How Different Medical School Selection Processes Call upon Different Personality Characteristics

BACKGROUND:Research indicates that certain personality traits relate to performance in the medical profession. Yet, personality testing during selection seems ineffective. In this study, we examine the extent to which different medical school selection processes call upon desirable personality characteristics in applicants. METHODS:1019 of all 1055 students who entered the Dutch Bachelor of Medicine at University of Groningen, the Netherlands in 2009, 2010 and 2011 were included in this study. Students were admitted based on either top pre-university grades (n = 139), acceptance in a voluntary multifaceted selection process (n = 286), or lottery weighted for pre-university GPA. Within the lottery group, we distinguished between students who had not participated (n = 284) and students who were initially rejected (n = 310) in the voluntary selection process. Two months after admission, personality was assessed with the NEO-FFI, a measure of the five factor model of personality. We performed ANCOVA modelling with gender as a covariate to examine personality differences between the four groups. RESULTS:The multifaceted selection group scored higher on extraversion than all other groups(p<0.01), higher on conscientiousness than both lottery-admitted groups(p<0.01), and lower on neuroticism than the lottery-admitted group that had not participated in the voluntary selection process. The latter group scored lower on conscientiousness than all other groups(p<0.05) and lower on agreeableness than the multifaceted selection group and the top pre-university group(p<0.01). CONCLUSIONS:Differences between the four admission groups, though statistically significant, were relatively small. Personality scores in the group admitted through the voluntary multifaceted selection process seemed most fit for the medical profession. Personality scores in the lottery-admitted group that had not participated in this process seemed least fit for the medical profession. It seems that in order to select applicants with suitable personalities, an admission process that calls upon desirable personality characteristics is beneficial

Impact of vocational interests, previous academic experience, gender and age on Situational Judgement Test performance

Situational Judgement Tests (SJTs) are increasingly implemented in medical school admissions. In this paper, we investigate the effects of vocational interests, previous academic experience, gender and age on SJT performance. The SJT was part of the selection process for the Bachelor's degree programme in Medicine at University of Groningen, the Netherlands. All applicants for the academic year 2015-2016 were included and had to choose between learning communities Global Health (n = 126), Sustainable Care (n = 149), Intramural Care (n = 225), or Molecular Medicine (n = 116). This choice was used as a proxy for vocational interest. In addition, all graduate-entry applicants for academic year 2015-2016 (n = 213) were included to examine the effect of previous academic experience on performance. We used MANCOVA analyses with Bonferroni post hoc multiple comparisons tests for applicant performance on a six-scenario SJT. The MANCOVA analyses showed that for all scenarios, the independent variables were significantly related to performance (Pillai's Trace: 0.02-0.47, p <.01). Vocational interest was related to performance on three scenarios (p <.01). Graduate-entry applicants outperformed all other groups on three scenarios (p <.01) and at least one other group on the other three scenarios (p <.01). Female applicants outperformed male applicants on three scenarios (p <.01) and age was positively related to performance on two scenarios (p <.05). A good fit between applicants' vocational interests and SJT scenario was related to better performance, as was previous academic experience. Gender and age were related to performance on SJT scenarios in different settings. Especially the first effect might be helpful in selecting appropriate candidates for areas of health care in which more professionals are needed

Supervisor leadership in relation to resident job satisfaction

Background: Research from outside the medical field shows that leadership behaviours influence job satisfaction. Whether the same is true for the medical training setting needs to be explored. The aim of this study was to investigate the influence of residents' overall appreciation of their supervisor's leadership and observation of specific supervisor leadership behaviours on job satisfaction. Methods: We invited residents (N = 117) to rate how often they observed certain task and relation-oriented leadership behaviours in their supervisor and overall appreciation of their supervisor's leadership. Furthermore, they rated their satisfaction with 13 different aspects of their jobs on a 10-point scale. Using exploratory factor analysis we identified four factors covering different types of job satisfaction aspects: personal growth, autonomy, affective, and instrumental job satisfaction aspects. Influence of overall appreciation for supervisor leadership and observation of certain leadership behaviours on these job satisfaction factors were analysed using multiple regression analyses. Results: The affective aspects of job satisfaction were positively influenced by overall appreciation of leadership (B = 0.792, p = 0.017), observation of specific instructions (B = 0.972, p = 0.008) and two-way communication (B = 1.376, p = 0.008) and negatively by mutual decision-making (B = -1.285, p = 0.007). No effects were found for the other three factors of job satisfaction. Conclusions: We recommend that supervisors become more aware of whether and how their behaviours influence residents' job satisfaction. Especially providing specific instructions and using two-way communication seem important to help residents deal with their insecurities and to offer them support

