MMI Preception

[SunnyHere]

---

Members don't see this ad.

Hi just had my first MMI and I think I did real well in about half of them and the others were just average and one was real bad haha. What was your perception on MMI's? When you think you did badly or things went poorly did you still get accepted?

I liked it for the most part but there were some off beat questions. I was frustrated I couldn't get across certain thoughts like why i thought the school was a fit but otherwise I thought the MMI went OKAY. Still prefer the traditional interviews!

EDIT: Should be perception woops!

 

[food2]

Eh it's okay, not my cup of tea but not the end of the world. Haven't gotten my results as of yet but hoping for the best

 

[Ismet]

I only had one MMI interview and I hated it. Had a few bizarre stations and thought I did horribly. There was one station where we were paired up with another interviewee and we had to choose a certain number of people from a list to save from apocalypse and repopulate the earth (the typical cliche "dilemma"). We had two interviewers who just sat there and watched us discuss. I have no idea how they think this determines who should go to this school, but I guess it works for them.

Ended up getting waitlisted, but I was really turned off by some of the things I learned about the school so I really wasn't bummed.

 

[Leoz M Jiliums]

I only had one MMI interview and I hated it. Had a few bizarre stations and thought I did horribly. There was one station where we were paired up with another interviewee and we had to choose a certain number of people from a list to save from apocalypse and repopulate the earth (the typical cliche "dilemma"). We had two interviewers who just sat there and watched us discuss. I have no idea how they think this determines who should go to this school, but I guess it works for them.

Ended up getting waitlisted, but I was really turned off by some of the things I learned about the school so I really wasn't bummed.

+1, I think MMI doesn't work that well in practice.

Edit: they are kind of fun though

 

[DurgaRangoli]

I did really well at all the stations except the actor stations, lots of awkward silence. I don't think MMI is super useful either. I'd rather just have a conversation with one person. Plus, the running around is sort of stressful.

 

[Pacna]

I LOVED my one and only MMI at MSUCHM. From my experience, they really let you expand your character in a realistic setting rather than drilling your for the right answer. Of course, MSUCHM's interview is also accompanied by a classic interview. *shrug*

I hope more schools incorporate MMI's. They're fun and so much more fair.

 

[Leoz M Jiliums]

I LOVED my one and only MMI at MSUCHM. From my experience, they really let you expand your character in a realistic setting rather than drilling your for the right answer. Of course, MSUCHM's interview is also accompanied by a classic interview. *shrug*

I hope more schools incorporate MMI's. They're fun and so much more fair.

I disagree with this. MMIs cater to outgoing personalities too much, especially the acting stations. Furthermore, the entire "poker face" thing really throws me off, and is not very realistic. In a real conversation the other person would give you feedback.

Finally, I think that MMIs kind of "dehumanize" the entire process. I felt like I was on a conveyer belt the entire time I interviewed, and that really impacted my perception of the schools that used this method. It would be interesting to examine the yield of schools that use MMI vs traditional interviews. Anecdotally, McMaster University (the school in Canada which invented the MMI), loses a large amount of it's accepted applicants every year to other schools. But it's also a purely PBL cirriculum, so that may have something to do with that.

 

[Pacna]

I disagree with this. MMIs cater to outgoing personalities too much, especially the acting stations. Furthermore, the entire "poker face" thing really throws me off, and is not very realistic. In a real conversation the other person would give you feedback.

Finally, I think that MMIs kind of "dehumanize" the entire process. I felt like I was on a conveyer belt the entire time I interviewed, and that really impacted my perception of the schools that used this method. It would be interesting to examine the yield of schools that use MMI vs traditional interviews. Anecdotally, McMaster University (the school in Canada which invented the MMI), loses a large amount of it's accepted applicants every year to other schools. But it's also a purely PBL cirriculum, so that may have something to do with that.

I think this is true, but I don't think it's "too much." Being outgoing is a positive thing in the profession, and I think it's fair to test for that.

You could also say that it caters to people who think well on their feet "too much," but I would counter with a similar idea.

I'm sorry that you felt dehumanized during your MMIs. All I can say is that I had the opposite experience. I doubt that all institutions will ever perform MMI's, and I think you provide a compelling story as to why that is.

 

[Leoz M Jiliums]

I guess it depends on which school you interview. I still have 2 MMIs left, I'll try to keep an open mind.

 

[Davida]

I LOVED my one and only MMI at MSUCHM. From my experience, they really let you expand your character in a realistic setting rather than drilling your for the right answer. Of course, MSUCHM's interview is also accompanied by a classic interview. *shrug*

I hope more schools incorporate MMI's. They're fun and so much more fair.

I also loved my only MMI. But the thing is, I hate the traditional interview where all they do is go over the stuff on your application. You already know that stuff - I wrote it down for you! I liked interview questions where I got the chance to solve problems and think out loud, since I think it shows something that the admissions committee can't get from my application.

