护理研究生导学关系现状及其影响因素分析

doi:10.3760/cma.j.cn115259-20250507-00513

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 目的了解护理研究生导学关系现状和导学关系质量的影响因素。方法采用便利抽样法,于2025年5至7月对全国46所高校437名护理研究生进行问卷调查,收集研究生的一般资料调查表、研究生导学关系期待量表、正面指导体验量表、负面指导体验量表、心理健康连续体量表、科研创新行为量表和导学关系质量量表相关数据。采用描述性统计、独立样本t检验、单因素方差分析、多元线性回归分析数据。结果护理研究生导学关系期待量表条目均分为(4.44±0.55)分;导学关系正面指导体验量表条目均分为(3.73±0.84)分;导学关系负面指导体验量表条目均分为(2.24±0.70)分;心理健康连续体条目均分为(2.43±1.01)分;科研创新行为条目均分为(3.54±0.73)分,导学关系质量量表条目均分为(3.68±0.86)分。导学关系负面指导体验对导学关系质量具有负向影响(β=-0.304, P<0.05);导学关系正面指导体验、研究生科研创新行为、心理健康连续体、师生沟通主动性对导学关系质量具有正向影响(β=0.090~0.430,均P<0.05)。导师正面指导体验、负面指导体验,学生积极心理、创新行为,以及双方沟通主动性对导学关系质量影响显著,可以解释因变量70.5%。结论我国护理研究生导学关系质量处于中上水平。导师指导体验、学生创新行为、学生积极心理、双方沟通主动性是影响导学关系质量的外部因素和个体因素。改善导学关系促进高层次人才培养需要重视导学关系互动体验,发挥导师的正面指导。同时,应当重视培养护理研究生的积极心理、充分激发研究生沟通主动性,保证师生的高效协作,继而推动护理学科高质量发展。

关键词: 护理学, 导学关系, 研究生教育, 影响因素, 分析

Abstract: Objective To understand the current status of the mentoring relationship and the factors influencing its quality among nursing graduate students in China. Methods A cross-sectional online survey was conducted among 437 nursing graduate students from 46 universities across China from May to July 2025, utilizing validated scales: graduate nursing student mentoring relationship expectations scale, positive mentoring experiences scale, negative mentoring experiences scale, mental health continuum scale short form, innovative behavior scale, and quality of mentoring relationships scale. Descriptive statistics, independent t-tests, one-way ANOVA and multiple linear regression were performed on data from 437 valid responses. Results The mean item score of the quality of mentoring relationship scale was 3.68±0.86. The mean item score of the positive mentoring experiences scale was 3.73±0.84, and the mean item score of the negative mentoring experiences scale was 2.24±0.70. The mean item score of the mental health continuum scale was 2.43±1.01, the mean item score of the innovative behavior scale was 3.54±0.73. And the mean item score of the graduate nursing student mentoring relationship expectations scale was 4.44±0.55. Negative mentoring experiences negatively influenced mentorship quality (β=-0.304, P<0.05), positive mentoring experiences, innovation behavior, psychological resilience and communication initiative positively influenced mentorship quality (β=0.090~0.430, all P<0.05). Mentors′ positive and negative mentoring experiences, students′ positive psychology and innovative behavior, and proactive communication between both parties significantly influenced the quality of the mentoring relationship, explaining 70.5% of the variance in the dependent variable. Conclusions The quality of the mentoring relationship among nursing graduate students in China is at an above-average level. Mentors′ guidance experiences, students′ innovative behavior, students′ positive psychology, and proactive communication between both parties are external and individual factors influencing the quality of the mentoring relationship. Improving the mentoring relationship to promote high-level talent cultivation requires attention to the interactive experiences within the relationship and leveraging the positive guidance of mentors. Simultaneously, emphasis should be placed on cultivating students′ positive psychology and fully stimulating their proactive communication to ensure efficient collaboration between mentors and students, thereby advancing the high-quality development of the nursing discipline.

Key words: Nursing, Mentorship, Graduate education, Influencing factors, Analysis

中图分类号:

R-05

徐妍雪, 牛艳平, 王克冰, 孙圆圆, 梁敏余. 护理研究生导学关系现状及其影响因素分析[J]. 中华医学教育杂志, 2026, 46(9): 704-710, DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn115259-20250507-00513.

Xu Yanxue, Niu Yanping, Wang Kebing, Sun Yuanyuan, Liang Minyu. Nursing postgraduate students′ mentoring relationship and the related factors impact on its quality[J]. Chinese Journal of Medical Education, 2026, 46(9): 704-710, DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn115259-20250507-00513.

