| Course | NR 501 Theoretical Basis for Advanced Nursing Practice |
|---|---|
| Week | 2 |
| Paper type | Theory selection rationale |
| Length | About 1,120 words, 3 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Chamberlain University |
| Program | MSN |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for NR 501 Week 2
Theory Selection Rationale: Reed's Theory of Self-Transcendence for Well-Being in Adults Dying of Cancer on an Inpatient Oncology Unit, Chosen Over Kolcaba's Comfort Theory
Student Name
College of Nursing, Chamberlain University
NR 501: Theoretical Basis for Advanced Nursing Practice
Instructor Name
Month Day, Year
Theory Selection Rationale: Reed's Theory of Self-Transcendence for Well-Being in Adults Dying of Cancer on an Inpatient Oncology Unit, Chosen Over Kolcaba's Comfort Theory
The Question, Sized
My question is: in adults with advanced cancer in their last weeks of life on an inpatient oncology unit, what nursing approaches are associated with greater well-being? The question is narrower than "how should nurses care for the dying," which belongs to a grand theory or a philosophy of nursing, and broader than "does a specific life-review intervention reduce anxiety," which could be answered by a single study without a theory at all. It sits at the level of middle-range theory: specific enough to name concepts that can be measured, general enough to guide more than one intervention.
Sizing the question first decides what kind of theory can answer it. A grand theory such as Rogers', examined in Week 1, can frame the question but cannot tell me what to measure. A practice protocol can tell me what to do but not why. I need something in between.
Which Statement of the Theory
The theory adopted is Pamela Reed's theory of self-transcendence. Reed first presented it in 1991, describing how she developed it by deductive reformulation: taking knowledge from life-span developmental psychology and reformulating it within Rogers' conceptual system, with clinical experience and research also contributing (Reed, 1991). In that article she proposed the theory as potentially useful in nursing settings where well-being may be compromised by end-of-life issues, which is exactly my setting.
For the rest of this term, I will quote the theory from Reed's current chapter in Middle Range Theory for Nursing (Reed, 2023), because the theory has been refined since 1991 and a paper quoting the earliest statement may describe concepts or relationships that the author has since changed. Where I cite the 1991 article, it will be for the theory's origins, not its current form.
Concepts Laid Against the Question
The theory's core concepts, as I read them in the current chapter, are vulnerability, self-transcendence and well-being, with moderating and mediating factors between them. Vulnerability is the awareness of one's mortality, often heightened by serious illness or aging. Self-transcendence is the capacity to expand the boundaries of the self, inward toward one's values and meaning, outward toward others and the world, across time by integrating past and future into the present, and beyond the self toward whatever the person finds greater. Well-being is a sense of feeling whole and healthy in one's own terms.
Laid against my question, the concepts fit closely. My patients are in a state of acute vulnerability by any definition. The outcome I care about is their well-being, not their survival. And the nursing approaches I see in practice that seem to help, such as helping a patient reconnect with family, talk about their life, or find meaning in their remaining time, map onto the dimensions of self-transcendence. The theory proposes that self-transcendence is related to well-being in people facing vulnerability, which is a relationship I could study.
A Rival Taken Seriously
The strongest rival is Katharine Kolcaba's theory of comfort (Kolcaba, 1994). It is also a middle-range theory, widely used in palliative and end-of-life care, and it treats comfort as a holistic outcome with physical, psychospiritual, sociocultural and environmental contexts. For many of my patients, comfort is the most immediate need, and a nurse who ignores it in favor of meaning-making would be failing them.
I set Kolcaba aside for this question for one reason. Comfort theory centers on relieving discomfort and meeting needs, which is essential but largely something nurses provide. My question is about something patients do: finding meaning and connection in the face of death. Self-transcendence theory is built around that inner activity and treats the nurse as someone who facilitates it. If my question were about symptom relief or the environment of care, Kolcaba would be the better choice.
Why Not a Borrowed Theory
A third option was to use a theory from outside nursing, most obviously Erik Erikson's account of the final stage of psychosocial development, in which older adults work toward integrity rather than despair. It is well known and intuitively fits dying patients. Two things led me away from it. The first is that Erikson described a developmental stage tied to late life, while many of my patients are in their forties and fifties, dying long before the stage the theory describes. The second is that Reed's theory already draws on life-span developmental psychology, including work in Erikson's tradition, and reformulates it for nursing, with attention to what nurses can do. Using the borrowed theory directly would mean doing that translation myself, less well.
This is not a dismissal of borrowed theory. I will return to it in Week 6, when the assignment is to critique how a borrowed theory has been used in nursing, because understanding what Reed took from developmental psychology, and what she changed, is part of understanding the theory I have chosen.
What the Choice Rules Out
Every choice of theory narrows what I will look at. Choosing self-transcendence means that physical symptoms, family burden and the hospital environment will appear in my work mainly as moderating factors or as vulnerabilities, not as outcomes in their own right. It also means that my outcome measure will be well-being as the patient defines it, which is harder to measure than pain scores and may be impossible to assess in patients too sick or too sedated to answer questions. That is a real limitation in a population in its last weeks, and I will need to decide whether to include family reports or restrict the question to patients able to respond.
It also means accepting the theory's roots in Rogers' abstract system, which some readers find hard to translate into practice. I accept that, because the middle-range theory has already done most of the translating, and because Reed and others have developed instruments, such as the Self-Transcendence Scale, that let the concept be measured.
