↓ Skip to main content

Exploration of a possible relationship between examiner stringency and personality factors in clinical assessments: a pilot study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Education, December 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
31 Mendeley
Title
Exploration of a possible relationship between examiner stringency and personality factors in clinical assessments: a pilot study
Published in
BMC Medical Education, December 2014
DOI 10.1186/s12909-014-0280-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yvonne Finn, Peter Cantillon, Gerard Flaherty

Abstract

BackgroundThe reliability of clinical examinations is known to vary considerably. Inter-examiner variability is a key source of this variability. Some examiners consistently give lower scores to some candidates compared to other examiners and vice versa ¿ the `hawk- dove¿ effect. Stable examiner characteristics, such as personality factors, may influence examiner stringency. We investigated whether examiner stringency is related to personality factors.MethodsWe recruited 12 examiners to view and score a video-recorded five station OSCE of six Year 1 undergraduate medical students at our institution. In addition examiners completed a validated personality questionnaire. Examiners¿ markings were tested for statistically significant differences using non-parametric one way analysis of variance. The relationship between examiners¿ markings and examiner personality factors was investigated using Spearman correlation coefficient.ResultsAt each station there was a statistically significant difference between examiners markings, confirming the presence of inter-examiner variability. Correlation analysis showed no association between stringency and any of the five major personality factors. When we omitted an outlier examiner we found a statistically significant negative correlation between examiner stringency and openness to experience with a correlation coefficients (rho) of ¿ 0.66 (p¿=¿0.03). Conversely there was a moderate positive correlation between examiner stringency and neuroticism with a correlation coefficient (rho) of 0.73 (p¿=¿0.01).ConclusionsIn this study we did not find any relationship between examiner stringency and examiner personality factors. However, following the elimination of an outlier examiner from the analysis, we found a significant relationship between examiner stringency and two of the big five personality factors (neuroticism and openness to experience). The significance of this outlier is not known. As this was a small pilot study we recommend further studies in this field to investigate it there is a relationship between examiner stringency in clinical assessments and personality factors.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 3%
Unknown 30 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 5 16%
Student > Postgraduate 5 16%
Professor 3 10%
Unspecified 3 10%
Other 3 10%
Other 12 39%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 19 61%
Social Sciences 4 13%
Unspecified 3 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 6%
Psychology 1 3%
Other 2 6%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 January 2015.
All research outputs
#3,873,326
of 4,753,611 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Education
#772
of 834 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#126,886
of 159,092 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Education
#51
of 53 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 4,753,611 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 2nd percentile – i.e., 2% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 834 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.5. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 159,092 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 53 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.