Knowledge production in nursing in the light of societal fields and the quadripolar space of the research: a reflective exercise

Abstracts

The reflection aims to analyze the production of knowledge in Nursing from a doctoral thesis, identifying the elements from societal field and from the quadripolar space that compose it. Societal fields refer to the social demand as well as to axiological, doxological and epistemic fields. Quadripolar methodological space is compound by epistemological, theoretical, morphological and technical poles. In the chosen text, it were identified the elements that compound the theoretical-philosophical reference chosen for the analysis. These elements are articulated and complement themselves to ensure scientificity to the produced knowledge. Thus, this kind of analysis is a (device) strategy that adds to instrumentalization of researches for the production of knowledge.

Science; Knowledge; Methodology; Nursing

O objetivo da reflexão consiste em analisar a produção de conhecimento na enfermagem, a partir de uma tese de doutorado, identificando os elementos dos campos societais e do espaço quadripolar que a compõem. Os campos societais referem-se à demanda social e aos campos axiológico, doxológico e epistêmico. O espaço metodológico quadripolar compõe-se dos polos epistemológico, teórico, morfológico e técnico. Na obra selecionada, identificaram-se os elementos do referencial teórico-filosófico escolhido para a análise, os quais se articulam e se complementam com a finalidade de garantir cientificidade ao conhecimento produzido. Ainda, esse tipo de análise constitui-se em estratégia que contribui na instrumentalização de pesquisadores para a produção de conhecimento.

Ciência; Conhecimento; Metodologia; Enfermagem

REFLECTION

Knowledge production in nursing in the light of societal fields and the quadripolar space of the research: a reflective exercise

Producción del conocimiento en enfermería bajo la perspectiva de los campos societales y espacio cuadripolar de la investigación científica: un ejercicio de reflexión

Isabel Cristina Pacheco van der Sand^I; Leila Mariza Hildebrandt^II; Fernanda Beheregaray Cabral^III; Marlea Chagas Moreira^IV; Maria Gaby Rivero de Gutiérrez^V

^IPh.D. candidate, Nursing, "New Frontiers" Inter-institutional Doctorate Program of the Federal University of São Paulo, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro and the Federal University of Santa Maria. Assistant Professor, Department of Health Sciences, Northern Rio Grande do Sul Center for Higher Education, Federal University of Santa Maria. Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil. E-mail: [e-mail]

^IIPh.D. candidate, Nursing, "New Frontiers" Inter-institutional Doctorate program of the Federal University of São Paulo, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro and the Federal University of Santa Maria. Assistant Professor, Department of Health Sciences, Northern Rio Grande do Sul Center for Higher Education, Federal University of Santa Maria. Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil. E-mail: [e-mail]

^IIIPh.D. candidate, "New Frontiers" Inter-institutional Doctorate program of the Federal University of São Paulo, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro and the Federal University of Santa Maria. Assistant Professor, Department of Health Sciences, Northern Rio Grande do Sul Center for Higher Education, Federal University of Santa Maria. Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil. E-mail: [e-mail]

^IVPh.D., Nursing. Associate Professor, Anna Nery School of Nursing, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro. Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. E-mail: [e-mail]

^VPh.D., Nursing. Full Professor, Federal University of São Paulo. São Paulo, Brazil. E-mail: [e-mail]

^{Correspondence}

ABSTRACT

The objective of this reflection is to analyze the production of knowledge in nursing in a doctoral thesis, identifying the elements from the societal fields and quadripolar space that compose it. Societal fields refer to social demand and to the axiological, doxological and epistemic fields. Quadripolar methodological space is composed of the epistemological, theoretical, morphological and technical poles. In the selected text, the elements of the theoretical-philosophical framework chosen for the analysis were identified, which combine and complement each other in order to guarantee scientificity to the knowledge produced. This type of analysis is a strategy that contributes to the instrumentalization of researchers for the production of knowledge.

Descriptors: Science. Knowledge. Methodology. Nursing.

RESUMEN

El objetivo de la reflexión consiste en analizar la producción del conocimiento en enfermería, a partir de una tesis de doctorado, identificando los elementos del campo societario y del espacio cuadripolar que la componen. Los campos societarios dicen respecto a la demanda social y a los campos axiológico, doxológico y epistémico. El espacio metodológico cuadripolar se compone de los polos epistemológico, teórico, morfológico y técnico. En la obra seleccionada se identificaron los elementos del referencial teórico filosófico elegido para el análisis, los cuales se articulan y se complementan con la finalidad de garantizar cientificidad al conocimiento producido. Todavía, ese tipo de análisis se constituye en estrategia que contribuye en la instrumentalización de los investigadores para la producción del conocimiento.

