Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • COVID-19
    • Articles & podcasts
    • Blog posts
    • Collection
    • News
  • Content
    • Current issue
    • Past issues
    • Early releases
    • Collections
    • Sections
    • Blog
    • Infographics & illustrations
    • Podcasts
    • Classified ads
  • Authors
    • Overview for authors
    • Submission guidelines
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Forms
    • Editorial process
    • Editorial policies
    • Peer review process
    • Publication fees
    • Reprint requests
  • CMA Members
    • Overview for members
    • Earn CPD Credits
    • Print copies of CMAJ
    • Career Ad Discount
  • Subscribers
    • General information
    • View prices
  • Alerts
    • Email alerts
    • RSS
  • JAMC
    • À propos
    • Numéro en cours
    • Archives
    • Sections
    • Abonnement
    • Alertes
  • CMAJ JOURNALS
    • CMAJ Open
    • CJS
    • JAMC
    • JPN

User menu

Search

  • Advanced search
CMAJ
  • CMAJ JOURNALS
    • CMAJ Open
    • CJS
    • JAMC
    • JPN
CMAJ

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • COVID-19
    • Articles & podcasts
    • Blog posts
    • Collection
    • News
  • Content
    • Current issue
    • Past issues
    • Early releases
    • Collections
    • Sections
    • Blog
    • Infographics & illustrations
    • Podcasts
    • Classified ads
  • Authors
    • Overview for authors
    • Submission guidelines
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Forms
    • Editorial process
    • Editorial policies
    • Peer review process
    • Publication fees
    • Reprint requests
  • CMA Members
    • Overview for members
    • Earn CPD Credits
    • Print copies of CMAJ
    • Career Ad Discount
  • Subscribers
    • General information
    • View prices
  • Alerts
    • Email alerts
    • RSS
  • JAMC
    • À propos
    • Numéro en cours
    • Archives
    • Sections
    • Abonnement
    • Alertes
  • Visit CMAJ on Facebook
  • Follow CMAJ on Twitter
  • Follow CMAJ on Pinterest
  • Follow CMAJ on Youtube
  • Follow CMAJ on Instagram
Holiday Review

Rainy weather and medical school admission interviews

Donald A. Redelmeier and Simon D. Baxter
CMAJ December 08, 2009 181 (12) 933; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.091546
Donald A. Redelmeier
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Simon D. Baxter
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Tables
  • Related Content
  • Responses
  • Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Mood can influence behaviour and consumer choice in diverse settings. We found that such cognitive influences extend to candidate admission interviews at a Canadian medical school. We suggest that an awareness of this fallibility might lead to more reasonable medical school admission practices.

Admission offers to medical school are competitive and sometimes based on an interview. Psychology research suggests, however, that interviews are prone to subconscious biases from extraneous factors unrelated to the candidate. 1 One of the most fundamental observations is that people interviewed on rainy days tend to receive lower ratings than people interviewed on sunny days. 2 We studied whether this bias also extends to admission interviews at a large Canadian medical school.

We analyzed the results of consecutive medical school interviews at the University of Toronto between 2004 and 2009. We included all data available with no exclusions. Almost all interviews occurred in the early spring. Scores for each interview were obtained from the admissions office as recorded from 0 to 20. 3 This Likert scale was anchored with integer values where 10 denoted “unsuitable,” 12 denoted “marginal,” 14 denoted “fair,” 16 denoted “good,” 18 denoted “excellent” and 20 denoted “outstanding.”

We obtained weather data from the official government archive and defined a priori the day as “rainy” if precipitation (including freezing rain, snow and hail) occurred in the morning or afternoon. 4 Otherwise, we defined the day as “sunny.” We did not examine more complex combinations with time lags, such as when a sunny day followed multiple rainy days.

