Clarifying the concepts of confidence and competence to produce appropriate self-evaluation measurement scales

Introduction This paper reviews the literature on self‐evaluation and discusses the findings of a small‐scale qualitative study which explored the terms ‘confidence’ and ‘competence’ as useful measures in a self‐evaluation scale. Four pre‐registration house officers took part in interviews and compl...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Medical education 2000-11, Vol.34 (11), p.903-909
Hauptverfasser: Stewart, Jane, O'Halloran, Catherine, Barton, J Roger, Singleton, Stephen J, Harrigan, Patrick, Spencer, John
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 909
container_issue 11
container_start_page 903
container_title Medical education
container_volume 34
creator Stewart, Jane
O'Halloran, Catherine
Barton, J Roger
Singleton, Stephen J
Harrigan, Patrick
Spencer, John
description Introduction This paper reviews the literature on self‐evaluation and discusses the findings of a small‐scale qualitative study which explored the terms ‘confidence’ and ‘competence’ as useful measures in a self‐evaluation scale. Four pre‐registration house officers took part in interviews and completed a provisional instrument to assess their perceived competence. Findings Competence and confidence are useful terms for house officers expressing beliefs about their ability to perform their job but the terms should not be used synonymously. In our study, ‘competent’ represented what individuals knew about their ability and was based on the individual’s previous experience of the task. ‘Confident’ described a judgement which influenced whether an individual was willing or not to undertake an activity. Confidence was not necessarily based on known levels of competence and therefore performance of tasks which were unfamiliar to the house officer also involved the assessment of risk. The authors give examples of task and skill scales which may be useful in the process of self‐evaluation by pre‐registration house officers. Conclusions The authors suggest that the process of assessing oneself is complicated, and by its very nature can never be objective or free from the beliefs and values individuals hold about themselves. Therefore self‐evaluation instruments are best used to help individuals analyse their work practices and to promote reflection on performance. They should not be used to judge the ‘accuracy’ of the individual’s evaluation.
doi_str_mv 10.1046/j.1365-2923.2000.00728.x
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_72463986</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>64823234</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4598-4d4d432994ed11bef00701bdd8ee4335498f7d43bfe4ba0020d3d13a430fcdbf3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkUtv1DAQxy1ERZfCV0ARQtwSxo8kzoEDWsqC1BYJqHq0nHgMXvKqncDut8fprgrqCfngefz-4_EMIQmFjIIo3mwzyos8ZRXjGQOADKBkMts9Iqv7xGOyAg4yBUrhlDwNYRvBMhfyCTmlMVYCFSvSr1vtnd27_nsy_cCkGfoGxykkg11s6wzGQKJ7E91uxOnOnYZk9IOZl8wYrdE7PWESsLUp_tLtrCc39EmHOsweO-ynJDS6xfCMnFjdBnx-vM_I9Yfzb-uP6cXnzaf1u4u0EXklU2Hi4ayqBBpKa7SwtFsbIxEF57mopC0jUVsUtQZgYLihXAsOtjG15Wfk9aFubO52xjCpzoUG21b3OMxBlUwUvJJFBF8-ALfD7PvYm2LAKp4zLiMkD1DjhxA8WhU_3Gm_VxTUshC1Vcvc1TJ3tSxE3S1E7aL0xbH-XHdo_gqPG4jAqyOglxFZr_vGhX84IZnII_b2gP12Le7_-311ef7-OlpRnx70Lky4u9dr_1MVJS9zdXO1UV9KWa1v4Kva8D8LmLbR</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>202935238</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Clarifying the concepts of confidence and competence to produce appropriate self-evaluation measurement scales</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Access via Wiley Online Library</source><source>EBSCOhost Education Source</source><creator>Stewart, Jane ; O'Halloran, Catherine ; Barton, J Roger ; Singleton, Stephen J ; Harrigan, Patrick ; Spencer, John</creator><creatorcontrib>Stewart, Jane ; O'Halloran, Catherine ; Barton, J Roger ; Singleton, Stephen J ; Harrigan, Patrick ; Spencer, John</creatorcontrib><description>Introduction This paper reviews the literature on self‐evaluation and discusses the findings of a small‐scale qualitative study which explored the terms ‘confidence’ and ‘competence’ as useful measures in a self‐evaluation scale. Four pre‐registration house officers took part in interviews and completed a provisional instrument to assess their perceived competence. Findings Competence and confidence are useful terms for house officers expressing beliefs about their ability to perform their job but the terms should not be used synonymously. In our study, ‘competent’ represented what individuals knew about their ability and was based on the individual’s previous experience of the task. ‘Confident’ described a judgement which influenced whether an individual was willing or not to undertake an activity. Confidence was not necessarily based on known levels of competence and therefore performance of tasks which were unfamiliar to the house officer also involved the assessment of risk. The authors give examples of task and skill scales which may be useful in the process of self‐evaluation by pre‐registration house officers. Conclusions The authors suggest that the process of assessing oneself is complicated, and by its very nature can never be objective or free from the beliefs and values individuals hold about themselves. Therefore self‐evaluation instruments are best used to help individuals analyse their work practices and to promote reflection on performance. They should not be used to judge the ‘accuracy’ of the individual’s evaluation.