Descriptores: Ciencia. Conocimiento. Metodología. Enfermería.

INTRODUCTION

This reflection, which has the objective to produce knowledge in the field of nursing, and uses the analysis of a thesis as a strategy, results from discussions held during the development of the discipline "The construction of the field of knowledge of nursing." The discipline has the proposal to ground discussions on knowledge in general, focusing on nursing through analysis of its epistemological bases, and amplification of professional knowing/doing, and is inserted into "New Frontiers," the Inter-institutional Ph.D. Program at the Federal University of São Paulo and the Federal University of Santa Maria, in collaboration with the Anna Nery School of Nursing at the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro.

The importance of debates about the production of knowledge in nursing is emphasized, as international and national agencies, such as the International Council of Nurses (ICN) and the Coordination of Improvement of Higher Education Personnel (CAPES), have recently been advocating in favor of the production of new knowledge in nursing, aiming for advances that contribute to the training of these professionals, in their practice, and management and research in the field.^1-2

In this perspective, it is worth mentioning the propositions of the CAPES Coordination of the Field of Nursing, which guide the definition of a new profile of Doctor in Nursing. These premises, if implemented, will contribute to attain new standards of research in this field, which are situated in the domain of new investigative methods, practices grounded on diverse research, resulting in the production of advanced knowledge and technologies, and culminating in publications in qualified periodicals.² In this sense, the international literature emphasizes that the current scientific task is to organize and improve the processes of publication.³

Additionally, it is worth noting that nursing constitutes a science-in-the-making, because it is founded on theoretical concepts, basic principles, specific methods of work and knowledge of a legally-recognized scientific practice that is concerned with the epistemological attainment of the results of its investigations.⁴

Based on this justification, through reflection, this study intends to contribute to facilitate the analysis of the scientificity of knowledge produced, which appears to meet the concerns mentioned above. Considering the theoretical-philosophical framework adopted for analysis, explained below, the objective of this reflection is to analyze the production of knowledge in a doctoral thesis, identifying the elements that compose the societal fields and the quadripolar methodological space in the work analyzed.

THEORETICAL-PHILOSOPHICAL FRAMEWORK FOR THE REFLECTION

The production of knowledge is a process that requires the objectification of a given phenomenon, situated in a determined field of research. This field is the practical place for the development of the objects of the scientific knowledge, from its systematic and empirical construction of the facts that the research provided knowledge about. Each investigation needs to be situated in an epistemic field, aiming to attain scientific objectivity.⁵

This reflection is anchored in the theoretical-philosophical framework that deals with the societal fields and the methodological quadripolar space of the production of knowledge. The societal environment of the research is composed of four fields, which influence and/or facilitate the research, and relate with each particular context of the production of knowledge, sometimes limiting or being contrary to "the methodological choices of the researcher."^5:31 The authors of this framework, supported in Touraine, explain that the researchers are influenced by the political and social conflicts of an era, as well as their research; however, it is necessary to emphasize that these are not reduced to the ideology of the social actors involved.⁵

All scientific practice also has a quadripolar methodological space, composed of the epistemological, theoretical, morphological and technical poles, which articulate with one another with the purpose of guaranteeing its scientificity.⁵ In regard to societal fields, these are:⁵ the social demand, axiological, doxological and the epistemic. The field of social demand is that which will bring the marks of the society to which the researcher pertains; the axiological field is in regard to the social and individual values that condition scientific research; the doxological is the non-systematized field of knowledge, of the language and evidence from everyday practice, from where the specific scientific problems emerge; and finally the epistemic, which refers to the field of scientific knowledge that reached a degree of recognized objectivity, revealed by theories of epistemological reflection.⁵

In regard to the quadripolar space of the research, this study is concerned with the epistemological pole, crossing the entire process with critical surveillance; the theoretical pole is related to the development of hypotheses and the construction of concepts; the technical is what reveals control of the collection and analysis of the information, transforming them into data pertinent to the researched problem; and the morphological, that which states the rules of structuring.⁵

METHOD

The scientific character of a research project is the result of a continuous process of breaking with pre-conceived notions of common sense, with empty, mythical or ideological knowledge. Additionally, it is observed that scientific practice cannot be reduced to a sequence of operations, of necessary and immutable procedures or codified protocols. On the contrary, as a result of the complexity inherent to the problems in the field of social sciences, there is a demand for interpenetrations and constant returns between the poles that constitute a research project - that is, the epistemological, theoretical, morphological and the technical.⁵ In this perspective, in the discipline "The construction of the field of knowledge of nursing", an analysis of the production of knowledge in nursing was performed with the thesis, "Cultural approximations between nursing workers and families in the context of hospital birth: an ethnography of rooming-in care".⁶

The choice of analyzed study came from the autonomous methodological urge to verify the knowledge produced in a thesis, as a result of the proximity with the actual workplace of one of the authors, focusing on the perspective of culture in the field of nursing. Additionally, it came from the presupposition that a thesis would have elements that confer it scientificity, making possible the identification of those constants in the theoretical framework adopted for analysis.

The steps followed for analysis were: 1) study of the book Dinâmica de pesquisa em ciências sociais - os polos da prática metodológica [Dynamics of research in social sciences-the poles of methodological practice] by De Bruyne P, Herman J, Schouteete M. (1982); 2) reading of the selected thesis for knowledge of its content; 3) rereading of the thesis under analysis, seeking to identify elements that substantiate the fields of the societal environment and the poles of the quadripolar methodological space. In this process, new immersions in the theoretical-methodological framework were necessary, along with others in the thesis analyzed, in a movement of going and coming, from where the analytical praxis emerged; 4) as part of this praxis, presentation of the material produced until then in a seminar of the above-cited discipline was done, and reconstruction of the knowledge through discussions and collective reflections with professors and colleagues, based on the theoretical framework.

When beginning the exposition of the analysis of the referred thesis, it is emphasized that this was done highlighting literal parts of the study, which, through methodological option and to give emphasis, are in quotation marks in the text. It should be noted that the development of this analysis was authorized by the author of the thesis, thus respecting the ethical aspects involved in scientific practice.

THE RIGHT AND WRONG OF THE WORK: A VIEW TOWARD THE PRODUCTION OF KNOWLEDGE

The reflexive analysis in question will be presented as topics, which are: the societal fields and the quadripolar methodological space of the research.

The societal fields of the research: from the circumstances to the factors implied in the production of knowledge

To contextualize the environment in which the thesis under analysis was produced is important to attain the objective of this reflection, because separating it from this context may incur a reductionist attitude that places the analysis itself at risk.⁷ In this logic, the production of a study with a title that signals having a theoretical-philosophical framework of the social sciences as a background, more specifically relative to culture, appears to meet the propositions of the graduate program in which it was produced, that being the Nursing Graduate Program of the Federal University of Santa Catarina (UFSC), the area of concentration being the interlocution between nursing, health and society.

Additionally, information is sought regarding who is the researcher, for an approximation, before the analysis of the thesis itself, of the possible motives for her interest in the theme of the study, which will provide information about the societal fields in which the knowledge was generated. So who is Marisa Monticelli?

Based on information contained in the Lattes Platform,⁸ it was verified that Monticelli graduated with a degree in nursing from UFSC at the end of 1970s. Monticelli continued her studies soon after graduation, in the beginning of the 1980s, in Itajaí, Santa Catarina, in the lato sensu graduate program in public health, and at the end of the 1990s, attended a specialization course in education at the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro. These specializations appear to signal understanding by the researcher about the demands and nature of nursing, which request interlocutions with fields in addition to biological and/or natural sciences, that is, approximations with the human and social sciences.⁹ Additionally, along this trajectory of professional and academic training, the author studies for masters and doctoral degrees in nursing during the 1990s and 2000s, respectively, both at UFSC. Currently, Monticelli is a professor in the Department of Nursing and a licensed teacher of the permanent board of the nursing graduate program of this institution, with theoretical experience and production in the field of nursing, with emphasis on maternal-child nursing.

The work under analysis has the theme "relationships established between nursing workers and families that experience the childbirth process - in hospital institutions, and more specifically in rooming-in units."^6:13 Monticelli's research questions are synthesized: "what are the relationships established between nursing workers and the families that experience the post-partum period in rooming-in units?; and what are the perspectives or references that these workers adopt, when interacting with families that experience the post-partum, during hospitalization".^6:37

When outlining the theme of the study, the author does it in a way so that the reader, in the first paragraph, has an idea about the theoretical-methodological options that sustain it, indicating the thesis of the study. Thus, she states that the relationships between nursing workers and families are "immersed in the cultural context of each human being who participates in the childbirth process".^6:13

Next, the author makes it possible for the reader to go within the doxological field of the research, from where concerns emerge about specific problematics that may be established in scientific object. She refers to the world of her profession, stating "the practice of nursing, inserted into the complex field of human reproduction, needs to be revisited".^6:13 Through this argument, she mentions that her interest in treating the research theme originated in her professional work, in which she has been involved with families and health professionals, and consequently, "with multiple and different nuances of meetings - sometimes magical, sometimes perverse - in the reality of the health institutions".^6:13

On the first page of her thesis, Monticelli allows one to glimpse that knowledge, which is intended to be scientific, has a profound insertion into the doxological field, in that she demonstrates sensibility to experience a "surprise" that she is everyday, from that which is part of her everyday. However, it is worth highlighting that the demands that emerged, in the beginning, in this field, are presented by the author with characteristics of the epistemic field, because they are problematized in the light of the theoretical-philosophical framework to which it is affiliated, highlighting the inter-penetrations of the different poles that constitute the research. According to Monticelli: "these digressions impel me to look at the familiar everyday with the eyes of a stranger. This allows me to separate myself from the practice, at the same time in which from it I approximate to myself, seeking new discoveries and bringing a new view to previously unperceived meanings".^6:13

It is confirmed that the author is using, in the definition of the research problem, a framework, which comes close to the theoretical pole, which provides her with inspirations resulting from contributions by other thinkers. At this stage, Monticelli argues that the literature related to childbirth is rich with studies with different approaches, but the anthropological focus has been shown to be pertinent to capture how the symbolic codes that regulate human relationships during the entire childbirth process are structured. She points out that the nurses have shown themselves to be sensitive to the cultural approach and perceive that care is not neutral, homogenous or universal, but based on the relationships established between the subjects involved in the care, that is, something that is constituted in an action that contains an intentionality.⁶

With the purpose of supporting her choices in regard to the object and theoretical-philosophical and methodological framework, Monticelli uses other authors whose works are considered, in contemporary scientific work, important to the advance of anthropological knowledge in health, more particularly, in the "anthropology of labor," or the "anthropology of childbirth," including Arthur Kleinman, Mary-Jo Delvecchio Good, Byron J. Good, Brigitte Jordan, Sheila Kitzinger, Robbie E. Davis-Floyd, Carolyn Sargent and Madeleine Leininger, among others.⁶ With this attitude the author once again demonstrates recognition that knowledge from other fields is essential for the development of nursing and its workers, as defended in the specialized literature.⁹

It is noted, from this movement, in the choice of the researcher, considering the object of the study, by a comprehensive framework, that is ratified in the moment in which she presents her proposal: "to comprehend the cultural universe that permeates the relationships between the nursing workers and families in the Roooming-in Units".^6:37 This approach has the purpose of "learning and making explicit the meaning of the social and collective activity, during the realization of an intention".^5:139

The dialogue that comes from within the thesis analyzed, from the definition of the author by a mark of reference, which is also composed of her own scientific work, produces new questionings, which she intends to elucidate. This clarifies the dialectic character of the nature of knowledge in itself, and in particular, of the study analyzed, since the evolutionary nature of science, understood as something that is not only cumulative, but offers conditions for new, superior qualitative productions.⁵ The production of new questionings in the process of the research is also characteristic of qualitative methods, adequate for the object of the study proposed by Monticelli, which are anchored in the notion of something that is flexible, plastic, in development, that is, unfinished.

It is worth pointing out that the task of making distinctions between what can and cannot reveal the different fields of the societal environment of the research is difficult, because by its nature and that of the study under analysis, these fields overlap, and are not linear.

However, the field of social demand, understood as that which will reveal the needs of the particular society to which the researcher pertains (in this case, nursing and Brazilian society), is made explicit, among other argumentative spaces of the thesis, when Monticelli, although recognizing the contributions of national studies in the field of reproductive health, states that these, including those with an anthropological focus, concentrate on the phase of the birth itself and minimally treat the post-birth hospitalization period. Similarly, she signals that these studies almost all do not include the relationships with the family nor with other members of the nursing team that work together in the maternity institutions.⁶

Therefore, in this stage of the thesis under analysis, one is able to perceive elements of the field of social demand, since Monticelli's argumentation brings data from nursing (social field of the researcher), which justifies her interest in the theme. In this sense, she also states that the mid-level and beginning nursing workers are almost invisible in the literature, constituting a "marginal theme, about which little or almost nothing has been written".^6:17 Thus, she formulates inquiries in regard to the experiences, contributions and meanings of these professionals relative to the field of childbirth, among other aspects, which serve as motivation for development of the study.

