Article

The Assessment of Emotional Intelligence Among Candidates Interviewing for General Surgery Residency

Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California. Electronic address: .
Journal of Surgical Education (Impact Factor: 1.39). 09/2012; 70(4):514-521. DOI: 10.1016/j.jsurg.2013.03.010
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT BACKGROUND: There is an increasing demand for physicians to possess strong personal and social qualities embodied in the concept of emotional intelligence (EI). However, the residency selection process emphasizes mainly academic accomplishments. In this system, the faculty interview is the primary means of evaluating the nontangible, nonacademic attributes of a candidate. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the impressions derived from faculty interviews correlate with an applicant's actual EI as measured by a validated objective instrument. STUDY DESIGN: Participating applicants interviewing for a surgical residency position at Stanford completed an EI inventory Trait Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire (TEIQue). Faculty estimated the EI of the applicants they interviewed using a corresponding 360° evaluation form. Multivariate linear regression was performed to identify demographic and academic factors predictive of EI. Applicant TEIQue scores and faculty 360° impressions were correlated using Pearson coefficients. RESULTS: Mean EI of the cohort was higher than that of the average population (5.43 vs 4.89, p<0.001). Age was the only demographic variable that significantly informed EI (B = 0.07, p = 0.005). Among the academic factors considered, United States Medical Licensing Examination Step 1 score was a slight negative predictor of EI (B =-0.007, p = 0.04). Applicant global EI scores did not correlate with faculty impressions of overall EI (r = 0.27, p = 0.06). Of the 4 domains that comprise global EI, sociability and emotionality demonstrated a moderate correlation between applicant and faculty scores (r = 0.31, p = 0.03 and r = 0.27, p = 0.05, respectively). None of the fifteen individual facets of EI demonstrated any correlation between applicant and faculty ratings (r =-0.12 to 0.26, p = 0.06-0.91). No association was found between applicant TEIQue and traditional faculty interview evaluations (r = 0.18, p = 0.19). CONCLUSIONS: Applicant EI correlated poorly with academic parameters and was not accurately assessed by faculty interviews. Methods that better capture this dimension should be incorporated into the residency selection process.

2 Followers
 · 
27 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objective For the past 15 years at our institution’s general surgery residency program, 3 of the senior residents have been chosen to be awarded either (1) Best Resident in Research, (2) Best Resident in Teaching, or (3) Best Resident Overall. Considering that these awards serve as data representing outstanding performance as surgical residents, the objective of this study was to determine the association between receiving one of these awards and objective measures of performance. Methods Individual files were reviewed for the 103 residents who graduated from our institution’s general surgery program from 1994 to 2010. These data were studied as a whole, and then divided into an award-winning group and a non–award winning group and subsequently compared across several objective parameters, including The United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) scores, American Board of Surgery In-Training Examination (ABSITE) scores, first-time American Board of Surgery Certifying and Qualifying Examination pass rates, Alpha Omega Alpha membership status, and number of research years, using a logistic regression model. Results Overall, 103 residents completed their general surgery residency training at our institution from 1994 to 2010, and of these residents, 16 (16%) received the Best Resident in Research award, 15 (16%) received the Best Resident in Teaching award, and 17 (17%) received the Best Resident Overall award in their final years of training. Compared with those who did not receive an award, a hypothesis-based one-tailed test revealed that award winners had a significantly lower median USMLE Step 1 scores (p = 0.04) and marginally lower median USMLE Step 2 scores (p = 0.05). Alpha Omega Alpha membership status, median ABSITE percent correct overall, first-time American Board of Surgery examination pass rates, and number of research years during residency were not significantly different between the 2 groups. Conclusion Many factors contribute to success during general surgery residency. Our study showed that higher USMLE and ABSITE scores were not associated with receiving top awards in final years of training at one institution over 15 years.
    Journal of Surgical Education 01/2013; 71(2). DOI:10.1016/j.jsurg.2013.07.012 · 1.39 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Although emotional intelligence (EI) may have a role in the development of Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education core competencies, few studies have measured resident EI across specialties. This study aimed to describe the EI of resident physicians across multiple specialties. METHODS: Three hundred twenty five surgery, pediatric, and pathology residents at 3 large academic institutions were invited to complete the psychometrically validated Trait Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire. RESULTS: The response rate was 42.8% (n = 139). Global EI of all residents (101.0 +/- 8.1) was comparable with, but less variable than, the general population sample and was not statistically different between specialties. Compared with the norm sample, residents in the 3 specialty groups demonstrated unique combinations of areas of relative high and low development. CONCLUSIONS: There exist distinct strengths and opportunities for the development for surgery, pediatrics, and pathology residents. Future investigations could use EI profiling to create educational interventions to develop specific areas of EI and assess correlation with resident performance.
    The American Journal of Surgery 10/2014; 209(1). DOI:10.1016/j.amjsurg.2014.09.015 · 2.41 Impact Factor