UCAT Situational Judgement: Importance Questions – From Essential to Irrelevant
Understanding the UCAT Situational Judgement Test (SJT)
The Situational Judgement Test (SJT) is the final section of the UCAT exam, designed to assess your ability to handle real-life scenarios professionally. Unlike the other UCAT subtests, the SJT isn’t about academic knowledge or quick calculations – it focuses on ethics, integrity, teamwork, and judgement. The official UCAT consortium explains that this section “measures your capacity to understand real-world situations and to identify critical factors and appropriate behaviour in dealing with them.” It’s about evaluating the values and behaviours expected of a good doctor or dentist.
💡 No medical knowledge needed: Don’t worry – you don’t need any prior clinical or medical knowledge for SJT questions. The scenarios may be set in medical or dental contexts, but you’ll never be asked for clinical facts. Instead, the exam assesses your judgement and professional attitude. As the UCAT guidance emphasises, it’s your principles and decision-making that count, not textbook knowledge. This means applying common sense, empathy, and ethics to each situation.
💡 Why it matters for admissions: Situational judgement is highly relevant to medical and dental school admissions. Admissions tutors know that a candidate’s UCAT SJT band (Band 1 is highest, Band 4 lowest) reflects their alignment with professional values. Most UK medical schools require at least Band 3 (average judgement) or higher – many will outright reject applicants who score Band 4, as a poor SJT result suggests that their decisions often differ greatly from expected ethical standards. In short, performing well in this section keeps your options open; a top Band 1–2 score can even strengthen your application in interviews, whereas a Band 4 could disqualify you from consideration at several schools. No pressure – but the SJT is clearly important to master!
Finally, remember that the SJT is scored differently from other sections: you’ll get full marks for exactly correct answers and partial marks for those that are close. So even if you don’t hit the exact ideal rating, a “near miss” still earns credit. The goal is to show sound judgement consistently, even if you’re slightly off on a few questions. With that in mind, let’s dive into the specific “Importance” questions and how to ace them. 😃
What Are “Importance” Questions in UCAT SJT?
“Importance” questions are one of the two main question types in the SJT (the other type being “Appropriateness” questions). In an Importance question set, you’ll be given a scenario followed by a series of considerations or factors related to that situation. Your task is to rate how important each factor is in deciding the best outcome or course of action for that scenario.
Typically, you’ll see a scenario (e.g., a dilemma faced by a medical student or doctor) followed by a question like: “How important are the following factors in this situation?” For each factor, you must choose from a fixed set of four possible ratings, which always have the same standard meanings:
🟢 Very Important – This factor is essential to consider. It must be taken into account to handle the scenario properly. In other words, the key issues in the situation cannot be addressed without this factor. If you ignore a “Very Important” consideration, you would likely fail to resolve the main problem or could even breach professional duties.
🟡 Important – This factor is significant and should be considered, but it’s not absolutely critical. It has a meaningful impact on the scenario, yet the scenario could still be resolved without it, or it’s less central than a “very important” factor. In short, it’s good to include this consideration, but it’s not a deal-breaker if it’s missing.
🟠 Of Minor Importance – This factor has only a small or tangential relevance. It could be considered a low priority, but it doesn’t really matter much whether it is or not. A “minor importance” factor might have some slight effect on the situation (perhaps a nice-to-have or a small detail), but it does not significantly influence the outcome. Ignoring it would not cause any real harm or ethical lapse – it’s largely incidental.
🔴 Not Important At All – This factor is irrelevant to the scenario and should not be considered when making a decision. In fact, giving this factor undue weight could be distracting or misleading. These are often factors that seem related but actually have no genuine bearing on the proper handling of the situation. Essentially, you can completely ignore “not important” points – or they might even be things that ought to be ignored for professional reasons.
Understanding these four answer options is crucial. They are fixed phrases used in every Importance question, so memorise what each one signifies. Think of them as a ranking from essential (must do/consider) to irrelevant (don’t bother with it). A common pitfall is the fine line between “Very Important” and “Important” – both indicate something worth considering, so how do you tell which factors warrant the highest rating? The difference lies in degree: “Very Important” means crucial or absolutely necessary, whereas “Important” means useful or relevant but not critical. If leaving out a consideration would seriously compromise your decision or violate an ethical principle, it’s Very Important. If including the consideration helps but isn’t vital, it’s merely Important. We’ll talk more about how to make that call soon.
