CRITIQUE AND REPLICATION
This issue of Advances in Nursing Science (ANS) continues a long-standing tradition of publishing manuscripts that build on previously published articles in ANS. When I founded ANS in 1978, I made a commitment, along with the members of the journal's advisory board, to seek scholarly work that breaks new ground, offering new and challenging ideas and possibilities for the discipline of nursing. At the same time, we recognized that a single article representing a particular development in nursing scholarship could not stand alone, nor was any particular work static in the real world of practice. So we established the tradition of calling for articles that look back, that reassess, and that bring forward the evolution that occurs once ideas are subjected to the test of time.
This duty to revisit completed work is well established in the realm of empirical science. It is widely accepted that the findings of a single research study must be replicated and tested again and again in different contexts to achieve widespread acceptance, to be considered reliable and valid. In other realms of knowledge development, the same principle applies, only the methods for establishing lasting value shift. Fundamental ethical norms are a good example, where empirical evidence has some bearing on the processes required to establish strong and lasting ethical knowledge, but philosophic methods of logic dominate the process. Reflection and refinement over time, along with experiential evidence, lead to refined insights and reasoning that strengthen, refine, or challenge what had been previously established as knowledge.
The articles in this issue of ANS illustrate a wide range of scholarly methods used to further the development of prior work published in ANS. Regardless of the particular methods used, the articles in this issue exemplify the role of reasoning and critical reflection that is at the heart of any process aimed at refining and advancing ideas. These processes are not the easiest to employ, and there are no "how-to" manuals-they require creativity as well as discipline. They are based on well-established rules of logic, along with integration of new insights arising from contemporary norms and circumstances.
Most important, this process of critique and replication, as well as of reflection, revision and refinement, does not stop with the publication of these articles. Knowledge in a discipline advances in the context of a community of scholars. You, as the reader, are vital to this community. You can contribute to the ongoing development of the ideas presented in any of these articles in more ways than ever! As always, you can contribute a "letter to the editor" with your ideas and responses. But now we have a more dynamic avenue using the ANS Blog (http://ansjournalblog.com). Each of the articles in this issue will be featured on the blog and will include messages from the authors giving some background about their work, and on the blog you can participate in a conversation with the authors and other readers in an asynchronous discussion, critique, and challenge of these ideas. We encourage you to comment on the blog-share your ideas, your critiques, and stories related to the work of these authors! This interaction is at the heart of the very best critique that advances our discipline-so join the conversation today!
-Peggy L. Chinn, PhD, RN, FAAN
Editor