参考文献

[1] Woolston C. Stress and uncertainty drag down graduate students′ satisfaction[J]. Nature, 2022,610(7933):805-808. DOI: 10.1038/d41586-022-03394-0.
[2] Evans TM, Bira L, Gastelum JB, et al. Evidence for a mental health crisis in graduate education[J]. NatBiotechnol, 2018,36(3):282-284. DOI: 10.1038/nbt.4089.
[3] Sadeghnezhad M, Heshmati Nabavi F, Najafi F, et al. Mutual benefits in academic-service partnership: an integrative review[J]. Nurse Educ Today, 2018,68:78-85. DOI: 10.1016/j.nedt.2018.05.019.
[4] 倪平, 陈京立, 刘娜. 护理研究中量性研究的样本量估计[J].中华护理杂志,2010,45(4):378-380.
[5] Ali P, Watson P, Dhingra K. Postgraduate research students′ and their supervisors′ attitudes towards supervision[J]. Int J Dr Stud, 2016, 11: 227-241. DOI: 10.28945/3541.
[6] Noe RA. An investigation of the determinants of successful assigned mentoring relationships[J]. Pers Psychol, 1988, 41(3): 457-479. DOI: 10.1111/j.1744-6570.1988.tb00638.x.
[7] Eby L, Buits M, Lockwood A, et al. Proteges negative mentoring experiences: construct development and nomological validation[J]. Pers Psychol, 2004, 57(2): 411-447. DOI: 10.1111/j.1744-6570.2004.tb02496.x.
[8] Keyes CL, Wissing M, Potgieter J P, et al. Evaluation of the mental health continuum-short form (MHC-SF) in Setswana-speaking South Africans[J]. Clin Psychol Psychother, 2008,15(3):181-192. DOI: 10.1002/cpp.572.
[9] 尹可丽, 何嘉梅. 简版心理健康连续体量表(成人版)的信效度[J].中国心理卫生杂志,2012,26(5):388-392.
[10] Scott SG, Bruce RA. Determinants of innovative behavior: a path model of individual innovation in the workplace[J]. Acad Manage J, 1994, 37(3): 580-582. DOI: 10.2307/256701.
[11] Allen TD, Eby LT. Factors related to mentor reports of mentoring functions provided: gender and relational characteristics[J]. Sex Roles, 2004, 50(1): 129-139. DOI: 10.1023/B:SERS.0000011078.48570.25.
[12] 李政. 导学关系质量与专业研究生教育——指导体验作用的实证研究[D]. 合肥: 中国科学技术大学, 2018.
[13] 李政. 研究生自恋型人格特质对导学关系的影响[J].研究生教育研究,2015(3):54-59.
[14] Arora R, Rangnekar S. Mentoring in Indian organizations: a revisit to Noe′s (1988) mentoring functions scale[J]. Int J Evid Based Coach Mentor, 2017, 15(2): 155-169. DOI: 10.24384/000256.
[15] Arora R, Rangnekar S. The joint effects of personality and supervisory career mentoring in predicting occupational commitment[J]. Career Dev Int, 2015, 20(1): 63-80. DOI: 10.1108/CDI-12-2014-0156.
[16] Casanave CP. Performing expertise in doctoral dissertations: thoughts on a fundamental dilemma facing doctoral students and their supervisors[J]. J Second Lang Writ, 2019, 43(1): 57-62. DOI: 10.1016/j.jslw.2018.02.005.
[17] Hofstede G, Hofstede GJ. Cultures and organizations: software of the mind[M]. 2nd ed. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill, 2004:332-335.
[18] Bronfenbrenner U. Developmental research, public policy, and the ecology of childhood[J]. Child Dev, 1974, 45(1): 1-5. DOI: 10.2307/1127743.
[19] Sharabani R, Od Cohen Y, Shalev I, et al. Motivations and challenges of Israeli nurses on their journey to a PhD: a qualitative study[J]. Nurse Educ Pract, 2023,68:103584. DOI: 10.1016/j.nepr.2023.103584.
[20] Atkison PR. Advantages of the Socratic method for medical teaching[J]. CMAJ, 2021,193(43):E1665. DOI: 10.1503/cmaj.80194.
[21] Langen I, Stamov Roßnagel C. East is East: Socratic classroom communication is linked to higher stress in students from confucian heritage cultures[J]. Heliyon, 2023,9(5):E15748. DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e15748.
[22] 马幸会, 赵静波. 医科院校研究生积极心理健康状况及其影响因素研究[J].现代预防医学,2017,44(16):2981-2984.
[23] Luijten CC, Kuppens S, van de Bongardt D, et al. Evaluating the psychometric properties of the mental health continuum-short form (MHC-SF) in Dutch adolescents[J]. Health Qual Life Outcomes, 2019,17(1):157-162. DOI: 10.1186/s12955-019-1221-y.
[24] Zhong Z, Hu D, Zheng F, et al. Relationship between information-seeking behavior and innovative behavior in Chinese nursing students[J]. Nurse Educ Today, 2018,63:1-5. DOI: 10.1016/j.nedt.2018.01.004.