The elements, already analyzed, also allow one to glimpse individual and social values of the author, which guide her in the definition of the object of the research, which indicates presence of the axiological field. This field encompasses the values mentioned above, which condition the research, since persecution of the scientific effort is sustained by them. Thus, the researcher is guided by cultural values of the society to which she pertains, which will influence the choice of her objects of study.⁵

In the way in which the author, in order to qualify and clarify the research problem, articulates her professional trajectory and perception about the relationships that are established in the field of nursing assistance to childbirth, highlighting beginning and mid-level professionals, with the framework, identifies that the fields of the societal environment of the research are inseparable, because they overlap, in constant circular movements. Additionally, analysis of the thesis allows for the perception that these fields are part of an intellectual process of the researcher, from approximation to a given phenomenon, as a result of her anxieties, to the configuration of an epistemic field.

The quadripolar space of the research: from definition of its poles to the tessitura of the network that anchors the objectification of the scientific fact

In search of the quadripolar space in the thesis under analysis, from its introduction there is the presence of the theoretical pole. The author, supported in the literature on nursing and anthropology of health, specifically hermeneutics and critique, states that for definition of the research problem it is necessary to surround it with theoretical elements and practices to dominate the object (place it in suspension), in a way to obtain a more comprehensive idea of its entire magnitude. For this, in the introductory part, supported in a frame of reference, the author broaches the insertion of the workers into the institutional practice, aspects of the rooming-in, including participation of the family in this context.⁶ For this, the author uses comparative and anchoring literature.

In the second chapter, she explicitly brings in the "Theoretical Support" in which, among four sub-items, she treats aspects related to the anthropological concepts of health and nursing pertinent to the elucidation of the object of study. This is supported, in a critical manner, in the explanatory model of Kleinman, for whom there are different dimensions of disease, expressed by synonymous English language terms, but for which there is the possibility of a semantic distinction. The terms are: disease (illness process), illness (illness experience) and sickness (social illness).¹⁰

Thus, disease refers to abnormalities in the structure and function of the organs and systems; it is what occurs when the physiology stops being "normal," or when people become hosts to organisms that limit their capacities or life expectancy. Illness concerns the experiences that imply changes in the states of being of the subject and in his/her social role; it applies to the most subjective or psychological dimensions of the lack of health. Sickness alludes to the social dimension of the disease, that is, it refers to the incapacity to fulfill obligations of group life, as a result of the individual being defined, by the others, as someone who is unhealthy.^10-11

Based on the theoretical-philosophical anthropology of health, Monticelli assumes that: a) "childbirth is not disease, as it is being considered and treated by the hegemonic professional knowledge;" and further, that: b) although "people and families are going through the same event of the childbirth or through the same organic and functional abnormalities that may be involved in the birthing process, the experiences occur in a totally diverse manner (illness)." ^6:53 Then, the author affirms that, based on these assumptions, she uses these concepts to reflect on the puerperium experienced by the families within the hospital institution and the relationships with the health care professionals.

Furthermore, in the "Theoretical Support" stage (theoretical pole), the author touches upon the clinical reality, and in it uses authors whose thinking is anchored in the critical approach to the anthropology of health, which discuss questions of power in the professional-patient relationship, and especially within hospitals (and, remitted to the object of the study, in the scenario of maternities).

In this chapter, the author also deals with the narrative in the clinical practice, from theories of hermeneutic anthropology, as a possibility of interpreting a determined social context, in the perspective of understanding the contents and social meanings of the experience. Here, Monticelli brings definitions and mentions the potential roles of the clinical narrative, reaffirming her choice for Kleinman's framework when she states: "the explanatory models of Kleinman (1980) may serve as a basis for the construction and interpretation of the narratives, in any context of health-disease".^6:58 This assertion is corroborated by other studies in the field of health.^12-13

Finally, in order to theoretically sustain her study, she lectures on the "authoritative knowledge on childbirth," when she mentions that, despite the existence of various systems of knowledge, for different reasons, some have more weight than others (consensus, efficacy, structural superiority/power).⁶ One of the consequences of this legitimation of determined knowledge (authoritative) is the devaluation and even displeasure relative to other types of knowledge. The construction of authoritative knowledge shows the relationships of power within the community in which this is produced. Based on this type of knowledge, people make decisions and justify their actions. This does not mean that knowledge itself is in a position of authority, but that it is founded on notions of interactionality and empowerment. ⁶

The aspects woven into the theoretical pole are constituted in the network over which Monticelli will anchor the content of the narratives, which she will obtain when she goes within the technical pole of the research.

