Clinapp2017

Agreed. There are no "rankings" per se for programs. Match with your goals and desires for training is what matters. You will want to pay attention to what @PsyDuck90 mentioned but also look at success of recent students in publishing, where they go for practica, where they land internship and post-doc, and where they land jobs. All of that will be far more informative.

I resonate with this statement immensely as someone with a partner who doesn't make a ton of money in her job, but still makes enough for us to get by. Also getting married meant I had the benefit of joining her insurance plan which was significantly better than my university's plan. Playing devil's advocate, I am not really sure how things are going to change unless we somehow burn down the whole system and start over. PhD students, while a source of invaluable labor to the university, are also fundamentally students IMHO because they are at the university to obtain a product: a PhD. This means the university has to hire faculty, hire admin to support the faculty, etc. to make sure PhD students (and undergrads, too) get an education. Don't even get me started on masters degree students... that is the university's cash cow, for sure. I still think we PhD students are woefully underpaid for the amount of work we put in, and I will be honest in saying that I have a couple of side-hustles only because the grad government at my university made the university wave that requirement a long time ago through a negotiation that ended a strike. These are small side-gigs (e.g., portrait photography) that are also my hobby, so it's a nice way to supplement my terrible income in my high CoL area. The sad thing is if I went full-time and really invested in launching a portrait business (or wedding photography) I could possibly earn nearly double a post-doc salary in just a year or two with the right photography connections and marketing... *sigh* I really hate academia. Even with a pretty successful research run during my PhD, I fully plan to obtain a clinical job at a VA or academic med center where I can make a decent salary after post-doc and not have to worry about this BS anymore, lol

From my (limited) experience as now the most senior PhD student in my lab reviewing applications, I can say that it is very important. Naturally the top 5-10% of applicants are all very similar: good GPA, good GRE (if applicable/needed), good LORs. What really can separate people invited vs. those not invited is how clearly the articulate fit with the prospective PI(s). For example, a good SOP will clearly articulate what your research experiences have been like and why that aligns with the PI's current projects, but especially in a way that adds something new to the PI's line of research. You may also draw heavily form clinical experiences or unique skills (I did) to state why working with a certain mentor could help you build on these skills and develop new ones. Ultimately, being concise, avoiding jargon, and REALLY avoiding cliches are the best practices. If my PI had a $ for everyone person who wrote "I want to become a clinical psychologist because I want to help people" they would be VERY rich and not need to work so hard in academia. ? We *all* want to help people, otherwise, why would you be going into this field? Having a lot of people read over the SOP is also good, including people not in your field (that way you can know if you are very clear to a general reader).

If you don't want to do research at all, a PsyD might be better fit (but way more expensive). PhD programs are highly competitive, and even more so for neuropsych or other speciality concentrations of clinical psych. My two cents: I would apply to RA jobs and work for 2 years and then apply. If you will have 0 posters and 0 publications on your resume right now, you may be competitive in other areas (GPA, volunteering) but you are not very competitive on the research front. Many people work 2+ years in paid full-time research roles, which gives you some invaluable experience and also gives you more time to present posters, maybe even co-author or first-author some pubs. Just my two cents. I did come straight into my program after undergrad but was fortunate to have a very active mentor in my undergrad so I had already presented several posters and had what would become my first first-author pub in revision by the time I applied to grad school.

I think it was PsyD -> PhD but I am not sure. This person was at a program most would classify as a "diploma mill" for PsyDs and realized it only after a year in the program b/c these particular programs are often very deceptive in their admissions processes. I would at least voice your concerns to your DCT now, even if not saying you are going to leave yet. It is good to work within programs in the event you have to start entirely over at a new program. Also, I would be sure not to discount that the entirety of your training has happened during the pandemic, which creates stress all around.

First of all, sorry to hear about all of this! Dealing with the challenges of a PhD is hard enough, much more during a pandemic! Is there an option to work with a different mentor or get a co-mentor in your current program? I would fully explore that option first. Also, have you talked to your DCT about all of this? Leaving is possible (I know someone who did it and got in somewhere else) but there are a lot of factors to consider. This person had to entirely re-start her PhD despite being 2 years in the program she left. She also had no guarantees of getting in anywhere else and she certainly burned a big bridge... there was a very valid reason, but not ideal.

