Introduction
Sociological perspectives are essential for understanding and interpreting the numerous social concerns and challenges that impact patient outcomes and healthcare delivery in the nursing profession. By utilizing sociological theories, nurses can better comprehend the social dynamics, disparities, and relationships that affect their practice and patients’ experiences. Conflict Theory and Symbolic Interactionism, two significant sociological perspectives, will be examined in this research paper and how they apply to nurses. The paper will comprehensively analyze Conflict Theory and Symbolic Interactionism in nursing, highlighting their applications, strengths, limitations, and potential implications for nursing practice.
Conflict Theory in Nursing
According to Reay et al. (2001), conflict theory is a sociological theory that looks at society through the lens of competition, power, and social conflict. It asserts that social inequality characterizes society and that struggles for power and control lead to unequal resource distribution and war. Conflict theorists examine how social institutions, like hospitals, maintain and spread injustices.
Reay et al. (2021) argue that nursing practitioners actively utilize conflict theory in various ways. Firstly, conflict theory aids nurses in understanding the power relationships that exist within healthcare institutions. It draws attention to the healthcare industry’s hierarchical structure and uneven allocation of power and resources. Nurses can examine the impact of power disparities on decision-making procedures, resource distribution, and chances for career promotion. Secondly, To examine the nurse-patient relationship, one can utilize conflict theory. It acknowledges that patients could experience power imbalances and that support for patient rights and equitable healthcare is essential. Nurses can recognize how racial or social class discrepancies affect the standard of patient care. Conflict theory equips nurses with the tools to advocate for fair healthcare access and confront oppressive regimes. Finally, conflict theory enables nurses to examine systemic disparities in healthcare provision. This viewpoint emphasizes the interplay between social, political, and economic variables resulting in uneven healthcare access. Nurses can look at how gaps in funding and access to healthcare affect vulnerable populations and lead to health inequities.
Power relations and socioeconomic disparities are critically analyzed in the healthcare system using conflict theory (Reay et al., 2021). It empowers nurses to confront repressive structures and increases awareness of systemic problems. However, it might oversimplify intricate social dynamics and undervalue the value of teamwork and consensus in the healthcare industry. Nurses are motivated by conflict theory to promote social justice and equality in healthcare. In order to advance patient-centered care, it motivates nurses to deal with power disparities, participate in policy advocacy, and work with interdisciplinary teams. Nurses can contribute to reforming healthcare systems by comprehending the larger social environment.
Symbolic Interactionism in Nursing
A sociological perspective is a symbolic interactionism, which focuses on how people create meaning through social interactions and symbols (Husin et al., 2021). It highlights how crucial social interactions, language, and shared understandings are in forming social reality. Symbolic interactionism examines how people interact with symbols and continual carry-on conversations about interpretation.
There are numerous approaches to using symbolic interactionism in nursing (Carter & Lamoreaux, 2022). Firstly, understanding how nursing roles and identities are socially constructed requires using Symbolic Interactionism. It acknowledges that social interactions, communication, and shared meanings shape nursing responsibilities rather than dictating them. Nurses might examine how cultural norms, professional standards, and personal experiences affect how they define their professional selves. Secondly, symbolic interactionism highlights the importance of engagement and communication between nurses and patients. It acknowledges that the social construction of meaning occurs through verbal and nonverbal interactions. This viewpoint can help nurses comprehend how communication affects the relationship between a nurse and patient, patient satisfaction, and the overall healthcare experience. Lastly, Symbolic Interactionism sheds light on how people think about sickness and behave healthily. It acknowledges that social interactions, cultural circumstances, and symbolic representations impact people’s perceptions of health and their experiences with illness. Nurses can investigate how patients’ perceptions of their health and sickness affect their choice of treatments, adherence to medical advice, and general well-being.
According to Carter & Lamoreaux (2022), nurses can better understand the value of language, symbols, and interactions in healthcare settings. However, it might ignore more significant structural issues that influence how people experience healthcare and their health. Nurses can provide patient-centered care and encourage favorable health outcomes by being aware of sickness and health’s social and symbolic connotations. The perspective also emphasizes the significance of cultural competence and knowledge of the various connotations that health and illness have among other communities.
