Premium
Gender differences in opposite dissection group peer feedback among interprofessional allied health students in the gross anatomy lab (721.20)
Author(s) -
Chen Vince,
Martin Charys,
Nichols Carol,
Edmondson Anna
Publication year - 2014
Publication title -
the faseb journal
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.709
H-Index - 277
eISSN - 1530-6860
pISSN - 0892-6638
DOI - 10.1096/fasebj.28.1_supplement.721.20
Subject(s) - constructive , psychology , gross anatomy , dissection (medical) , medical education , medicine , anatomy , process (computing) , computer science , operating system
Giving professional feedback is uncomfortable, but the small group setting in the anatomy lab provides an ideal environment to develop these skills. Lab groups alternate dissections, and allied health (physician assistant, occupational & physical therapy) students provide feedback to the opposite lab groups based on interactions & dissection reviews. To assess the narrative feedback given by allied health students to peers in opposite lab groups, feedback comments were quantified and sorted into themes and divided by gender. Most comments were positive; the majority associated with themes involving professionalism & leadership skills (48%), followed by knowledge (35%) & personal behaviors (5%). Similar results were seen with constructive criticisms. Females left more comments than males (4.03 vs. 2.89 per student) and emphasized knowledge more in both positive (38% vs. 27%) & constructive (40% vs. 29%) comments than males. Males focused more on professionalism/leadership skills in their constructive criticisms compared to females (71% vs. 59%). Some of these differences may be attributed to the fact that males gave more generic & neutral comments than females (18% vs. 8%) and that there were more females enrolled in the course (93 vs. 35). However, these differences may also be attributed to intrinsic traits amongst genders, including detail‐oriented skills, thoroughness, and insightfulness.