That's good! Glad to hear it is supportive and not just applicants. I am in PsyDuck's boat that I also can't add another thing to check, but will keep lurking on here to help as I can.

Is the discord anonymous? I have a discord account from gaming with my friends/my lab uses it so I would like to join if you want someone to give advice but I want to remain anonymous. I thought that was kind of the whole point of grad cafe/SDN... that people could be relatively anonymous. In my case as someone who comments on here/SDN quite a bit to try to help applicants, I want to remain anonymous b/c many people might be applying to my PI's lab (we get 150+ apps any given cycle). Do you have experienced people on there who made it to the other side of the process, or is it just an echo-chamber of applicants? Frankly, when I was applying I did not find talking to other applicants to be personally helpful and it was more anxiety-producing.

Yep... just don't even go there with this program. Getting your doctoral training will just put you in a world of hurt/constantly playing catch up if you don't get it from an accredited university. As stated by @PsyDuck90, the supervised hours are the hours you get on full intern year, plus 1 or more post-doc years. Most APPIC internships won't even consider non-accredited program students, and several job positions (e.g., VA and many AMCs) expressly prohibit hiring students training in unaccredited programs.

EDIT: Removed b/c I realized the above poster grave-dug this thread from 2012 LOL (not 2021 like I thought)

I enjoy giving SOP advice. If you feel comfortable DMing me, I am happy to give it a read and provide some feedback in the coming weeks. I can't speak r.e. applying to multiple cycles and updating it because I was very fortunate to get in on my first try, but I think the SOP is a critical factor. Several PIs I know say it is a big driver in deciding who to invite to interview when you have several applicants who look roughly the same on paper. Balancing how to let your voice come through, whilst still being professional, is key. For me, I used it as an opportunity to clearly outline 1) why I was interested in X area of psych, 2) what experiences I have had that have prepared me to study X in grad school, and 3) how I think studying X will set me up for a career in clinical work/academia.

For PHD programs you will want to get some research experience with results in tangible products (e.g., first-author presentations at national/international conferences; even better would be authorship or even first-authorship on a publication in a good peer-reviewed journal). Ideally this research should be related to the research you want to pursue in your PhD. Some master's programs (maybe 2 year ones?) will provide you with some opportunities to get that research experience but at a potentially large cost. Getting a job as a research assistant or clinical research coordinator in a lab that studies something you are interested and working in it in 2+ years may be the most logical way to get that research experience with the products you need for PhD programs. Even getting a master's degree without the research products won't make you very competitive in itself. There are some 1 year master's programs in psychology that may position you better for these RA jobs, as I feel like usually these research jobs take applicants who got very hands-on experiences in research during college (i.e., not just doing papers for classes, but actually working in labs and gaining very specific skills that are used in research). Also, I am not sure exactly why you have the focus is on Ivy leagues, specifically. There are some excellent masters and clinical PhD psych programs (arguably better than the Ivies) out there that you may want to consider. Ultimately, having a good fit with your PhD mentor (assuming you go that route) will be infinitely more important to your happiness and productivity than the name of the institution. I hope this helps. Feel free to DM me or reply with any questions!

*research assistant (not essential)

Agreed with @PsyDuck90. I think 2+ years is fine, and increasingly more common. As someone who actually came straight from undergrad to my PhD program, if I could do it over I would have taken at least 2 years to work as an RA or CRC. It is all fine for me now, but I think gaining more exposure to the ins and outs of research that you rarely can receive as an undergraduate research essential would have made my transition smoother to developing my own independent research interests. This is really critical in setting you apart from the pack since a lot of people can easily be "clones" of their research mentor, which creates a whole host of problems when applying for your own grants or jobs in the future.

You probably should go ahead and accept tomorrow (4/15) if you don't hear back by mid-day from the first school. There is no guarantee your offer of admission (and financial aid/stipend) will remain valid after close of business on 4/15.

