Nurse Education Today
Volume 24, Issue 2 , Pages 121-127 , February 2004

Angel, handmaiden, battleaxe or whore? A study which examines changes in newly recruited student nurses’ attitudes to gender and nursing stereotypes

,Accepted 2 October 2003.

References 

  1. Bridges J. Literature review on the image of the nurse and nursing in the media. Journal of Advanced Nursing. 1990;15(7):850–854
  2. Carlowe J. Definitely no wings. Nursing Standard. 2000;14(36):16–17 24th May
  3. Coombes R. What do little girls dream of?. Nursing Times. 2000;96(9):7
  4. Couch S. Professionals – myth or reality?. Nursing Management. 1996;3(6):1–12
  5. Crocker AC. Statistics for the Teacher. London: NFER; 1974;
  6. Cunningham A. Nursing stereotypes. Nursing Standard. 1999;13(45):46–47 28th July
  7. Jinks AM. A study of attitudes to gender and nursing stereotypes in newly recruited student nurses. Nurse Education Today. 1993;13:287–294
  8. Kalisch PA, Kalisch BJ. The Changing Image of the Nurses. Menlo Park, CA: Addison-Wesley; 1987;
  9. Kinnear PJ, Gray CD. SPSS for Windows Made Simple. third ed.. East Sussex: Psychology Press Ltd; 1999;
  10. Payne D. New year, new image. Nursing Times. 2000;96(1):14–15 January 6th
  11. Savage J. The Politics of Nursing. London: Heinemann; 1985;
  12. United Kingdom Central Council for Nursing, Midwifery and Health Visiting, 1999. Fitness for Practice (the ‘Peach Report’), UKCC, London
  13. Wallis L. Bossy stereotypes makes nurses unlucky in love. Nursing Standard. 2000;14(42):8; July 5th
  14. Wilson, P., 2001. I wouldn’t mind being called an ‘over-charge nurse’, Nursing Standard, June 6th, 15,38,31

PII: S0260-6917(03)00153-9

doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2003.10.011

Nurse Education Today
Volume 24, Issue 2 , Pages 121-127 , February 2004