Evaluating resident candidates: does closed file review impact faculty ratings?

Abstract

Background: The purpose of this study was to examine faculty ratings of resident candidates in closed and open file conditions.

Methods: Surgical faculty conducted interviews of 70 resident candidates. Interviewers completed an evaluation following a closed file interview then reviewed the candidate's Electronic Residency Application Service file and completed the evaluation again.

Results: A multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) yielded significant file x familiarity (P < .01), familiarity x attribute (P < .01), and file x familiarity x attribute (P < .05) interactions. Analyses for each attribute revealed consistent findings in ratings of candidates' intelligence, maturity, interpersonal skills, motivation for learning, ability to work with others, qualifications to succeed in surgery, and likelihood to succeed in surgery. Known candidates were rated higher until files were examined. After file review, unknown candidates were seen to be as strong as or stronger than known candidates.

Conclusion: Interviewers rate known and unknown candidates differently in open and closed file conditions.