Likewise, distinguishing between “Minor” vs “Not at all” is key. A factor that is Of Minor Importance might have some minimal connection or a harmless effect, even if it’s not significantly helpful – think of it as a low-priority item. In contrast, if a factor truly has no relevance or is based on a wrong-headed concern, it’s Not Important At All. In some cases, a factor could even be something you shouldn’t consider at all as a professional (for example, a personal bias or an unrelated detail). Those definitely belong in the “Not at all” bucket.
In the UCAT, roughly one third to half of SJT questions are in the Importance format. You might get about 20–30 Importance rating questions in total. They often appear in sets: one scenario followed by several factors to rate. Now, let’s discuss how you decide which rating to give – this is where ethical frameworks come in handy.
🔴 Live UCAT Course – Limited Places Available
The UCAT is competitive — your preparation shouldn’t be.
Join our live, expert-led UCAT course and get real-time guidance to boost your score, build confidence, and secure medical or dental interviews.
Why students choose Blue Peanut:
- Live teaching with opportunities to ask questions
- UCAT-focused strategies that actually work
- Clear, step-by-step guidance for every UCAT section
- Built by doctors & admissions experts
- Trusted by students applying to top UK medical & dental schools
👉 Places on our live UCAT course are limited.
Book now to secure your spot and stay ahead of the competition.
Ranking Factors: From Essential to Irrelevant
When faced with an Importance question, your job is essentially to rank or classify each factor into one of the four categories above. To do this effectively, you should analyse how each factor relates to the core problem and ethical duties in the scenario. Here are some guidelines to help you determine what’s essential and what’s irrelevant:
1. Identify the key issue(s) of the scenario.
Start by asking: “What is the main problem or dilemma here? What’s at stake?” A factor is “Very Important” if it directly addresses a key issue or a fundamental duty in the scenario. For example, if the scenario is about a patient’s safety being at risk, any factor related to ensuring patient safety is likely very important (possibly the most important). On the other hand, a factor that doesn’t touch on the main problem is unlikely to be very important. Always connect each consideration back to the scenario’s central concern.
2. Determine if the factor ties into professional and ethical obligations.
In the SJT, the most essential considerations often involve upholding core professional values – things like patient welfare, honesty, integrity, consent, confidentiality, and teamwork. If a factor represents one of these obligations, it’s probably at least “Important,” if not “Very Important.” For instance, honesty with a patient or confidentiality are typically crucial in relevant scenarios (because doctors are duty-bound to uphold them). In contrast, factors related to personal convenience, emotions, or external pressures tend to be less important or not important at all, especially when they conflict with professional duties. Ask yourself: “If I were a doctor/medic in this scenario, would this factor influence a good doctor’s decision? Or is it extraneous?”
3. Gauge the consequences of considering vs. ignoring the factor.
Another way to rank importance is to imagine what would happen if that factor is not considered. If ignoring the factor would lead to a serious negative outcome (e.g., harm to someone, a breach of ethics, or an escalation of the problem), then that factor is Very Important. If ignoring it has some negative effect but not a critical one, it may be Important or maybe Minor. If ignoring the factor makes no real difference (or might even avoid a distraction), then it’s of Minor importance or not important at all. Essentially, essential factors are those that would cause trouble if overlooked, whereas irrelevant factors are those you can safely ignore with no ill effect.
4. Use an ethical framework or checklist.
It often helps to run through a mental checklist of key ethical principles and see if the factor relates to any of them. For instance, consider the “four pillars” of medical ethics:
Beneficence (doing good – does this factor help improve someone’s well-being or solve a problem?)
Non-Maleficence (avoiding harm – does this factor prevent harm or reduce risk?)
Autonomy (respecting individuals’ rights and choices – does this factor involve consent, privacy, or respecting someone’s wishes?)
Justice (fairness – does this factor concern fairness, equality, or following rules/law?)
If a factor strongly involves one of these pillars, it’s likely quite important. For example, if the factor concerns accurately informing a patient, that relates to beneficence (helping the patient make decisions) and honesty, so it’s probably Important or Very Important. If a factor is about following a safety protocol, that’s directly about Non-Maleficence (preventing harm) – again, very high importance. Conversely, if a factor doesn’t touch any ethical principle or professional guideline, and especially if it’s a personal or trivial matter (e.g. “the doctor’s convenience” or “fear of embarrassment”), it’s usually not important in the professional context.
Let’s illustrate ranking with a quick example scenario:
Scenario: A junior doctor realises she has made a minor prescription error that hasn’t harmed the patient.
Considerations: (A) Ensuring the patient’s safety by addressing the error, (B) Being honest and informing her supervisor about the mistake, (C) Worrying about her reputation if others find out, (D) Whether the patient likes her as a doctor.
In this case:
• (A) Patient safety – clearly Very Important (essential to fix any error to prevent harm).
• (B) Honesty with supervisor – also Very Important (critical for integrity and to correct the issue properly). There might be debate over whether this is just “Important,” but according to ethical guidance, openness after an error (the duty of candour) is essential, so we’d rate it at the top.
• (C) Her personal reputation worry – this is Not Important At All in terms of doing the right thing. It should not influence the professional response (in fact, prioritising reputation over patient safety would be wrong).
• (D) Whether the patient likes her – this is Of Minor Importance at best. While a good doctor-patient relationship is generally positive, in this scenario, it’s not directly relevant to solving the prescription error. It shouldn’t drive the decision (so it’s not important), but acknowledging the patient’s trust might be a minor consideration in communication – hence “minor importance” rather than completely irrelevant.
As you can see, factors tied to ethical duties (safety, honesty) emerged as essential, while factors tied to personal feelings or unrelated matters emerged as irrelevant/minor. Always think: “Does this factor matter for doing the right thing in this situation?”
Pro Tip: A great strategy is to first sort each factor into two halves – important vs. not important. Quickly decide for each whether it’s generally something that should be considered (could be Very Important or Important) or not really considered (Minor or Not at all). This “binary” sorting helps because even if you’re not sure how high or low to go, you at least know which side of the spectrum it’s on. You’ll already be halfway correct (and remember, the UCAT awards partial marks for getting the correct side!). Then, you can fine-tune whether it’s the top or the middle of that half. If unsure between two adjacent options, don’t agonise too long – go with your gut and move on, as partial credit will still reward your general sense.
Now that we know how to judge importance, we need some tools to guide our judgment. That’s where the GMC ethical frameworks come in.
Using GMC Guidelines and Ethical Frameworks for Guidance
The General Medical Council (GMC) sets the official standards for medical professionals in the UK. Their guidance (such as the Good Medical Practice handbook and related advice for medical students) outlines the core values doctors must follow. The UCAT SJT is directly based on these GMC-aligned principles – essentially, the “correct” answers in Situational Judgement often reflect what a good doctor should do according to professional guidelines. Therefore, familiarising yourself with GMC ethics is one of the best ways to improve your SJT performance.
Here are some key GMC-aligned principles and values that frequently come up in SJT scenarios:
Patient Safety First:
Make the care of patients your first concern. Protect patients from harm – for example, if someone is at risk, acting to safeguard them is Very Important. Patient safety considerations usually trump everything else.
Honesty and Integrity:
Always be honest, transparent, and act with integrity. If a scenario involves truth-telling (to patients or colleagues) or owning up to mistakes, honesty is almost always critical. Concealing important information or lying is extremely inappropriate in medical ethics.
Compassion and Patient-Centred Care:
Treat patients (and colleagues) with respect, empathy and dignity. Consider the patient’s perspective and needs. Factors relating to being kind, respectful, or maintaining dignity tend to be Important because they uphold trust and good care.
Confidentiality:
Keep patient information private. If a factor involves sharing information inappropriately, that’s usually wrong (unimportant or inappropriate). Protecting confidentiality is a fundamental duty, unless doing so would be necessary to prevent serious harm.
Patient Autonomy:
Respect patients' choices and rights. This means involving patients in decisions about their care when possible, obtaining consent, and respecting their values. A consideration that ensures the patient’s informed involvement is typically Important. Overriding a competent patient’s wishes without good reason would be inappropriate.
Professionalism and Accountability:
Follow the rules and expectations of your role. This includes following hospital policies and legal requirements, and being accountable for your actions. For instance, if a scenario factor is “reporting an incident to a supervisor” (following procedure), that aligns with accountability and is likely Very Important if something serious occurred. Professional behaviour also means staying within your competence – recognising your limits and seeking help when needed (e.g. a medical student should consult a senior rather than doing something beyond their training).
Teamwork and Effective Collaboration:
Healthcare is a team effort. Many scenarios involve interactions with colleagues. Valuing teamwork means listening to others, sharing concerns appropriately, and supporting colleagues. An option that fosters good teamwork (like communicating concerns privately to a colleague or avoiding undermining them publicly) is often the more appropriate or important course. Conversely, anything that creates conflict or bypasses teamwork (e.g. acting unilaterally in a team scenario) might be less appropriate.
