1. “Hawks vs Dove” Phenomenon in Faculty Attending Evaluations of
Emergency Medicine Residents
Nicole M. Dubosh MD, Layla Abubshait MD, Celine Pascheles MD, Carlo Rosen MD, Nitsan Mendelson BSc, Edward Ullman MD
CLICK TO GO BACK TO KIOSK MENU
Harvard Affiliated Emergency Medicine Residency, Department of Emergency Medicine
Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA
Official hospital of the
Boston Red Sox
INTRODUCTION
METHODS, continued
RESULTS
Evaluators whose medical knowledge rating was outside of the interquartile range (25th-75th percentile) were defined as hawks or doves, respectively.
A multivariate generalized estimating equations analysis was performed to comparing the above variables.
Models were adjusted for resident post-graduate year.
“Hawk vs dove” phenomenon refers to the stringency of evaluators i.e. hawks evaluate learners more stringently whereas doves evaluate more leniently compared to peers.
While this concept has been discussed in the medical education literature, its presence in EM resident evaluations is unclear.  
Figure 1: Number of “Strengths” and “Suggestions for Improvement” Words by Grading Group
OBJECTIVE
RESULTS
The objectives of this study were to:
Determine if hawks and doves differ in the amount of written feedback provided on EM resident evaluations.
Determine if gender or seniority correlates with an evaluator being a hawk or a dove.
4965 evaluations by 52 faculty attendings were included.
13 (25%) were hawks and 13 (25%) were doves.
Hawks provided fewer “strengths” word comments (B-coefficient , p=0.001) and more “suggestions for improvement” words (B- coefficient 0.533, p=0.000) compared to their peers.
Doves provided more “strengths” words (B coefficient 0.278, p=0.080) and fewer “suggestions for improvement” words B-coefficient 0.504, p=0.020). Figure 1.
73% of all faculty evaluators were male, with 92% of hawks being male and 69% of doves being male (p=0.190).
There was no significant difference in faculty seniority between the hawks and doves (p=0.962).  
METHODS
Retrospective study of EM resident shift evaluations by EM faculty at a single academic, urban medical center in a three-year residency program.
EM faculty attending evaluations of EM residents from were included.
Ratings of residents’ medical knowledge, number of words in the “strengths” and “suggestions for improvement” comment boxes, attending gender, and senior versus junior faculty (greater or less than 5 years post-training) were extracted from the database.
CONCLUSION .
Hawks provided more “suggestions for improvement” comments.
Male faculty were more likely to be hawks, however, this was not statistically significant.
Further faculty development on written evaluation feedback may reduce variability by gender and provide learners with a more accurate assessment of their progress.