Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39835093›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in medicine2024

Evaluating factors that impact scoring an open response situational judgment test: a mixed methods approach.

Muhammad Zafar Iqbal, Rodica Ivan, Colleen Robb, Jillian Derby

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Muhammad Zafar IqbalResearch Department, Acuity Insights, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Rodica IvanResearch Department, Acuity Insights, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Colleen RobbResearch Department, Acuity Insights, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Jillian DerbyResearch Department, Acuity Insights, Toronto, ON, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Situational judgment tests (SJT) are commonly used in admissions to measure skills associated with professionalism. Although open-response SJTs have shown strong psychometric properties, assessors' personal beliefs, experiences, and cultural backgrounds may influence how they perceive, organize and evaluate information within test takers' diverse responses. Additionally, SJT research typically focuses on reliability and predictive validity, whereas the construct validity of open response SJTs remains underexplored. This mixed methods study aims to address this gap by exploring the construct-(ir)relevant factors that may impact assessors' evaluation of professionalism in open response SJTs. Methods: For this study, we used data from Casper, an open response SJT commonly used in professional program admissions. In Study I, a quantitative content analysis was conducted on 160 responses to identify factors which were significant predictors of low and high scores. Correlation coefficients and logistic regression models were used to evaluate the relationship between each factor and response scores. In Study II, think-aloud activities were conducted with 23 Casper assessors to directly observe how they evaluated responses. All interviews were transcribed verbatim, which were then thematically analyzed using an inductive coding technique. Results: Results from both the content analyses and think-aloud activities revealed that several construct relevant factors influenced scores. Scores were impacted by the extent to which test takers demonstrated the competencies probed for by the SJT, engaged with the context of the presented ethical dilemma, provided in-depth justifications for their response, considered various perspectives relevant to the presented dilemma, and provided creative solutions or insightful arguments for the suggested approach. Mixed results were found with respect to construct irrelevant factors, such as the flow, cohesion, and kinds of phrases used in the response. Conclusion: This mixed methods study contributes to the construct validity of SJTs by investigating construct relevant and irrelevant factors that may impact assessors' evaluation of open responses. The findings of this study provide evidence that open-response SJTs are valid approaches to measure professional competencies more broadly, both in terms of

Indexed as

admissionsconstruct validityopen response scoringpersonal skillsprofessionalismprofessional skillssituational judgment tests

Identifiers

PMID39835093
PMCPMC11743161

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.