Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 277

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Key components of an effective mentoring relationship: A qualitative study

Open access
Eller, Lucille Sanzero, Lev, Elise L., Feurer, Amy·2014·Nurse Education Today

Abstract

Background Despite the recognized importance of mentoring, little is known about specific mentoring behaviors that result in positive outcomes. Objective To identify key components of an effective mentoring relationship identified by protégés-mentor dyads in an academic setting. Methods In this qualitative study, purposive sampling resulted in geographic diversity and representation of a range of academic disciplines. Participants were from 12 universities in three regions of the U.S. (South, n=5; Northeast, n=4; Midwest, n=2) and Puerto Rico (n=1). Academic disciplines included natural sciences (51%), nursing/health sciences (31%) engineering (8%), and technology (1%). Twelve workshops using the Technology of Participation© method were held with 117 mentor-protégé dyads. Consensus was reached regarding the key components of an effective mentoring relationship. Results Conventional content analysis, in which coding categories were informed by the literature and derived directly from the data, was employed. Eight themes described key components of an effective mentoring relationship: (1) open communication and accessibility; (2) goals and challenges; (3) passion and inspiration; (4) caring personal relationship; (5) mutual respect and trust; (6) exchange of knowledge; (7) independence and collaboration; and (8) role modeling. Described within each theme are specific mentor-protégé behaviors and interactions, identified needs of both protégé and mentor in the relationship, and desirable personal qualities of mentor and protégé. Conclusions Findings can inform a dialogue between existing nurse mentor-protégé dyads as well as student nurses and faculty members considering a mentoring relationship. Nurse educators can evaluate and modify their mentoring behaviors as needed, thereby strengthening the mentor-protégé relationship to ensure positive outcomes of the learning process

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.nedt.2013.07.020

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 3 references

Metadata

Authors
Eller, L. S., Lev, E. L., & Feurer, A.
Venue
Nurse Education Today
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2014-05
Volume
34
Issue
5
Pages
815-820
ISSN
0260-6917 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1975279855
Cited by
277
References
3
FWCI
22.46
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.