The morphological pole is constituted in the moment that expresses the rules of structuring and formation of the scientific object, giving it a determined form, an ordering among its elements. This pole comprises the "methodological role of supplying a configuration, an architecture," to the research. She presents three inseparable characteristics, these being: exposition, causation and objectification.^5:162

Exposition is understood as the way in which the researcher defines the steps and articulates the parts of the study, so that there is internal coherence between them.⁵ It can be visualized in an analogous manner, as a picture of the totality of the object studied, seen as a system and not only as a process.

Causation (causality) is an action that makes it possible for something (occurrence, effect, situation, fact) to occur under determined theoretical conditions.⁵ It allows the researcher to explain or understand the problem that she proposed to analyze, guided by a determined lens, that is, through the theory that she uses to examine the object of study (events, practices, means of practice), which in this case is the anthropology of health.

Causality can be explanatory or comprehensive. Explanatory causality resorts to external factors, and has a time sequence that guides the establishment of the explanation. Comprehensive causality considers internal factors of the problem, understood by the subject in its totality. However, one must consider that this distinction has a didactic character, because they are complementary.⁵ The notion of complementarity is considered by Monticelli, when defined by the hermeneutic and critical approaches of the anthropology of health. In the first, explanations about the events from the understanding of childbirth as an "experience" and its comprehension in the symbolic field are favored; in the second, questions of power and its developments are brought to the discussion, which, most of the time, pertain to the elements of the macrostructure to which the social phenomena are submitted.⁶

The objectification is constituted in the third characteristic of the morphological pole. It is related to aspects of inter-objectivity, in which the inter-subjective critique of the researchers has the purpose of performing a regulatory role in the research. This aspect of the morphological pole intends to guarantee the rigor of the investigation process, that is, its scientificity.⁵

In the study under analysis, each time Monticelli chooses a specific author to guide her, for example, her definition with the explanatory model of Kleinman, she takes care to present arguments to support her choice, but does not fail to critique her choice, which shows her attention to this regulatory role.⁵ The author does not make a naive choice, and demonstrates awareness about the potentials and limitations of any theoretical model.

Additionally, in the search for scientific rigor of the production of knowledge in nursing,^14-15 and after collection of the field narratives and observations, Monticelli, through return to the actors involved in the research process, validates them, which denotes a concern with questions of "inter-objectivity". In this perspective, the subjective becomes the objective, when it takes on tones of science.

The technical pole entails procedures for the collection of information, and transformation of these into data pertinent to the problematic of the research. "It has the role of circumscribing the 'facts' into meaningful systems, through protocols of experimental substantiation of the empirical data". ^5:201

In this pole, the "information" becomes "data" through the application of collection techniques and its analysis and interpretation, and from there, scientific facts emerge. The choice of these techniques will be dependent on the problems of the research, or even working hypotheses that guide the theoretical development and verification. In this way, the information may become distinct data and scientific facts, dependent upon the technical (techniques of collection and analysis) and theoretical (theories) fields defined by the researcher.⁵

In the case studied, the collection techniques were ethnographic, specifically participant-observation, used as the principal qualified guide, and the ethnographic interview, as the complementary guide in the data survey.

It is important to emphasize that the term "data" could, in the conception of the framework adopted for this reflection, be substituted for "learnt," because it deals with an apprehension of the real that the investigation, in its technical pole, wants to assure. This apprehension does not permit the researcher to be based in this reality, but to produce in it specific testable and controllable effects.⁵

In the study under analysis, the author discusses in detail the steps taken to search for the information that, a posteriori, will be that "learnt" from the study, which is configured in the technical pole. Monticelli describes her entry into field research, in which from it she approximates to it to know it, become familiar with it (without ceasing to have an attitude of foreign to that observed) and to become familiar with the scenario - this stage called "preliminary entry to the field".^6:86

Next comes her entry to the field, in which approximation of the researcher with the nursing workers occurs, in order to explain the research project, make it known among them, to seek guarantee for application of ethnographic techniques of data collection - observation of their interaction with the families that experience the intra-hospital puerperium period, and interviews with these workers. From there she mentions that approximation with the families occurs concomitant to the process of observation.

