You are viewing a free preview of this lesson.
Subscribe to unlock all 10 lessons in this course and every other course on LearningBro.
This lesson presents 10 complete SJT-style scenarios with full worked answers and explanations. Each scenario focuses on professional integrity, covering the UCAT SJT question format and the kind of ethical complexity candidates need to be prepared for.
Remember: The SJT is scored in Bands 1–4 (Band 1 = best). It uses partial credit scoring, so being one step away from the correct answer scores some marks. The UCAT now has four subtests: Verbal Reasoning (VR), Decision Making (DM), Quantitative Reasoning (QR), and Situational Judgement (SJT).
You are working on a portfolio assignment. A fellow medical student sends you their completed portfolio entry and says: "Here — use this as a template. Everyone copies bits from each other." You know that the assignment is individually assessed and that copying would constitute plagiarism.
Rate how appropriate each action is:
Action A: Use the portfolio entry as a "template," changing some words but keeping the same structure and content.
Rating: Very inappropriate This is plagiarism. Changing a few words (paraphrasing without original thought) does not make it your own work. If detected, both you and the student who shared the work could face Fitness to Practise proceedings.
Action B: Thank the student for offering but explain that you prefer to write your own work to avoid any risk of plagiarism.
Rating: Very appropriate This is honest, professional, and respectful. You are declining without being judgemental.
Action C: Accept the document but do not use it. Say nothing more about it.
Rating: Appropriate, but not ideal Not using the document is the right outcome. However, the student may share with others and a wider plagiarism issue may develop. Ideally, you would gently flag the risk to your colleague.
Action D: Report the student to the medical school for offering to share plagiarised work.
Rating: Inappropriate, but not awful While sharing work for copying is problematic, immediately reporting an offer (rather than an actual incident of plagiarism) is disproportionate. A private conversation explaining the risk is a better first step. If the student persists or you become aware they are actively facilitating plagiarism, reporting would be appropriate.
You are in the hospital canteen during your lunch break. Two junior doctors at the next table are loudly discussing a patient's case, including the patient's name, diagnosis, and treatment plan. Several other people in the canteen can clearly hear the conversation.
Which is the MOST appropriate action?
A. Ignore it — junior doctors know the rules and it is not your place to intervene B. Politely approach the doctors, introduce yourself as a medical student, and suggest they might want to continue their discussion somewhere more private C. Report the doctors to the hospital's information governance team D. Move to a different table so you cannot hear the conversation
Answer: B is the MOST appropriate. A polite, direct approach gives the doctors the opportunity to correct their behaviour immediately. Most doctors would appreciate the reminder.
Which is the LEAST appropriate action?
Answer: A is the LEAST appropriate. Ignoring a confidentiality breach because of the hierarchy ("it is not your place") is inconsistent with your duty to act. Patient confidentiality takes priority.
You are applying for a competitive summer research programme. The application asks whether you have published any research papers. You have not, but you contributed to a data collection project that led to a paper published by the research group. Your name is not on the paper.
Action A: List the paper on your application as if you are a named author.
Rating: Very inappropriate This is dishonest. You are not an author on the paper, and claiming to be one is a misrepresentation of your academic record. If discovered, it could result in disciplinary action and damage your reputation.
Action B: Describe your contribution to the data collection project honestly, noting that the work contributed to a published paper on which you are not a named author.
Rating: Very appropriate This is truthful and still demonstrates your research experience. Honesty about the nature and extent of your contribution is exactly what professional integrity requires.
Action C: Leave the research section blank, since you do not have a publication in your name.
Rating: Inappropriate, but not awful While this avoids dishonesty, it undersells your genuine experience. You contributed to a research project — that is valuable and should be mentioned honestly.
Action D: Ask the research group leader to add your name to the paper retrospectively.
Rating: Inappropriate, but not awful It is not inherently wrong to raise the question of authorship with the group leader, but retrospective addition to a published paper is ethically complex and may not be appropriate if you did not meet authorship criteria. The best approach is to describe your actual contribution honestly.
During a hospital placement, you notice that a fellow medical student appears to be unwell — they are pale, sweating, and their hands are shaking. They tell you privately that they are going through a difficult personal situation and have not slept for two days. They ask you not to tell anyone because they are worried about being seen as weak. They are about to observe a surgical procedure.
Action A: Respect their wishes and say nothing — they have asked for confidentiality.
Rating: Inappropriate, but not awful Respecting a friend's wishes is important, but patient safety takes priority. A sleep-deprived, visibly unwell student in a surgical environment may create safety risks (e.g. fainting, contaminating the sterile field, or being unable to respond in an emergency).
Action B: Encourage the student to speak to the clinical supervisor themselves, explaining that it is better to take a day off than to struggle through and potentially compromise patient safety.
Rating: Very appropriate This supports the student while addressing the safety concern. You are empowering them to take the right action rather than reporting them behind their back.
Action C: Go directly to the clinical supervisor and report that the student is unfit to be on placement today.
Rating: Appropriate, but not ideal Reporting to the supervisor is not wrong — patient safety may require it. However, going directly to the supervisor without giving the student the opportunity to self-report may feel like a betrayal and could damage your working relationship. It would be more appropriate if the student refused to act themselves.
Action D: Tell the student to have a coffee and get on with it — everyone has tough days.
Rating: Very inappropriate This dismisses the student's genuine distress and ignores the patient safety concern. A student who has not slept for two days is impaired and should not be in a clinical environment.
You and a fellow medical student worked together on a research poster. You did most of the data analysis and writing, while your colleague did a small amount of the literature review. When the poster is presented at a conference, your colleague is listed as the first author (implying they did the majority of the work) because they submitted the abstract without consulting you.
Action A: Say nothing — it is not worth causing conflict over authorship.
Rating: Inappropriate, but not awful While avoiding conflict is understandable, misattribution of credit is a form of academic dishonesty. It misrepresents who did the work and could affect your academic record.
Action B: Speak to your colleague privately, explain that the authorship does not reflect the contributions, and ask for the order to be corrected.
Rating: Very appropriate This is direct, proportionate, and respectful. Authorship should reflect contributions, and raising this privately gives your colleague the opportunity to correct the issue.
Action C: Submit a formal complaint to the conference organisers without speaking to your colleague first.
Rating: Inappropriate, but not awful While a formal complaint may ultimately be necessary if the colleague refuses to correct the issue, going straight to a formal process without attempting resolution is disproportionate for a first step.
Action D: Post on social media about how your colleague took credit for your work.
Rating: Very inappropriate This is unprofessional, unlikely to resolve the issue, and could damage both your reputations. Academic disputes should be resolved through proper channels, not social media.
Subscribe to continue reading
Get full access to this lesson and all 10 lessons in this course.