Ginsburg Shiphra R, Regehr Glenn, Mylopoulos Maria
Acad Med. 2007 Oct;82(10 Suppl):S40-3. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0b013e31813ffda4.
Previous research explored students' reasoning in the face of professional dilemmas, using interviews in response to videotaped scenarios. This study determined the effects of a change in context (to a written exam) and format (video versus text scenarios) on students' response patterns.
Fifty-three students were randomized to videotaped or text-based scenarios in the context of a mock written exam. Responses were coded by two raters.
Interrater reliability was high (kappa = 0.872). There were no differences in response patterns between the video and text groups. When compared with the interview setting, students' exam responses showed a shift towards more "acceptable" rationales for action; however, they still considered implications for themselves.
This shift in responses indicates that students took the exam seriously. Their continued reference to implications for themselves might therefore reflect a sense that their status as students makes these considerations legitimate; alternatively, students' interpretation of altruism may be different than what the profession avows.
以往的研究通过对录像场景进行访谈，探讨了学生在面对职业困境时的推理过程。本研究确定了情境变化（改为书面考试）和形式变化（视频场景与文本场景）对学生回答模式的影响。
53名学生在模拟书面考试的情境下被随机分配到录像场景组或文本场景组。两名评分者对回答进行编码。
评分者间信度较高（kappa = 0.872）。视频组和文本组的回答模式没有差异。与访谈情境相比，学生在考试中的回答显示出向更“可接受”的行动理由转变；然而，他们仍然考虑对自己的影响。
回答的这种转变表明学生认真对待考试。因此，他们继续提及对自己的影响可能反映出一种观念，即作为学生的身份使这些考虑变得合理；或者，学生对利他主义的理解可能与该职业所宣称的不同。
