa Knowtense @ STRUCTURAL HOLARCHY OF CONTEMPORARY NURSING KNOWLEDGE ‘An analysis of the terminology used to describe contem- porary nursing knowledge led to the identification of five components—metaparadigm. philosophies, conceptual ‘modils, theories, and empirical indicators (Faweott, 19934: King & Fawcett, 1997a). These components constitute the unique disciplinary knowledge of nursing, the knowledge that separates nursing from other disciplines (Parse, 2001), ‘The STRUCTURAL HOLARCHY OF CONTEMPO- RARY NURSING KNOWLEDGE is a heuristic device that places the five components of contemporary nursing knowiedge into a holarchy based on level of abstra Similar structures have long been proposed by scholars in other disciplines, including Feigl (1970), Gibbs (1972), and Margenau (1972), The holarchy is depicted in Figure 1-1 ‘With the exception of empirical indicators, the compo- nents of the structural holarchy are made up af concepts and propositions. Empirical indicators measure concepts A CONCEPT is a word or phrase that summarizes a phe- nonomen, such as an idea, an observation, or an experi- ence. Each concepts is a tool that provides a mental image that facilitates communication about and understanding ofthephenomenon. A concept is not a real thing but rather isa way to articulate a more or less abstract phenomenon, A PROPOSITION is a statement about a concept or a statement of the relation hetween tivo or more concepts. A nonrelational proposition isa description or definition of a concept. A nonrelational proposition that states the meaning of a concept 's called a constitutive definition. COMPONENTS LEVEL OF ABSTRACTION Most Abstnct | Most Conorete: FIGURE 1-1. The structural holarchy of contemporary rursing knowledge: components and levels of abstraction, ‘A nonrelational proposition that states how a concept is observed or measured is called an operational definition A relational proposition asserts the relation, or linkage, between two or more concepts, METAPARADIGM ‘The first component of the structural holarchy of con temporary nursing knowledge is the METAPARADIGM (see Fig. 1-1). A metaparadigm is defined asthe global con- cepts that identify the pheniomena of central interest to a discipline, the global propositions that describe the con cepts, and the global propositions that state the relations be- tween the concepts This definition of a metaparadigm indicates that concepts alone are not sufficient to identify the subject matter ofa discipline or to delineate the bound ary for the subject matter of interest to a discipline (Kim, 2010), Rather, both concepts and propositions about those concepts are required to specify the subject matter. The metaparadigm is the most abstract component ofthe structural holarchy of contemporary nursing knowledge and acts as “an encapsulating unit, or framework, within which the mote restricted... structures develop” (Eckberg & Hill, 1979, p.927), The concepts and propositions of a metapara- digm are extremely global and provide no definitive direc- tion for such activities as practice and research. That is tobe expected because the metaparadigm “isthe broadest consen- sus within a discipline. It provides the general parameters of the field and gives scientists a broad orientation from which to work" (Hardy, 1978, p, 38) In other words, a metapara dligm focuses on the general or global subject matter of in terest toa particular discipline (Kim, 2010) “The idea for a component of knowledge called the meta paradigm arose in discussion of the multiple meanings Kuhn (1962) had given to the term paradigm. Masterman (1970) pointed out that one meaning reflected a metaphys- ical rather than scientific notion or entity and labeled that ‘meanings the metaparadigm. Functions of a Metaparadigm “The functions of a metaparadigm are to summarize the in tellectual and social missions of a discipline and place a ‘boundary on the phenomena of interest to the members of a discipline (Kim, 1989, 2010), Articulation of the meta paradigm brings unity to adiscipline. In particular specifi cation of the concepts and propositions that represent the subject matter of a discipline permits the members of that discipline to communicate to members of other disciplines and to the general public what is of special interest to that discipline, In other words, the members of the discipline can say, “This is who we are and what our work is all about.” Similarly, specification of the metaparadigm con- cepts and propositions facilitates communication of what the discipline is not about. Thus, members ofthe discipline also can say, “This is what we are not about” In addition,the boundary imposed by the metaparadigm concepts sad propositions helps the members of the discipline to, cdentify the focus of their knowledge development activities and to have confidence that what they are doing is consis. nt with the subject matter of the discipline. Members of ne discipline then can say, “This is why I am doing what Fam doing. These functions of a metaparadigm are reflected in cer ‘sin requirements for a metaparadigm (Fawcett, 1992, 96). The four requirements, which pertain to the meta. adigm of any discipline, are listed in Box 1-1 The requirements indicate that the metaparadigm of any