Professional Identity in Nursing Scale 2.0: A national study of nurses’ professional identity and psychometric properties

Volume 50, January–February 2024, Pages 61-65

Author links open overlay panel, , , AbstractBackground

Professional identity is a relatively new concept in the nursing and health care literature. Using the definition of Professional Identity in Nursing (PIN) as its main construct, the authors developed and tested the second iteration of the Professional Identity in Nursing Scale (PINS 2.0) used to measure PIN from two perspectives, self and environment.

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the psychometric properties of the PINS 2.0.

Methods

To assess psychometric validity and reliability, a split-sample analysis was conducted. An exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was conducted on one half of the sample (n = 322) and a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted on the other half of the sample (n = 312). Descriptive statistics were also performed and analyzed.

Results

According to the EFA pattern of parameter coefficients and CFA fit statistics (PINS-self: χ2(399) =1059.495, p < .001, CFI = 0.934, RMSEA = 0.072, SRMR = 0.032; PINS-environment: χ2(399) =929.019, p < .001, CFI = 0.946, RMSEA = 0.065, SRMR = 0.029), the PINS 2.0 shows adequate psychometric properties for measuring the concept of PIN with the following 4 constructs: 1) values and ethics, 2) knowledge, 3) leadership, and 4) professional comportment. Cronbach's alpha coefficients were: PINS 2.0-self = 0.97 and PINS 2.0-environment =0.98.

Conclusion

We further advance the assessment of the psychometric properties of the PINS 2.0 to measure PIN from the perspective of self and environment.

Section snippetsBackground

Professional identity is a relatively new concept referenced in the health care literature and to a lesser extent in the nursing literature. Cruess et al. (2014) first introduced the concept of professional identity formation in health care observing its broader application and utility in contrast to the less encompassing term of professionalism. Cruess et al. (2014) adopted the developmental psychology perspective of identity formation because it explained the development of multiple

Purpose

The need to provide a common language for PIN led to the first phase of instrument development in 2019 (Landis et al., 2021) which detailed the initial development and testing of PINS 1.0. This article describes the second phase of instrument development and testing (PINS 2.0) by examining nurses' perception of self and the respondents' current work environment. The authors explain the revision PINS 1.0, process for developing and testing PINS 2.0, and psychometric analysis of PINS 2.0. The

Instrument

The initial PINS 1.0 was developed using the DeVellis and Thorpe (2022) scale development process. As a component of scale development, the authors garnered input from 50 subject matter experts participating in two consecutive think tanks specifically designed to identify key constructs associated with PIN and to create the initial item pool (Landis et al., 2021). Thirty-four scale items were developed to measure PIN based on four identified constructs including 1) values and ethics, 2)

Item-level descriptive statistics

All response categories were used for all 30 items of the scale. All response categories skewness values were < 3 and kurtosis values were < 5, demonstrating normality. Mean scores for all items were also calculated. (See Table 1, Table 2). Items were generally scored higher for self than for environment. The highest mean score on the PINS 2.0-self was Trustworthiness 4.37 (SD = 0.785) under the domain of Leadership and the lowest mean score was Takes care of oneself 3.26 (SD = 1.079) under the

Discussion

According to the EFA and CFA of the PINS-self and PINS-environment, the PINS 2.0 shows adequate psychometric properties for measuring the concept of PIN. The EFA and CFA suggested the 4-factor model of the PINS 2.0 has an acceptable fit, which corresponds with the 4 constructs of PIN: 1) values and ethics, 2) knowledge, 3) leadership, and 4) professional comportment. In addition, the results for internal consistency indicate that the PINS 2.0 is a reliable tool for measuring PIN.

A review of the

Declaration of competing interest

The authors declare no funding or conflicts of interest for this research.

References (22)N. GodfreyNew language for the journey: Embracing a professional identity of nursing

Journal of Radiology Nursing

(2022)

LandisMeasuring professional identity

Nurse Leader

(2023)

Accreditation Commision on Nursing Education2023 standards and criteriaAmerican Association of Colleges of NursingThe essentials: Core competencies for professional nursing educationE. Armitage-Chan et al.The veterinary identity: A time and context model

Journal of Veterinary Medical Education

(2019 Summer)

P. Benner et al.Educating nurses: A call for radical transformation

(2010)

Brewington et al.The professional identity in nursing initiative

Nursing Education Perspectives

(2020)

T.A. BrownConfirmatory factor analysis for applied research

(2006)

R.L. Cruess et al.Reframing medical education to support professional identity formation

Academic Medicine

(2014)