There has been a heightened focus on improving the resident selection process, particularly within highly competitive specialties. Previous research, however, has generally lacked a theoretical background, leading to inconsistent and biased results. Our recently published systematic review examining applicant characteristics and performance in residency can provide historical insight into the predictors (ie, constructs) and outcomes (ie, criteria) previously deemed pertinent by the otolaryngology community. Personnel psychology uses evidence-based practices to identify the most qualified candidates for employment using a variety of selection methods. Extensive research in this discipline has shown that integrity tests, structured interviews, work samples, and conscientiousness offer the greatest increase in validity when combined with general cognitive ability. Blending past research knowledge with the principles of personnel selection can provide the necessary foundation with which to engage in theory-driven, longitudinal studies on otolaryngology resident selection moving forward.
BoweSNLauryAMGrayST. Associations between otolaryngology applicant characteristics and future performance in residency or practice: a systematic review. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2017;156:1011-1017.
2.
HamdyHPrasadKAndersonMB. BEME systematic review: predictive values of measurements obtained in medical schools and future performance in medical practice. Med Teach. 2006;28:103-116.
3.
KennySMcInnesMSinghV. Associations between residency selection strategies and doctor performance: a meta-analysis. Med Ed. 2013;47:790-800.
4.
PattersonFKnightADowellJNicholsonSCousansFClelandJ. How effective are selection methods in medical education? A systematic review. Med Ed. 2016;50:36-60.
5.
LeeAGGolnikKCOettingTA. Re-engineering the resident applicant selection process in ophthalmology: a literature review and recommendations for improvement. Surv Ophthalmol. 2008;53:164-176.
6.
HarfmannKLZirwasMJ. Can performance in medical school predict performance in residency? A compilation and review of correlative studies. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2011;65:1010-1022.
7.
EgolKACollinsJZukermanJD. Success in orthopedic training: resident selection and predictors of quality performance. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2011;19:72-78.
8.
LevyP. Industrial/Organizational Psychology: Understanding the Workplace. New York, NY: Worth Publishers; 2013.
9.
PattersonFLievensFKerrinMZibarrasLCaretteB. Designing selection systems for medicine: the importance of balancing predictive and political validity in high-stakes selection contexts. Int J Selec Assess. 2012;20:486-496.
10.
SmithMRobertsonIT. The Theory and Practice of Systematic Personnel Selection. London, UK: Macmillan; 1986.
11.
SchmidtFLHunterJE. The validity and utility of selection methods in personnel psychology: practical and theoretical implications of 85 years of research findings. Psychol Bull. 1998;124:262-274.
12.
PragerJDMyerCMIVHayesKMMyerCMIIIPensakML. Improving methods of resident selection. Laryngoscope. 2010;120:2391-2398.
13.
OnesDSViswesvaranC. Integrity tests and other criterion-focused occupational personality scales (COPS) used in personnel selection. Int J Select Assess. 2001;9:31-39.
14.
PattersonFAshworthVZibarrasLCoanPKerrinMO’NeillP. Evaluations of situational judgement tests to assess non-academic attributes in selection. Med Educ. 2012;46:850-868.
15.
HusbandsARodgersonMJDowellJPattersonF. Evaluating the validity of an integrity-based situational judgement test for medical school admissions. BMC Med Educ. 2015;15:144.
16.
PattersonFZibarrasLAshworthV. Situational judgement tests in medical education and training: research, theory and practice: AMEE Guide No. 100. Med Teach. 2016;38:3-17.
17.
PauAJeevaratnamKChenYSFallAAKhooCNadarajahVD. The multiple mini-interview (MMI) for student selection in health professions training—a systematic review. Med Teach. 2013;35:1027-1041.
18.
PattersonFRowettEHaleR. The predictive validity of a situational judgment test and multiple-mini interview for entry into postgraduate training in Australia. BMC Med Educ. 2016;16:87.
19.
KominskyAHBrysonPCBenningerMSTierneyWS. Variability of ratings in the otolaryngology standardized letter of recommendation. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2016;154:287-293.
20.
HojatMErdmannJBGonnellaJS. Personality assessments and outcomes in medical education and the practice of medicine: AMEE Guide No. 79. Med Teach. 2013;35:e1267-e1301.
21.
NascaTJGonnellaJSHojatM. Conceptualization and measurement of clinical competence of residents: a brief rating form and psychometric properties. Med Teach. 2002;24:299-303.
22.
HojatMPaskinDLCallahanCA. Components of postgraduate competence: analyses of thirty years of longitudinal data. Med Educ. 2007;41:982-989.
DongTDurningSJGillilandWRSwygertKAArtinoARJr.Development and initial validation of a program director’s evaluation form for medical school graduates. Mil Med. 2015;180:97-103.
25.
ArtinoARJrDongTCruessDFGillilandWRDurningSJ. Development and initial validation of a program director’s evaluation form for third-year residents. Mil Med. 2015;180:104-108.
