原著

Role Model Behaviors of Nursing Facultyin Japan and the United States
Tomomi Kameoka1
Naomi Funashima2
Patricia Ann. Gorzka3
Kumiko Hongo4
Nobuko Yamashita5
Toshiko Nakayama2
Mika Hattori5
1 National College of Nursing, Japan；1-2-1 Umezono, Kiyose-shi, Tokyo, 〒 204-8575, Japan
2 Chiba University
3 University of South Florida
4 Saniku Gakuin College
5 Gunma Prefectural College of Health Sciences
kameokat@adm.ncn.ac.jp【Abstract】To compare the self-evaluation of role model behaviors of nursing faculty in Japan and the United States, a cross-sectional research was
conducted. Nursing faculty in Bachelor of Science in Nursing programs in both Japan（n = 328）and the United States（n = 307）participated.
Originally developed in Japanese, the Self-Evaluation Scale on Role Model Behaviors of Nursing Faculty（RMBNF）was administered to theJapanese participants. The translated English version of the RMBNF was received by participants in the United States. Data were analyzed
statistically. The mean score on the RMBNF of the United States participants was signiﬁcantly higher than that of the Japanese participants（p <.001）. The mean score of each sub-scale showed that the participants of both countries gave the highest evaluation to “behaviors that show respect tostudents” and the lowest evaluation to “behaviors oriented to ongoing professional development. The factors that relate to the differences of the selfevaluations of the role model behaviors should be explored.

【Keywords】 Role model behavior, nursing faculty, Japan, United States
Introduction

nursing faculty in the United States（US）and Japan, who were

In nursing education, students attempt to imitate the behaviors

cross-cultural research on role model behaviors of nursingof members of the nursing faculty, as observed in the classroom

faculty was found in the literature. The similarities andor in a clinical setting（Campbell et al., 1994）, and internalize

differences between the role model behaviors of such individuals

the values and norms of these nursing professionals（Coats,in Japan and those in the US were explored. Social forces are in1997）. Role model behaviors of nursing faculty members areconstant motion within social systems, and the interplay of thesedefined as the behaviors that reflect the attitude of nursing

forces influences social behaviors, interaction, and perception

professionals when performing various functions, including（King, 1981, p.11）. Therefore, cultural differences will have an

teaching activities and nursing practice. Students observe these

impact on the differences of role model behavior in eachbehaviors and identify with them as their ideal status.

country. The ﬁndings of this research will help nursing faculty ininterested in the role model behaviors of nursing faculty. No

Girard（2006）points out that during the 1970s and 1980s,

both countries to understand the uniqueness of their own role

many studies were conducted and many articles were written on

model behaviors toward their autonomous professional

the importance of role models, or role model behaviors, and thedevelopment.

concept remains important in nursing education today. It is
common to all countries of the world. Therefore, the importanceof the role model behaviors shown by nursing faculty to students

Participants

is a global concern.

Methods

Nursing faculty in Japan and the US participated in this cross-

The present study details the first phase of an international

sectional study. For Japan, secondary data derived fromcross-cultural research project examining the role model

randomly sampled nursing faculty（n = 328）in Bachelor of

behaviors of nursing faculty members, which was conducted by

Science in Nursing（BSN）programs in Japan who had− 1 −J Nurs Studies NCNJ Vol. 12 No. 1 2013

participated in a project examining ethical behaviors from 2007

to .81. The results of factor analysis showed that factor

to 2008 were used（Murakami et al., 2010）. For US, nursing

structures of each RMBNF were almost identical, and suggested

faculty, who attended four international nursing conferences,that the RMBNF-E had well-established construct validity andwere asked to collaborate the study, and they answered theequality with RMBNF-J.

questionnaire at there or distribute the instruments to their

The FAQ is a questionnaire that examines the demographic

colleague or friends after coming back to their school from 2006

characteristics of nursing faculty. Content validity was assessed

to 2008. After that, 307 US faculty participated in the study. Twoby a panel of experts and use of a pilot study（Funashima,

instruments, the Self-Evaluation Scale on Role Model Behaviors

2002）
.

of Nursing Faculty（RMBNF）and the Faculty Attribute
Questionnaire（FAQ）, were used. Fifty-three of the 307 US

Data Analysis

participants returned the RMBNF and FAQ documents via

The Statistical Package for the Social Sciences（SPSS forelectronic mail after completion, while the remaining 254

Windows）was used to analyze the data. Normality of data wasparticipants completed these documents at four international

examined before statistical analysis was performed.

nursing conferences, and returned them either on site or throughEthical Considerations

the conventional mail.

All recruitment procedures for the research were approved by
the institutional review board of Gunma Prefectural College of

Measures

Health Sciences in Japan and that of the University of SouthThe original Japanese versions of both the RMBNF

Florida in the US.

（RMBNF-J）and the FAQ（FAQ-J）（Funashima, 2002）were
administered to the Japanese participants, while the English

Resultstranslated versions of the RMBNF（RMBNF-E; Funashima,2009; Kameoka et al., 2007）and the FAQ（FAQ-E）were

Demographic Characteristics of Participants

administered to the US participants.

The demographic characteristics of the participants are

The RMBNF-J was developed based on a qualitative researchsummarized in Table 1. Japanese participants（n = 328）differedstudy（Funashima et al., 2002）, in which 1417 Japanese student

significantly from those in the US（n = 307）in terms of age,nurses were asked to answer the open-ended question, “Pleaseacademic degree, basic nursing education, years of clinicalwrite the behaviors used by your faculty that you aspire to.”experience, years of teaching experience, job title, and nursing

Qualitative analysis of the findings identified 35 categories,

specialty（p < .001）. The members of the Japanese faculty werewhich were used as the basis of the items of the RMBNF-J. The

significantly younger than the members of faculty in the US.

35 items of the RMBNF-J use a 5-point Likert-type scale

Approximately 61% of participants in Japan had a master's（5=Always, 4=Almost Always, 3=Usually, 2=Occasionally,

degree and only 18% possessed a doctoral degree, while in the

1=Almost Never）grouped into ﬁve sub-scales, and scores are

US, 58% of participants held a doctoral degree and 40% had athen reported by five sub-scales: “Behaviors that show social

masterʼs degree. In Japan, 52% of participants had over 8 years

appropriateness,” “Behaviors that show respect to students,”

of clinical experience and 50% had over 8 years of teaching“Behaviors that show the value of nursing practice and nursing

experience. In the US, 83% of participants had over 8 years ofprofession,” “Behaviors associated with enthusiastic and highclinical experience, while 70% had over 8 years of teachingquality teaching,” and “Behaviors oriented to ongoingexperience. The highest percentage, or 38%, of the members ofprofessional development.” A high score on the RMBNF-J or E

the Japanese faculty held the rank of instructor, while theindicates that the nursing faculty self-evaluated their role model

greatest percentage of the members of the participating US

behaviors adequately. Cronbachʼs alpha coefficient of thefaculty, 31%, held the rank of assistant professor. Both Japanese

RMBNF-J was .96, and that of each sub-scale ranged from .81

and US faculty had representation in every clinical specialty,

to .90（Funashima, 2002）.

with medical surgical nursing having the highest representation

The RMBNF-E was developed on the basis of the RMBNF-J.

in the faculty from both countries.

Back-translations were performed three times to obtain equality
across the two versions. Cronbachʼs alpha coefficient of theRole Model Behaviors

RMBNF-E was .90, and that of each sub-scale ranged from .76

国立看護大学校研究紀要

第 12 巻

第1号

2013 年− 2 −The scores of the RMBNF-J of the Japanese participants andTable 1

Demographic Characteristics of the Participants

Demographic Characteristics

All participants
N = 635

Japanese participants US participants
N = 328
N = 307

GenderFemaleMale

N = 631609（96.5%）22（ 3.5%）

N = 325318（97.8%）
7（ 2.2%）

N = 306291（95.1%）
15（ 4.9%）Age（years）*
26 〜 30
31 〜 35
36 〜 40
41 〜 45
46 〜 50
51 〜 55
56 〜 60
Over 61

N = 625
27（ 4.3%）
54（ 8.6%）80（12.8%）
86（13.8%）
101（16.2%）
122（19.5%）
98（15.7%）
57（ 9.1%）

N = 32024（ 7.5%）
49（15.3%）
65（20.3%）
59（18.4%）
46（14.4%）
31（ 9.7%）25（ 7.8%）21（ 6.6%）

N = 3053（ 1.0%）5（ 1.6%）15（ 4.9%）27（ 8.9%）55（18.0%）91（29.8%）73（23.9%）36（11.8%）

Academic degree*
None（Diploma graduate）
Associate degree
Baccalaureate degree
Masterʼs degree
Doctoral degree