Comparative Analysis of Conflict Theory and Symbolic Interactionism
According to Salvini (2019), there are two areas of convergence. First, there is a shared emphasis in Conflict Theory and Symbolic Interactionism on social interaction and the creation of meaning. Conflict Theory stresses how social dynamics of power and inequality influence encounters, whereas Symbolic Interactionism emphasizes the function of symbols and communication in forging common ground. Both viewpoints acknowledge the significance of clear communication, symbol interpretation, and the development of shared meanings in nurse-patient interactions in nursing. Second, power dynamics are recognized as being in healthcare settings by both Conflict Theory and Symbolic Interactionism. Conflict Theory draws attention to the unequal allocation of power and resources within healthcare organizations, whereas Symbolic Interactionism acknowledges that power can be exercised through symbolic interaction and communication. When nurses use these viewpoints, they assess power dynamics critically, promote patient rights, and move toward more equitable healthcare practices.
Structural Inequality vs. Symbolic Representation and Macro-Level vs. Micro-Level Analysis are two areas of divergence (Burbank & Martins, 2019). In order to examine social structures, institutions, and inequities, conflict theory primarily relies on macro-level analysis. It emphasizes broader social dynamics and systemic elements that affect delivering healthcare. While concentrating on specific interactions, meanings, and interpretations, symbolic interactionism stresses micro-level analysis. In particular social contexts, it investigates how people construct and bargain meanings. Conflict Theory highlights structural inequalities and the influence of societal structures on healthcare access and outcomes. Nurses need to consider both macro and micro views to build a thorough understanding of the complex social dynamics in nursing. It emphasizes the contribution of socioeconomic class, race, gender, and other social factors to the persistence of disparities. The emphasis of symbolic interactionism, on the other hand, is on creating meaning through dialogue and interaction. It investigates the subjective ways in which people interpret symbols. To effectively address social inequality, nurses must be aware of the interaction between structural injustices and symbolic representations.
Conflict Theory and Symbolic Interactionism are two examples of complementary applications in nursing that might be useful in clinical settings (Grosjean et al., 2021). To fully comprehend the social dynamics in healthcare settings, nurses can combine the macro-level analysis of Conflict Theory with the micro-level insights of Symbolic Interactionism. Nurses can spot conflict areas, power disparities, and chances for revolutionary change by looking at structural causes and human interactions. Second, it may be advantageous to incorporate conflict theory and symbolic interactionism into nursing education and professional growth. These viewpoints aid nurses in cultivating critical thinking abilities, cultural sensitivity, and a thorough comprehension of social determinants of health. These viewpoints can be included in school curricula and professional development programs to prepare nurses to confront social issues, fight for fair treatment, and encourage social change in the healthcare industry.
Conclusion
The research paper has explored two sociological perspectives, Conflict Theory and Symbolic Interactionism, and their applications in nursing. Conflict Theory highlights power dynamics, inequalities, and social conflict within healthcare organizations, while Symbolic Interactionism focuses on social interactions, meaning-making, and the construction of reality in nurse-patient relationships. Areas of convergence between the two perspectives, such as their shared focus on social interaction and power dynamics within healthcare settings, were identified. Additionally, points of divergence, including macro-level versus micro-level analysis and the emphasis on structural inequality versus symbolic representation, were discussed. Future research can explore the integration of Conflict Theory and Symbolic Interactionism in nursing practice. It can involve investigating how these perspectives can inform nursing interventions, policies, and education. Sociological perspectives provide useful frameworks for understanding and addressing social issues and problems within nursing practice. Conflict Theory and Symbolic Interactionism help nurses critically analyze power dynamics, social inequalities, and the construction of meaning in healthcare settings.
References
Reay, T., Goodrick, E., & D’Aunno, T. (2021). Health care research and organization theory. Cambridge University Press.
Husin, S. S., Ab Rahman, A. A., & Mukhtar, D. (2021). The Symbolic Interaction Theory: A Systematic Literature Review of Current Research. International Journal of Modern Trends in Social Sciences.
Carter, M. J., & Lamoreaux, L. V. (2022). Symbolic Interactionism and Global Public Health. In Handbook of Social Sciences and Global Public Health (pp. 1-18). Cham: Springer International Publishing.
Salvini, A. (2019). The methodological convergences between symbolic interactionism and constructivist grounded theory. Przegląd Socjologii Jakościowej, 15(3), 10-29.
Burbank, P. M., & Martins, D. C. (2019). Critical interactionism: A theoretical bridge for understanding complex human conditions. Critical and Cultural Interactionism, 79-98.
Grosjean, S., Matte, F., & Nahon‐Serfaty, I. (2021). “Sensory Ordering” in Nurses’ Clinical Decision‐Making: Making Visible Senses, Sensing, and “Sensory Work” in the Hospital. Symbolic Interaction, 44(1), 163-182.
