How does the match process work?

[Anxiety]

Does the match process give priority to students' ranking of sites or to sites' ranking of students? Is it possible to jeopardize a potential match by how I rank the sites?

Hypothetically speaking, let's say I and another student named Jennifer interviewed at sites A, B, C. This is my ranking list: C, B, A and Jennifer's ranking list: A, B, C. Let's say Site A can only take one intern and they ranked me first and Jennifer second. Let's say I did not get sites C and B so now I'm down to my third choice. Will I be matched to site A (because I am first on their list) or will Jennifer be matched to site A (because they are first on her list). If Jennifer matches, then I would have jeopardized a potential match by ranking site A last on my list. Does that make sense?

Please help.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[erg923]

Does the match process give priority to students' ranking of sites or to sites' ranking of students? Is it possible to jeopardize a potential match by how I rank the sites?

Hypothetically speaking, let's say I and another student named Jennifer interviewed at sites A, B, C. This is my ranking list: C, B, A and Jennifer's ranking list: A, B, C. Let's say Site A can only take one intern and they ranked me first and Jennifer second. Let's say I did not get sites C and B so now I'm down to my third choice. Will I be matched to site A (because I am first on their list) or will Jennifer be matched to site A (because they are first on her list). If Jennifer matches, then I would have jeopardized a potential match by ranking site A last on my list. Does that make sense?

Please help.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

https://www.appic.org/Match/FAQs/Applicants/Rank-Order-Lists

 

[Anxiety]

Reason I ask is because I was told to rank by how I perceive the sites will rank me. So if I think a site will rank me high on their list (because I did well in the interview, there was good chemistry, it felt like a good fit, they complimented me a lot, etc), then I should rank them high on my list as well to maximize my match potential. But does that also mean if I rank a site high (bc of other factors like location or career goal) that may not have ranked me high, I might not match at all?


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[Anxiety]

#2 on that link just answered my concerns. Thanks.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[voyeurofthemind]

No. That is incorrect. APPIC clearly says rank your sites based on your true preferences NOT on your perception on how you will be ranked.

 

[erg923]

Reason I ask is because I was told to rank by how I perceive the sites will rank me. So if I think a site will rank me high on their list (because I did well in the interview, there was good chemistry, it felt like a good fit, they complimented me a lot, etc), then I should rank them high on my list as well to maximize my match potential. But does that also mean if I rank a site high (bc of other factors like location or career goal) that may not have ranked me high, I might not match at all?


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

That's makes no sense. Think about it after you read the link I posted.

 

[Anxiety]

The advice was from a misinformed classmate then. Got it. Thanks.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[glowstick]

Just out of curiosity and not because I don't understand this, was there ever a system wherein it would have mattered? The algorithm doesn't seem to care about it, but so many people seem to have that misperception.

As a solution of the problem "how to create a situation where no match exists in which both applicant and site would prefer each other but are not matched together", applicants ranking in order of their preference is the only reasonable way to act. Right?

 

[MCParent]

Just out of curiosity and not because I don't understand this, was there ever a system wherein it would have mattered? The algorithm doesn't seem to care about it, but so many people seem to have that misperception.

As a solution of the problem "how to create a situation where no match exists in which both applicant and site would prefer each other but are not matched together", applicants ranking in order of their preference is the only reasonable way to act. Right?

I think the misunderstanding arises from the fact that some people think the algorithm works to optimize the number of matches, which it doesn't. If it did, it would make some sense to rank sites based on how you think they ranked you. But it doesn't work that way and doing that would actually not impact the match rate by much more than 2 dozen matches or so.

 

[glowstick]

If anyone's interested, they can also read about the Stable Marriage Problem on Wikipedia, of which this is a generalization.

MCParent, yeah, your hypothesis rings true to me. People as well like to feel like they're gaming the system.

I do also think that people get confused about how exactly the Match prioritizes applicants.

 

[Remembering]

I'm quite tired after a long interview day so forgive me for not understanding this, but how is this possible? The matching process will attempt to match you to Wonderland (your top choice) without penalizing you and without reducing your chances of being matched with other sites if you do not match to Wonderland. I was under the impression that our ranking was weighted over the sites' rankings, so that we get preference. If that's true, then how would I be matched at my fifth or sixth choice? Shouldn't that spot go to another person who had ranked that other site higher than I did?

An example: I rank Site X at #6 and another person ranks Site X at #1. Site X ranks me at #1 and the other person at #6. Even if my top 5 sites rank me very poorly and I don't match to them, wouldn't the other person match at Site X?

 

[hthpsych]

Here's how the match works, according to NMS:

Bottom Line: Rank based on YOUR preference!

 

[AcronymAllergy]

I'm quite tired after a long interview day so forgive me for not understanding this, but how is this possible? The matching process will attempt to match you to Wonderland (your top choice) without penalizing you and without reducing your chances of being matched with other sites if you do not match to Wonderland. I was under the impression that our ranking was weighted over the sites' rankings, so that we get preference. If that's true, then how would I be matched at my fifth or sixth choice? Shouldn't that spot go to another person who had ranked that other site higher than I did?

An example: I rank Site X at #6 and another person ranks Site X at #1. Site X ranks me at #1 and the other person at #6. Even if my top 5 sites rank me very poorly and I don't match to them, wouldn't the other person match at Site X?

