title: Reasoning when it counts: students' rationales for action on a professionalism exam.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Previous research explored students' reasoning in the face of professional dilemmas, using interviews in response to videotaped scenarios. This study determined the effects of a change in context (to a written exam) and format (video versus text scenarios) on students' response patterns.
  
  
  METHODS
  Fifty-three students were randomized to videotaped or text-based scenarios in the context of a mock written exam. Responses were coded by two raters.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Interrater reliability was high (kappa = 0.872). There were no differences in response patterns between the video and text groups. When compared with the interview setting, students' exam responses showed a shift towards more "acceptable" rationales for action; however, they still considered implications for themselves.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  This shift in responses indicates that students took the exam seriously. Their continued reference to implications for themselves might therefore reflect a sense that their status as students makes these considerations legitimate; alternatively, students' interpretation of altruism may be different than what the profession avows.
authors: shiphra.ginsburg@utoronto.ca
authors: Shiphra R
authors: SR
authors: Ginsburg
authors: Glenn
authors: G
authors: Regehr
authors: Maria
authors: M
authors: Mylopoulos
mesh_terms: D002983:Clinical Competence / Q000592:standards*; D004504:Education, Medical, Undergraduate / Q000379:methods*; D004521:Educational Measurement / Q000379:methods*; D006801:Humans; D009042:Motivation; D011340:Problem Solving; D013337:Students, Medical / Q000523:psychology*; D011795:Surveys and Questionnaires; D014741:Video Recording