N = 6246（ 1.0%）8（ 1.3%）63（10.1%）
316（50.6%）231（37.0%）

N = 3246（ 1.9%）6（ 1.9%）56（17.3%）
198（61.1%）
58（17.9%）

N = 3000（ 0.0%）2（ 0.7%）7（ 2.3%）118（39.3%）
173（57.7%）

Basic nursing education *DiplomaADN
BSN

N = 629
133（21.1%）72（11.4%）424（67.4%）

N = 328
113（34.5%）63（19.2%）
152（46.3%）

N = 30120（ 6.6%）9（ 3.0%）272（90.4%）

Years of clinical experience*0〜3
4 〜７
8 〜 15
Over 16

N = 63249（ 7.8%）
157（24.8%）210（33.2%）
216（34.2%）

N = 328
34（10.4%）
122（37.2%）
132（40.2%）40（12.2%）

N = 304
15（ 4.9%）35（11.5%）
78（25.7%）
176（57.9%）

Years of teaching experience*
0〜3
4〜7
8 〜 15
Over 16

N = 628
141（22.5%）
113（18.0%）173（27.5%）201（32.0%）

N = 327100（30.6%）65（19.9%）90（27.5%）72（22.0%）

N = 30141（13.6%）
48（15.9%）83（27.6%）
129（42.9%）

Job title*
Instructor
Assistant professor
Associate professor
Professor/Dean/President

N = 609
191（31.4%）
159（26.1%）
141（23.2%）
118（19.4%）

N = 327
125（38.2%）70（21.4%）
63（19.3%）
69（21.1%）

N = 282
66（23.4%）
89（31.6%）
78（27.7%）
49（17.4%）

Nursing specialty *Fundamental nursing
Medical-surgical nursing
Gerontological nursing
Maternal/Child nursing
Community nursing
Psychiatric/mental health nursing
Others

N = 616111（18.0%）
148（24.0%）40（ 6.5%）
118（19.2%）75（12.2%）
34（ 5.5%）90（14.6%）

N = 318
79（24.8%）
68（21.4%）
23（ 7.2%）
78（24.5%）
52（16.4%）
18（ 5.7%）0（ 0.0%）N = 298
32（10.7%）80（26.8%）17（ 5.7%）40（13.4%）
23（ 7.7%）
16（ 5.4%）90（30.2%）

Note. * Chi-square test p < .001 between the Japanese participants and the US participants.
those of RMBNF-E of the US participants are shown in theparticipants than for the US participants, with significant

Table 2.

differences observed between the participants of the two

The mean item score of the RMBNF of Japanese participants

countries（p < .0001）.

（mean = 3.90, SD = .53）was lower than that of US participants

Therefore, further analyses were conducted to explore（mean = 4.34, SD = .34）, and there was a signiﬁcant difference

whether the differences of the background of the nursing faculty

between them（p < .0001）. Each mean item score of the five

participants in both countries influenced the scores of the

sub-scales of the RMBNF was lower for the Japanese

RMBNF. An ANOVA was conducted to explore the demographic− 3 −J Nurs Studies NCNJ Vol. 12 No. 1 2013

attributes, which relate to the RMBNF scores. Results showed（p < .001）.

that there were significant differences of mean scores of

The mean item scores of the RMBNF were then compared

RMBNF in age, academic degree, basic nursing education, years

between both countries with regard to the following categories:

of clinical experience, years of teaching experience, and job title“over 41 years old,” “obtained masterʼs or doctoral degree,”（p < .001）. The results of the ad hoc test showed that nursing“graduated from a baccalaureate program in nursing,” “had more

faculty members aged over 41 years obtained higher scores ofthan 8 years of clinical experience,” “had more than 16 years of

RMBNF than those with an age less than 39 years（p < .001）;

teaching experience,” and was “professor/dean/president,

the nursing faculty members who had a master's or doctoral

associate professor or assistant professor.” The results showed

degree obtained higher scores of RMBNF than those who hadthat the US participants obtained higher scores than did theobtained less than a baccalaureate degree（p < .001）; nursing

Japanese participants in every category（Table 3）.

