McQuagge 1

Madison McQuagge

Dr. Sharity Nelson

English 1301-102

6 October 2023

Rhetorical Analysis of a Peer Reviewed Article About Medical Students Empathy

“Influences on Students’ Empathy in Medical Education: An Exploratory Interview

Study with Medical Students in Their Third and Last Year” by N J Pohontsch, et al. is a research

article published in 2018 by BMC Medical Education, based on whether or not students' empathy

evolves throughout their medical career. The article and research took place in “Hamburg,

Germany. 2 Institute for Social Medicine and Epidemiology, University of Lübeck, Lübeck,

Germany” (238). According to Pohontsch, “We interviewed 24 medical students (six male and

six female students in their 6th semester as well as six male and six female students in their final

clinical year) using semi-structured interviews” (231). For the interview process, they gathered

students with different backgrounds and medical training to determine the evolution of their

empathy. As stated by Pohontsch, “Medical students‘ empathy evolves and changes during their

medical education” (232). Pohontsch wants to determine whether or not a medical students’

empathy towards patients and their healthcare matures during their studies. As stated by

Pohontsch, et al., “Medical students‘ empathy evolves and changes during their medical

education” (232). In the article, Pohontsch wants to be able to determine whether or not a

medical students’ empathy declines during their studies. Pohontsch’s article is effective in

supporting its argument because he claims credibility due to using logos by inserting tables,

ethos by claiming the credibility of the conductors of the research, and pathos by using the

medical students' working conditions to gain sympathy from the audience.

 McQuagge 2

First of all, Pohontsch captures his credibility in his article by using logos, inserting

tables. On page 234, Pohontsch inserted a table based on the interview variables. The table was

split into two different halves one with interview group A and the other half had interview group

B. Each group had 12 interviewees, 6 females and 6 males. However, Group A were all in

between the ages of 21 and 29 with 6 semesters of school. Group B were in between the ages of

24 and 43, with 13 semesters of medical school. Pohontsch inserts tables in the journal to

establish the credibility of the interview. The table is horizontal with Group A on the top, and

Group B is on the bottom. The table shows the readers that there were different factors such as

age, gender, and medical experience put into the interview. Pohontsch et al. states in the article,

“Some of the abovementioned studies show a decline in students’ empathy during their medical

education” (233). Therefore, the use of students from different ages is important to the interview

research because medical students can face a downslope of empathy for their patients as they

extend their medical education. According to Pohontsch, et al., “Gender is also known to

influence empathy. Therefore we aimed to interview female and male students from their 6th

semester and those in their final year to maximize variations in the students’ accounts on

curricular influences on empathy”(233). Since gender is familiar with changing factors of

peoples empathy, gender is a huge factor in this research. For these reasons, the table is inserted

to appeal to the reader's logic. Pohontsch brilliantly placed this chart to claim his credibility by

demonstrating his interviewing variables, therefore the audience should trust these interviews

and results.

Next, Pohontsch uses ethos to claim credibility by claiming the credibility of the

constructors of research. For example, Pohontsch, et al. states, “NJP is a female trained

psychologist and post doctorate researcher with comprehensive experience in conducting focus
 McQuagge 3

groups and interviews as well as qualitative data analysis” (235). In the article, Pohontsch lists

the education of the interviewers to gain the trust of the readers. He has many different

interviewers with their own impressive educations and resumes. Not only is Pohontsch trying to

impress his readers, he got some of the best people to help him with this experiment. The

interviewers are all outstanding in the medical field, so they are trustworthy for their findings

throughout these interviews. Pohontsch is establishing his credibility by listing all of the

interviewers' education and qualifications, he makes them seem reliable. So, whenever the

readers see the results they will most likely trust the findings and conclusion of the experiment.

Lastly, Pohontsch uses pathos by using the medical students' working conditions to gain

sympathy from the audience. According to Pohontsch, et al., “Poor working conditions during

clinical internships, e.g. a high workload, a lot of overtime and the excessive expectations of

young professionals, but also an underload and doubts about the reasonableness of the health

care system can reduce empathic abilities” (236). As Pohontsch is trying to gain sympathy from

the audience, he uses the interviewees’ sad background as a way to get the readers' trust. By

making the audience feel bad for the interviewees, he declares his credibility because he

provokes the readers pity. For example, if a medical student with a difficult background has more

sympathy for patients than a medical student with a normal background, out of pity the readers

will trust that information.

All in all, Pohontsch’s article is successful in supporting his argument because he

establishes his credibility by using logos by inserting tables and graphs, ethos by claiming the

credibility of the conductors of the research, and pathos by using the medical students' working

conditions to gain sympathy from the audience. According to Pohontsch, et al., “Some

longitudinal studies show a decrease in empathy throughout medical education and students
 McQuagge 4

suffering from burn-out symptoms show lower empathy scores.” Therefore, the results of this

research is that students who have spent a good amount of time in college have decreased

empathy for their patients. Also, medical students who are mentally exhausted and no longer

have motivation for school have declined empathy scores. After reading the peer reviewed

journal, the rhetorical situations in Pohontsch’s research are important because he wants his

audience’s trust. With the knowledge of the rhetorical situations, readers should read the article

and understand why he wants the trust of the readers and what information he is trying to spread.
 McQuagge 5

Work Cited

Pohontsch, N J, et al. “Influences on Students’ Empathy in MedicalEducation: An

Exploratory Interview Study with Medical Students in Their Third and Last

Year.” BMC Medical Education, vol. 18, no. 1, 2018, pp. 231–239,

https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-018-1335-7.