BACKGROUND: Evidence suggests that doctors and medical students use different strategies to evaluate unprofessional behaviour. Anecdotal evidence suggests that the public and profession may judge misdemeanours differently. AIMS: To explore whether members of the public will judge examples of medical student misconduct more harshly than medical students and doctors. METHODS: This was a pilot cross-sectional survey of the public, medical students and doctors. For 10 hypothetical examples of medical student misconduct and one of appropriate conduct in a questionnaire, participants were asked to (1) indicate the level of acceptability and (2) to choose the sanction they considered most appropriate for each. RESULTS: Overall, doctors were harsher than students and the public were harsher than doctors in their choice of sanctions. The most lenient outcomes were selected by students for deception in an examination, nonattendance and dishonesty. The most punitive were chosen by the public for forgery, criminal conviction, misrepresenting qualifications, alcohol and drug misuse and lack of insight. CONCLUSIONS: The public judge misdemeanours among medical students more harshly than do medical students and medical professionals. This implies that views of lay members should be sought by medical schools when promoting professionalism and considering cases of medical student misconduct.
BACKGROUND: Evidence suggests that doctors and medical students use different strategies to evaluate unprofessional behaviour. Anecdotal evidence suggests that the public and profession may judge misdemeanours differently. AIMS: To explore whether members of the public will judge examples of medical student misconduct more harshly than medical students and doctors. METHODS: This was a pilot cross-sectional survey of the public, medical students and doctors. For 10 hypothetical examples of medical student misconduct and one of appropriate conduct in a questionnaire, participants were asked to (1) indicate the level of acceptability and (2) to choose the sanction they considered most appropriate for each. RESULTS: Overall, doctors were harsher than students and the public were harsher than doctors in their choice of sanctions. The most lenient outcomes were selected by students for deception in an examination, nonattendance and dishonesty. The most punitive were chosen by the public for forgery, criminal conviction, misrepresenting qualifications, alcohol and drug misuse and lack of insight. CONCLUSIONS: The public judge misdemeanours among medical students more harshly than do medical students and medical professionals. This implies that views of lay members should be sought by medical schools when promoting professionalism and considering cases of medical student misconduct.