Further regarding to the technical pole, the researcher gives importance to her time spent in the field, during which she is assimilated into the scenario, while at the same time remains a stranger in it. "As time went by, I was 'assimilated' as someone who 'is there,' but 'isn't.' [...] If in the beginning of data collection I 'sought' opportunities for observation, after four or five months I was invited by the workers to participate in situations of care and interaction between them and the families that were there, or some other activity that I had not previously planned".^6:92

The author also discusses the importance of her gradual exit from the field, and her ethical commitment to the actors involved in the investigation process. Here one perceives her concern with epistemic surveillance (epistemological pole), as well as a return to the axiological and social demand fields, to respectively reveal some of her personal values in the field research, and to show the potential of the results of the study for transformation of the scenario studied. "My exit from the field occurred very gradually, because I sought to maintain contact with the people even during the intense phase of writing the ethnography. During this period, I returned to the institution various times to gather more data, resolve doubts, polish the analytical view, ensure understanding of the themes, reevaluate recurring standards, reconfirm meanings and interpretations, realign perspectives of interpretation, guarantee the confirmability of the data and proceed to the validation of the findings. In agreement with the nursing workers, I chose to schedule meetings after defense of the thesis, to share the research findings, 'return' the results, and propose actions for new agreements and proposals for meetings".^6:94-5

In the same way, the epistemological pole is substantiated when the researcher shows concern for the rigor of the research, making it clear that she will follow criteria established by some authors, these being: credibility, confirmability, meaning in context, recurring standards, saturation and transferability.⁶

In the chapters in which the author approaches the information obtained in the scenario of the study, transforming them into "learnt," she does this anchored on the theories that sustain it and confronts them with comparative literature, at which point the interlocking of the technical, theoretical, morphological and epistemological poles occurs.

Under the light of the theoretical framework used in this analysis, in relation to the nature of the information from the field of social sciences, it is important to emphasize that these are events, phenomena that frequently are important before any scientific research. "This meaning of the 'social things' are derived from the symbolic practice of the social actors themselves, layered practice, codified in lexical groups." In this perspective, the doxological field, that is, "of the pre-reflexive experience and knowing is the first data of the investigation, to be transformed and reduced".^5:202 However, in order for the investigation to take on a scientific character, the researcher must objectify this discourse to transform it into science, not purely and simply repeating mythical and ideological discourses.⁵

It is worth remembering that "the information conserves the meaning of the effective social practices, the data should first neutralize this meaning and transform it into meaning pertinent to the scientific research".^5:203 Thus, when the researcher is faced with the "data," that which was "understood" in the doxological field, she should abandon this field and introduce it into the theoretical and epistemological fields.

In the process of objectification of the information, there are three ways to transform it into data and fact: through phenomenological knowledge (when the researcher "thinks" about her own situation as researcher in light of the data collected, adhering to the data in a more intimate manner); the objectivist (when the researcher "thinks" about her situation as researcher, radically distinguishing herself from the data collected); and the praxiologic (when she "thinks" about her approach as an integral part of the observations to better control her appearance).⁵ In this sense, in the study analyzed, the author, when opting for the qualitative approach to her study, does this with a phenomenological attitude, because among its characteristics, "the researcher remains sensitive to the effects of her presence with the people of the study, seeking to minimize them without having the pretention of eliminating them".^6:69

To end the analysis of Monticelli's work, it was identified that the epistemological pole imbues it, since it represents a process of reflection, with critical vigilance about the theories and procedures used in the investigation, as well as its results. It excels from the rigor in the search for the guarantee of the objectification of the scientific fact.⁵

CONCLUSION

Contemporary research as a social process of production of knowledge represents a useful space in Brazilian nursing, that has contributed to the formation, strengthening and updating of this field, conferring critical and reflexive evaluation to professional practice, in addition to greater visibility and social recognition of the profession.

The analytical reading of this thesis, from the perspective of the societal fields and quadripolar methodological space of the research, while it demanded the disassociation of its components, made possible the recognition that these meet intimately overlap, with complementarity between them.

The theoretical-practical exercise of analysis of a study that wants to be scientific through a determined lens, as proposed in this reflection, has the potential to assist in the instrumentalization of researchers for the production of knowledge, also contributing to the amplification of professional knowing/doing. In this sense, the application of this exercise of reflection turns to the academic practice of critique about the construction of sustained scientific knowledge, and not to the assistance practice itself. Thus, the exercise developed here may result in the acquisition of greater "criticality" in the development and analysis of research by future nursing researchers.

Additionally, the contribution is related to the presentation of an experience of the demonstration of a scientific practice that constructs a particular matrix of understanding and interpretation from a phenomenon situated in the field of nursing.⁵

In this logic, De Bruyne's explanatory bases and frame of reference for the critical analysis of the production of knowledge in the epistemic field, when applied per se in the analysis of research that has already been done, still does not serve as a basis for generalizations, configured as a potent device for the development of scientific thinking and the construction of the intellectual posture anchored in the praxic dimension of academic knowing/doing. It can contribute to the formation of new researchers for nursing and the epistemological attainment of the results of their investigations and reflections.

