A Generalizability Analysis of a Veterinary School Multiple Mini Interview: Effect of Number of Interviewers, Type of Interviewers, and Number of Stations

Hecker, Kent G.; Violato, Claudio

doi:10.1080/10401334.2011.611769

Cited by 23 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Most studies reported that reliability was moderate (Roberts et al 2008;Yen et al 2011), presumably between stations, or high (Hecker et al 2009), but generally acceptable or satisfactory (Eva et al 2004c;Dowell et al 2012). However, reliability would appear to be associated with number of stations or interviewers (Hecker & Violato 2011), and the content of each station . Within an MMI, multiple stations may be designed to assess the same attributes resulting in high reliability, or very different attributes resulting in low reliability.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…Reliability between faculty and community veterinarians has also been reported (Hecker & Violato 2011), although community assessors' ratings were reportedly less consistent than faculty's (Eva et al 2004b). …”

Section: Reliabilitymentioning

confidence: 89%

“…Future research on reliability should perform factor analysis to identify which stations assess the same attributes , and reliability should be reported for groups of stations assessing the same attributes, or between groups of stations assessing different attributes. A number of studies carried out generalisability analysis and decision studies to quantify the amount of error caused by each factor such as number of items per station, number of raters per station, number of stations (Hecker & Violato 2011), and length of time per station (Dodson et al 2009). This allows computation of overall reliability of the MMI considering all sources of variance (Dore et al 2010), and would be a more appropriate measure of reliability.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Fourteen of the studies used one assessor per station while 4 used 2 assessors, and the remaining 12 did not report the number of assessors per station. Most studies used faculty as assessors, while some used a combination of faculty and community practitioners (Hecker & Violato 2011) and others included students ).…”

Section: Features Of the MMImentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

The Multiple Mini-Interview (MMI) for student selection in health professions training – A systematic review

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Section: Reliabilitymentioning

confidence: 89%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Features Of the MMImentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The Multiple Mini-Interview (MMI) for student selection in health professions training – A systematic review

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…[14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21] Across these settings, the MMI seems to be a useful admissions tool for measuring professional attributes. In a systematic review of studies exploring MMI use for student selection in health professions training, Pau et al concluded that candidates and interviewers found the process acceptable and fair.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Development and Assessment of the Multiple Mini-Interview in a School of Pharmacy Admissions Model

Cox

McLaughlin

Singer

et al. 2015

American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective. To describe the development, implementation, and evaluation of the multiple mini-interview (MMI) within a doctor of pharmacy (PharmD) admissions model. Methods. Demographic data and academic indicators were collected for all candidates who participated in Candidates' Day (n5253), along with the score for each MMI station criteria (7 stations). A survey was administered to all candidates who completed the MMI, and another survey was administered to all interviewers to examine perceptions of the MMI. Results. Analyses suggest that MMI stations assessed different attributes as designed, with Cronbach alpha for each station ranging from 0.90 to 0.95. All correlations between MMI station scores and academic indicators were negligible. No significant differences in average station scores were found based on age, gender, or race. Conclusion. This study provides additional support for the use of the MMI as an admissions tool in pharmacy education.

show abstract

Validating MMI scores: are we measuring multiple attributes?

Oliver

Hecker

Hausdorf

et al. 2014

Adv in Health Sci Educ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The multiple mini-interview (MMI) used in health professional schools' admission processes is reported to assess multiple non-cognitive constructs such as ethical reasoning, oral communication, or problem evaluation. Though validation studies have been performed with total MMI scores, there is a paucity of information regarding how well MMI scores differentiate the constructs being measured, the relationship between MMI scores (construct or total) and personality characteristics, and how well MMI scores (construct or total) predict future performance in practice. Results from these studies could assist with MMI station development, rater training, score interpretation, and resource allocation. The purpose of this study was to investigate the validity of MMI construct scores (oral communication and problem evaluation), and their relationship to personality measures (emotionality and extraversion) and specific scores from standardized clinical communications interviews (building the relationship and explaining and planning). Confirmatory factor analysis results support a two factor MMI model, however the correlation between these factors was .87. Oral communication MMI scores significantly correlated with extraversion (r c = .25, p < .05), but MMI scores were not related to emotionality. Scores for building a relationship were significantly related to MMI oral communication scores, (r c = .46, p < .001) and problem evaluation scores (r c = .43, p < .001); scores for explaining and planning were significantly related to MMI problem evaluation scores (r c = .36, p < .01). The results provide validity evidence for assessing multiple non-cognitive attributes during the MMI process and reinforce the importance of developing MMI stations and scoring rubrics for attributes identified as important for future success in school and practice.

show abstract

A Generalizability Analysis of a Veterinary School Multiple Mini Interview: Effect of Number of Interviewers, Type of Interviewers, and Number of Stations

Cited by 23 publications

References 11 publications

The Multiple Mini-Interview (MMI) for student selection in health professions training – A systematic review

The Multiple Mini-Interview (MMI) for student selection in health professions training – A systematic review

Development and Assessment of the Multiple Mini-Interview in a School of Pharmacy Admissions Model

Validating MMI scores: are we measuring multiple attributes?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About