Feedback falling on deaf ears: residents' receptivity to feedback tempered by sender credibility
Abstract
We interviewed internal medicine residents to characterize their perceptions of effective feedback. These semi-structured interviews also explored aspects of the person sending the feedback which might cause residents to discount or disbelieve the information. Well-timed, private and verbal feedback that fostered development of an action plan are examples of residents' perceptions of effective feedback. Sender credibility, and subsequent resident receptivity to feedback, was influenced by the method of feedback delivery, the content of the feedback and the residents' perceptions of sender characteristics, and their observation of sender behavior. These qualitative results may help to develop initial hypotheses and frame further investigations optimizing the reception of feedback by residents.
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?
Trainees must perceive feedback as credible in order for it to be influential.
“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 [7]
Timeliness is important to learners' acceptance and use of feedback.
“Studies of learners’ perceptions of effective feedback have highlighted the importance of timeliness to learners’ acceptance and use of feedback [7, 11]”
From Guidelines: The do’s, don’ts and don’t knows of feedback for clinical education. (2015) · cites this paper as [7]
Factors such as the emotional reaction of the learner, the credibility of the educator, or the time interval within which feedback is given may all affect how learners perceive and interpret the feedback message.
“Other factors -such as the emotional reaction of the learner, the credibility of the educator, or the time interval within which feedback is given -may all affect how learners perceive and interpret the feedback message. 14,18-21”
From Medical student perceptions of feedback and feedback behaviors within the context of the “educational alliance.” (2017) · cites this paper as [21]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 16 · Cited by 161
- Authors
- Bing-You, R. G., Paterson, J., & Levine, M. A.
- Affiliations
- Maine Medical Center, Portland, ME, USA
- Maine Medical Center (US)
- Venue
- Medical Teacher
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 1997-01
- Volume
- 19
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 40-44
- ISSN
- 0142-159X (ISSN-L)
- 1466-187X
- OpenAlex
- W2130854479
- Cited by
- 161
- References
- 16
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 19 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 7
- FWCI
- 0.92
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Medical Teacher (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Innovations in Medical Education
- Social Sciences › Education › Student Assessment and Feedback
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Family Practice › Clinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills
- Keywords
- feedback reception, sender credibility, internal medicine residents, physician training, action planning, observational learning
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