Ethical Principles (the Four Pillars):
As mentioned earlier, the classic principles of medical ethics underlie many decisions. Always consider if a factor upholds doing good (beneficence), avoiding harm (non-maleficence), respecting choice (autonomy), or being fair (justice). For example, ensuring a patient is fully informed respects autonomy and beneficence, making it important. Ensuring no one is being treated unfairly or discriminated against ties into justice.
By keeping these principles in mind, you can quickly evaluate the factors in a scenario. If a consideration clearly reflects one of these core duties, it likely deserves a high importance rating. If it conflicts with them, it might be something you should ignore or even avoid.
For instance, suppose a factor in a scenario is “Whether I’ll get in trouble for speaking up about a colleague’s mistake.” A GMC-aligned view would say your duty to patient safety and honesty outweighs personal repercussions, so the fear of personal trouble is Not Important compared to the importance of addressing the colleague’s mistake (which is Very Important). By using the ethical framework, you cut through the noise and focus on what a responsible professional would do.
It’s highly recommended that you actually read through the GMC’s Good Medical Practice guidance (or a summary of it) during your UCAT prep. The official UCAT advice even suggests this, because it attunes you to the mindset expected of medical professionals. You don’t need to memorise every line, but grasp the spirit: doctors must be competent, honest, and put patients first; they must work well with others, and maintain trust in the profession. If you internalise these values, the “best” answers in SJT scenarios will start to feel more intuitive.
Additionally, practice applying these principles to scenarios. As you do SJT practice questions, consciously think: “Which GMC principle is relevant here? What would Good Medical Practice advise?” Over time, you’ll notice patterns – certain themes like confidentiality, informed consent, raising concerns about misconduct, dealing with mistakes, respecting boundaries, equality and diversity – these come up often. The more you align your thinking with the ethical framework, the more naturally you’ll identify which factors are crucial vs. which are red herrings.
In summary, let the GMC guidelines be your compass. When in doubt, ask: “Does considering this factor help me act as a good doctor/dentist should?” If yes, it’s important; if no, it’s probably not important. Ethics isn’t just an abstract concept here – it’s practically the scoring key for the SJT.
Strategies and Tips for Tackling “Importance” Questions 🚀
Now that we’ve covered the theory, let’s get practical. Here are some effective strategies and tips to apply when you encounter Importance ranking questions in your UCAT:
1. Read the Scenario Actively and Note the Essentials.
Start by carefully reading the scenario. Identify who you are (your role), where the situation is occurring, and the main issue or dilemma. Jot (mentally or on the whiteboard) the key problem and any secondary issues. For example, is this scenario about patient safety, ethical consent, professional misconduct, team conflict, or something else? Once you pinpoint the core theme, you’ll have a reference point to judge importance. Any factor related to that core theme will likely be more important than factors that aren’t. Also, noting your role is crucial: if you’re a medical student in the scenario, for instance, factors involving actions beyond a student’s authority might automatically be inappropriate or of low importance (because you shouldn’t do them). Always put yourself in the character's shoes in the scenario and consider: what are their responsibilities and limitations? This will help filter out what they should or shouldn’t consider important. (For instance, a student’s priority might be to inform a supervisor, whereas a senior doctor’s priority might be to directly address an issue.)
2. Link each factor back to the key issue.
When you look at the list of factors to rate, take them one by one. For each factor, immediately ask: “Does this address the main problem I identified? Does it significantly affect the outcome or the people involved?” If yes, it goes into the Important category (and possibly Very Important if it’s central). If it’s only tangentially related, maybe it’s Minor. If it’s not related at all, it’s Not Important. This systematic approach ensures you’re always grounding your judgements in the scenario’s context, rather than getting swayed by irrelevant details.
3. Use the “must/should/could/never” test.
Another way to think of the four options is:
Must consider (essential) = Very Important
Should consider (helpful) = Important
Could consider (optional) = Minor importance
Never mind (irrelevant) = Not important at all
For each factor, frame it in those terms: “Is this something I MUST take into account? Should I take it into account? Could I, perhaps, but it wouldn’t matter? Or should I not take it into account at all?” This can clarify your choice.
