The DOI matches its Crossref record; 25 of the 25 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Learning from clinical work: the roles of learning cues and credibility judgements
Open accessAbstract
Medical Education 2012: 46 : 192–200 Context: How learners interpret their clinical experiences to create meaningful learning has not been well studied. We explored experiences considered by doctors to be influential in their learning in order to better understand this process. Methods: Using a grounded theory approach, we interviewed 22 academic doctors who had been in practice for ≤ 5 years. Participants were asked to reflect on experiences they considered to have been influential during their training. Constant comparative analysis for emerging themes was conducted iteratively with data collection. Results: A model of clinical learning emerged in which the clinical work itself is central. As they observe and participate in clinical work, learners can attend to a variety of sources of information that facilitate the interpretation of the experience and the construction of knowledge from it. These ‘learning cues’ include feedback, role models, clinical outcomes, patient or family responses, and comparisons with peers. The integration of a cue depends on the learner’s judgement of its credibility. Certain cues, such as clinical outcomes or feedback from patients, are seen as innately credible, whereas other cues, particularly feedback from supervisors, are subjected to critical judgement. Conclusions: Learners make complex judgements regarding the credibility of information about clinical performance. Credibility judgements influence the learning that arises from the clinical experience. Further understanding of how such judgements are made could guide educators in providing credible information to learners.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“However, opportunities to practice these skills and receive constructive assessment remain limited in clinical settings.”
From Enhancing Psychiatry Training Using an Agentic AI Simulated Consultation Tool: Prospective Cohort Study (2026) · cites this paper as [7]
In the citing paper
“Invested, credible supervisors 2,4-7 and a supportive, open culture [33][34][35][36] are integral to positive learning and coaching in medicine 8 and education.16,19”
From The R2C2 Model in Residency Education: How Does It Foster Coaching and Promote Feedback Use? (2018) · cites this paper as [4]
In the citing paper
“Features seen to be especially important to the provision of feedback include actively engaging providers and recipients in the feedback interaction and addressing factors that influence feedback credibility and use, such as relationships, context, and culture.[2][3][4][5][6][7][8]”
From The R2C2 Model in Residency Education: How Does It Foster Coaching and Promote Feedback Use? (2018) · cites this paper as [4]
In the citing paper
“Relevance and credibility are important parameters for learners to decide how to act on feedback [10].”
From Guidelines: The do’s, don’ts and don’t knows of feedback for clinical education. (2015) · cites this paper as [10]
In the citing paper
“Do recognize that trainees must perceive feedback as credible in order for it to be influential.”
From Guidelines: The do’s, don’ts and don’t knows of feedback for clinical education. (2015) · cites this paper as [10]
In the citing paper
“As a consequence, trainees may begin to devalue external feedback in general, relying instead on self-assessment [10, 11].”
From Guidelines: The do’s, don’ts and don’t knows of feedback for clinical education. (2015) · cites this paper as [10]
In the citing paper
“In reality, however, the quality of the feedback received in medical training is often reported as low, and poorly informed due to factors including limited direct observation of performance.”
From Guidelines: The do’s, don’ts and don’t knows of feedback for clinical education. (2015) · cites this paper as [10]
Citations
Cites
(2006) · Cited by 18,730
Basics of Qualitative Research
Ozanne, J. L., Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. M. (1992) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.2307/3172751 · Cited by 17,852
Constructing Grounded Theory. A Practical Guide Through Qualitative Analysis
Boyle, C., & Barker, A. (2006) · QMiP Bulletin · doi:10.53841/bpsqmip.2006.1.2.36 · Cited by 11,844
Nicol, D. J., & Macfarlane‐Dick, D. (2006) · Studies in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/03075070600572090 · Cited by 5,846
Feedback and Self-Regulated Learning: A Theoretical Synthesis
Butler, D. L., & Winne, P. H. (1995) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/00346543065003245 · Cited by 3,334
Self-Assessment in the Health Professions: A Reformulation and Research Agenda
Eva, K. W., & Regehr, G. (2005) · Academic Medicine · doi:10.1097/00001888-200510001-00015 · Cited by 992
360° feedback: Accuracy, reactions, and perceptions of usefulness.
Brett, J. F., & ATWATER, L. E. (2001) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.86.5.930 · Cited by 505
The processes and dimensions of informed self-assessment: A conceptual model.
Sargeant, J., Armson, H., Chesluk, B., Dornan, T., Eva, K., Holmboe, E., Lockyer, J., Loney, E., Mann, K., & van der Vleuten, C. (2010) · Academic Medicine · doi:10.1097/acm.0b013e3181d85a4e · Cited by 318
How residents learn: qualitative evidence for the pivotal role of clinical activities
Teunissen, P. W., Scheele, F., Scherpbier, A. J. J. A., van der Vleuten, C. P. M., Boor, K., van Luijk, S. J., & van Diemen-Steenvoorde, J. A. A. M. (2007) · Medical Education · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2923.2007.02778.x · Cited by 304
Why medical educators may be failing at feedback.
Bing-You, R. G. (2009) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2009.1393 · Cited by 224
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Grounded theory in medical education research: AMEE Guide No. 70
Watling, C., & Lingard, L. (2012) · Medical Teacher · doi:10.3109/0142159x.2012.704439 · Cited by 600
Self-citationThe “educational alliance” as a framework for reconceptualizing feedback in medical education.
Telio, S., Ajjawi, R., & Regehr, G. (2015) · Academic Medicine · doi:10.1097/acm.0000000000000560 · Cited by 572
Core principles of assessment in competency-based medical education.
Lockyer, J., Carraccio, C., Chan, M.-K., Hart, D., Smee, S., Touchie, C., Holmboe, E. S., Frank, J. R., & Collaborators, O. B. O. T. I. (2017) · Medical Teacher · doi:10.1080/0142159x.2017.1315082 · Cited by 493
Assessment, feedback and the alchemy of learning
Watling, C., & Ginsburg, S. (2018) · Medical Education · doi:10.1111/medu.13645 · Cited by 461
Self-citationCheng, A., Nadkarni, V., Mancini, M. B., Hunt, E. A., Sinz, E. H., Merchant, R. M., Donoghue, A. J., Duff, J. P., Eppich, W., Auerbach, M. A., et al. (2018) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/cir.0000000000000583 · Cited by 457
Metadata
- Authors
- Watling, C., Driessen, E., van der Vleuten, C. P. M., & Lingard, L.
- Affiliations
- Western University (CA)
- Maastricht University (NL)
- Corresponding author
- Watling, Christopher
- Venue
- Medical Education
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2012-01-12
- Volume
- 46
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 192-200
- ISSN
- 0308-0110 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2923
- OpenAlex
- W1944495410
- Cited by
- 261
- References
- 25
- Citations by year
- 2026: 16 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 23 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 23 · 2018: 29 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 23 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 20 · 2013: 15 · 2012: 6
- FWCI
- 16.05
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Medical Education (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Research Publications (Maastricht University) (publishedVersion)
- Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion)
- Research Publications (Maastricht University) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Innovations in Medical Education
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Family Practice › Clinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Empathy and Medical Education
- Keywords
- clinical learning, clinical supervision, feedback, role models, clinical outcomes, peer comparison, patient feedback, knowledge construction, early-career physicians, clinical experience
- MeSH terms
- Attitude of Health Personnel, Clinical Competence, Cues, Education, Medical, Female, Humans, Judgment, Learning, Male, Sampling Studies, Knowledge, Feedback, Psychological
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
