Personality factors and medical training: a review of the literature

Abstract

Medical Education 2011: 45: 132–140 Context It has been acknowledged that certain personality characteristics influence both medical students’ and doctors’ performance. With regard to medical students, studies have been concerned with the role of personality, and performance indicators such as academic results and clinical competence. In addition, the link between personality and vulnerability to stress, which has implications for performance, has been investigated at both undergraduate and postgraduate levels. Most of the studies cited in the literature were published before the year 2000. The authors therefore undertook a literature search to determine whether any prospective systematic studies have been published since 2000. Methods A review of the literature for 2000–2009 was performed, using the databases MEDLINE, PsycINFO and CINAHL. The search terms used were ‘personality’, ‘performance’, ‘stress’ and ‘medical student’. Specific inclusion criteria required studies to be cohort studies carried out over a minimum period of 2 years, which measured medical student scores on valid and reliable personality tests, and used objective measures of performance and stress. Results The authors identified seven suitable studies. Four of these looked at personality factors and academic success, one looked at personality factors and clinical competence, and two looked at personality factors and stress. The main personality characteristic repeatedly identified in the literature was conscientiousness. Conclusions The personality trait known as conscientiousness has been found to be a significant predictor of performance in medical school. The relationship between personality and performance becomes increasingly significant as learners advance through medical training. Additional traits concerning sociability (i.e. extraversion, openness, self‐esteem and neuroticism) have also been identified as relevant, particularly in the applied medical environment. A prospective national study with the collaboration of all medical schools would make it possible to further investigate these important but initial findings.

Response distortion on personality tests in applicants: comparing high-stakes to low-stakes medical settings

“…Although research has examined correlations of medical student personality with academic performance (Doherty et al, 2011;Ferguson et al, 2003;Haight et al, 2012;Knights et al, 2007;Lievens et al, 2009;McLarnon et al, 2017;Peng et al, 1995) and other outcomes (Hojat et al, 2015;Jerant et al, 2012;McManus et al, 2004;Pohl et al, 2011;Song et al, 2017;Tyssen et al, 2007), there appears to be no research that has systematically compared responses to personality in a large sample of medical students with applicants to medical programs. So, the "jury is still out" regarding the extent to which applicants to medical programs distort their responses.…”

Associations Between the Big Five Personality Traits and a Medical School Admission Interview

“…13 Personality can be assessed directly by self-report personality tests but it has been shown that applicants can fake on personality self-report tests.…”

“…The first phase of the seriation process ranked applicants based on their previous achievement once it has been showed that previous achievement predicts posterior achievement. 2,17,18 Neverthless, it isn't absolutely certain that high achievers have other important attributes that are needed from the very beginning.…”

Personality Testing in Resident Selection

“…Personality traits have been shown to be relatively stable over time, starting at a young age [1], and a recent review of the existing literature concluded that personality assessments that identify conscientiousness, agreeableness, extraversion, openness, and emotional stability (known as the "big five") are effective predictors of performance in medical school (assuming a minimum level of academic ability has been demonstrated) [2,3]. Personality tests, however, may not be reliable predictors of academic performance, especially if those administering the tests fail to consider the variables that can skew results (e.g., dishonest answers, a poor environment with multiple interruptions, mood).…”

“…Further, the medical education literature suggests that a significant minority of residents have serious problems during their training. The estimate was 7 percent of residents in one national survey of all program directors [3] and another, by the American Board of Internal Medicine, estimated that between 8 and 15 percent of residents had serious problems during training [4].…”