siscipline must be highly abstract and general; concise and see of redundant terms; not aligned with a particular dis- inary frame ofreference; and free of particular national, sltural, or ethnic group orientations. Conflicting opinions ave been voiced about the third requirement, which calls # perspective neutrality, That means that the metapara- gm should not embrace a particular philosophic stance or fceptual model within a discipline that encompasses di «se philosophies and conceptual models. The comments ‘Thorne and colleagues (199) reflect support forthe third rement. These authors stated, “We believe that our “oncepts ought to be characterized by paradigmatic ality” (p, 1265). In contrast, Cody (1996) and Malinski 896) maintained that the third requirement is neither ap: opriate nor possible. Cody (1996) asserted that the re- ement is “an impossibility recognized throughout st-positivist philosophy of science and the human science spectives of hermeneutics and critical theory” (p. 98) alinski (1996) pointed out that the metaparadigm of srsing, at least the proposal put forth by Fawcett (1596), ® reflective of the dominant view in nursing,” which alinskt (1996) labeled as the totality paradigm (p. 101). é Sa SOP RRNA Hae en Box 1-1 REQUIREMENTS FOR A METAPARADIGM. he metaparadigm must identify a damatn that is distinctive nthe domains of ather discipline. The requirement is “uliled only when the concepts and propositions represent 4 unique perspective fr inguiry and practice ne metaparadigm must encompass a phenomena of ter «tothe disiptine na parsimonious manner, This requite- scaits fulfled ony ifthe concepts and propositions are Sobal and ifthere are no redundancies ih concepts or postions, 3 metaparadigm must be perspetive-neutril. This require tis failed onl ifthe concepts and prapstions do not representa specific perspective, that is, specific paradigm or . 76), Alligood (2010) explained that philosophies “ex- press the meaning of nursing and nursing phenomena ugh reasoning and logical presentation of ideas” (p. 51). atticular, philosophies of nursing encompass ontological and epistemic claims about the phenomena of interest tothe discipline of nursing an ethical clams sboat nursing ions, nursing practices, and the character of individuals ~ choose to practice nursing (Salsberry, 1994), Ontolog- ai claims address “the totality of assumptions about the sre of the world or the portion of reality in question, ats] thenature of being” (Young, Taylor, & McLaugh: -Renpenning, 2001. p. 9). The ontological claims in ‘ophies of nursing state what is believed about the are of human beings, the environment, health, and nurs pistemic claims address “knowledge itself what is it, at ts properties are, and why it has these properties «se claims focus on] answers about the properties of math and falsity, the nature of evidence, and the certainty st evidence produces in scientific knowledge” (Young 2001, p10). Bpistemic claims in philosophies of aurs ovide "some information on how one may come to ™ about the world [and] about how the basic phenom- san be known” (Salsberry, 1994, p13), Epistemic claims using extend the ontological claims by directing how ‘edge about human beings, the environment, health, nursing is developed Oniological claims and epistemic claims in philosophies nursing reflect one or more of three contrasting world “os: the Reaction World View, the Reciprocal Interac- en World View, and the Simultaneous Action World lew (Fawcett, 1093b). These three world views emerged Som an analysis offive other sets of world views: mechanism, # organicism (Ackofi, 1974; Reese & Overton, 1570); ange and persistence (Hall, 1981, 1983; Thomae, 1979; sills & Stryker, 1988); totality and simultaneity (Parse, *S7)sparticulate-deterministic,interactive-integrative,and sarJ-transformative (Newman, 1992), and heuristic complementarity (Rawnsley, 2003), The different world * lead to different conceptualizations of the metapara- em concep, different statements about the nature of the ‘ions between those metaparadigm concepts (Altman & #1987), and different ways to generate and test knowl- Sze about the concepts and their connections. ‘The features of the Reaction World View, which con- elements of the mechanistic, persistence, totality, Particulate-deterministic world views, has the features ad here: wmans are bio-psycho-social-spiritual beings. The etaphor isthe compartmentalized human being, who is wed as the sum of discrete biological, psychological, so- gical, and spiritual parts “onan beings react to external environmental stimuli in smear, causal manner. Human beings are regarded as ‘Tre Structure oF Contemporary Nunsinc Knowteoce 9 inherently at rest, responding in a reactive manner to ex- ternal environmental stimuli, Rehavior is considered a lin- ear chain of causes and effects, or stimuli and reactions. + Change occurs only for survival and as a consequence of predictable and controllable antecedent conditions. Change occurs only when human beings must modify behaviors to survive. Consequently, stability is valued. ‘Threats to stability are, however, predictable and contral- hhble if enough is known about the stimali thet would force a change. + Only objective phenomena that can be