Avoiding the Virtual Pitfall: Identifying and Mitigating Biases in Graduate Medical Education Videoconference Interviews
- PMID: 33464743
- DOI: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000003914
Avoiding the Virtual Pitfall: Identifying and Mitigating Biases in Graduate Medical Education Videoconference Interviews
Abstract
Public health concerns related to the COVID-19 pandemic are leading many residency and fellowship programs to transition from in-person to videoconference interviews (VCIs). The magnitude and speed of the shift to VCIs, the lack of existing research around bias and VCIs, and the underlying stress on all involved related to the pandemic put programs at risk of implementing virtual interviews without fully exploring their implications for diversity and equity. VCIs can promote diversity efforts by reducing the need for travel, making interviews more convenient and cost effective for applicants. However, VCIs may also introduce new biases and amplify existing biases in recruitment. VCIs introduce a dependence on technology to conduct the interview process, which may amplify systemic inequities in access to broadband internet and high-quality hardware. Communication delays due to technology challenges may negatively affect interview scores. Additionally, users experience increased cognitive load when participating in videoconferences, which can activate implicit biases. Exposure to cues in the interviewee's personal living situation previously unavailable to interviewers may lead to unconscious assumptions by interviewers, which may also influence scoring. Graduate medical education programs committed to maintaining equitable recruitment processes must be able to recognize potential biases in VCIs and implement strategies to mitigate them. This article identifies some of the biases VCIs can introduce to the recruitment process and offers strategies for programs to mitigate them. These include making interviewers aware of potential technology-based inequities, encouraging interviewers to minimize multitasking, and offering guidance on use of standardized backgrounds. The authors also recognize the limitations of offering behavioral strategies to mitigate systemic inequities and suggest that structural changes are needed to ensure equitable access to technology.
Copyright © 2021 by the Association of American Medical Colleges.
References
-
- Association of American Medical Colleges.. AAMC Resources for Residency Program Selection. https://www.aamc.org/what-we-do/mission-areas/medical-education/conducti... . Accessed December 15, 2020
-
- Accreditation Council of Graduate Medical Education. Common Program Requirements (Residency) Sections I-V: Table of Implementation Dates. https://www.acgme.org/Portals/0/PFAssets/ProgramRequirements/CPRResidenc... . Accessed December 15, 2020
-
- Haider AH, Sexton J, Sriram N, et al. Association of unconscious race and social class bias with vignette-based clinical assessments by medical students. JAMA. 2011; 306:942–951
-
- Bass A, Wu C, Schaefer JP, Wright B, McLaughlin K. In-group bias in residency selection. Med Teach. 2013; 35:747–751
-
- Maxfield CM, Thorpe MP, Desser TS, et al. Bias in radiology resident selection: Do we discriminate against the obese and unattractive? Acad Med. 2019; 94:1774–1780
References cited only in the tables
-
- Williams J. The 5 biases pushing women out of STEM. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2015/03/the-5-biases-pushing-women-out-of-stem . Published March 2015 Accessed December 15, 2020
-
- Harasym PH, Woloschuk W, Mandin H, Brundin-Mather R. Reliability and validity of interviewers’ judgments of medical school candidates. Acad Med. 1996; 71suppl 1S40–S42
-
- Jhangiani R, Tarry H. Principles of Social Psychology. 1st International ed. Victoria, BC: BCcampus, 2014
-
- Bendick M, Nunes A. Developing the research basis for controlling bias in hiring. J Soc Issues. 2012; 238–262
-
- Dunham Y. Mere membership. Trends Cogn Sci. 2018; 22:780–793
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical