Background: The number of Multiple Mini Interview (MMI) stations and the type and number of interviewers required for an acceptable level of reliability for veterinary admissions requires investigation.
Purpose: The goal is to investigate the reliability of the 2009 MMI admission process at the University of Calgary.
Methods: Each applicant (n = 103; female = 80.6%; M age = 23.05 years, SD = 3.96) participated in a 7-station MMI. Applicants were rated independently by 2 interviewers, a faculty member, and a community veterinarian, within each station (total interviewers/applicant N = 14). Interviewers scored applicants on 3 items, each on a 5-point anchored scale.
Results: Generalizability analysis resulted in a reliability coefficient of G = 0.79. A Decision study (D-study) indicated that 10 stations with 1 interviewer would produce a G = 0.79 and 8 stations with 2 interviewers would produce a G = 0.81; however, these have different resource requirements. A two-way analysis of variance showed that there was a nonsignificant main effect of interviewer type (between faculty member and community veterinarian) on interview scores, F(1, 1428) = 3.18, p = .075; a significant main effect of station on interview scores, F(6, 1428) = 4.34, p < .001; and a nonsignificant interaction effect between interviewer-type and station on interview scores, F(6, 1428) = 0.74, p = .62.
Conclusions: Overall reliability was adequate for the MMI. Results from the D-study suggest that the current format with 7 stations provides adequate reliability given that there are enough interviewers; to achieve the same G-coefficient 1 interviewer per station with 10 stations would suffice and reduce the resource requirements. Community veterinarians and faculty members demonstrated an adequate level of agreement in their assessments of applicants.