Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current issue
    • Past issues
    • Early releases
    • Collections
    • Sections
    • Blog
    • Infographics & illustrations
    • Podcasts
    • COVID-19 articles
    • Obituary notices
  • Authors & Reviewers
    • Overview for authors
    • Submission guidelines
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Forms
    • Editorial process
    • Editorial policies
    • Peer review process
    • Publication fees
    • Reprint requests
    • Open access
    • Patient engagement
  • Physicians & Subscribers
    • Benefits for Canadian physicians
    • CPD Credits for CMA Members
    • Subscribe to CMAJ digital
    • Subscribe to CMAJ print
    • Subscription prices
    • Obituary notices
  • Alerts
    • Email alerts
    • RSS
  • JAMC
    • À propos
    • Numéro en cours
    • Archives
    • Sections
    • Abonnement
    • Alertes
    • Trousse média 2023
    • Avis de décès
  • CMAJ JOURNALS
    • CMAJ Open
    • CJS
    • JAMC
    • JPN

User menu

Search

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

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current issue
    • Past issues
    • Early releases
    • Collections
    • Sections
    • Blog
    • Infographics & illustrations
    • Podcasts
    • COVID-19 articles
    • Obituary notices
  • Authors & Reviewers
    • Overview for authors
    • Submission guidelines
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Forms
    • Editorial process
    • Editorial policies
    • Peer review process
    • Publication fees
    • Reprint requests
    • Open access
    • Patient engagement
  • Physicians & Subscribers
    • Benefits for Canadian physicians
    • CPD Credits for CMA Members
    • Subscribe to CMAJ digital
    • Subscribe to CMAJ print
    • Subscription prices
    • Obituary notices
  • Alerts
    • Email alerts
    • RSS
  • JAMC
    • À propos
    • Numéro en cours
    • Archives
    • Sections
    • Abonnement
    • Alertes
    • Trousse média 2023
    • Avis de décès
  • Visit CMAJ on Facebook
  • Follow CMAJ on Twitter
  • Follow CMAJ on Instagram
  • Listen to CMAJ podcasts
News
Open Access

Should medical educators rethink on-the-spot quizzing?

Diana Duong
CMAJ August 03, 2021 193 (30) E1182-E1183; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.1095954
Diana Duong
CMAJ
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Tables
  • Responses
  • Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Posing on-the-spot questions to probe the limits of trainees’ knowledge, also known as “pimping,” is a longstanding teaching method in medicine. It’s part pop quiz, part trial by fire. But with growing concerns about bullying and burnout, some physicians and trainees are questioning the value of the technique in modern medical education.

Proponents say high-stress, rapid-fire questioning teaches trainees to think fast under pressure and ensures they’ll remember key concepts for the rest of their careers. In the Journal of Surgical Education, Drs. James Healy and Peter Yoo described the discomfort of pimping as a kind of inoculation. “Although sometimes unpleasant, this type of education is truly a long-term kindness to the student, much like a vaccination creates temporary discomfort to achieve a durable gain.”

Done badly, however, critics argue that pimping can easily cross the line into teaching by humiliation, particularly when senior physicians question students in ways that shame them for their lack of knowledge.

One Australian study found that nearly three-quarters of a student cohort across two medical schools had experienced such intimidation; as a result, they were less likely to engage in future ward rounds or the specialty in question. “More effective and respectful approaches to teaching need to be adopted,” the authors concluded.

Dr. Ashley Palmer will never forget the first time a medical school preceptor quizzed her in front of her peers.

While conducting a cardiac exam on a simulated patient in first year, “I remember a preceptor asking me the six different characteristics of a heart murmur,” said Palmer, now a family medicine resident in Chilliwack, Sask. “I got a few of them, but I didn’t know all of them. The preceptor said he was disappointed with my lack of knowledge.”

Figure

Concerns about trainee wellbeing have sparked debate about the medical education technique commonly called “pimping.”

Image copyright iStock.com/kali9. No standalone file use permitted.

He went on to ask the simulated patient questions about Palmer’s performance until the patient retorted, “Are you trying to get me to say she was awful?”

Such experiences may motivate some students, but not necessarily in lasting or positive ways. In a qualitative study of 13 medical students at the University of Saskatchewan, Palmer found that pimping mainly motivated students to impress their preceptors and avoid embarrassment. Without the potential for reward or retribution, students became “completely disengaged,” she said.

According to Palmer, who presented her findings at the 2019 Canadian Conference on Medical Education, pimping also discouraged students from asking questions and led many to feel anxious, guilty or inadequate. “It didn’t help in the long term.”

Another small qualitative study from the University of British Columbia observed that students facing directed questioning were more often concerned with image management than optimizing their learning.