Selection and study performance:comparing three admission processes within one medical school

ObjectivesThis study was conducted to: (i) analyse whether students admitted to one medical school based on top pre-university grades, a voluntary multifaceted selection process, or lottery, respectively, differed in study performance; (ii) examine whether students who were accepted in the multifaceted selection process outperformed their rejected peers, and (iii) analyse whether participation in the multifaceted selection procedure was related to performance. MethodsWe examined knowledge test and professionalism scores, study progress and dropout in three cohorts of medical students admitted to the University of Groningen, the Netherlands in 2009, 2010 and 2011 (n=1055). We divided the lottery-admitted group into, respectively, students who had not participated and students who had been rejected in the multifaceted selection process. We used ancova modelling, logistic regression and Bonferroni post hoc multiple-comparison tests and controlled for gender and cohort. ResultsThe top pre-university grade group achieved higher knowledge test scores and more Year1 course credits than all other groups (p ConclusionsA top pre-university grade point average was the best predictor of performance. For so-called non-academic performance, the multifaceted selection process was efficient in identifying applicants with suitable skills. Participation in the multifaceted selection procedure seems to be predictive of higher performance. Further research is needed to assess whether our results are generalisable to other medical schools

A multi-site study on medical school selection, performance, motivation and engagement

Medical schools seek ways to improve their admissions strategies, since the available methods prove to be suboptimal for selecting the best and most motivated students. In this multi-site cross-sectional questionnaire study, we examined the value of (different) selection procedures compared to a weighted lottery procedure, which includes direct admission based on top pre-university grade point averages (≥8 out of 10; top-pu-GPA). We also considered whether students had participated in selection, prior to being admitted through weighted lottery. Year-1 (pre-clinical) and Year-4 (clinical) students completed standard validated questionnaires measuring quality of motivation (Academic Self-regulation Questionnaire), strength of motivation (Strength of Motivation for Medical School-Revised) and engagement (Utrecht Work Engagement Scale-Student). Performance data comprised GPA and course credits in Year-1 and clerkship performance in Year-4. Regression analyses were performed. The response rate was 35% (387 Year-1 and 273 Year-4 students). Top-pu-GPA students outperformed selected students. Selected Year-1 students reported higher strength of motivation than top-pu-GPA students. Selected students did not outperform or show better quality of motivation and engagement than lottery-admitted students. Participation in selection was associated with higher engagement and better clerkship performance in Year-4. GPA, course credits and strength of motivation in Year-1 differed between students admitted through different selection procedures. Top-pu-GPA students perform best in the medical study. The few and small differences found raise questions about the added value of an extensive selection procedure compared to a weighted lottery procedure. Findings have to be interpreted with caution because of a low response rate and small group sizes

Students' approaches to medical school choice: relationship with students' characteristics and motivation

The aim was to examine main reasons for students' medical school choice and their relationship with students' characteristics and motivation during the students' medical study. In this multisite cross-sectional study, all Year-1 and Year-4 students who had participated in a selection procedure in one of the three Dutch medical schools included in the study were invited to complete an online survey comprising personal data, their main reason for medical school choice and standard, validated questionnaires to measure their strength of motivation (Strength of Motivation for Medical School-Revised) and autonomous and controlled type of motivation (Academic Self-regulation Questionnaire). Four hundred seventy-eight students participated. We performed frequency analyses on the reasons for medical school choice and regression analyses and ANCOVAs to study their associations with students' characteristics and motivation during their medical study. Students indicated 'city' (Year-1: 24.7%, n=75 and Year-4: 36.0%, n=52) and 'selection procedure' (Year-1: 56.9%, n=173 and Year-4: 46.9%, n=68) as the main reasons for their medical school choice. The main reasons were associated with gender, age, being a first-generation university student, ethnic background and medical school, and no significant associations were found between the main reasons and the strength and type of motivation during the students' medical study. Most students had based their medical school choice on the selection procedure. If medical schools desire to achieve a good student-curriculum fit and attract a diverse student population aligning the selection procedure with the curriculum and taking into account various students' different approaches is importan