A total of 2926 candidates were interviewed over the 6-year period. As expected, their demographic characteristics were unrelated to the weather (Appendix 1, available online at www.cmaj.ca/cgi/content/full/cmaj.091546/DC1). Overall, those interviewed on rainy days received about a 1% lower score than those interviewed on sunny days (average score 16.31 v. 16.49, p = 0.042). This pattern was consistent for both senior interviewers (16.39 v. 16.55, p = 0.08) and junior interviewers (16.23 v. 16.42, p = 0.041). We next used logistic regression to analyze subsequent admission decisions. The difference in scores was equivalent to about a 10% lower total mark on the Medical College Admission Test.

Figure1
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint

Image courtesy of @2009 Jupiterimages Corp.

We suggest that cognitive patterns evident in controlled psychology laboratories can also occur in regular medical settings. The magnitude of the specific influence may be modest, but such small differences can be important in some cases because each year there are about 100 candidates who receive a score within 1% of the admission threshold. 5 In this study, we examined only one extraneous influence on mood. Many additional factors may also affect mood (e.g., ambiance, deportment, humour and scent). 2 Calling attention to these issues may diminish their impact on judgment. 1

REFERENCES

  1. 1.↵
    Schwarz N, Clore GL. Feelings and phenomenal experiences. In: Kruglanski A, Higgins ET, editors. Social psychology. Handbook of basic principles. 2nd ed. New York (NY): Guilford; 2007. p. 385–407.
  2. 2.↵
    Schwarz N, Clore GL. Mood, misattribution, and judgments of well-being: informative and directive functions of affective states. J Pers Soc Psychol 1983;45:513–23.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  3. 3.↵
    Hensel JM, Shandling M, Redelmeier DA. Rural medical students at urban medical schools: Too few and far between?Open Medicine 2007;1:19–23.
    OpenUrl
  4. 4.↵
    Canada’s national climate archive. Ottawa (ON): Environment Canada; 2008. Available: http://climate.weatheroffice.ec.gc.ca/ (accessed 2009 Oct. 21).
  5. 5.↵
    Gladwell M. The tipping point: How little things can make a big difference. Boston (MA): Little, Brown & Co.; 2000.
View Abstract
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Canadian Medical Association Journal: 181 (12)
CMAJ
Vol. 181, Issue 12
8 Dec 2009
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author

Article tools

Respond to this article
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
To sign up for email alerts or to access your current email alerts, enter your email address below:
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on CMAJ.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Rainy weather and medical school admission interviews
(Your Name) has sent you a message from CMAJ
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the CMAJ web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Rainy weather and medical school admission interviews
Donald A. Redelmeier, Simon D. Baxter
CMAJ Dec 2009, 181 (12) 933; DOI: 10.1503/cmaj.091546

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
‍ Request Permissions
Share
Rainy weather and medical school admission interviews
Donald A. Redelmeier, Simon D. Baxter
CMAJ Dec 2009, 181 (12) 933; DOI: 10.1503/cmaj.091546
Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Tables
  • Related Content
  • Responses
  • Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Snappy answers to stupid questions: an evidence-based framework for responding to peer-review feedback
  • A report on the zombie outbreak of 2009: how mathematics can save us (no, really)
  • How random is the toss of a coin?
Show more Holiday Review

Similar Articles

Content

  • Current issue
  • Past issues
  • Collections
  • Sections
  • Blog
  • Podcasts
  • Alerts
  • RSS
  • Early releases

Information for

  • Advertisers
  • Authors
  • Reviewers
  • CMA Members
  • Media
  • Reprint requests
  • Subscribers

About

  • General Information
  • Journal staff
  • Editorial Board
  • Governance Council
  • Journal Oversight
  • Careers
  • Contact
  • Copyright and Permissions

Copyright 2021, Joule Inc. or its licensors. All rights reserved. ISSN 1488-2329 (e) 0820-3946 (p)

All editorial matter in CMAJ represents the opinions of the authors and not necessarily those of the Canadian Medical Association or its subsidiaries.

Powered by HighWire