Seventy students participated in an experiment to measure the effects of either providing explanations or listening during small group discussions on recall of related subject-matter studied after the discussion. They watched a video of a small group discussing a problem. In the first experimental condition, the video was stopped at various points in time, enabling the participants to verbally respond to the discussion. In the second condition, they listened to the same discussion, without contributing. In the control condition, they listened to a discussion that was not related to the subject-matter subsequently studied. After the discussion, all participants studied a text and answered questions that tested their recall of information from this text. No immediate differences in recall were found. One month later, participants who had actively engaged in explaining remembered more from the text. The conclusion appears justified that actively providing explanations during a discussion positively affects long-term memory.

ObjectivesThe medical field is facing a physician–scientist shortage. Medical schools could contribute to developing physician–scientists by stimulating student involvement in research. Studies have examined motivation for research as a key parameter of success. However, previous studies did not investigate if students act on their self-reported motivation. The aim of this study is to examine if motivation for research of medical students is related to actual research involvement. Furthermore, this study distinguishes intrinsic (IM) and extrinsic motivation (EM) for research and aims to investigate if a type of motivation matters in the relation between research motivation and involvement.Design and settingProspective cohort study in which students were surveyed at the start of medical school and reported IM and EM for research, self-efficacy, perceptions of research and curiosity on a 7-point Likert scale. One year later, students involved in research were identified. Logistic regression was used to examine influences of IM and EM on research involvement.ParticipantsAll undergraduate medical students starting at one medical school in the Netherlands in 2016. In total, 315 out of 316 students participated (99.7%), of whom 55 became involved in research (17.5%).Main outcome measureResearch involvement, which was operationalised as the enrolment of students in the research-based honours programme or the involvement of students in voluntary research activities outside of the regular curriculum.ResultsStudents with higher levels of IM were more often involved in research (OR 3.4; 95% CI 2.08 to 5.61), also after adjusting for gender, age, extracurricular high school activities, self-efficacy, perceptions and curiosity (OR 2.5; 95% CI 1.35 to 4.78). Higher levels of EM increased the odds of research involvement (OR 1.4; 95% CI 0.96 to 2.11). However, the effect of EM disappeared after adjusting for the above-mentioned factors (OR 1.05; 95% CI 0.67 to 1.63). Furthermore, the effect of IM remained after adjusting for EM, whereas the effect of EM disappeared after adjusting for IM.ConclusionsOur findings suggest that the type of motivation matters and IM influences research involvement. Therefore, IM could be targeted to stimulate research involvement and could be seen as the first step towards success in fostering the physician–scientist workforce.

Background: Research is of great value to make advancements within the medical field and, ultimately, offer the best possible patient care. Physician-scientists are key in contributing to the development of medicine, as they can bridge the gap between research and practice. However, medicine currently faces a physician-scientist shortage. A possible solution to cultivate physician-scientists is to engage medical students in research in early phases of medical school. Evidence-based strategies to stimulate positive perceptions of and motivation for research among students could help to enhance research engagement. Consequently, understanding of students' perceptions of and motivation for research is needed. Therefore, this study aimed to identify conditions under which students develop positive perceptions of and motivation for research by answering the following sub-questions: 1) how do first-year medical students perceive research? and 2) which factors contribute to motivation or demotivation for conducting research? Methods: We conducted a qualitative study with individual interviews using a grounded theory approach, involving 13 purposively sampled first-year medical students at Leiden University Medical Center. Results: Our results suggest that first-year students are already able to identify many aspects of research. Students elaborated on the relevance of research for professional practice and personal development. Furthermore, our results suggest a relationship between perceptions of and motivation for research. Some perceptions were identical to motivating or demotivating factors to conduct research, like the relevance of research for practice and performing statistics respectively. Other motivating factors were, among others, acknowledgment, autonomy, and inspiring role models. Demotivating factors were, among others, lack of autonomy and relevance, and inadequate collaboration.