isolated, observed, defined, and measured are studied. Knowledge is devel- oped only about objective, quantifiable phenomena that can be isolated and obsesved, defined in a concrete man- rer, and measured by objective instrumens, ‘The Reciprocal Interaction World View, which isa syn- thesis of elements from the organismic, simultaneity, total: ity, change, persistence, and interactive-integrative world views, has the features listed here: + Human beings are holistic parts are viewed only in the con- text of the whole, The metaphor is the holistic, interacting human being, who is viewed as an integrated, organized entity not reducible to discrete parts. Although parts are acknowledged, they have meaning only within the context of the whole human being. + Human beings are active, and interactions between human beings and their environments are reciprocal. Human be- ings are regarded as inherently and spontaneously active. Human beings and the environment interact in a recipro- cal, that is, a shared or matual, manner. + Change s a function of multiple antecedent factors, is prob- abilistic, and may be continuous or may be only for sur- vival, Changes in behavior occur throughout life as the result of multiple factors within the individual and within the environment. At times, changes are continuous, At other times, persistence or stability reigns, and change ‘occurs onty to foster survival. The probability of change at any given time can only be estimated. + Reality is multidimensional, context-dependent, and rela- tive, Both objective and subjective phenomena are studied through quantitative and qualitative methods of inq emphasis is placed on empirical observations, method ological controls, and inferential data analytic techniqu Knowledge development focuses on both abjective phe- omens and subjective experiences and is accomplished by means of both quantitative and qualitative methodolo- gies. Multiple dimensionsof experience are taken into ac- count, the context of the human being-environment interaction is considered, and the product of knowledge development efforts is regarded as relative to historical time and place, Emphasis always is placed on empirical observations within methodologically controlied situs- tions, and quantitative data typically are analyzed objec tively by means of descriptive and inferential statistics410 part one Structure ano Use oF Nursine KwowLence The Simultaneous Action World View, which combines ements the organismic,simultaneity, change, and unitary transformative world views, has the features listed here: + Unitary human beings are identified by pattern. The metaphor is the unitary human being, whois regarded as, a holistic, seli-organized field, The human being is more than and different from the sum of parts and is recognized through patterns of behavior + Human beings are in mutual rhythmical intere their environments. The human being environment in terchange is a mutual, rhythmical process + Human beings change continucusly, unpredictably the direction of more compl ton, Changesin patterns of behavior occur continuously, unidirectionally and unpredictably as the human being evolves, Although the patterns are sometimes organized and sometimes di organized, change ultimately isin the direction of increas- ing organization of behavioral pattern + The phenomena of interest are personal knowledge anc pat- tern recognition, Knowledge development emphasizes per- sonal becoming through recognition of patterns. Therelore, the phenomena ofinterest are the inner experiences, fel- ings, values, thoughts, and choices of human beings. ange with Newman (2002) regarded the diverse world views notas separate realms of knowledge or as competitive bodies of Knowledge but rather as ever inclusive Newinan (2002) ex plained, "Just as relativity theory includes mechanistic the Ory as special cases, the unitary perspective includes the more particulate view” (p.3). H Newman's (2002) position is accepted, the simultaneous action world view would be the most inclusive, the reciprocal interaction world view would be a special case of the simultaneous action world view, and the reaction world view would be a special case ofthe reciprocal interaction world view ‘Ontological claims in philosophies of nursing also reflect ‘one or more broad Categories of Knowledge found in od junctive disciplines and in nursing, Categories of knowledge from adjunctive disciplines are developmental, systems, and interaction (Johnson, 1974 Reilly, 1975; Riehl & Roy, 1980). Bunkers (Pilkington, Bunkers, Clarke, & Frederickson, 2002) wondered whether there is a category of knowledge thatis unique to nursing. Inasmach as nurse theorists have drawn liberally from other disciplines to create distinctive orunique nursing conceptual models and theories, evidence ofa unique category into which nursing knowledge might fitis notyet evident. Categories of knowledge that have been mentioned in the nursing literature are needs and outcomes (Meleis, 2007); client focused, person-environment focused, and nursing therapeutics focused (Meleis, 2007); energy fields (Hickman, 1995; Marriner-Tomey, 1989): and inter- vention, substitution, conservation, sustenance support, and enhancement (Barnum, 1998), None of these seems particularly