Purpose
Interviews play a crucial role in the medical school selection process, although little is known about interviewers’ non-verbal observable communications (NoVOC) during the interviews. This study investigates how interviewers perceive NoVOC exhibited by interviewees in two medical schools, one in Taiwan and the other in Australia. The study also explores potential cross-cultural differences in these perceptions.
Methods
A 26-item questionnaire was developed using a Delphi-like method to identify NoVOC. Interviewers from the University of New South Wales, Australia, and National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Taiwan (n=47 and N=78, respectively) rated these NoVOC between 2018 and 2021. Factor analyses identified and validated underlying factors. Measurement invariance across countries and genders was examined.
Results
A total of 125 interviewers completed the questionnaire, including 78 from Taiwan and 47 from Australia. Using exploratory factor analysis, 14 items yielded reliable three factors “charming,” “disengaged,” and “anxious” (Cronbach’s α=0.853, 0.714, and 0.628, respectively). The measurement invariance analysis indicated that the factor models were invariant across genders but significantly different between the two countries. Further analysis revealed inconsistencies in interpreting the “anxious” factor between Taiwan and Australia.
Conclusion
The three distinct factors revealed in this study provide valuable insights into the NoVOC that interviewers perceive and evaluate during the interview process. The findings highlight the importance of considering non-verbal communication in selecting medical students and emphasize the need for training and awareness among interviewers. Understanding the impact of non-verbal behaviors can improve selection processes to mitigate bias and enhance the fairness and reliability of medical student selection.

Purpose
Assessment in different languages should measure the same construct. However, item characteristics, such as item flaws and content, may favor one test-taker group over another. This is known as item bias. Although some studies have focused on item bias, little is known about item bias and its association with items characteristics. Therefore, this study investigated the association between item characteristics and bias.
Methods
The University of Groningen offers both an international and a national bachelor’s program in medicine. Students in both programs take the same progress test, but the international progress test is literally translated into English from the Dutch version. Differential item functioning was calculated to analyze item bias in four subsequent progress tests. Items were also classified by their categories, number of alternatives, item flaw, item length, and whether it was a case-based question.
Results
The proportion of items with bias ranged from 34% to 36% for the various tests. The number of items and the size of their bias was very similar in both programmes. We have identified that the more complex items with more alternatives favored the national students, whereas shorter items and fewer alternatives favored the international students.
Conclusion
Although nearly 35% of all items contain bias, the distribution and the size of the bias were similar for both groups. The findings of this paper may be used to improve the writing process of the items, by avoiding some characteristics that may benefit one group whilst being a disadvantage for others.