4. Watch out for distractors and emotional traps.
The exam may include factors that sound compelling but are actually unimportant when you apply an ethical lens. A classic example: “It might upset your colleague if you tell them they made a mistake.” While empathy for colleagues is nice, avoiding someone’s upset feelings is not as important as, say, ensuring patient safety or honesty. Don’t let personal emotions, hypothetical excuses, or “what ifs” cloud your judgment of importance. Stick to professional priorities. Put aside personal beliefs or anxieties – answer as the ideal medical professional would. If a factor appeals to sympathy or fear in a way that conflicts with doing the right thing, it’s likely of low importance.
5. Manage your time and don’t overthink.
In the heat of the exam, it’s easy to second-guess yourself on whether something is “very” or just “important.” Remember that the test awards partial credit for being close. It’s better to quickly choose between, say, A or B (Very Important vs Important) and move on, than to spend two minutes agonising only to perhaps change a right answer to a wrong one. Trust your first instinct if you’ve prepared well – often, your gut guided by ethics will know if something is crucial or not. If you find yourself stuck, use the elimination method: you almost certainly know when something is clearly not important or clearly very important. Eliminate those extremes for each factor to see what’s left. And if truly unsure, lean towards the safer side (for example, if debating between Important vs Minor, ask “could ignoring this cause any harm or breach of duty?” If yes, err on the higher side).
6. Take advantage of partial marks:
As mentioned, if you identify the correct half (important vs not important) but miss the exact degree, you still get a half-mark. So focus first on getting the factor into the correct half of the scale. Is it generally a positive, relevant consideration (then it’s either Very Important or Important), or is it generally not helpful/irrelevant (then it’s Minor or Not at all)? Once you decide that, you’ve secured some points. Then refine: is it essential (top) or just good (second), vs is it negligible (third) or totally off-base (fourth)? This strategy boosts your efficiency and scores.
7. Practice, Practice, Practice:
Finally, nothing beats practising with real UCAT-style questions. Use official question banks and high-quality practice exams to apply these strategies. As you practice Importance questions, review explanations for why a factor was rated a certain way. This will reinforce your understanding of the ethical reasoning. Over time, you’ll develop an intuition for “importance” that aligns with the test makers. Also, through practice, you’ll see recurring themes – for example, scenarios about dealing with an impaired colleague, breaking bad news, informed consent issues, team disagreements, etc. Each theme has its typical dos and don’ts, which inform importance. The more scenarios you see, the more patterns you’ll recognise (like “whenever patient safety is involved, that factor is always very important”).
Bonus Tip: Keep patient welfare and professionalism at the forefront of your mind as your guiding light. If you always ask, “What action or consideration best protects or helps the patient (or the people involved) while staying true to professional standards?”, you will usually identify the most important factors correctly.
Final Thoughts
Facing UCAT Situational Judgement Importance questions might feel daunting at first, but with a clear strategy and an ethical compass, you can navigate them successfully. Remember that these questions are not about guessing the “nice” answer – they are about demonstrating that you, as a future medical/dental professional, know how to prioritise what truly matters in difficult situations. By aligning your judgement with GMC ethical guidelines, you ensure that your answers reflect the mindset of a safe, responsible practitioner.
As you prepare, focus on understanding principles and practising systematically. Over time, you’ll gain confidence in quickly and accurately rating factors from essential to irrelevant. On test day, stay calm and trust the reasoning skills you’ve developed. Every scenario in the SJT is an opportunity to show that you can think like a clinician – balancing empathy with ethics and patient-first thinking.
Good luck, and remember: if you keep the patient’s best interests and professional values at heart, you won’t go far wrong. You’ve got this! 💪✨
References and Further Reading
UCAT Consortium – Test Format and Scoring (Situational Judgement): Official description of the SJT, scoring method (Bands 1–4), and skills assessed. ucat.ac.uk
UCAT Consortium – Candidate Advice (Situational Judgement Tips): Top tips from high-scoring candidates, including the advice to read the GMC’s Good Medical Practice guidelines and identify common themes. ucat.ac.uk
General Medical Council – Good Medical Practice (2019): Core guidance outlining the professional values and standards (patient safety, honesty, integrity, teamwork, etc.) expected of doctors. gmc-uk.org
Brighton & Sussex Medical School – Preparing for UCAT (2022): Tips from a UK medical school’s admissions team on tackling each UCAT section. The SJT advice highlights no prior knowledge required, taking the scenario character’s perspective, and key values such as confidentiality, respect, and teamwork. bsms.ac.uk
