A comparison of behavioral and multiple mini-interview formats in physician assistant program admissions

P. Eugene Jones, J. Glenn Forister

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

12 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: The interview remains a widely used tool in health professions program admissions. The purpose of this study was to compare the use of a behavioral interview format with the multiple mini-interview format in measuring desired noncognitive behaviors. Methods: This dual cohort, observational, comparative study used a polytomous ratingscale model to analyze the results from two homogeneous groups of physician assistant (PA) program applicants (total N = 176). One group (n = 93) participated in two 20-minute behavioral interviews conducted by two raters per interviewee. The behavioral format included questions related to past behaviors and performance as a way to identify latent professionalism characteristics. The second group (n = 83) completed ten separate 7- minute stations with one rater per station. Each of the mini-stations assigned a specific topic and/or task to be completed. The score distributions related to applicant performance and station difficulty were plotted using Rasch analysis software. Results: The behavioral interview format and multiple mini-interview had similar model fit. The behavioral interview did not adequately measure differences in applicant characteristics. In contrast, the multiple mini-interview measured more variation in noncognitive traits and identified better matching of station difficulty and person ability. Conclusions: In this study the multiple mini-interview format was a more reliable admissions tool in detecting latent professionalism attributes among PA program applicants. The multiple mini-interview format appeared to measure professional potential and organizational fit better than the behavioral interview format. A larger study across several programs may provide additional support for these findings.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)36-40
Number of pages5
JournalJournal of Physician Assistant Education
Volume22
Issue number1
StatePublished - 2011

Fingerprint

Physician Assistants
assistant
physician
Interviews
interview
applicant
Health Occupations
Group
Observational Studies
performance
Software
profession

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medical Assisting and Transcription
  • Education

Cite this

A comparison of behavioral and multiple mini-interview formats in physician assistant program admissions. / Eugene Jones, P.; Glenn Forister, J.

In: Journal of Physician Assistant Education, Vol. 22, No. 1, 2011, p. 36-40.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

@article{9c60fee3c7d54a52b65a5324e28fa175,
title = "A comparison of behavioral and multiple mini-interview formats in physician assistant program admissions",
abstract = "Purpose: The interview remains a widely used tool in health professions program admissions. The purpose of this study was to compare the use of a behavioral interview format with the multiple mini-interview format in measuring desired noncognitive behaviors. Methods: This dual cohort, observational, comparative study used a polytomous ratingscale model to analyze the results from two homogeneous groups of physician assistant (PA) program applicants (total N = 176). One group (n = 93) participated in two 20-minute behavioral interviews conducted by two raters per interviewee. The behavioral format included questions related to past behaviors and performance as a way to identify latent professionalism characteristics. The second group (n = 83) completed ten separate 7- minute stations with one rater per station. Each of the mini-stations assigned a specific topic and/or task to be completed. The score distributions related to applicant performance and station difficulty were plotted using Rasch analysis software. Results: The behavioral interview format and multiple mini-interview had similar model fit. The behavioral interview did not adequately measure differences in applicant characteristics. In contrast, the multiple mini-interview measured more variation in noncognitive traits and identified better matching of station difficulty and person ability. Conclusions: In this study the multiple mini-interview format was a more reliable admissions tool in detecting latent professionalism attributes among PA program applicants. The multiple mini-interview format appeared to measure professional potential and organizational fit better than the behavioral interview format. A larger study across several programs may provide additional support for these findings.",
author = "{Eugene Jones}, P. and {Glenn Forister}, J.",
year = "2011",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "22",
pages = "36--40",
journal = "The journal of physician assistant education : the official journal of the Physician Assistant Education Association",
issn = "1941-9430",
publisher = "Physician Assistant Education Association",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A comparison of behavioral and multiple mini-interview formats in physician assistant program admissions

AU - Eugene Jones, P.

AU - Glenn Forister, J.

PY - 2011

Y1 - 2011

N2 - Purpose: The interview remains a widely used tool in health professions program admissions. The purpose of this study was to compare the use of a behavioral interview format with the multiple mini-interview format in measuring desired noncognitive behaviors. Methods: This dual cohort, observational, comparative study used a polytomous ratingscale model to analyze the results from two homogeneous groups of physician assistant (PA) program applicants (total N = 176). One group (n = 93) participated in two 20-minute behavioral interviews conducted by two raters per interviewee. The behavioral format included questions related to past behaviors and performance as a way to identify latent professionalism characteristics. The second group (n = 83) completed ten separate 7- minute stations with one rater per station. Each of the mini-stations assigned a specific topic and/or task to be completed. The score distributions related to applicant performance and station difficulty were plotted using Rasch analysis software. Results: The behavioral interview format and multiple mini-interview had similar model fit. The behavioral interview did not adequately measure differences in applicant characteristics. In contrast, the multiple mini-interview measured more variation in noncognitive traits and identified better matching of station difficulty and person ability. Conclusions: In this study the multiple mini-interview format was a more reliable admissions tool in detecting latent professionalism attributes among PA program applicants. The multiple mini-interview format appeared to measure professional potential and organizational fit better than the behavioral interview format. A larger study across several programs may provide additional support for these findings.

AB - Purpose: The interview remains a widely used tool in health professions program admissions. The purpose of this study was to compare the use of a behavioral interview format with the multiple mini-interview format in measuring desired noncognitive behaviors. Methods: This dual cohort, observational, comparative study used a polytomous ratingscale model to analyze the results from two homogeneous groups of physician assistant (PA) program applicants (total N = 176). One group (n = 93) participated in two 20-minute behavioral interviews conducted by two raters per interviewee. The behavioral format included questions related to past behaviors and performance as a way to identify latent professionalism characteristics. The second group (n = 83) completed ten separate 7- minute stations with one rater per station. Each of the mini-stations assigned a specific topic and/or task to be completed. The score distributions related to applicant performance and station difficulty were plotted using Rasch analysis software. Results: The behavioral interview format and multiple mini-interview had similar model fit. The behavioral interview did not adequately measure differences in applicant characteristics. In contrast, the multiple mini-interview measured more variation in noncognitive traits and identified better matching of station difficulty and person ability. Conclusions: In this study the multiple mini-interview format was a more reliable admissions tool in detecting latent professionalism attributes among PA program applicants. The multiple mini-interview format appeared to measure professional potential and organizational fit better than the behavioral interview format. A larger study across several programs may provide additional support for these findings.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79956226788&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=79956226788&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Review article

VL - 22

SP - 36

EP - 40

JO - The journal of physician assistant education : the official journal of the Physician Assistant Education Association

JF - The journal of physician assistant education : the official journal of the Physician Assistant Education Association

SN - 1941-9430

IS - 1

ER -