unique to nursing. Clearly, Bunkers’ question deserves more thought and study. The various categories of knowledge are “different classes of approaches to understanding the person who isa patient, {so that they) not only call for differing forms of practice to- ‘ward different objectives, but also point to different kinds of phenomena, suggest different kinds of questions, and lead eventually ta dissimilar bodiesof knowledge” (Johnson, 1974, p-376). Each category emphasizes different phenomena and leads to ditierent questions about nursing situations. Conse quently, each category fosters development of a different body of knowledge about human beings, the environment, health, and nursing. The characteristics of each category of knowledgeare summarized next the origin of the Developmental Category of Knowl edge is the discipline of psychology. In this category: + Identification of actual and potential developmental prob- lems and delineation of intervention strategies that foster maximum growth and development of people and theit ‘exivironmients are emphasized. + Processes of growth, development, and maturation are emphasized. + Change is the major focus, based on the assumption “that there are noticeable differences between the states of a system at different times, that the succession of these states implies the system isheading somewhere, and that there are orderly processes that explain how the system gets from its present state to wherever itis going” (Chin, 1980, p. 30), + Changes are regarded as directional—the individuals, groups, tuations, and events of interest are headed in somie direction. The direction of change is:“(a) some goal or end state (developed, mature), (b) the process of becoming (developing, maturing), or (c) the degree of achieventent toward some goal or end state (increased development, increase in maturity)” (Chin, 1980, p. 31) + Different states of human beingsare examined over time, The states frequently are termed stages, levels, phases, or periods of development: they may be quantitatively or quilitatively differentiated trom one another. Shifts in state may be either small, nondiscernible steps that even- tually are recognized as change or sudden, cataclysmic changes (Chin, 1980), + Developmental change is thought to be possible through four different forms of progression: (1) unidirectional development may be postalated, such that “once a stage is worked through, the client system shows continued progression and normally never turns back’; (2) devel: opmental change may take the form of a spiral, 0 that although return to a previous problem may occur, the problem is dealt with at a higher level; (3) development may be seen as "phases which occur and recur .., where no chronological priority is assigned to each state; there are cycles"; or (4) development may take the form of a branching out into differentiated forms and processes, each part increasing in its specialization and at the same‘me acquiring its own autonomy and significance” Chin, 1980, pp. 31-32). + Sorces are regarded as “causal factors producing develop- and growth” (Chin, 1980, p, 32) and may be viewed 4) a natural component of human beings undergoing. Change, (b) coping response to new situationsand envi amental factors that leads to growth and development, ~ ‘c)internal tensions withina human being that at some reach a peakand cause adisruption that leads to fur- ser growth and development man beings are assumed to have the inherent potential change: potentiality may be overt or latent, triggered >y internal states or certain environmental conditions. Phe origins of the Systems Category of Knowledge are +z disciplines of biology and physics, In this category: « “2entification of actual and potential problems in the conction of systems and delineation of intervention strate~ & that maximize efficient and effective system operation se emphasized: change is of secondary importance. «system is defined as [a] set of objects together with re- sconships between the objects and between their attri- es" (Hall & Fogen, 1968, p. 83). enomena are treated “as if there existed organization, view a system as if it had no interaction with its envi- sonment (Chin, 1980), However, the arvficiaity of that must be taken into account, inment is defined as “The set ofall objects @ change = whose attributes affects the system and also those ob: ‘hose attributes are changed by the behavior of the ssstem” (Hall & Fagen, 1968, p. 83) boundary is the line of demarcation between a sys- and its environment, “the line forming a closed circle ~oud selected variables, where there isless interchange energy ... across the line of the circle than within the -hmiting circle” (Chin, 1980, p. 24). The placement of ve boundary must take all relevant system parts into sccount. Boundaries may be thought of as more or less, sermeable. The greater the boundary permeability, the e-cater the interchange of energy between the system and environment, | Twe Sraucrune oF Contemporary Nunswc Knowtence 11 + Tension, stress, strain, and conflict are the forces that alter system structure, The differences in system parts, as well as the need to adjust to outside disturbances, lead to dif- ferent amounts of tension within the system (Chin, 