Abstract
Background: The medical education research literature consistently recommends a structured format for the medical school preadmission interview. There is, however, little direct evidence to support this recommendation. Purpose: To shed further light on this issue, the present study examines the respective reliability contributions from the structured and unstructured interview components at the University of Iowa. Methods: We conducted three univariate G studies on ratings from 3,043 interviews and one multivariate G study using responses from 168 applicants who interviewed twice. Results: Examining interrater reliability and test–retest types of reliability, the unstructured format proved more reliable in both instances. Yet, combining measures from the two interview formats yielded a more reliable score than using either alone. Conclusions: At least from a reliability perspective, the popular advice regarding interview structure may need to be reconsidered. Issues related to validity, fairness, and reliability should be carefully weighed when designing the interview process.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
