ArticleNursing inquiry2026
The Coercive Edge of Kindness: A Critical Analysis of 'Random Acts' in Nursing.
Article in Nursing inquiry, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The Coercive Edge of Kindness: A Critical Analysis of 'Random Acts' in Nursing.Nursing inquiry · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Kindness is frequently framed as an unassailable virtue, celebrated across social, professional and political domains as a simple and uncomplicated good. It is rarely problematised, and its assumed benefits are seldom interrogated, leaving kindness largely positioned as a self-evident moral imperative. In this paper, we adopt a Foucauldian lens, not to seek an essential definition of kindness, but to consider how it circulates and operates discursively, what effects it produces and what is surrendered in its performance. We position kindness as a discourse that does not merely encourage compassion or generosity but also regulate behaviour, shapes subjectivities and establishes boundaries around what may or may not be said. Through such mechanisms, the imperative to 'be kind' can act to silence resistance, temper critique and foster compliance, functioning as a subtle technology of governance. By problematising kindness in this way, we reveal how a practice so often presented as wholly benevolent can also operate as a powerful disciplinary force. We suggest that alternatives to the disciplinary framing of kindness may be found within First Nations knowledge systems, which offer different ways of understanding generosity and care beyond Western institutional logics. Our purpose is not to argue for the abandonment of kindness, but to highlight that it should not be accepted uncritically; its operations and consequences must be understood in order for it to be engaged ethically and politically.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.