1980) Internal tensions arising fiom the structural arrangements ‘ofthe system are called the stresses and strains of the sys- tem (Chin, 1980), Conflict occurs when tensions accumu- late and become opposed along the lines of two or more components ofthe system. Change then occurs toresolve the conilict + Systems are assumed to tend to move toward a balance between intemal and external forces. “When the balance is thought of as a fired point orlevel, it is called ‘equilib- rium,’ Steady state,’on the other hand, isthe term... used to describe the balanced relationship of parts that is not dependent upon any fixed equilibrium point or level” (Chin, 1980, p. 25). Steady state, which also is referred to as a dynamic equilibrium, is characteristic of living open systems and is maintained by a continuous low of energy within the system and between the system and its envi- ronment (von Bertalantiy, 1968). «+ Feedback is the flow of energy between a system and its ‘environment. Systems “are affected by and in turn affect the environment, While affecting the environment, a process we call output, systems gather information about how they are doing. Such information s then fed back into the system as input to guide and steer its operations” (Chin, 1980, p. 27). The feedback process works so that 4s open systems interact with their environments, any change in the system is associated with a change in the environment, and vice versa TThe origin of the Interaction Category of Knowledge is symbolic interactionism, from the discipline of sociology. Symbolic interactionism is a view of human beings "as crea- tures who define and classify situations, including them selves, and who choose ways of acting toward and within them!” (Renoliel, 1977. p. 110), and “postulates that the im- portance of social life lies in providing [human beings) with language. self-concept, role-taking ability, and other skills” (Heiss, 1976, p. 467), In this category: + Wdentification of actual and potential problems in interper- sonal relationships and delineation of intervention strate- {ges that promote optimal sacialization are emphasized + Social acts and relationships between human beings are emphasized. + A human being's perceptions of other people, the envi- ronment, situations, and events—that is, the awareness and experience of phenomena—depend on meanings at- tached to the phenomena, The meanings, or definitions of the situation, determine how human beings behave in agiven situation. Human beings actively set goals on the basis of their perceptions of the relevant factors in @ given situation, which are derived from social interac- lions with others,12 vie SrmucTune ano Use oF Nunsing Know.eoce + Communication is through language, “a system of signifi cant symbols” (Heiss, 1981, p.3). Communication, there fore, involves the transfer of arbitrary meanings of things from one human being to another. Human beings are thought to evaluate actively communication from others, rather than passively accept their ideas, + Roles are “Prescriptions for behavior which are associat with particular actor-other combinations ... the ways we think people of a particular kind ought to act toward var ious categories of others” (Heiss, 1981, p, 63). Each human being has many different roles, each one providing a be: havioral repertoire, Fluman beings adopt the behaviors as sociated with a given role when, through communication. they determine that agiven role is called for ina particular situation Self-concept is defined as, “The individual's thoughts and feelings about himself [or herself)” (Heiss, 1981, p. 83), An important aspect of self-concept is self-evaluation, which refers to “our view of how good we are at what we think weare” (Heiss, 1981, p. 83) In the Needs Category of Knowledge: * The focus is on functions of nurses and consideration of the client in tems of a hierarchy of needs, When clients cannot fulfill their own needs, nursing is required. The function of the nurseis to provide the necessary action to hep clients meet their needs. The human being is reduced to a set of needs, and nursing is reduced to a set of func tions. Nurses are portrayed as the final decision makers for nursing practice (Meleis, 2007). In the Outcomes Category of Knowledge: + Emphasis is placed on the outcomes of nursing practice and comprehensive éescriptions of the recipient of nurs- ing practice (Meleis, 2007) In the Client Focused Category of Knowledge: + There is a comprehensive focus on the client as viewed from a nursing perspective (Meleis, 2007), In the Person-Environment-Focused Category of Knowledge + Emphasis is placed on the relationship between clients and their environments (Meleis, 2007) In the Nursing Therapeutics Category of Knowledge: + Emphasis is placed on what nurses should do and under what circumstances they should act (Meleis, 2007), In the Fnergy Fields Category of Knowledge: + The concept of energy is incorporated (Marriner-Tomey 1989), and the focus is on human beings as energy fields in constant interaction with their environment or the unt: verse (Hickman, 1995) In the Intervention Category of Knowledge: + Emphasis is on the professional actions and decisions of the nurse, and the patient is regarded as an object of nurs- ing