CONTEXT Widening access promotes student diversity and the appropriate representation of all demographic groups. This study aims to examine diversity-related benefits of the use of situational judgement tests (SJTs) in the UK Clinical Aptitude Test (UKCAT) in terms of three demographic variables: (i) socioeconomic status (SES); (ii) ethnicity, and (iii) gender.METHODS Outcomes in medical and dental school applicant cohorts for the years 2012 (n = 15 581) and 2013 (n = 15 454) were studied. Applicants' scores on cognitive tests and an SJT were linked to SES (parents' occupational status), ethnicity (White versus Black and other minority ethnic candidates), and gender.RESULTS Firstly, the effect size for SES was lower for the SJT (d = 0.13-0.20 in favour of the higher SES group) than it was for the cognitive tests (d = 0.38-0.35). Secondly, effect sizes for ethnicity of the SJT and cognitive tests were similar (d =~0.50 in favour of White candidates). Thirdly, males outperformed females on cognitive tests, whereas the reverse was true for SJTs. When equal weight was given to the SJT and the cognitive tests in the admission decision and when the selection ratio was stringent, simulated scenarios showed that using an SJT in addition to cognitive tests might enable admissions boards to select more students from lower SES backgrounds and more female students.CONCLUSIONS The SJT has the potential to appropriately complement cognitive tests in the selection of doctors and dentists. It may also put candidates of lower SES backgrounds at less of a disadvantage and may potentially diversify the student intake. However, use of the SJT applied in this study did not diminish the role of ethnicity. Future research should examine these findings with other SJTs and other tests internationally and scrutinise the causes underlying the role of ethnicity.

BackgroundEvidence for the predictive validity of situational judgement tests (SJTs) and multiple-mini interviews (MMIs) is well-established in undergraduate selection contexts, however at present there is less evidence to support the validity of their use in postgraduate settings. More research is also required to assess the extent to which SJTs and MMIs are complementary for predicting performance in practice. This study represents the first longitudinal evaluation of the complementary roles and predictive validity of an SJT and an MMI for selection for entry into postgraduate General Practice (GP) specialty training in Australia.MethodsLongitudinal data was collected from 443 GP registrars in Australia who were selected into GP training in 2010 or 2011. All 17 Regional Training Providers in Australia were asked to participate; performance data were received from 13 of these. Data was collected for participants’ end-of-training assessment performance. Outcome measures include GP registrars’ performance on the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners (RACGP) applied knowledge test, key feature problems and an objective structured clinical exam.ResultsPerformance on the SJT, MMI and the overall selection score significantly predicted all three end-of-training assessments (r = .12 to .54), indicating that both of the selection methods, as well the overall selection score, have good predictive validity. The SJT and MMI provide incremental validity over each other for two of the three end-of-training assessments.ConclusionsThe SJT and MMI were both significant positive predictors of all end-of-training assessments. Results provide evidence that they are complementary in predicting end-of-training assessment scores. This research adds to the limited literature at present regarding the predictive validity of postgraduate medical selection methods, and their comparable effectiveness when used in a single selection system. A future research agenda is proposed.

No abstract