Personality Preference Distribution of Dental Students Admitted to One Dental School Using Different Selection Methods
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study sought to determine whether using the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) would detect differences in personality preferences in first-year dental students admitted to the same dental school through different admission methods. First-year dental students admitted in 2000 and 2001 were given the MBTI instrument during orientation prior to the start of classes. In fall 2000, the Class of 2004 had 140 students, with 116 in the traditional track and twenty-four in the parallel problem-based learning (PBL) track. In fall 2001, the Class of 2005 had 144 students, all enrolled in the PBL curriculum. All students admitted to the PBL track had experienced a process that included evaluation of their participation in a small group. Students in the traditional track had individual interviews with faculty members. Both student groups were required to meet the same baseline grade point average and Dental Admission Test standards. In 2000, the PBL students showed personality preferences that were distinctly different from the personality preferences of traditional track students in the categories of Extroversion (89 percent PBL, 44 percent traditional) and Thinking (72 percent PBL, 39 percent traditional). In 2001, the all-PBL class retained the trend towards Extroversion (69 percent). This study suggests that admission method may effectively change the personality preference distribution exhibited by the students who are admitted to dental school.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".