rather than a participant in nursing, Agency, or action, rests with the nurse, who makes the practice decisionsand manipulates selected patient or environmental variables to bring about change (Barnum, 1998), In the Conservation Category of Knowledge: + Emphasis is on preservation of beneficial aspects of the patient's situation that are threatened by illness or actual br potential problems. Agency rests with the nurse, but he or she acts to conserve the existing capabilities of the patient (Rarnum, 1998) In the Substitution Category of Knowledge: +The focus is on provision of substitutes for patient expa- bilities that cannot be enacted or have been lost. Agency rests with the patient, in that the patient exercises his or her will and physical control to the greatest possible ex- tent, Nursing acts as a substitute for the patient's will or intent when the patient is incapacitated (Barnum, 1998), In the Sustenance/Support Category of Knowledge: + The focus is on helping the patient endure insults to health and supporting the patient while building psychological and physiological coping mechanisms. Required nursing is determined by the extent to which the patient can or cannot cope without assistance in a particular situation (Barnum, 1998). In the Enhancement Category of Knowledge: + Nursing is regarded as way to improve the quality of the patient's existence following a health insult. Nursing en- ables the patient ( emerge fro a health insult stronger, better, or improved in some way because he or she expe- rienced of overcame the health insult (Barnum, 1998), ‘The ethical claims in philosophies of nursing address the values “that guide the nurse’s relationship with patients/ clients... the character ofthe persons entering and remain- ing in the field of nursing... {and) the values thet regulate nursing practice” (Salsberry, 1994, p. 18). Ethical claims in nursing are summarized in the dominant collective philos- ‘ophy of humanism (Gortner, 1990), which emphasizes “humanistic (moral) values of caring and the promotion of individual welfare and rights” (Fry, 1981, p. 5). Ethical claims in nursing abo articulate values about “the treatment of others,” including the respect that should be accorded zhuman beings “simply for what they are”; values about con- sideration of human dignity when engaging in nursing practice; values about caring; values about autonomy: values about the rights of people to health care; and values about beneficence (Salsberry, 1994, pp. 13-14)CONCEPTUAL MODELS The third component of the structural holarchy of contem- sorary nursing knowledge is the CONCEPTUAL MODEL cc Fig. 1-1). A conceptual model is defined as a set of rl- vely abstract and general concepts that address the phe- ‘na of central interest to a discipline, the propositions at broadly describe those concepts, and the propositions ‘Gat state relatively abstract and general relations between or more of the concepts. he term conceptual model is synonymous with the ems conceptual framework, conceptual system, paradigm, sod disciplinary matrix. Conceptual models have exisied sce people began to think about themselves and their sur ousidings, They now exist in allareas of lite and inall disci ‘Everything that human beings see, hear, read, and rience i filtered through the cognitive lens of some con- al frame of reference (Kalideen, 1993; Lachman, 1983). The concepts of « conceptual model are s0 abstract and eral that they are not directly observed in the real world, they are not limited to any particular incividual, group, -ssuation, or event. Human adaptive system is an example of conceptual model concept (Rey, 2008). This concept can sci to several types of human systems, including individu. “+ families, groups, communities, and entire societies he propositions of a conceptual model also are so Sstract and general that they are not amenable to direct ical observation or test. Nonrelational propositions snd in conceptual models are general descriptions or con setutive definitions of the conceptual mode! concepts. Be- cssse conceptital model concepts are so abstract, their constitutive definitions typically are broad. For example, adaptation level is defined as “the condition of the life s described on three levels as integrated, compensa- and compromised” (Roy, 2008, p. 26). Because the “cocepts are so abstract, nonrelational propositions that are ‘eerational definitions, that is, propositions that tate how Se concepts are empirically observed or measured, are not znd in conceptual models, and they should not be ex ex to be part of conceptual models. The relational propositions of a conceptual model state « relations between conceptual model concepts in a rela svcly abstract and general manner, They are exemplified by allowing statement: “As a stimulus, the changing con nn ofadaptation level affects the individual or group abil st respond positively in a situation” (Roy, 2009. p. 37) snceptual models evolve from the empirical observa. ons and intuitive insights of scholars or fram deductions creatively combine ideas from several fields of inquiry saceptual model is inductively developed when gener sieations about specific observations are formulated ands, Seiuctively developed when specific situations are seen as