Psychology, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Med J Aust. 2010 Sep 20;193(6):343-6. doi: 10.5694/j.1326-5377.2010.tb04015.x.
To investigate whether interviewer personality, sex or being of the same sex as the interviewee, and training account for variance between interviewers' ratings in a medical student selection interview.
DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: In 2006 and 2007, data were collected from cohorts of each year's interviewers (by survey) and interviewees (by interview) participating in a multiple mini-interview (MMI) process to select students for an undergraduate medical degree in Australia. MMI scores were analysed and, to account for the nested nature of the data, multilevel modelling was used.
Interviewer ratings; variance in interviewee scores.
In 2006, 153 interviewers (94% response rate) and 268 interviewees (78%) participated in the study. In 2007, 139 interviewers (86%) and 238 interviewees (74%) participated. Interviewers with high levels of agreeableness gave higher interview ratings (correlation coefficient [r] = 0.26 in 2006; r = 0.24 in 2007) and, in 2007, those with high levels of neuroticism gave lower ratings (r = -0.25). In 2006 but not 2007, female interviewers gave higher overall ratings to male and female interviewees (t = 2.99, P = 0.003 in 2006; t = 2.16, P = 0.03 in 2007) but interviewer and interviewee being of the same sex did not affect ratings in either year. The amount of variance in interviewee scores attributable to differences between interviewers ranged from 3.1% to 24.8%, with the mean variance reducing after skills-based training (20.2% to 7.0%; t = 4.42, P = 0.004).
This study indicates that rating leniency is associated with personality and sex of interviewers, but the effect is small. Random allocation of interviewers, similar proportions of male and female interviewers across applicant interview groups, use of the MMI format, and skills-based interviewer training are all likely to reduce the effect of variance between interviewers.
探讨在医学生选拔面试中，面试官的个性、性别或与被面试者的性别是否相同，以及培训是否会导致面试官评分的差异。
设计、设置和参与者：2006 年和 2007 年，通过调查收集了参与多站迷你面试（MMI）过程以选拔澳大利亚本科医学学位学生的各年面试官（通过调查）和被面试者（通过面试）的数据。对 MMI 评分进行了分析，并使用多层次模型来解释数据的嵌套性质。
面试官评分；被面试者分数的差异。
2006 年，有 153 名面试官（94%的回复率）和 268 名被面试者（78%）参与了研究。2007 年，有 139 名面试官（86%）和 238 名被面试者（74%）参与了研究。评分较高的面试官往往具有较高的宜人性（2006 年的相关系数[r]为 0.26；2007 年为 0.24），而在 2007 年，评分较低的面试官往往具有较高的神经质（r=-0.25）。2006 年而不是 2007 年，女性面试官对男性和女性被面试者的总体评分较高（2006 年 t=2.99，P=0.003；2007 年 t=2.16，P=0.03），但在这两年中，面试官和被面试者的性别相同并不会影响评分。被面试者分数的差异归因于面试官之间的差异，范围从 3.1%到 24.8%，经过基于技能的培训后，差异的平均值从 20.2%减少到 7.0%（t=4.42，P=0.004）。
本研究表明，评分宽松与面试官的个性和性别有关，但影响很小。面试官的随机分配、各申请人面试组中男女面试官的比例相似、使用 MMI 格式以及基于技能的面试官培训都可能降低面试官评分差异的影响。
