Pilot study of the roles of personality, references, and personal statements in relation to performance over the five years of a medical degree.

Full Abstract

OBJECTIVES:
To compare the power of three traditional selection procedures (A levels, personal statements, and references) and one non-traditional selection procedure (personality) to predict performance over the five years of a medical degree.

DESIGN:
Cohort study over five years.

SETTING:
Nottingham medical school.

PARTICIPANTS:
Entrants in 1995.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:
A level grades, amounts of information contained in teacher's reference and the student's personal statement, and personality scores examined in relation to 18 different assessments.

RESULTS:
Information in the teacher's reference did not consistently predict performance. Information in the personal statement was predictive of clinical aspects of training, whereas A level grades primarily predicted preclinical performance. The personality domain of conscientiousness was consistently the best predictor across the course. A structural model indicated that conscientiousness was positively related to A level grades and preclinical performance but was negatively related to clinical grades.

CONCLUSION:
A teacher's reference is of no practical use in predicting clinical performance of medical students, in contrast to the amount of information contained in the personal statement. Therefore, simple quantification of the personal statement should aid selection. Personality factors, in particular conscientiousness, need to be considered and integrated into selection procedures.

Learn Faster Today Improve your study skills

Author information

Author/s: Ferguson, Eamonn (E); James, David (D); O'Hehir, Fiona (F); Sanders, Andrea (A); McManus, I C (IC);

Affiliation: School of Psychology, University of Nottingham, Nottingham NG7 2RD. eamonn.ferguson(-atsign-)nottingham.ac.uk

Journal and publication information

Publication Type: Journal Article

Journal: BMJ (Clinical research ed.) (BMJ), published in England. (Language: eng)

Reference: 2003-Feb; vol 326 (issue 7386) : pp 429-32

Dates: Created 2003/02/21; Completed 2003/03/27; Revised 2008/11/20;

PMID: 12595384, status: MEDLINE (last retrieval date: 12/26/2008)

Sourced from the National Library of Medicine. Abstract text and other information may be subject to copyright.

Comments and Corrections

CommentIn: BMJ. 2003 Feb 22;326(7386):429-32. (PMID: 12596791)

CommentIn: BMJ. 2003 May 3;326(7396):986. (PMID: 12727782)

CommentIn: BMJ. 2003 May 3;326(7396):986. (PMID: 12727761)

External Links for this article (including full text providers, if available):

Click Electronic Full-text Provider Links to see options for finding the electronic full text links to this article. Note there may be a subscription or fee required for access to the full text. See our FAQ for information on finding FREE full text articles.

This article may also be located in paper journal collections available in many libraries. Use the Journal and Publication Information above to find the full article.

MeSH headings (categories)

This article was linked to the MESH Headings shown below.

These are the highest related articles currently in the database:

See 100+ related articles.