My stipend in a clinical program in a high COL area on the east coast is 34,000, pre-tax. It is among the highest PhD stipends I have heard of, and is largely driven by the COL. It's crappy, though, because it still not a lot. But at least I don't have tuition I think across the country, the median stipend for *funded* clinical programs is somewhere between 20-30k, pre-tax. At least anecdotally, people I know in other programs and other programs I interviewed at were in that range, with low COL = lower stipend, high COL = higher stipend.

What is mindpab? I am not sure what that is referring to r.e. the manuscript. I think getting that manuscript published would be great (assuming it's a good journal). Fingers crossed! Other then that, I think keep looking for different research opportunities and advocated for yourself in the labs to get on more neuropsych projects. Neuropsych, even more than general psych, is really competitive. Letters of rec from professors in neuropsychology are ideal, and be sure to be clear in your personal statement why you are a match at each lab and program. Circuitous (long) paths to clinical psych are not atypical, but I would try to make sure everything you've done up to this point has a clear thread and that you convey a clear trajectory for your research/career goals.

For research intensive PhD programs in clinical psych, I would advise at minimum getting a first-author poster accepted at a national/international conference in your area of the field before your apply. A pub (submitted) would be even better. As mentioned, there are many archival datasets out there, and your faculty members may have opportunities to use data within their lab that isn't being analyzed. It's worth pursuing, even if not your thesis, as mentors in research programs increasingly want to see evidence of emerging independent thought/productivity in research.

I would not give up hope at all but echo what others are saying. Re-taking and acing the GRE, even if programs make it optional, might help offset low undergrad GPA and borderline masters GPA. Fit is everything for clinical (and a lot of counseling) PhD programs, since you'll be working under the guidance of a mentor for 5+ years on your research projects. If its not clear how your MSW and previous research aligns with the work of your POI's, that's going to be a detriment to your application. One thing I would advise more consideration on, though (assuming you haven't put a ton of thought into this, which maybe you have) is do you really need a clinical or counseling psych PhD to achieve your specific goals? For people who have completed license-eligible programs, like MSW, I always ask that question b/c you are committing another 6+ years of your life, and more with post-doc, to training in a related speciality, with little-to-no pay. There are also academic/research positions for people holding MSW degrees, if your goal is to be faculty. If not faculty and you just want to work in the research world to an extent, you can be hired be a larger study to be a clinician in their research lab's trials, assuming they want licensed folks. Long story short, there are multiple paths, and a PhD will be a significant time investment after already being license eligible.

I know someone has to be the first cohort at these programs, but gambling with your professional trajectory is a big wager. In the event they did not become accredited, for some reason, you would be in a world of hurt trying to land internship, post-doc, licensing, etc... at least in clinical, and to the best of my knowledge school psych operates in a very similar fashion as a profession. No hurt in applying and interviewing if you are offered an interview, but you would want to get some exact timetable on when they would be APA accredited and I would advise talking to your mentors/current bosses in the field that are not at this school what their opinions are about attending a program that is not yet accredited.

I would leave it be. You will hear back when they have made their decision. Your thank you email is enough; now it's just the hard, but important waiting game!

Maybe I am missing the nuance of your points, but I largely think any good program which trains in CBT, ACT, and DBT would fit your needs. The concept you describe is flexibly applied in most modern evidence-based approaches (minus the philosophy of what is/is not socially appropriate). Most therapists who use these evidence based techniques will work on building up a toolbox of different ways to respond to emotions/situations AND teach clients that emotions serve a purpose, so often we should listen to them but may need to employ other skills to reduce the extreme aversive reaction to the emotions. Where you want to go in the end should center on your end goal (academia? clinical work?). It's a very important topic, especially as we think cross-culturally about the views of emotions and emotional dysregulation.

For clinical, you will normally hear from the POI/program coordinator directly. I never checked any portals.

It can be either. When I applied about 50% came from the grad coordinator or DCT, and 50% came from the POI.

Agreed. I understand why nepotism exists (the path of least resistance) but our field MUST change, and radically, or we are going to under-serve our patients and communities, broadly.