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.

Participation and selection effects of a voluntary selection process.

Many different medical school selection processes are used worldwide. In this paper, we examine the effect of (1) participation, and (2) selection in a voluntary selection process on study performance. We included data from two cohorts of medical students admitted to Erasmus MC, Rotterdam and VUmc, Amsterdam, The Netherlands and compared them to previously published data from Groningen medical school, The Netherlands. All included students were admitted based on either (1) a top pre-university grade point average, or (2) a voluntary selection process, or (3) weighted lottery. We distinguished between lottery-admitted students who had participated in the voluntary selection process and had been rejected, and lottery-admitted students who had not participated. Knowledge test scores, study progress, and professionalism scores were examined using ANCOVA modelling, logistic regression, and Bonferroni post hoc multiple-comparison tests, controlling for gender and cohort. For written test grades, results showed a participation effect at Groningen medical school and Erasmus MC (p < 0.001), and a selection effect at VUmc (p < 0.05). For obtained course credits, results showed a participation effect at all universities (p < 0.01) and a selection effect at Groningen medical school (p < 0.005). At Groningen medical school, a participation effect seemed apparent in on time first-year completion (p < 0.05). Earlier reported selection and participation effects in professionalism scores at Groningen medical school were not apparent at VUmc. Top pre-university students performed well on all outcome measures. For both the participation effect and the selection effect, results differed between universities. Institutional differences in curricula and in the design of the selection process seem to mediate relations between the different admissions processes and performance. Further research is needed for a deeper understanding of the influence of institutional differences on selection outcomes.

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

OBJECTIVES: This 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. METHODS: We 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. RESULTS: The top pre-university grade group achieved higher knowledge test scores and more Year 1 course credits than all other groups (p < 0.05). This group received the highest possible professionalism score more often than the lottery-admitted group that had not participated in the multifaceted selection process (p < 0.05). The group of students accepted in the multifaceted selection process obtained higher written test scores than the lottery-admitted group that had not participated (p < 0.05) and achieved the highest possible professionalism score more often than both lottery-admitted groups. The lottery-admitted group that had not participated in the multifaceted selection process earned fewer Year 1 and 2 course credits than all other groups (p < 0.05). Dropout rates differed among the groups (p < 0.05), but correction for multiple comparisons rendered all pairwise differences non-significant. CONCLUSIONS: A 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.

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.