The video below shows an example of how the system works. But in your situation, I believe you've answered your own question--you've not been penalized by ranking the site at #6 instead of #1, because my understanding is that you would indeed bump the person from that spot. However, the algorithm would then continue to try to match you to your #1-5 sites, while then trying to match the bumped applicant to their #2. If you end up later in one of sites #1-5 somehow, the previous person goes back in to your former spot.

 

[glowstick]

I'm quite tired after a long interview day so forgive me for not understanding this, but how is this possible? The matching process will attempt to match you to Wonderland (your top choice) without penalizing you and without reducing your chances of being matched with other sites if you do not match to Wonderland. I was under the impression that our ranking was weighted over the sites' rankings, so that we get preference. If that's true, then how would I be matched at my fifth or sixth choice? Shouldn't that spot go to another person who had ranked that other site higher than I did?

An example: I rank Site X at #6 and another person ranks Site X at #1. Site X ranks me at #1 and the other person at #6. Even if my top 5 sites rank me very poorly and I don't match to them, wouldn't the other person match at Site X?

The video below shows an example of how the system works. But in your situation, I believe you've answered your own question--you've not been penalized by ranking the site at #6 instead of #1, because my understanding is that you would indeed bump the person from that spot. However, the algorithm would then continue to try to match you to your #1-5 sites, while then trying to match the bumped applicant to their #2. If you end up later in one of sites #1-5 somehow, the previous person goes back in to your former spot.

I think it's kind of the opposite, although in the long run it works similarly: first the system tries to put Remembering at their first site, but they aren't ranked there. Then the system tries to put them at their second site, and suppose they're ranked at position 12 out of 6 slots there, so they stick. But someone else who's ranked #9 ranks the second site as #1, so Remembering is bumped out of matching at site 2. Then Remembering goes down their list, etc. – until they hit Site X. Site X has been temporarily matched with the other potential intern (call them Forgetting) who really wanted to be there, but Site X likes Remembering better – so Forgetting is bumped out, and Remembering is matched with Site X. Now Remembering is at the site they most want to be at that wants them there, and Site X has their most favorable intern who wants to be there -- so it's a stable match. Now Forgetting, who ranked Site X as #1, goes down to their second site, potentially bumping interns from there... etc.

The video does do a pretty good job of showing how this works. Again, remember the idea of the stable match: no intern is matched to a site where the intern would prefer to be somewhere else AND the internship site would prefer to have that intern. So the example of Site X that Remembering gave would have been unstable if Forgetting stayed matched there, even though Remembering wanted to be there AND Site X would have preferred Remembering to Forgetting.

To be clear, the only "correction" I'm really making is that the system doesn't consider your sixth choice until it's already considered choice 1, choice 2, etc. And the way that the system weights applicants over sites is that it works based on applicants' rankings and then sites', rather than the other way round.

 

[AcronymAllergy]

I think it's kind of the opposite, although in the long run it works similarly: first the system tries to put Remembering at their first site, but they aren't ranked there. Then the system tries to put them at their second site, and suppose they're ranked at position 12 out of 6 slots there, so they stick. But someone else who's ranked #9 ranks the second site as #1, so Remembering is bumped out of matching at site 2. Then Remembering goes down their list, etc. – until they hit Site X. Site X has been temporarily matched with the other potential intern (call them Forgetting) who really wanted to be there, but Site X likes Remembering better – so Forgetting is bumped out, and Remembering is matched with Site X. Now Remembering is at the site they most want to be at that wants them there, and Site X has their most favorable intern who wants to be there -- so it's a stable match. Now Forgetting, who ranked Site X as #1, goes down to their second site, potentially bumping interns from there... etc.

The video does do a pretty good job of showing how this works. Again, remember the idea of the stable match: no intern is matched to a site where the intern would prefer to be somewhere else AND the internship site would prefer to have that intern. So the example of Site X that Remembering gave would have been unstable if Forgetting stayed matched there, even though Remembering wanted to be there AND Site X would have preferred Remembering to Forgetting.

To be clear, the only "correction" I'm really making is that the system doesn't consider your sixth choice until it's already considered choice 1, choice 2, etc. And the way that the system weights applicants over sites is that it works based on applicants' rankings and then sites', rather than the other way round.

Oh, yeah, I didn't do a great job of explaining that in my example. By saying the person who'd ranked the site #6 would've bumped the person ranking it #1, I was assuming said person had already failed to match at sites 1-5. However, I believe the match algorithm is iterative in that it would then still attempt to match you to sites 1-5 if a spot opens up.

But yes, it goes through and attempts to rank each applicant to their highest spot first. The bumping occurs, as you've said, when a person who's previous matches have been exhausted matches to "your" spot/site, and that site has in turn ranked the other person higher than you.

 

[madpsych78]

Here's how the match works, according to NMS:

Bottom Line: Rank based on YOUR preference!

Yeah, but what would happen if they started with Baker or Charles rather than Able in this video? Would the outcome be different?

 

[EmotRegulation]

Shouldn't matter....you can try this yourself. If it starts with Charles, Charles gets his top choice because they also prefer him over anyone else...Able would never even temporarily match there. If it starts with Baker, Baker goes to Program A...and then so does Able. Doesn't matter who you start with.

 

[glowstick]

QUESTION: Does the Matching Program favor applicants' or programs' rankings?

ANSWER: Neither. Applicants' and programs' rankings are given equal weight in the process. More information on this question may be found here.

Generally speaking the email that just got sent out is super helpful.