faculty members who graduated from a baccalaureate program

Furthermore, the ranking of the RMBNF sub-scale meanin nursing obtained higher scores of RMBNF than those whoscores was examined and compared between countries. Japanese

graduated from an associate degree program in nursing or

participants obtained the highest score on sub-scale 2 “Behaviors

diploma program in nursing（p < .001）; nursing facultythat show respect to students.” This was followed by sub-scale 3

members who had over 8 years of clinical experience obtained“Behaviors that show value of nursing practice and nursing

higher scores than those who had less than 7 years of clinicalprofession,” sub-scale 4 “Behaviors associated with enthusiastic

experience（p < .001）; nursing faculty members who had more

and high quality teaching,” and sub-scale 1 “Behaviors that show

than 16 years of teaching experience obtained higher scores thansocial appropriateness.” Sub-scale 5, ” Behaviors oriented tothose who had less than 15 years of teaching experience（p <ongoing professional development” was rated the lowest. The.001）; and nursing faculty members with a job title of professor/

results pertaining to the US participants showed the same orderdean/president, associate professor or assistant professorof scores.

obtained higher scores than those with the job title of instructor
Table 2Comparison of Mean Item Score of the RMBNF and Its Sub-scales between Participants from Japan and the US
n of items

Total score

Japan（n = 328） US（n = 307）
Mean（SD）

Mean（SD）

35

3.90（.53）

4.32（.34）

Sub-scale 1

Behaviors that show social appropriateness6

3.75（.60）

4.28（.44）

Sub-scale 2

Behaviors that show respect to students

8

4.07（.57）

4.48（.42）

Sub-scale 3

Behaviors that show value of nursing practice and nursing profession

7

4.09（.68）

4.47（.43）

Sub-scale 4

Behaviors associate with enthusiastic and high quality teaching

5

3.78（.70）

4.46（.43）

Sub-scale 5

Behaviors oriented towards ongoing professional development9

3.69（.76）

4.00（.59）

Table 3 Mean Item Score of the RMBNF between the Participants from Japan and the US, based on Personal Characteristics
Mean item score of the RMBNF
Mean（SD）tp

N = 2824.31（.34）

–8.28

<.001

Academic degree: Masterʼs or doctoral degree

N = 583.91（.55）

N = 173
4.36（.33）

–7.40

<.001

Basic nursing education: Baccalaureate program in nursing

N = 152
3.82（.54）

N = 272
4.33（.34）–11.66<.001

Years of clinical experience: Over 8 years

N = 172
3.93（.50）

N = 2544.33（.34）–10.43<.001

Years of teaching experience: Over 16 years

N = 72
3.98（.46）

N = 129
4.36（.34）

–6.62

<.001

Job title: Professor/dean/president, associate professor, or assistant professor

N = 2024.00（.50）

N = 2164.32（.34）

–7.98

<.001

Personal Characteristics

Japan

US

Age: Over 41 years old

N = 182
4.00（.48）

国立看護大学校研究紀要

第 12 巻

第1号

2013 年− 4 −Discussion

different between people from the Western world and those fromthe East, and a number of investigations, using a variety of

The findings showed that the total mean item score of themethodologies, have shown that many self-enhancement biases

RMBNF of the Japanese participants（mean = 3.90, SD = .53）

are less prevalent in Eastern cultures（e.g. China, Korea, Japan）

was lower than that of the US participants（mean = 4.34, SD =than in Western cultures（e.g. America, Canada and the countries.34）, and that there was a signiﬁcant difference between them（pof Western Europe）（Brown & Kobayashi, 2002）. This suggests< .001）. Japanese participants obtained lower scores than US

the possibility that the Japanese participants self-evaluated lower

participants on all item mean scores of the ﬁve sub-scales of thethan the US participants in the present study because of their

RMBNF, and there were significant differences between thecultural characteristics.

participants of the two countries（p < .001）. These results

A third possibility to consider is the differences of theshowed that the Japanese participants self-evaluated their rolesampling methods of the participants in both countries. Most ofmodel behaviors lower than did the US participants.

the US participants were nursing faculty members who attended

There may be several reasons for this, the first being theinternational nursing conferences, while all of the Japanesedifferences in the background of the participants. The

participants were randomly selected for the primary survey.

participants of the two countries were considerably different

When nursing faculty members attend such internationalwith regard to age distribution, years of clinical experience,

conferences, it may mean that they are motivated for self-

years of teaching experience, job title, and academic

directed learning better than people who do not attend them. Not

background. The Japanese participants were younger and had

the difference of the countries, but that of the self-directedness

less clinical experience and teaching experience than the US

may reflect it in the difference in result of the nursing faculty

participants. Furthermore, the positions and academic

members of the two countries, because self-directed learning

backgrounds of the Japanese participants were lower than thoseleads people to obtain higher professional competence（Snape etof the US participants.

al., 2006）. An exploration of the variables that influence theFaculty member characteristics, such as experience andeducational preparation, are important to high quality teachingdifferences of the mean scores of the RMBNF between the U.S.
and the Japanese participants is an issue for future research.