Some critics argue this “aggressive style of Socratic questioning” is no longer relevant now that modern medical education is shifting away from rote memorization. Others say the term “pimping” itself is outmoded, given the sexist and exploitative connotations linking pimping with prostitution.

According to Drs. David Chen and Kelsey Priest, “it is surprising that various articles exploring pimping’s relationship to medical student mistreatment do not acknowledge that women and those of non-binary gender identities may experience the practice differently from men.”

Indeed, one study of faculty at Johns Hopkins University found that more aggressive “pimpers” tended to be younger, male specialists who reported “lower quality of life.”

Meanwhile, limited quantitative research suggests trainees’ overall experience of the practice is complicated.

One survey of University of Michigan medical students graduating in 2020 found that most (89%) valued probing questions even though nearly two in five (39%) felt humiliated when they didn’t know the answers. Notably, only a small minority of students (5%) believed that faculty asked questions expressly to humiliate them.

Another survey of third- and fourth-year medical students at the University of Washington found that “Socratic teaching” or pimping was not a risk factor for humiliation if learners received orientation on the practice.

“If it’s done tactfully and politely and not attached to judgment, I think it’s a good way to know where students stand, and preceptors can see where the limits of their knowledge are,” said Dr. Jack Yuan, National Officer of Wellness for the Canadian Federation of Medical Students (CFMS). Meanwhile, CFMS can advocate for better policies and make recommendations for handling mistreatment, Yuan said.

Despite criticism of the aggressive, one-way questioning usually associated with the term pimping, there isn’t much research on alternative approaches. Some have proposed a return to the Socratic roots of the practice emphasizing dialogue to promote critical thinking skills.

“If you really look at the Socratic method, the idea is that you’re asking questions to guide somebody to finding the answer or figuring out the answer themselves,” explained Dr. Peter Kwan, an assistant clinical professor and surgery clerkship coordinator at the University of Alberta. Kwan said he encourages his students to ask their own questions to promote dialogue and give them some control in the conversation.

According to Dr. Nikita-Kiran Singh, a Toronto-based internal medical resident, explaining teaching methods upfront is an important way to create a safe learning environment. “Socratic questioning should leave the learner feeling empowered and feel like the focus has been on the learning process.”

Singh gives the example of a discussion she had with a student about a patient with anemia who experienced a drop in haptoglobin. Hemolysis was one possible explanation for the drop, but when Singh asked the student about other potential causes, he confessed he didn’t know.

Singh then asked the student where haptoglobin is produced, to which he responded, “in the liver.” So, Singh asked again, “Knowing that, when do you think haptoglobin could be low without hemolysis?” This time, she said, the student responded immediately, “If someone has liver failure.”

According to Singh, thoughtful questioning can help students arrive at answers without shaming them about gaps in their knowledge. “I was able to see that he actually did know the foundational pieces that would allow him to make those connections. But if you just ask the one question [and move on when a student gets it wrong], you wouldn’t know that.”

Footnotes

  • Posted on cmajnews.com on July 20, 2021

This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) licence, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided that the original publication is properly cited, the use is noncommercial (i.e., research or educational use), and no modifications or adaptations are made. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/

PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Canadian Medical Association Journal: 193 (30)
CMAJ
Vol. 193, Issue 30
3 Aug 2021
  • 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.
Should medical educators rethink on-the-spot quizzing?
(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
Should medical educators rethink on-the-spot quizzing?
Diana Duong
CMAJ Aug 2021, 193 (30) E1182-E1183; DOI: 10.1503/cmaj.1095954

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
‍ Request Permissions
Share
Should medical educators rethink on-the-spot quizzing?
Diana Duong
CMAJ Aug 2021, 193 (30) E1182-E1183; DOI: 10.1503/cmaj.1095954
Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Footnotes
  • Figures & Tables
  • Responses
  • Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • Advantages of the Socratic method for medical teaching
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Saying goodbye to CMAJ News
  • National survey highlights worsening primary care access
  • How Canadian hospitals are decreasing carbon emissions
Show more News

Similar Articles

Collections

  • Topics
    • Medical education, residency, internship
    • Physician health

 

View Latest Classified Ads

Content

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

Information for

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

About

  • General Information
  • Journal staff
  • Editorial Board
  • Advisory Panels
  • Governance Council
  • Journal Oversight
  • Careers
  • Contact
  • Copyright and Permissions
CMAJ Group

Copyright 2023, CMA Impact 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.

To receive any of these resources in an accessible format, please contact us at CMAJ Group, 500-1410 Blair Towers Place, Ottawa ON, K1J 9B9; p: 1-888-855-2555; e: [email protected]

CMA Civility, Accessibility, Privacy

 

Powered by HighWire