Peer influence on students’ estimates of performance: social comparison in clinical rotations
Abstract
Context During clinical rotations, students move from one clinical situation to another. Questions exist about students' strategies for coping with these transitions. These strategies may include a process of social comparison because in this context it offers the student an opportunity to estimate his or her abilities to master a novel rotation. These estimates are relevant for learning and performance because they are related to self-efficacy. We investigated whether student estimates of their own future performance are influenced by the performance level and gender of the peer with whom the student compares him- or herself. Methods We designed an experimental study in which participating students (n = 321) were divided into groups assigned to 12 different conditions. Each condition entailed a written comparison situation in which a peer student had completed the rotation the participant was required to undertake next. Differences between conditions were determined by the performance level (worse, similar or better) and gender of the comparison peer. The overall grade achieved by the comparison peer remained the same in all conditions. We asked participants to estimate their own future performance in that novel rotation. Differences between their estimates were analysed using analysis of variance (ANOVA). Results Students' estimates of their future performance were highest when the comparison peer was presented as performing less well and lowest when the comparison peer was…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
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 present study, students could not see classmates' responses to discussion prompts until they had responded themselves, which prevented bias from social comparison.
“students were unable to see classmates' responses to the discussion prompts until they themselves had responded. This method prevents students from experiencing bias from social comparison (Raat et al., 2013)”
From Promoting metacognition in an allied health anatomy course (2023) · cites this paper as Raat et al., 2013
Cites
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511815355 · Cited by 33,219 · see citing works
What is social comparison and how should we study it?
Wood, J. V. (1996) · Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin · doi:10.1177/0146167296225009 · Cited by 697 · see citing works
Blanton, H., Buunk, B. P., Gibbons, F. X., & Kuyper, H. (1999) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.76.3.420 · Cited by 346 · see citing works
The rotational approach to medical education: time to confront our assumptions?
Holmboe, E., Ginsburg, S., & Bernabeo, E. (2011) · Medical Education · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2923.2010.03847.x · Cited by 154 · see citing works
Learning in clinical practice: Stimulating and discouraging response to social comparison
Raat, J., Kuks, J., & Cohen-Schotanus, J. (2010) · Medical Teacher · doi:10.3109/0142159x.2010.497820 · Cited by 27 · see citing works
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Promoting metacognition in an allied health anatomy course
Cale, A. S., Hoffman, L. A., & McNulty, M. A. (2023) · Anatomical Sciences Education · doi:10.1002/ase.2218 · Cited by 35 · see citing works
“This method prevents students from experiencing bias from social comparison (Raat et al., 2013) or simply reading and copying the previous responses from their classmates.”
Background
- Authors
- Raat, A. N. (., Kuks, J. B. M., van Hell, E. A., & Cohen‐Schotanus, J.
- Affiliations
- University Medical Center Groningen (NL)
- Corresponding author
- Raat, A N (Janet)
- Venue
- Medical Education
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2013-01-16
- Volume
- 47
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 190-197
- ISSN
- 0308-0110 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2923
- OpenAlex
- W2140334462
- Cited by
- 36
- References
- 5
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 5
- FWCI
- 3.06
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Medical Education (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (publishedVersion)
- University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Innovations in Medical Education
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Education, Achievement, and Giftedness
- Health Sciences › Nursing › Leadership and Management › Healthcare Education and Workforce Issues
- Keywords
- peer influence, social comparison, self-efficacy, clinical rotations, medical students, gender differences, clinical learning
- MeSH terms
- Analysis of Variance, Clinical Competence, Female, Humans, Male, Peer Group, Research Design, Rotation, Students, Medical, Self Efficacy
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