I'll say also that my top two schools are known for lots of ethics and critical thinking interview questions, so I over prepared for those (and then found myself struggling more with the more standard questions!). This preparation made a lot of the MMI questions easier. I HIGHLY suggest the UW Bioethics website - reviewing the scenarios on that website really helped for several interviews and especially for my MMI.

http://depts.washington.edu/bioethx/topics/

 

[wiloghby]

I HIGHLY suggest the UW Bioethics website - reviewing the scenarios on that website really helped for several interviews and especially for my MMI.

http://depts.washington.edu/bioethx/topics/

This is absolutely the best resource interviewees can use to prepare for ethics questions IMO.

Also, once I got my first acceptance, I withdrew from every school I applied to that employs MMI interviews. I'm more interested in having a conversation with faculty/students at the school to see if I fit in there. All an MMI does is put you through some weird experiment that reinforces the notion that you are just one of a billion applicants being considered.

 

[chronicidal]

The key about approaching MMIs is not just to think about how you're going to do well, but how your performance is going to be BETTER or DIFFERENT than that of your fellow interviewees. Think, how would the average pre-med answer this? Then think, how would an enlightened, successful pre-med answer this? Everything is rated numerically and converted to a z-score. Remember that.

MMIs shows that the institution cares about fairness. MMIs are useful because they're much more reliable than traditional interviews. You may feel like part of a conveyor belt, but conveyor belts are the basis for getting quality products in an efficient way.

 

[lobo.solo]

I had a couple this year and I liked them a lot. They seem more fair in comparison to traditional interviews. In fact the origin of MMI is because they wanted to evaluate students in their natural habital; meaning they want to know how you would react to "somewhat" real situations. Also the fact that the rater don't know anything about you, but your name takes away any bias they might have in relationship to your file.

For me, the key to MMI was to be myself and respond as if I would in real life. If you are not afraid to talk to strangers (which is something that you should get comfortable with in medicine), behave with respect compassion and understanding towards other... then you should be fine.

 

[Lifschitz]

2 MMI interviews → 2 Waitlists
2 Traditional interviews → 2 Acceptances

Hated them (I think you can see why 🙂).

 

[music2doc]

2 MMI interviews → 2 Waitlists
2 Traditional interviews → 2 Acceptances

Hated them (I think you can see why 🙂).

I had a similar ratio:

5 traditional --> 3 1st-round acceptances, 2 tier 1 waitlists
2 MMIs --> 1 mid-tier waitlist, 1 unranked waitlist

Nevertheless, I actually really liked the MMI and still do. I thought it was a fun challenge. The games tested skills I still believe are valuable for medical students to have. While some stations (acting, instructional, etc.) may seem to favor an outgoing person, I would say it's more that they favor people who have excellent interpersonal communication skills, which are absolutely critical for a physician to possess. Notably, some outgoing people are not particularly good communicators when it comes to giving/receiving instructions or expressing empathy/understanding appropriately. Those weaknesses would show in an MMI and could be a major flaw for a future physician.

I think supplementing w/ a traditional interview is best to maintain that "personal" element and have someone who can act as an "advocate" for each interviewee. I personally think OHSU has found an excellent approach to this: 7 standard MMI stations + 1 "double-station" where you get interviewed (~20 min) by one of two interviewers. This also allows for some level of consistency b/w traditional interviewers as there are only two and each gets to see half of the applicants on any given day.

 

[compstomper]

Unlike many of you guys I've only had 1 MMI. But I'll share my thoughts and hope this'll help some of you who has yet to have their MMI.

The office staff told us early in the morning that the MMI tend to favor extroverts, and I can indeed see why. The various stations require a certain degree of improvisation and reading the responses of your interviewers within a very short time constraint. For introverts, 1 interview is enough, not to mention 8+, which can be very draining. Yet in retrospect it was certainly informative as I got to meet and talk to not only faculty and students, but also practicing physicians, office staff, mid level providers, etc. I personally thought I bombed 2 of the mini interviews, but I still ended up with an outright acceptance.

My advice is to get a full night's sleep, and be prepared to be your best self (true for any type of interview). The MMI is more tiring as it's less relaxed and more involving, even occasionally confrontational due to the topical nature of the MMI. Do your best to prepare emotionally and psychologically to switch from topic to topic within the span of a few minutes while also be ready to discuss them in depth. Good luck to all of you!

 

[Leoz M Jiliums]

I had a couple this year and I liked them a lot. They seem more fair in comparison to traditional interviews. In fact the origin of MMI is because they wanted to evaluate students in their natural habital; meaning they want to know how you would react to "somewhat" real situations. Also the fact that the rater don't know anything about you, but your name takes away any bias they might have in relationship to your file.

For me, the key to MMI was to be myself and respond as if I would in real life. If you are not afraid to talk to strangers (which is something that you should get comfortable with in medicine), behave with respect compassion and understanding towards other... then you should be fine.

