Gary W. Procop MD, MS, MEd , Ty McCarthy MSS , Paul Jones PhD , Kirk Becker PhD
{"title":"Pathology program directors beliefs on changing answers and literature review","authors":"Gary W. Procop MD, MS, MEd , Ty McCarthy MSS , Paul Jones PhD , Kirk Becker PhD","doi":"10.1016/j.acpath.2025.100213","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The unfounded belief that changing answers during an examination will usually result in a diminished score due to the likelihood of changing correct responses to incorrect responses persists despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Ninety two percent of the Pathology Residency Program Directors responding to this survey had been told this sometime during their career. Although the majority of Program Directors reported not propagating this belief, 14 % still reported providing advice to their trainees to not change answers during an examination. A simple, overarching directive concerning changing answers is not possible given the complexity of this topic and the variables that have been discovered that influence answer-changing behavior. The influencing factors include academic ability, item difficulty, preexisting bias, the use of item marking, time for item reconsideration, and the metacognition of the examinees particularly with respect to the confidence they have in the change in the item selection. A more thorough explanation of these influencing factors should be given to trainees prior to an examination to achieve a truer evaluation of their knowledge and skills and improve the validity of the examination.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":44927,"journal":{"name":"Academic Pathology","volume":"12 3","pages":"Article 100213"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Academic Pathology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2374289525000557","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PATHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The unfounded belief that changing answers during an examination will usually result in a diminished score due to the likelihood of changing correct responses to incorrect responses persists despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Ninety two percent of the Pathology Residency Program Directors responding to this survey had been told this sometime during their career. Although the majority of Program Directors reported not propagating this belief, 14 % still reported providing advice to their trainees to not change answers during an examination. A simple, overarching directive concerning changing answers is not possible given the complexity of this topic and the variables that have been discovered that influence answer-changing behavior. The influencing factors include academic ability, item difficulty, preexisting bias, the use of item marking, time for item reconsideration, and the metacognition of the examinees particularly with respect to the confidence they have in the change in the item selection. A more thorough explanation of these influencing factors should be given to trainees prior to an examination to achieve a truer evaluation of their knowledge and skills and improve the validity of the examination.
期刊介绍:
Academic Pathology is an open access journal sponsored by the Association of Pathology Chairs, established to give voice to the innovations in leadership and management of academic departments of Pathology. These innovations may have impact across the breadth of pathology and laboratory medicine practice. Academic Pathology addresses methods for improving patient care (clinical informatics, genomic testing and data management, lab automation, electronic health record integration, and annotate biorepositories); best practices in inter-professional clinical partnerships; innovative pedagogical approaches to medical education and educational program evaluation in pathology; models for training academic pathologists and advancing academic career development; administrative and organizational models supporting the discipline; and leadership development in academic medical centers, health systems, and other relevant venues. Intended authorship and audiences for Academic Pathology are international and reach beyond academic pathology itself, including but not limited to healthcare providers, educators, researchers, and policy-makers.