Do different response formats affect how test takers approach a clinical reasoning task? An experimental study on antecedents of diagnostic accuracy using a constructed response and a selected response format

被引:7
作者
Schauber, Stefan K. [1 ]
Hautz, Stefanie C. [2 ]
Kaemmer, Juliane E. [3 ,4 ]
Stroben, Fabian [4 ,5 ]
Hautz, Wolf E. [2 ,6 ]
机构
[1] Univ Oslo, Fac Med, Ctr Hlth Sci Educ, Postboks 1161 Blindern, N-0318 Oslo, Norway
[2] Univ Bern, Inselspital Univ Hosp, Dept Emergency Med, Freiburgstr, CH-3010 Bern, Switzerland
[3] Max Planck Inst Human Dev, Ctr Adapt Rational ARC, Lentzeallee 94, D-14195 Berlin, Germany
[4] Charite Med Sch Berlin, AG Progress Test Med, Hannoversche Str 19, D-10115 Berlin, Germany
[5] Charite, Off Vice Dean Teaching & Learning, Berlin, Germany
[6] Univ Oslo, Ctr Educ Measurement CEMO, Postboks 1161 Blindern, N-0318 Oslo, Norway
关键词
Clinical reasoning; Response format; Cognitive reflection; Processing fluency; MULTIPLE-CHOICE; COGNITIVE REFLECTION; FLUENCY; TIME; DIFFICULTY; INTUITION; CONFLICT; QUESTION; MEMORY;
D O I
10.1007/s10459-021-10052-z
中图分类号
G40 [教育学];
学科分类号
040101 ; 120403 ;
摘要
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.
引用
收藏
页码:1339 / 1354
页数:16
相关论文
共 58 条
[1]   Overcoming intuition: Metacognitive difficulty activates analytic reasoning [J].
Alter, Adam L. ;
Oppenheimer, Daniel M. ;
Epley, Nicholas ;
Eyre, Rebecca N. .
JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY-GENERAL, 2007, 136 (04) :569-576
[2]   Uniting the Tribes of Fluency to Form a Metacognitive Nation [J].
Alter, Adam L. ;
Oppenheimer, Daniel M. .
PERSONALITY AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY REVIEW, 2009, 13 (03) :219-235
[3]   Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using lme4 [J].
Bates, Douglas ;
Maechler, Martin ;
Bolker, Benjamin M. ;
Walker, Steven C. .
JOURNAL OF STATISTICAL SOFTWARE, 2015, 67 (01) :1-48
[4]   The mismeasure of memory: When retrieval fluency is misleading as a metamnemonic index [J].
Benjamin, AS ;
Bjork, RA ;
Schwartz, BL .
JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY-GENERAL, 1998, 127 (01) :55-68
[5]   Overconfidence as a cause of diagnostic error in medicine [J].
Berner, Eta S. ;
Graber, Mark L. .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 2008, 121 (05) :2-23
[6]   Cognitive Reflection Effects on Time Discounting [J].
Bialek, Michal ;
Sawicki, Przemyslaw .
JOURNAL OF INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES, 2018, 39 (02) :99-106
[7]  
Bleske-Rechek A., 2007, Assessment Evaluation in Higher Education, V32, P89, DOI DOI 10.1080/02602930600800763
[8]   Conflict monitoring in dual process theories of thinking [J].
De Neys, Wim ;
Glumicic, Tamara .
COGNITION, 2008, 106 (03) :1248-1299
[9]   Conflict detection, dual processes, and logical intuitions: Some clarifications [J].
De Neys, Wim .
THINKING & REASONING, 2014, 20 (02) :169-187
[10]   The 'whys' and 'whens' of individual differences in thinking biases [J].
De Neys, Wim ;
Bonnefon, Jean-Francois .
TRENDS IN COGNITIVE SCIENCES, 2013, 17 (04) :172-178