Script concordance test item response process: The argument for probability versus typicality

Advances in Health Sciences Education

Volumn 17, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 11-13

  Lubarsky, Stuart ^a   Gagnon, Robert ^b   Charlin, Bernard ^b  

^a MCGILL UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITÉ DE MONTRÉAL   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84856750491     PISSN: 13824996     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10459-011-9338-8     Document Type: Note

References (7)

1. Charlin, B., Brailovsky, C. A., Leduc, C., & Blouin, D. (1998). The diagnostic script questionnaire: A new tool to assess a specific dimension of clinical competence. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 3, 51-58.
2. Eddy, D. (1982). Probabilistic reasoning in clinical medicine: Problems, opportunities. In D. Kahnemann, P. Slovic, & A. Tversky (Eds.), Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
3. Fournier, J. P., Demeester, A., & Charlin, B. (2008). Script concordance tests: Guidelines for construction. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, 8, 18.
4. Gagnon, R., Charlin, B., Roy, L., St-Martin, M., Sauve, E., Boshuizen, H. P. A., et al. (2006). The cognitive validity of the script concordance test: A time processing study. Teaching and Learning in Medicine, 18(1), 22-27.
5. Kreiter, C. (2011). Commentary: The response process validity of a script concordance item. Advances in health sciences education: Theory and practice. 2011 Oct 1 [Epub ahead of print].
6. Lubarsky, S., Charlin, B., Cook, D. A., Chalk, C., & van der Vleuten, C. P. M. (2011). Script concordance testing: A review of published validity evidence. Medical Education, 45, 329-338.
7. Tversky, A., & Kahnemann, D. (1982). Judgments of and by representativeness. In D. Kahnemann, P. Slovic, & A. Tversky (Eds.), Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.