Importance techniques

In each Importance set, you’ll first read the scenario from the decider’s perspective so you can find the key issues that the decider needs to address.

Next, you’ll read each question and evaluate the factor in terms of its importance in responding to the scenario according to the ethical and professional principles.

You know that multiple-choice questions in Situational Judgement always have the same answer choices.

Thus, you should use a technique to evaluate each factor according to the standard answer choice logic in Importance questions.

With practice, you can develop and refine your Importance technique so it becomes instinctive by Test Day. As you internalise the steps and logic, you’ll find that you’re able to improve speed and accuracy in Situational Judgement.

Our experience with Medify students indicates two common techniques that may work for you in Importance questions:

• The ‘two sides’ technique: Start by asking yourself ‘Is this factor relevant or irrelevant to consider in a good response in these circumstances?’
• The ‘A first’ technique: Start by asking yourself ‘Is this an essential factor to consider in these circumstances?’

Note that in both techniques, you should move swiftly towards deciding A is correct, or possibly correct, or eliminating A in order to focus on the remaining answers.

As you use the ‘two sides’ technique, you may find it helps to think in terms of answer choice charge.

Consider the ‘charge’ of each Importance answer in terms of positive, negative or neutral:

• A. Very important = highly relevant = positive (or very positive)
• B. Important = less relevant = positive
• C. Of minor importance = tangential or borderline irrelevant = neutral
• D. Not important at all = highly irrelevant = negative (or very negative)

Notice that this is fundamentally different from the two sides in Appropriateness, where there are two positive answers (A and B) and two negative answers (C and D).

Keep the logical meaning of C clear in your head as you practise Situational Judgement. C is negative in Appropriateness, but C is neutral in Importance.

An advantage of the ‘two sides’ technique is that it empowers you to rapidly eliminate 2 of the 4 possible answers.

With this technique, you move from a 25% chance of a correct answer to a 1-in-2 choice.

It also guides you to focus on nuance on a single side of the relevant/irrelevant divide.

You must revise and refine your understanding of what makes something C rather than D, or B rather than A. But this technique directs the mind to the key nuance, so you can develop your Importance skills as you prepare for Test Day.

The ‘A first’ technique is more challenging than the ‘two sides’ technique.

• You’ll likely prefer the ‘two sides’ technique early in your revision. If it works well, you might just keep using it all the way through Test Day.
• Note, however, that with additional experience applying answer choice logic, you may come to favour the ‘A first’ technique since it guides you to focus on essential factors to consider in a good response based on the scenario’s context. This can make it easier to see what is less central, tangential or irrelevant.

With some practice, the ‘A first’ technique can help you narrow the issues that you must weigh once you eliminate A. As you improve your technique, you’ll likely find you can decide quickly between the remaining answers:

• It may be that a factor is clearly not A yet it is broadly relevant to the key issues, so you can click B and move on to the next question.
• It could be that a factor is clearly not A and also generally irrelevant, so you must simply decide between C and D, click your answer and move on.

Remember as well that in many Importance sets, one or more factors may be relevant and central to addressing the key issues. So you will simply select A and not engage with the other answers.