Advances in Medical Education and Practice (Dec 2016)
Situational judgment tests reliably measure professional attributes important for clinical practice
Abstract
Katie Petty-Saphon,1 Kim A Walker,2 Fiona Patterson,3,4 Vicki Ashworth,4 Helena Edwards4 1Medical Schools Council, London, UK; 2United Kingdom Foundation Programme Office, Birmingham, UK; 3Department of Psychology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK; 4Work Psychology Group, Derby, UK Abstract: Over the course of more than 40 years, international research has consistently shown situational judgment tests (SJTs) to be a reliable and valid selection method for assessing a range of professional attributes. However, SJTs still represent a relatively new selection method within the medical profession, and as such it is to be expected that applicant reactions will vary. In this Expert Opinion piece, we respond to Najim et al’s article “The situational judgement test: a student’s worst nightmare” by highlighting three key clarifications. We outline that 1) the UK Foundation Programme’s SJT deliberately measures only a subset (five) of the nine professional attributes important for the role of Foundation Trainee doctor, 2) these attributes are measured in addition to academic attainment, and 3) the SJT represents a cost-effective approach to selection rather than attempting to interview approximately 8,000 candidates each year, which would be logistically impossible. We present these points to inform future research and encourage debate, and conclude that the SJT is an appropriate and fair measurement method to be used as one part of selection to the UK Foundation Programme. Keywords: situational judgment test, reliability, validity, fairness, candidate perceptions