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0308-0110</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1365-2923</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2923.2000.00728.x</identifier><identifier>PMID: 11107014</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford UK: Blackwell Science Ltd</publisher><subject>Attitude ; Clinical competence ; Clinical Competence - standards ; education ; education, medical, graduate ; Educational sciences ; Employment ; graduate ; hospital ; Humans ; Internship and Residency - standards ; Life-long education and employment ; medical ; medical staff ; medical staff, hospital ; Medical Staff, Hospital - standards ; methods ; Psycho-sociological aspects ; Self Concept ; Self-Assessment ; self-evaluation ; self‐evaluation, methods ; United Kingdom</subject><ispartof>Medical education, 2000-11, Vol.34 (11), p.903-909</ispartof><rights>Blackwell Science Ltd.</rights><rights>2001 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>Copyright Blackwell Scientific Publications Ltd. Nov 2000</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4598-4d4d432994ed11bef00701bdd8ee4335498f7d43bfe4ba0020d3d13a430fcdbf3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4598-4d4d432994ed11bef00701bdd8ee4335498f7d43bfe4ba0020d3d13a430fcdbf3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1046%2Fj.1365-2923.2000.00728.x$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1046%2Fj.1365-2923.2000.00728.x$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>315,781,785,1418,27929,27930,45579,45580</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&amp;idt=1148245$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11107014$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Stewart, Jane</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>O'Halloran, Catherine</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Barton, J Roger</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Singleton, Stephen J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Harrigan, Patrick</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Spencer, John</creatorcontrib><title>Clarifying the concepts of confidence and competence to produce appropriate self-evaluation measurement scales</title><title>Medical education</title><addtitle>Med Educ</addtitle><description>Introduction This paper reviews the literature on self‐evaluation and discusses the findings of a small‐scale qualitative study which explored the terms ‘confidence’ and ‘competence’ as useful measures in a self‐evaluation scale. Four pre‐registration house officers took part in interviews and completed a provisional instrument to assess their perceived competence. Findings Competence and confidence are useful terms for house officers expressing beliefs about their ability to perform their job but the terms should not be used synonymously. In our study, ‘competent’ represented what individuals knew about their ability and was based on the individual’s previous experience of the task. ‘Confident’ described a judgement which influenced whether an individual was willing or not to undertake an activity. Confidence was not necessarily based on known levels of competence and therefore performance of tasks which were unfamiliar to the house officer also involved the assessment of risk. The authors give examples of task and skill scales which may be useful in the process of self‐evaluation by pre‐registration house officers. Conclusions The authors suggest that the process of assessing oneself is complicated, and by its very nature can never be objective or free from the beliefs and values individuals hold about themselves. Therefore self‐evaluation instruments are best used to help individuals analyse their work practices and to promote reflection on performance. They should not be used to judge the ‘accuracy’ of the individual’s evaluation.</description><subject>Attitude</subject><subject>Clinical competence</subject><subject>Clinical Competence - standards</subject><subject>education</subject><subject>education, medical, graduate</subject><subject>Educational sciences</subject><subject>Employment</subject><subject>graduate</subject><subject>hospital</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Internship and Residency - standards</subject><subject>Life-long education and employment</subject><subject>medical</subject><subject>medical staff</subject><subject>medical staff, hospital</subject><subject>Medical Staff, Hospital - standards</subject><subject>methods</subject><subject>Psycho-sociological aspects</subject><subject>Self Concept</subject><subject>Self-Assessment</subject><subject>self-evaluation</subject><subject>self‐evaluation, methods</subject><subject>United Kingdom</subject><issn>0308-0110</issn><issn>1365-2923</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2000</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkUtv1DAQxy1ERZfCV0ARQtwSxo8kzoEDWsqC1BYJqHq0nHgMXvKqncDut8fprgrqCfngefz-4_EMIQmFjIIo3mwzyos8ZRXjGQOADKBkMts9Iqv7xGOyAg4yBUrhlDwNYRvBMhfyCTmlMVYCFSvSr1vtnd27_nsy_cCkGfoGxykkg11s6wzGQKJ7E91uxOnOnYZk9IOZl8wYrdE7PWESsLUp_tLtrCc39EmHOsweO-ynJDS6xfCMnFjdBnx-vM_I9Yfzb-uP6cXnzaf1u4u0EXklU2Hi4ayqBBpKa7SwtFsbIxEF57mopC0jUVsUtQZgYLihXAsOtjG15Wfk9aFubO52xjCpzoUG21b3OMxBlUwUvJJFBF8-ALfD7PvYm2LAKp4zLiMkD1DjhxA8WhU_3Gm_VxTUshC1Vcvc1TJ3tSxE3S1E7aL0xbH-XHdo_gqPG4jAqyOglxFZr_vGhX84IZnII_b2gP12Le7_-311ef7-OlpRnx70Lky4u9dr_1MVJS9zdXO1UV9KWa1v4Kva8D8LmLbR</recordid><startdate>200011</startdate><enddate>200011</enddate><creator>Stewart, Jane</creator><creator>O'Halloran, Catherine</creator><creator>Barton, J Roger</creator><creator>Singleton, Stephen J</creator><creator>Harrigan, Patrick</creator><creator>Spencer, John</creator><general>Blackwell