（American Association of Colleges of Nursing, 2009）. If aThe mean item score for each sub-scale of the RMBNF for

nursing faculty member has lengthy clinical experience, teachingparticipants from both countries showed that their score orderexperience, and advanced educational preparation, then thatwas identical. The participants of both countries obtained theindividual can perform more adequately. In the present study, thehighest score on sub-scale 2 “Behaviors that show respect to

US participants had the longer duration of both clinicalstudents.” This was followed by sub-scale 3 “Behaviors thatexperience and teaching experience, and higher educational

show value of nursing practice and nursing profession,” sub-preparation than the Japanese participants. These differences

scale 4 “Behaviors associated with enthusiastic and high quality

may have influenced the self-evaluation of the role model

teaching,” sub-scale 1 “Behaviors that show social appropriateness,”behaviors between the participants of both countries. However,

and, finally, sub-scale 5 “Behaviors oriented towards ongoing

the results also showed that the mean item scores of the RMBNF

professional development,” which scored the lowest. Thisof the US participants were higher than those of the Japanesesuggests that both the Japanese participants and the US

participants in the following categories: “over 41 years old,”participants perform well in behaviors that show respect to“obtained masterʼs or doctoral degree,” “graduated from a

students and that the participants of both countries should

baccalaureate program in nursing,” “had more than 8 years ofimprove the behaviors oriented towards ongoing professional

clinical experiences,” “had more than 16 years of teachingdevelopment.

experiences,” and was “professor/dean/president, associate

Sub-scale 2 had six items（e.g., “Listen earnestly to what

professor or assistant professor.” This suggests that thestudents say,” “Deal with each student in a sincere manner,”differences of the mean scores of the RMBNF in both countries“Answer studentsʼ questions even when the questions may seemdo not always relate to the demographic background of thetrivial”）. These six items express behaviors that are closely

participants.

related to ethical behaviors. Respecting the life and dignity of

A further consideration is cultural background. Most people

people and reacting in faithful way are ethically important forevaluate themselves favorably when comparing themselves withnursing professionals（Henshow, 2008; Fry & Johnstone, 2002）.

others（Brown & Kobayashi, 2002）. However, the tendency isThus, the results of the present study suggest that members of− 5 −J Nurs Studies NCNJ Vol. 12 No. 1 2013

nursing faculty in both Japan and the US react to students in an■ References

ethical way as nursing professionals.
Sub-scale 5 has nine items（e.g., “Read the latest professional

American Association of Colleges of Nursing（2009）.

journals,” “Actively attend professional conferences,” and “HaveNursing faculty tool kit for the implementation of theclear professional goals”）. There are several possible

baccalaureate essentials.

explanations for the low ranking of this sub-scale. Participants

Brown, J., & Kobayashi, C.（2002）. Self-enhancement in

may have been inﬂuenced by their perception of time available

Japan and America. Asian Journal of Social Psychology,

for teaching students versus professional development; again

5 , 145-167.

placing more emphasis on interacting with students. Participants

Campbell, I. E., Larrivee, L., Field, P. A., Day, R. A., &from both countries may actually place less value on

Reutter, L.（1994）. Learning to nurse in the clinicalprofessional development than behaviors involving interactions

setting, Journal of Advanced Nursing, 20 , 1125-1131.

with students. This tendency may be similar in nursing faculty

Coats, G.（1997）. Differences in perceived role modelingregardless of the cultural difference.

behaviors of clinical instructors and staff nurses by

It is important for the development of nursing faculty in bothcountries to discuss the strategies for improving the behaviors

associate degree nursing students, Doctoral Dissertation,
California State University Dominguez Hills.

oriented toward ongoing professional development. An

Fry, S., & Johnstone, M-J.（2002）. Ethics in nursing practice;awareness of how students perceive role model behaviors may

A guide to ethical decision making（2nd ed.）, Blackwell

encourage faculty to openly demonstrate and promote actions

Publishing Ames, Iowa, USA.

and behaviors based around professional development. The

Funashima, N., Sadahiro, W., Kameoka, T., & Suzuki, M.

