Objective. To explore pharmacists' and pharmacy students' perceptions regarding the significance of changing the features of test item scenario (eg, switching from a health care to a non-health care context) on their situational judgment test (SJT) responses.Methods. Fifteen Doctor of Pharmacy students and 15 pharmacists completed a 12-item SJT intended to measure empathy. The test included six scenarios in a health care context and six scenarios in a non-health care context; participants had to rank potential response options in order of appropriateness and no two items could be of equal rank. Qualitative data were collected individually from participants using think-aloud and cognitive interview techniques. During the cognitive interview, participants were asked how they selected their final responses for each item and whether they would have changed their answer if features of the scenario were switched (eg, changed to a non-health care context if the original item was in a health care context). Interviews were transcribed and a thematic analysis was conducted to identify the features of the scenario for each item that were perceived to impact response selections.Results. Participants stated that they would have changed their responses on average 51.3% of the time (range 20%-100%) if the features of the scenario for an item were changed. Qualitative analysis identified four pertinent scenario features that may influence response selections, which included information about the examinee, the actors in the scenario, the relationship between examinee and actors, and details about the situation. There was no discernible pattern linking scenario features to the component of empathy being measured or participant type.Conclusion. Results from this study suggest that the features of the scenario described in an SJT item could influence response selections. These features should be considered in the SJT design process and require further research to determine the extent of their impact on SJT performance.
Keywords: cognitive interview; empathy; response process; situational judgment test; think-aloud protocol.
© 2021 American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy.