Centre for Health Sciences Education, Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, Postboks 1161 Blindern, 0318, Oslo, Norway.
Department of Emergency Medicine, Inselspital University Hospital, University of Berne, 3010, Freiburgstrasse, Berne, Switzerland.
Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2021 Oct;26(4):1339-1354. doi: 10.1007/s10459-021-10052-z. Epub 2021 May 11.
The use of response formats in assessments of medical knowledge and clinical reasoning continues to be the focus of both research and debate. In this article, we report on an experimental study in which we address the question of how much list-type selected response formats and short-essay type constructed response formats are related to differences in how test takers approach clinical reasoning tasks. The design of this study was informed by a framework developed within cognitive psychology which stresses the importance of the interplay between two components of reasoning-self-monitoring and response inhibition-while solving a task or case. The results presented support the argument that different response formats are related to different processing behavior. Importantly, the pattern of how different factors are related to a correct response in both situations seem to be well in line with contemporary accounts of reasoning. Consequently, we argue that when designing assessments of clinical reasoning, it is crucial to tap into the different facets of this complex and important medical process.
在评估医学知识和临床推理的过程中,使用反应格式一直是研究和讨论的焦点。在本文中,我们报告了一项实验研究,旨在探讨清单式选择题和短文式简答题这两种题型与考生在处理临床推理任务时的方法差异有多大关联。本研究的设计受到认知心理学框架的启发,该框架强调了在解决任务或案例时,推理的自我监控和反应抑制这两个组成部分之间相互作用的重要性。所呈现的结果支持了这样一种观点,即不同的反应格式与不同的处理行为有关。重要的是,在这两种情况下,不同因素与正确答案的关联模式似乎与当代推理理论非常吻合。因此,我们认为,在设计临床推理评估时,必须挖掘出这个复杂而重要的医学过程的不同方面。