Residents' perceptions of what makes feedback valuable in workplace-based learning: A discrete choice experiment.

Abstract

Introduction: Research on feedback has shifted emphasis away from its 'delivery' to consideration of the interaction between individual learners and their 'feedback provider'. The complexity inherent in determining whether feedback is perceived as valuable by learners, however, can quickly overwhelm educators if every interaction must be considered completely idiosyncratic. We, therefore, require a better understanding of variability in the ways in which feedback is perceived. To that end, we ran a discrete choice experiment aimed at determining residents' preferences and whether discernible patterns exist across learners regarding factors that influence perceptions of feedback's learning value.

Methods: We performed a discrete choice experiment in which respondents were asked to read a clinical case and select repetitively between two feedback scenarios that differed according to six attributes identified from the literature as influencing feedback credibility: Dialogue, Focus, Relationship, Situation, Source and Valence. By systematically varying the levels of each attribute contained in the scenarios and asking residents to choose which from each pair they deemed more valuable for learning, a mixed logit model and latent class analysis could be applied to determine learners' feedback preferences and whether clusters of preference exist.

Results: Ninety-five elderly care medicine residents in the Netherlands completed the questionnaire. Their responses indicated that Valence, Dialogue, Relationship and Focus each accounted for about 20% of their preferences regarding the type of feedback perceived to offer the most learning value. Source and Situation were less influential, each accounting for 11% of the choices made. A latent class model with three clusters of respondents best accounted for the heterogeneity in feedback preferences. A total of 62% of respondents could be assigned to one of the three profiles with at least 80% probability. None of the respondents' characteristics (seniority, residency programme nor sex) were related to the feedback preference profile.

Discussion: Our findings suggest that 'how' feedback is provided has a greater influence on perceived learning value than who provides it. That said, variability exists in resident perceptions with no evidence (as yet) of factors that predict individual preferences. As such, tailoring to the needs and reactions of individual learners is likely to require open and ongoing conversations, and we recommend using the learner profiles generated through this study as a starting point because they provide classifications that could facilitate effective connections for the majority of residents.