Main content

Contributors:
  1. Annelies E.M. van Vianen
  2. Matthijs de Hoog
  3. Anne P.J. de Pagter

Date created: | Last Updated:

: DOI | ARK

Creating DOI. Please wait...

Create DOI

Category: Project

Description: Abstract Background. Medical students’ demand for career coaching is growing. However, little is known about what type of career coach they prefer. Using the Warmth-Competence Framework, we investigated if and why medical students prefer physician coaches compared to career psychologist coaches. We also examined whether students' coach choice related to coaches’ amount of experience with medical students. Methods. In a two-by-two between participants vignette study (n = 147), we manipulated coach occupational background (physician vs. psychologist) and experience with coaching medical students (limited vs. considerable). Participants read one coach description, rated the likelihood that they would choose the coach, and rated the coach on dimensions of warmth and competence. Results. Students who evaluated a physician career coach were more likely to choose the coach than students who evaluated a psychologist career coach. Students expected that a physician career coach would better understand their situation and be better able to provide career information, while they expected a psychologist career coach to have better conversation skills, all of which were relevant to choosing a coach. Coaches’ experience with coaching medical students was unrelated to students’ coach choice and their assessment of the coach's warmth and competence. Conclusions. Our findings highlight the relevance of coaches’ occupational background and have implications for the implementation of career coach interventions. Medical schools could help students choose a career coach by providing information about the coach qualities that students value. Future studies could investigate whether career coaches with different occupational backgrounds differ in coach behaviors and coaching effectiveness. Full article can be found through the following link: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-023-04882-1

Files

Loading files...

Citation

Recent Activity

Loading logs...

OSF does not support the use of Internet Explorer. For optimal performance, please switch to another browser.
Accept
This website relies on cookies to help provide a better user experience. By clicking Accept or continuing to use the site, you agree. For more information, see our Privacy Policy and information on cookie use.
Accept
×

Start managing your projects on the OSF today.

Free and easy to use, the Open Science Framework supports the entire research lifecycle: planning, execution, reporting, archiving, and discovery.