Science Ltd</general><general>Blackwell</general><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>200011</creationdate><title>Clarifying the concepts of confidence and competence to produce appropriate self-evaluation measurement scales</title><author>Stewart, Jane ; O'Halloran, Catherine ; Barton, J Roger ; Singleton, Stephen J ; Harrigan, Patrick ; Spencer, John</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4598-4d4d432994ed11bef00701bdd8ee4335498f7d43bfe4ba0020d3d13a430fcdbf3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2000</creationdate><topic>Attitude</topic><topic>Clinical competence</topic><topic>Clinical Competence - standards</topic><topic>education</topic><topic>education, medical, graduate</topic><topic>Educational sciences</topic><topic>Employment</topic><topic>graduate</topic><topic>hospital</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Internship and Residency - standards</topic><topic>Life-long education and employment</topic><topic>medical</topic><topic>medical staff</topic><topic>medical staff, hospital</topic><topic>Medical Staff, Hospital - standards</topic><topic>methods</topic><topic>Psycho-sociological aspects</topic><topic>Self Concept</topic><topic>Self-Assessment</topic><topic>self-evaluation</topic><topic>self‐evaluation, methods</topic><topic>United Kingdom</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Stewart, Jane</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>O'Halloran, Catherine</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Barton, J Roger</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Singleton, Stephen J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Harrigan, Patrick</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Spencer, John</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Medical education</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Stewart, Jane</au><au>O'Halloran, Catherine</au><au>Barton, J Roger</au><au>Singleton, Stephen J</au><au>Harrigan, Patrick</au><au>Spencer, John</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Clarifying the concepts of confidence and competence to produce appropriate self-evaluation measurement scales</atitle><jtitle>Medical education</jtitle><addtitle>Med Educ</addtitle><date>2000-11</date><risdate>2000</risdate><volume>34</volume><issue>11</issue><spage>903</spage><epage>909</epage><pages>903-909</pages><issn>0308-0110</issn><eissn>1365-2923</eissn><abstract>Introduction This paper reviews the literature on self‐evaluation and discusses the findings of a small‐scale qualitative study which explored the terms ‘confidence’ and ‘competence’ as useful measures in a self‐evaluation scale. Four pre‐registration house officers took part in interviews and completed a provisional instrument to assess their perceived competence. Findings Competence and confidence are useful terms for house officers expressing beliefs about their ability to perform their job but the terms should not be used synonymously. In our study, ‘competent’ represented what individuals knew about their ability and was based on the individual’s previous experience of the task. ‘Confident’ described a judgement which influenced whether an individual was willing or not to undertake an activity. Confidence was not necessarily based on known levels of competence and therefore performance of tasks which were unfamiliar to the house officer also involved the assessment of risk. The authors give examples of task and skill scales which may be useful in the process of self‐evaluation by pre‐registration house officers. Conclusions The authors suggest that the process of assessing oneself is complicated, and by its very nature can never be objective or free from the beliefs and values individuals hold about themselves. Therefore self‐evaluation instruments are best used to help individuals analyse their work practices and to promote reflection on performance. They should not be used to judge the ‘accuracy’ of the individual’s evaluation.</abstract><cop>Oxford UK</cop><pub>Blackwell Science Ltd</pub><pmid>11107014</pmid><doi>10.1046/j.1365-2923.2000.00728.x</doi><tpages>7</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0308-0110
ispartof Medical education, 2000-11, Vol.34 (11), p.903-909
issn 0308-0110
1365-2923
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_72463986
source MEDLINE; Access via Wiley Online Library; EBSCOhost Education Source
subjects Attitude
Clinical competence
Clinical Competence - standards
education
education, medical, graduate
Educational sciences
Employment
graduate
hospital
Humans
Internship and Residency - standards
Life-long education and employment
medical
medical staff
medical staff, hospital
Medical Staff, Hospital - standards
methods
Psycho-sociological aspects
Self Concept
Self-Assessment
self-evaluation
self‐evaluation, methods
United Kingdom
title Clarifying the concepts of confidence and competence to produce appropriate self-evaluation measurement scales
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-13T13%3A17%3A29IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Clarifying%20the%20concepts%20of%20confidence%20and%20competence%20to%20produce%20appropriate%20self-evaluation%20measurement%20scales&rft.jtitle=Medical%20education&rft.au=Stewart,%20Jane&rft.date=2000-11&rft.volume=34&rft.issue=11&rft.spage=903&rft.epage=909&rft.pages=903-909&rft.issn=0308-0110&rft.eissn=1365-2923&rft_id=info:doi/10.1046/j.1365-2923.2000.00728.x&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E64823234%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=202935238&rft_id=info:pmid/11107014&rfr_iscdi=true