From this perspective, and considering that there are no universal, absolute and permanent truths, it is understand that this reflexive exercise does not end here, in that the intentionality to articulate other lenses for analysis of scientific studies is recognized. This can make it possible to expose the circumstances and factors implied in the production of knowledge, including nursing, in addition to instigating new concerns, in a constant dialectic of production of "learned" subjects that are always in "inauguration."

REFERENCES

1. Consejo Internacional de Enfermeras (CIE). Declaración de posición: Investigación de enfermería [online]; 2007 [acesso 2012 Jul 01]. Disponible en: http://www.icn.ch/images/stories/documents/publications/position_statements/B05_ Investigacion_enfermeria-Sp.pdf

2. Erdmann AL. Editorial. A necessidade de atingirmos novos patamares na pesquisa de enfermagem. Acta Paul Enferm. 2009; 22(2):vi.

3. Mendoza-Parra S, Paravic-Klijn T, Muñoz-Muñoz AM, Barriga AO, Jiménez-Contreras E. Visibility of Latin American nursing research (1959 - 2005). J Nurs Scholarship. 2009 Mar; 41(1):54-63.

4. Carvalho V. Por uma epistemologia do cuidado de enfermagem e a formação dos sujeitos do conhecimento na área da enfermagem - do ângulo de uma visão filosófica. Esc Anna Nery Rev Enferm. 2009 Abr-Jun; 13(2):406-14.

5. De Bruyne P, Herman J, Schouteete M. Dinâmica da pesquisa em ciências sociais. 5ª ed. Rio de Janeiro (RJ): Francisco Alves Editora; 1991.

6. Monticelli M. Aproximações culturais entre trabalhadoras de enfermagem e famílias, no contexto do nascimento hospitalar: uma etnografia de alojamento conjunto [tese]. Florianópolis (SC): Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina. Programa de Pós-Graduação em Enfermagem; 2003.

7. Medina JL. La construcción del saber en enfermería: una visión ontoepistemológica. In: Anais do XII Colóquio Panamericano de Investigación en Enfermería, 2010 ago-set 29-02; Florianópolis, Brasil. Florianópolis (SC): ALADEFE/UDUAL/OPAS; 2010.

8. Ministério da Ciência e Tecnologia (BR). Plataforma Lattes - Currículo Lattes de Marisa Monticelli [página da Internet]. Brasília (DF): CNPq; 2012 [atualizado 2012 Jun 29; acesso 2012 Jul 01]. Disponível em: http://lattes.cnpq.br/3614843155038522

9. Benjumea CC. La investigación cualitativa y el desarrollo del conocimiento en enfermería. Texto Contexto Enferm, 2010 Out-Dez; 19(4):762-6.

10. Eisenberg L, Kleinman A. Clinycal social science. In: Eisenberg L, Kleinman A, editors. The relevance of social science for medicine: culture, illness and healing 1. Holland/Boston/London: D. Redel Publishinsg Company; 1980. p.1-23.

11. Twaddle AC. Sickness and the sickness carrer: some implacations. In: Eisenberg L, Kleinman A, editors. The relevance of social science for medicine: culture, illness and healing 1. Holland: D. Redel Publishinsg Company; 1980. p. 111-33.

12. Grossman E, Cardoso MHCA. As narrativas em medicina: contribuições à prática clínica e ao ensino da medicina. Rev Bras Educ Med. 2006 Jan-Abr; 30(1):6-14.

13. Favoretto CAO, Camargo Jr. KR. A narrativa como ferramenta para o desenvolvimento da prática clínica. Interface - Comunic, Saude, Educ. 2011 Abr-Jun; 15(37):473-83.

14. Carvalho V. Sobre conhecimento geral e específico para uma epistemologia da enfermagem. Esc Anna Nery. 2007 Jun; 11(2):337-42.

15. Carvalho V. Sobre a objetividade na relação sujeito/objeto e a esfera instrumental/organizacional. Esc Anna Nery. 2008 Jun; 12(2):334-40.

Received: August 16, 2012

Approved: August 23, 2013

Publication Dates

• Publication in this collection
  06 Feb 2014
• Date of issue
  Dec 2013

History

• Received
  Aug 2012
• Accepted
  Aug 2013