Evaluating Applicant Perceptions of the Impact of Social Media on the 2020-2021 Residency Application Cycle Occurring During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Survey Study

Background Due to challenges related to the COVID-19 pandemic, residency programs in the United States conducted virtual interviews during the 2020-2021 application season. As a result, programs and applicants may have relied more heavily on social media–based communication and dissemination of information. Objective We sought to determine social media’s impact on residency applicants during an entirely virtual application cycle. Methods An anonymous electronic survey was distributed to 465 eligible 2021 Match applicants at 4 University of California Schools of Medicine in the United States. Results A total of 72 participants (15.5% of eligible respondents), applying to 16 specialties, responded. Of those who responded, 53% (n=38) reported following prospective residency accounts on social media, and 89% (n=34) of those respondents were positively or negatively influenced by these accounts. The top three digital methods by which applicants sought information about residency programs included the program website, digital conversations with residents and fellows of that program, and Instagram. Among respondents, 53% (n=38) attended virtual information sessions for prospective programs. A minority of applicants (n=19, 26%) adjusted the number of programs they applied to based on information found on social media, with most (n=14, 74%) increasing the number of programs to which they applied. Survey respondents ranked social media’s effectiveness in allowing applicants to learn about programs at 6.7 (SD 2.1) on a visual analogue scale from 1-10. Most applicants (n=61, 86%) felt that programs should use social media in future application cycles even if they are nonvirtual. Conclusions Social media appears to be an important tool for resident recruitment. Future studies should seek more information on its effect on later parts of the application cycle and the Match.

Applicant Perceptions Regarding the 2020 to 2021 Virtual Ophthalmology Residency Interview and Match Season

Background The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has significantly impacted medical education, notably the mandate for all residency programs to implement virtual (rather than in-person) residency interviews. Understanding residency applicants' perceptions and approach to this novel virtual interview season will be beneficial as potential future interview formats are considered. Objective The aim of this study was to examine perceptions of the 2020 to 2021 ophthalmology residency match applicants regarding the virtual interview season prior to the start of the interview season. Patients and Methods Ophthalmology residency applicants during the 2020 to 2021 cycle were invited to complete the survey between October 20 and 29, 2020. Respondent demographic information, perceived importance of various application details in a normal versus virtual interview season, strengths and limitations of virtual interviews, and preferences for optimal virtual interview format were obtained. Results There were 337 survey respondents, with at least 50% of the survey completed by 190 applicants (56%). Of these, 73% of respondents applied to more than 60 ophthalmology residency programs, and 78% felt that the evaluation of candidates would be impacted by the virtual interview format. Regardless of interview format, United States Medical Licensing Examination Step 1 score and letters of recommendation were perceived to be the two most important factors related to matching at an applicant's top ranked programs. The primary limitation of a virtual interview season was the inability to experience a program's culture in person, while largest strength was cost savings. Conclusion The ophthalmology residency match is a competitive process made potentially more complex by a novel virtual interview format. A detailed postcycle analysis will be important to optimize future interview seasons.

Evaluating Applicant Perceptions of the Impact of Social Media on the 2020-2021 Residency Application Cycle Occurring During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Survey Study (Preprint)

BACKGROUND Due to challenges related to the COVID-19 pandemic, residency programs in the United States conducted virtual interviews during the 2020-2021 application season. As a result, programs and applicants may have relied more heavily on social media–based communication and dissemination of information. OBJECTIVE We sought to determine social media’s impact on residency applicants during an entirely virtual application cycle. METHODS An anonymous electronic survey was distributed to 465 eligible 2021 Match applicants at 4 University of California Schools of Medicine in the United States. RESULTS A total of 72 participants (15.5% of eligible respondents), applying to 16 specialties, responded. Of those who responded, 53% (n=38) reported following prospective residency accounts on social media, and 89% (n=34) of those respondents were positively or negatively influenced by these accounts. The top three digital methods by which applicants sought information about residency programs included the program website, digital conversations with residents and fellows of that program, and Instagram. Among respondents, 53% (n=38) attended virtual information sessions for prospective programs. A minority of applicants (n=19, 26%) adjusted the number of programs they applied to based on information found on social media, with most (n=14, 74%) increasing the number of programs to which they applied. Survey respondents ranked social media’s effectiveness in allowing applicants to learn about programs at 6.7 (SD 2.1) on a visual analogue scale from 1-10. Most applicants (n=61, 86%) felt that programs should use social media in future application cycles even if they are nonvirtual. CONCLUSIONS Social media appears to be an important tool for resident recruitment. Future studies should seek more information on its effect on later parts of the application cycle and the Match.

Ophthalmology Applicant Perceptions of Two Residency Application Services: The San Francisco Match Central Application Service and Electronic Residency Application Service

Purpose Given ophthalmology residency programs are transitioning to include the internship year, either through “joint” or “integrated” 4-year programs, we set out to identify applicant preferences regarding the match and their experiences with two residency application systems: (1) the Central Application Service (CAS) and (2) the Electronic Residency Application Service (ERAS). Design This study is designed as a retrospective repeated cross-sectional survey. Methods A 15-question online survey was sent to 196 and 461 applicants to the 2019 and 2020 ophthalmology match cycles, respectively. Questions from the survey assessed user experiences with specific components of both application services and evaluated preferences regarding the future of the ophthalmology match. Results Responses were received from 208 (32%) applicants. A majority of users had positive experiences with both application services; for CAS, 162 (78%) applicants had a positive experience, compared with 111 (53%) for ERAS. When compared directly, applicants favored the CAS (60%) to ERAS (21%). Furthermore, 108 (52%) respondents stated that they would prefer ophthalmology continue to use both the CAS and ERAS, while 47 (23%) respondents indicated a desire for the CAS to become the only application system for both matches. Conclusion Although half of all respondents prefer that both the CAS and ERAS systems are utilized for the match process, many express a desire for a single matching program. As ophthalmology residency programs move to joint and integrated 4-year programs, the complexity of matching will increase. Further evaluation of applicant preferences during this transition phase is needed as applicants are required to apply to a variety of different joint and integrated internship and ophthalmology programs.

We’ve Selected a Candidate Who More Closely Fits Our Current Needs: A Genre Analysis of Academic Job-Refusal Letters

For many, the academic job-search process involves experiencing rejection, self-doubt, and depression. And a common form of communication during this process—job-refusal letters—can reinforce these negative experiences. This article uses rhetorical genre analysis to study 131 academic job-refusal letters and the applicants’ perceptions of these letters. First it constructs a model of the common genre moves in the sample of letters, giving specific examples of variation in these moves. Then it correlates these moves with the applicants’ perceptions of the letters they received, analyzing the results for statistically significant variations in patterns of applicant perceptions. Based on these analyses, the author argues that the most typified genre moves do not contribute to applicants’ feeling valued. Instead, letters building goodwill through less typified moves and language are often more effective. Ultimately, he argues that we can make the job-search process more humane by attending to the specifics of the full range of interactions between applicants and institutions.