findings of similar faculty needs between Japan and the US（2002）. Development of Self-Evaluation Scale on Rolesuggest that the developmental needs of faculty must be

Model Behaviors for Nursing Faculty; based on theidentified at a global level. This implies that future research

qualitative research findings. Journal of School ofshould examine the self-evaluation of role model behaviors by

Nursing, Chiba University, 24 , 9-14. [In Japanese].

nursing faculty members in additional countries with cultural

Funashima, N.（Ed.）（2009）. Kangojissenn, kyouiku notamenosokuteiyougu file; Kaihatsu-kateikarakatsuyou no

differences.

jissai made [Instruments for nursing practice and nursing
education; Development process and its utilization]（2ndConclusionsed）. Tokyo, Igaku-Shoin Ltd, 291-300.

Similarities in the ranking of role model behaviors exist
between nursing faculty members in Japan and in the US,

Girard, N.J.（2006）. Like it or not, you are a role model.
AORN Journal, 84（1 ）, 13-15.

despite differences in demographic and cultural backgrounds.

Henshaw, C. M.（2008）. Faculty-student boundaries in

Nursing faculty members in both Japan and the US self-

associate degree nursing programs. Journal of Nursing

evaluated “behaviors that show respect to students” as higher

Education, 47（9 ）, 409-416.

and “behaviors oriented to ongoing professional development”

Kameoka, T., Nakayama, T., Funashima,N., Miura,H.,

as lower. However, demographic and cultural differences may

Yamashita,N., & Gorzka, P.A.（2007）. Development ofaccount for results within item scoring in which nursing faculty

instruments for cross-cultural research on role model

members in the US were inclined to self-evaluate their role

behaviors of nursing faculty in the United States andmodel behaviors higher than members of nursing faculty inJapan.（http://hdl.handle. net/10755/147690 , 2012/09/26）

Japan. Future research should examine, in detail, the relationshipKing, I. M.（1981）. A theory for nursing; Systems, concepts,

between role model behaviors and the cultural/demographic

process. New York: Delmar Publishers Inc.

backgrounds of nursing faculty members. Including those from

Murakami, M., Funashima, N., & Miura, H.（2010）. The

other countries is also the important issue. Replication of thisdevelopment of Self-Evaluation Scale on Ethicalresearch using a similar participant group from other countries

Behaviors for Nursing Faculty. Journal of Research forwill help to clarify the inﬂuence of culture and demographics on

Nursing Education, 19（1 ）, 35-45. [In Japanese].

faculty role model behaviors and lead to strategies for the

Snape, D., Tanner, E., & Sinclair, R., with Michaelson, J., &promotion of the desired such role model behaviors on a global

Finch, S.（2006）. National Adult Learning Survey

level.

（ NALS）2005（National Centre for Social Research;

国立看護大学校研究紀要

第 12 巻

第1号

2013 年− 6 −Report No. 815）
. Nottingham, UK: DfES Publications.
Wiseman, R. F.（1994）. Role model behaviors in the clinicalsetting. Journal of Nursing Education, 33（9 ）, 405-410.

【要旨】 看護学教員のロールモデル行動に対する自己評価について，日本と米国の比較を行った。研究対象は，日本の看護系大学
教員 328 名，および，米国の看護系大学教員 307 名であった。測定用具には，「看護学教員ロールモデル行動自己評価尺度」（SelfEvaluation Scale on Role Model Behaviors of Nursing Faculty: RMBNF）を用いた。これは，看護学教員のロールモデル行動の質を測定するための尺度であり，日本において開発された。そのため，日本の対象者には日本語原版を，米国の対象者には英語翻訳版を用いた。データ分析には，統計学的手法を用いた。その結果，RMBNF 総得点，および下位尺度得点の平均値は，全て，日米間に有意差があり，米国の看護系大学教員は，日本の看護系大学教員よりも高得点であった（p < .001）。また，下位尺度得点の平均値
は，日米ともに，看護系大学教員が，「学生を尊重し，誠実に対応する行動」の質を最も高く，「職業活動の発展を試行し続ける行動」の質を最も低く自己評価していることを示した。日米看護学教員のロールモデル行動の差異に関係する要因を探究することは，今後の課題である。

受付日 2012 年 8 月 24 日

− 7 −採用決定日 2012 年 11 月 14 日

J Nurs Studies NCNJ Vol. 12 No. 1 2013