IntroductionThe medical field is currently facing a physician-scientist shortage. One possible solution is to direct medical students towards a research oriented career. To do so, knowledge is needed on how to motivate medical students to do research. Therefore, this study examines motivation for research and identifies factors influencing intrinsic and extrinsic motivation for research among first-year medical students.MethodsFirst-year medical students were surveyed at the beginning of their bachelor’s program in 2016. On a 7-point Likert scale, students reported their motivation for research, self-efficacy, perceptions of research, curiosity, and need for challenge. Regression analyses were used to examine the influence of these factors on students’ motivation for research.ResultsOut of 316 approached students, 315 participated (99.7%). On average, students scored 5.49 on intrinsic, and 5.66 on extrinsic motivation for research. All factors measured influenced intrinsic and extrinsic motivation for research significantly and positively, also after adjusting for gender and age. Cumulative regression showed that these factors explained 39.6% of the variance in intrinsic, and 14% in extrinsic motivation for research.DiscussionAll factors play an important role in intrinsic and, to a lesser extent, extrinsic motivation for research. First-year medical students’ motivation for research could be enhanced by stimulating positive self-efficacy beliefs, positive perceptions of research, and curiosity. Also, it is important to fulfil students’ needs for challenge by stimulating them to actively conduct research. Thus, to catch students young and cultivate physician-scientists, students should be stimulated to engage in research from the beginning of medical training.

van den Berg a and Paul W. van den Broek b a leiden university Graduate School of teaching (iclon), leiden, the netherlands; b institute of Pedagogical Sciences, leiden university, leiden, the netherlands ABSTRACT Research skills are important for university graduates, but little is known about undergraduates' motivation for research. In this study, self-efficacy beliefs and intrinsic motivation for several research activities were measured three times during an undergraduate research project (N = 147 students). In order to promote self-efficacy for writing and collaboration, a collaboration script was developed and tested on half of the students. Twelve students were interviewed three times to gather in-depth information about motivational and selfefficacy beliefs. All measures except intrinsic motivation for research increased significantly during the project. Interview results suggest that enactive mastery and positive social interdependence promoted self-efficacy. Feelings of relatedness seemed to promote intrinsic motivation for writing. Lack of autonomy and low perceived relevance may explain why motivation for research remained stable. The script had no impact on self-efficacy beliefs. Relatedness, autonomy and positive social interdependence may boost motivation for research, but more evidence is needed.

Comprehension of physiology is essential for development of clinical reasoning. However, medical students often struggle to understand physiological concepts. Interactive learning through Peer instruction (PI) is known to stimulate students’ comprehension, but its relative efficacy and working mechanisms remain to be elucidated. In this study, we investigated if and how PI could optimize comprehension of physiological concepts and transfer relative to Self-explanation (SE) which is considered a lower-order type of overt learning. First-year medical students (n = 317) were randomly assigned to either PI or SE in a pre-post test design, followed by a set of near and far transfer questions. In both PI and SE groups post-test scores were significantly improved ( p < 0.0001) with PI outperforming SE (+ 35% vs. + 23%, p = 0.006). Interestingly, a substantial number of students with initial incorrect answers even had enhanced scores after discussion with an incorrect peer. Both methods showed higher transfer scores than control ( p = 0.006), with a tendency for higher near transfer scores for PI. These findings support PI as a valuable method to enhance comprehension of physiological concepts. Moreover, by comparing the effects of interactive PI with constructive SE we have established new insights that complement educational theories on overt learning activities. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1007/s10459-018-9858-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Individual student success is influenced by the educational environment and student characteristics. One adaptation of the educational environment to improve student success is the introduction of continuous, or in-course, assessment. Previous research already identified several student characteristics that are related to student success as measured by student achievement, like previous achievements, motivation, self-efficacy and gender. The two facets are investigated in a group of first-year undergraduate Law students in the Netherlands, by examining the relationship of different types of continuous assessment and student characteristics with academic achievement. A questionnaire, measuring demographic information, selfregulation and motivational constructs, was completed by 94 students and their grades were requested from the student administration. Repeated measures ANCOVAs with assessment type as the within-subject factor identified that student achievement is not dependent on the type of continuous assessment. Students with higher high-school GPAs got higher scores across assessment types. Male students performed worse than their female peers in courses without continuous assessment, but in courses using any type of continuous assessment, this gender difference disappeared. Intrinsic motivation was a negative predictor of achievement in courses using writing assignments and mandatory homework assignments. Results from the current study indicate that continuous assessment may be a potent measure to improve male students' success by closing the gender achievement gap, and that students with high levels of intrinsic motivation do not benefit from continuous assessment.

Engaging students in research during medical school could contribute to creating an academic attitude among students, which underlies practicing evidence-based medicine in future professional practice. However, attempts to involve undergraduate students in research during medical training remain inadequate. Most medical schools educate large numbers of students at the same time, especially in early phases of medical training. Large scale education on the one hand and individually providing students with authentic research experiences on the other hand is considered not that easy to achieve. Drawing on our own experiences, existing literature and theories we propose twelve tips to design and implement a course in which authentic individual research experiences can be provided to a large group of undergraduate students.