This is something I've always wondered about. If the rater doesn't know anything about the applicant, what stops them from straight up lying about their experiences and making themselves look good? An acquaintance told me he made up experiences for some his stations to prove his point, he got accepted to both the MMI schools he interviewed at. His advice to me (word for word) was " just BS if you're stuck, they'll never know."

I think that MMIs can be gamed, whether through practice or stuff like that.

EDIT: I wanted to add that I just had a "good" MMI experience recently. Still don't like them, but not that bad.

 

[Ambitionista]

This is something I've always wondered about. If the rater doesn't know anything about the applicant, what stops them from straight up lying about their experiences and making themselves look good? An acquaintance told me he made up experiences for some his stations to prove his point, he got accepted to both the MMI schools he interviewed at. His advice to me (word for word) was " just BS if you're stuck, they'll never know."

I think that MMIs can be gamed, whether through practice or stuff like that.

EDIT: I wanted to add that I just had a "good" MMI experience recently. Still don't like them, but not that bad.

Totally never knew people actually did this. I doubt I could just make up an experience on the spot with a straight face but sadly from the 1 MMI I've had, I can definitely see how someone could be successful with this strategy.

 

[lobo.solo]

This is something I've always wondered about. If the rater doesn't know anything about the applicant, what stops them from straight up lying about their experiences and making themselves look good? An acquaintance told me he made up experiences for some his stations to prove his point, he got accepted to both the MMI schools he interviewed at. His advice to me (word for word) was " just BS if you're stuck, they'll never know."

I think that MMIs can be gamed, whether through practice or stuff like that.

EDIT: I wanted to add that I just had a "good" MMI experience recently. Still don't like them, but not that bad.

I agree that they can definitively be gamed, but I think is more difficult to do so than the traditional ones. For instance, I think it's kind of hard to fake compassion, or being supportive towards someone right there in then IMO.

 

[Leoz M Jiliums]

I agree that they can definitively be gamed, but I think is more difficult to do so than the traditional ones. For instance, I think it's kind of hard to fake compassion, or being supportive towards someone right there in then IMO.

I can totally see what you're saying, but an MMI only lasts 6-8 minutes. Someone with even a little bit of acting skill could pretend for that long, and people who do improv/theater experience could do it even better.

 

[lobo.solo]

I can totally see what you're saying, but an MMI only lasts 6-8 minutes. Someone with even a little bit of acting skill could pretend for that long, and people who do improv/theater experience could do it even better.

Yeah, I agree. Is not that hard to do well even without any acting skill I think.

 

[food2]

What else do you guys think MMI's measure other than thinking on your feet and constructing a logical argument?

 

[ZtetNb]

What else do you guys think MMI's measure other than thinking on your feet and constructing a logical argument?

I don't think it does measure that, actually. In my experience MMI raters really don't care about the strength of the logic or reasoning behind your argument, only how confident you are in it and how much your position appeals to them. Pretty similar to televised political debates actually - how often does the audience actually like a candidate better because they had better reasoned arguments? I've often seen people fare very well in MMIs, even though they only justify decisions by saying they feel good about it.

 

[SunsFun]

I agree that they can definitively be gamed, but I think is more difficult to do so than the traditional ones. For instance, I think it's kind of hard to fake compassion, or being supportive towards someone right there in then IMO.

Some acting station actually evaluate your ability to "show" compassion (basically faking it).

I think some applicants read too deep into MMI. The mini interviews simply test how likable an applicant is. The person already looks good on the paper, now it's time to see if he or she can make a positive impression on a bunch of stranger in a short period of time. Useful skill considering that bedside manner is pretty much the only way a patient can evaluate his care.

 

[Pacna]

I disagree with the idea that MMIs cater to extroverts. I'm an introvert, but I think I did fine in my MMI.

I think some of you are confusing extrovert with an outgoing personality. I'm outgoing. I just can't be outgoing for 10 hours straight. After 2 hours or so my "outgoing battery" is depleted and I need a nap or a book.

MMIs cater to friendly, personable people, but so do traditional interviews. News flash: People aren't going to like you if you're not friendly. If an ADCOM doesn't like you, you won't get in. Yes, that means non-outgoing people can be (I think fairly) evaluated as unfriendly and face an additional hurdle to overcome in this process.

 

[justAstudent]

I disagree with the idea that MMIs cater to extroverts. I'm an introvert, but I think I did fine in my MMI.

I think some of you are confusing extrovert with an outgoing personality. I'm outgoing. I just can't be outgoing for 10 hours straight. After 2 hours or so my "outgoing battery" is depleted and I need a nap or a book.

MMIs cater to friendly, personable people, but so do traditional interviews. News flash: People aren't going to like you if you're not friendly. If an ADCOM doesn't like you, you won't get in. Yes, that means non-outgoing people can be (I think fairly) evaluated as unfriendly and face an additional hurdle to overcome in this process.

My thoughts also.

 

[mk04447]

I can't help myself, I've got to say its perception. Those things bother me sorry.