Different domains in abstract concepts

This study is a first attempt to unravel the almost unexplored domain of abstract conceptual knowledge. Four kinds of abstract concepts (nominal kinds, states of the self, cognitive processes, and emotion concepts) were investigated in two experiments. Emotion concepts displayed a specific pattern in both concreteness/abstractness and imagery ratings (cf. Altarriba et al., 1999), as did the other considered domains of abstract knowledge (Experiment 1). In Experiment 2 we highlighted the specific pattern of information (taxonomic, thematic, attributive, etc) these different abstract domains elicited in a definition production task.

To what extent does the Health Professions Admission Test-Ireland predict performance in early undergraduate tests of communication and clinical skills? – An observational cohort study

Background: Internationally, tests of general mental ability are used in the selection of medical students. Examples include the Medical College Admission Test, Undergraduate Medicine and Health Sciences Admission Test and the UK Clinical Aptitude Test. The most widely used measure of their efficacy is predictive validity.A new tool, the Health Professions Admission Test- Ireland (HPAT-Ireland), was introduced in 2009. Traditionally, selection to Irish undergraduate medical schools relied on academic achievement. Since 2009, Irish and EU applicants are selected on a combination of their secondary school academic record (measured predominately by the Leaving Certificate Examination) and HPAT-Ireland score. This is the first study to report on the predictive validity of the HPAT-Ireland for early undergraduate assessments of communication and clinical skills. Method. Students enrolled at two Irish medical schools in 2009 were followed up for two years. Data collected were gender, HPAT-Ireland total and subsection scores; Leaving Certificate Examination plus HPAT-Ireland combined score, Year 1 Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) scores (Total score, communication and clinical subtest scores), Year 1 Multiple Choice Questions and Year 2 OSCE and subset scores. We report descriptive statistics, Pearson correlation coefficients and Multiple linear regression models. Results: Data were available for 312 students. In Year 1 none of the selection criteria were significantly related to student OSCE performance. The Leaving Certificate Examination and Leaving Certificate plus HPAT-Ireland combined scores correlated with MCQ marks.In Year 2 a series of significant correlations emerged between the HPAT-Ireland and subsections thereof with OSCE Communication Z-scores; OSCE Clinical Z-scores; and Total OSCE Z-scores. However on multiple regression only the relationship between Total OSCE Score and the Total HPAT-Ireland score remained significant; albeit the predictive power was modest. Conclusion: We found that none of our selection criteria strongly predict clinical and communication skills. The HPAT- Ireland appears to measures ability in domains different to those assessed by the Leaving Certificate Examination. While some significant associations did emerge in Year 2 between HPAT Ireland and total OSCE scores further evaluation is required to establish if this pattern continues during the senior years of the medical course.

The geographies of encounter: investigating the spatiality and construction of 'meaningful' encounters with difference through the experiences of international students at University College Cork, Ireland

The purpose of this research is to investigate how international students negotiate encounters with Irish students and construct ‘meaning’ from those encounters in the spaces of the university and city. As cities are increasingly characterised by a multiplexity of diversity, the issue of living with difference is becoming more and more pertinent. In the wake of escalating socio-spatial polarisation, inter-cultural tension, racism, and xenophobia, the geographies of encounter seek to untangle the interactions that occur in the quotidian activities and spaces of everyday life to determine whether such encounters might reduce prejudice, antipathy and indifference and establish common social bonds (Amin 2002; Valentine 2008). Thus far, the literature has investigated a number of sites of encounter; public space, the home, neighbourhoods, schools, sports clubs, public transport, cafes and libraries (Wilson 2011; Schuermans 2013; Hemming 2011; Neal and Vincent 2011; Mayblin, Valentine and Anderrson 2015; Laurier and Philo 2006; Valentine and Sadgrove 2013; Harris, Valentine and Piekut 2014; Fincher and Iveson 2008). While these spaces produce a range of outcomes, the literature remains frustrated by a lack of clarity of what constitutes a ‘meaningful’ encounter and how such encounters might be planned for. Drawing on survey and interview data with full-time international students at University College Cork, Ireland, this study contributes to understanding how encounters are shaped by the construction and reproduction of particular identities in particular spaces, imbuing spaces with uneven power frameworks that produce diverse outcomes. Rather than identifying a singular ‘meaningful’ outcome of encounter as a potential panacea to the issues of exclusion and oppression, the contention here is to recognise a range of outcomes that are created by individuals in a range of ways. To define one outcome of encounter as ‘meaningful’ is to overlook the scale of intensity of diverse interactions and the multiplicity of ways in which people learn to live with difference.

Systems 1 and 2 thinking processes and cognitive reflection testing in medical students

Background: Diagnostic decision-making is made through a combination of Systems 1 (intuition or pattern-recognition) and Systems 2 (analytic) thinking. The purpose of this study was to use the Cognitive Reflection Test (CRT) to evaluate and compare the level of Systems 1 and 2 thinking among medical students in pre-clinical and clinical programs. Methods: The CRT is a three-question test designed to measure the ability of respondents to activate metacognitive processes and switch to System 2 (analytic) thinking where System 1 (intuitive) thinking would lead them astray. Each CRT question has a correct analytical (System 2) answer and an incorrect intuitive (System 1) answer. A group of medical students in Years 2 & 3 (pre-clinical) and Years 4 (in clinical practice) of a 5-year medical degree were studied. Results: Ten percent (13/128) of students had the intuitive answers to the three questions (suggesting they generally relied on System 1 thinking) while almost half (44%) answered all three correctly (indicating full analytical, System 2 thinking). Only 3-13% had incorrect answers (i.e. that were neither the analytical nor the intuitive responses). Non-native English speaking students (n = 11) had a lower mean number of correct answers compared to native English speakers (n = 117: 1.0 s 2.12 respectfully: p < 0.01). As students progressed through questions 1 to 3, the percentage of correct System 2 answers increased and the percentage of intuitive answers decreased in both the pre-clinical and clinical students. Conclusions: Up to half of the medical students demonstrated full or partial reliance on System 1 (intuitive) thinking in response to these analytical questions. While their CRT performance has no claims to make as to their future expertise as clinicians, the test may be used in helping students to understand the importance of awareness and regulation of their thinking processes in clinical practice.