The Decision, Recorded
The decision recorded here is to use Reed's theory of self-transcendence, as stated in the 2023 chapter, as the theoretical basis for my question about well-being at the end of life on an oncology unit, with Kolcaba's comfort theory held in reserve for questions about symptom relief. I will revisit the decision in Week 5, when I apply the theory to a real patient situation, and record whether it held.
References
Kolcaba, K. Y. (1994). A theory of holistic comfort for nursing. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 19(6), 1178-1184. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.1994.tb01202.x
Reed, P. G. (1991). Toward a nursing theory of self-transcendence: Deductive reformulation using developmental theories. Advances in Nursing Science, 13(4), 64-77. https://doi.org/10.1097/00012272-199106000-00008
Reed, P. G. (2023). Theory of self-transcendence. In M. J. Smith & P. R. Liehr (Eds.), Middle range theory for nursing (5th ed.). Springer Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1891/9780826139276.0007
NR 501 Week 2 instructions, in plain terms
The Week 2 rationale has you select a theory to guide a practice question and explain why it fits. You will likely need the question, the chosen theory with its source, a comparison of its concepts with your question, at least one alternative considered, the limits of the choice and APA. Size your question before choosing, since that decides whether a grand or middle-range theory fits. Say which version of the theory you will quote. Lay the theory's concepts against each part of the question and report the fit. Take the strongest rival seriously before setting it aside. Say what the choice rules out. Record the decision so later weeks can hold you to it.
How the NR 501 Week 2 example is put together
The question section asks which nursing approaches go with well-being in adults with advanced cancer in their final weeks on an inpatient unit, and explains why sizing it rules out a grand theory. The statement section describes Reed's deductive reformulation in 1991 and chooses the 2023 chapter for the rest of the term. The concepts section matches vulnerability, self-transcendence and well-being to the patients and outcome. The rival section presents Kolcaba's comfort theory as widely used in palliative care and sets it aside because comfort centers on relieving discomfort rather than the patient's own expansion. The borrowed theory section postpones Erikson. The limits section names symptoms, family burden and the environment as background. The decision is recorded.
Reading the NR 501 Week 2 grading rubric
Theory selection rubrics in NR 501 generally weigh a clearly stated question, an accurate description of the theory, fit between concepts and question, consideration of alternatives, acknowledgment of limits and APA. Fit is the row this rationale is built to win, laying each concept against a part of the question and reporting where it fits. The question is credited for being sized first. Description scores through the original article and the current chapter. Alternatives earn points because Kolcaba is given a fair case and Erikson is deferred with a reason. Limits are credited for naming what moves into the background. Recording the decision shows commitment. Three references complete APA.
NR 501 Week 2 help from the desk
The rationale written as appreciation hurts most, praising a theory for depth and holism without ever setting a question beside it. Another loss is choosing before sizing the question, so a grand theory is asked to answer something specific. Students also skip rivals, cite only secondary summaries or never say what the choice leaves out. If your section assigns the theory, you still write the fit and the limits. The question should name a population, setting and outcome. You may change theory later, but say why. Tell us your practice question and an NR 501 selection rationale can be built with the strongest rival in view.
Get a NR 501 Week 2 example written to your instructions
Send the Week 2 instructions and the rubric, plus the question or practice situation you want a theory chosen for, and a custom rationale written to those requirements comes back inside 24 to 48 hours, the first at no cost. If your section restricts the choice to a set list, send the list, because the argument runs differently when the field is fixed.
More NR 501 papers and MSN samples
- NR 501 Week 1: Nursing Theory Metaparadigm Post
- NR 501 Week 3: Concept Analysis
- NR 501 Week 4: Middle-range Theory Review
- NR 501 Week 5: Theory to Practice Write-up
- NR 501 Week 6: Borrowed Theory Critique
- NR 501 Week 7: Theory Evaluation Paper
- NR 501 Week 8: Synthesis Paper
- NR 503 Week 2: Epidemiologic Measure Write-up
- NR 500NP Week 2: APRN Role Comparison Paper
- NR 504 Week 2: Role Theory Write-up
- NR 500 Week 2: Informatics Nurse Role Analysis
NR 501 Week 2 questions, answered
My section assigns the theory. Is there still a rationale to write?
There is, and it often makes the better paper. The document then argues fit instead of choice: where the assigned theory reaches your question cleanly, where it strains, and which part of the situation it has no concept for. Instructors read that as evidence the theory was applied rather than accepted, and it protects the later weeks, since the strain you name now is what you will be working around in Week 5.
How specific does the question have to be?
Specific enough that a size can be assigned to it. A question about how nurses across the profession experience being overruled, and a question about one night shift's handover, need theories of different reach, and a rationale that leaves the scale open cannot argue fit in either direction. Narrowing costs a sentence and settles most of the paper's remaining decisions.
Can I change theory later in the term?
Some sections permit it and others do not, so the question is worth asking early. Where a change is allowed, the useful move is to write the reason down as it happens: the concept that turned out to be empty, the part of the situation the theory could not name. That note becomes real material for the final paper, whereas a switch made silently between weeks reads as inconsistency to anyone reading the assignments together.
Where can I find a free NR 501 Week 2 sample paper?
This page shows the complete Week 2 rationale for choosing Reed's self-transcendence theory, the sized question, the concepts against it, Kolcaba as rival, the limits, the recorded decision and three references.
Why does the NR 501 Week 2 paper set Kolcaba's comfort theory aside?
Because comfort theory centers on relieving discomfort and meeting needs, which nurses largely do to patients, while the question is about the patient's own well-being and expansion near death.