Personal statement in PhD applications: Gatekeepers' evaluative perspectives

This paper explores academic readers’ views of the doctoral Personal Statements (PSs) written by student applicants across institutional contexts. The analysis was based on in-depth semi-structured interviews with 19 faculty members involved in evaluating the PhD applications within Education at one UK-based and one US-based university. Data were coded by NVivo software and then analysed using methods drawn from critical discourse analysis and conversation analysis to unravel participant intended meaning. Results suggest that the situated knowledge of institutional settings where these academics are based will affect the ways in which they act and think in relation to particular forms of discourse. Specifically, the UK and US academics’ interpretations of PSs and its associated evaluation practices are related to their conceptual understanding of the culture of doctoral level study and the structure of the admissions process in their own particular academic community. The paper concludes with some pedagogical implications and a discussion of potential areas for further study to investigate the ‘academic’ and ‘rhetorical’ aspects of the PS and to understand the different and often implicit features of the PS across different disciplines, programmes, and institutional contexts.

An Empirical Evaluation of the Reversal Theory State Measure Using Three Running Brand Video Commercials

This paper reports on the first known empirical use of the Reversal Theory State Measure (RTSM) since its publication by Desselles et al. (2014). The RTSM was employed to track responses to three purposely-selected video commercials in a between-subjects design. Results of the study provide empirical support for the central conceptual premise of reversal theory, the experience of metamotivational reversals and the ability of the RTSM to capture them. The RTSM was also found to be psychometrically sound after adjustments were made to two of its three component subscales. Detailed account and rationale is provided for the analytical process of assessing the psychometric robustness of the RTSM, with a number of techniques and interpretations relating to component structure and reliability discussed. Agreeability and critique of the two available versions of the RTSM – the bundled and the branched – is also examined. Researchers are encouraged to assist development of the RTSM through further use, taking into account the analysis and recommendations presented.