lewin

As postscript to my comment -- I would also have to repay some of my fellowship if I graduated early in the term or took a leave for some other reason. i.e., they're not penalizing dropouts per se, but no longer being a student.

That's not necessarily true. For example, I have a government fellowship that would definitely require repayment if I dropped out mid-term. This really varies by institution and award, you should check with a local admininstrator.

Just FYI, using these services might contradict some of your university's IT policies on storage of grades and research data. I think the benefits outweigh the risks because computer crashes, lost USB's, etc. are more likely than a security breach, but it's something to consider. I use SpiderOak. The client is a bit unwieldy but it will backup any folder and does client-side encryption (unlike dropbox, google drive and many other services). $75/year for 100 GB or I think 5 GB free.

The person whose opinion is important is your new PhD advisor, not the undergrad advisor. Ask that person. Depending on the week, you might not miss much.

I thought this was weird too when somebody mentioned U of Alberta doing it, so I did some digging. It's a CPA policy but not binding on universities if they choose not to follow it: Personally I think it's short-sighted to give students an earlier deadline, like choosing defect in a prisoner's dilemma.

Dropping contact like that is unprofessional and irritating but, unfortunately, not rare in academia (or in any corporate job hunt, for that matter). In addition to the great advice above, I'll just point out that even if POI A read your materials and decided he doesn't want to work with you, it doesn't mean he "doesn't like" you. Poor research fit (or whatever caused him to disappear) shouldn't cause personal dislike and won't make it awkward if POI B accepts you. On the other hand, did you make a racist joke? Call his daughter a "handsome lad"? Then he might actually dislike you. But in the absence of other factors you haven't mentioned I think you're reading too much into this. ....also, this probably won't be comforting to hear, but if you really did do something specific to make POI A personally dislike you then POI B definitely knows about it too, or will soon. Admissions aren't done in isolation and I'm sure they'll talk to each other. Also, academics are the worst gossips.

I daresay it's impossible to manage a property if you don't have somebody local (e.g., a property management company). What if the house needs repairs? Or has an emergency? You'll need somebody nearby. Otherwise, get very familiar with the rental laws in your area. Renting is a business and you need to be serious about it.

http://www.walkscore.com is a good general site too, if you're into walking. [insert regular caveat about apartment-rental scams]

Unfortunately you forfeit the award. But sometimes you can re-approach PI's and write something like, "I found out I received a SSHRC award, is there any chance this would make you reconsider my application...?" People are of mixed opinion about whether this approach can be successful.

hah hah! I appreciate your confidence but I don't know of any hard data on this question in particular. But there is more general evidence that people are motivated to be selectively skeptical about science or medical tests that present findings they dislike (Peter Ditto's work comes to mind... or Drew Westen if you like fMRI).

I would avoid that program in particular too. I got accepted there (after being rejected for the PhD) and it has expensive tuition, no funding, and (almost certainly) limited opportunities to collaborate with faculty. Take the funded PhD.

that departmental prestige is the best predictor of post-PhD employment. So you might have a more enjoyable PhD but, statistically speaking, worse career prospects

The social psychology rankings fit with my impressions. But one flaw is that it's U.S.-centric. There are Canadian programs like University of Waterloo, University of Toronto, and University of British Columbia that are great schools but completely omitted. One or more could arguably be in the top 10... the recent research impact paper by Nosek in PSPB puts all three of those in the top 25. (Toronto: 8, Waterloo: 16, UBC: 22)

Quoted for emphasis. My spouse and I lived apart for a year while we were engaged because she was just starting her career and didn't want to switch jobs so soon. Thankfully, she's in a relatively portable, in-demand job and is willing to uproot herself 2-3 times (PhD, Post doc, job). And it's not just the career, it's that she has to make new friends everywhere too... that's almost harder. Very hard on the academic spouse, but mine's a champ.

Second year is a terrible time to take a break; you're taking courses and just getting your research started. Actually, there's no good time to take a break. People usually take justified leave-of-absences for (1) pregnancy, (2) severe medical illness, and (3) family emergencies (i.e., taking care of relative with (1) or (2). Frankly, "I miss my fiancee," will not be seen as a good reason. I've had several friends who had to spend time long-distance during their PhD. It stinks but it's not unusual. And the financial aspects are a consequence of the relationship issue, not an independent problem; graduate student stipends aren't intended to cover multiple, cross-country trips. If his job out there is permanent and you move, will you really want to leave again after being together and married for a year? I doubt it. So here's my take: 1. If you value his job and your relationship more than your PhD then just drop out and move. 2. If this job is temporary and eventually he'll work closer to your program, then stay enrolled and continue long-distance until he can move there. And if I can meddle in your relationship finances Since your'e going to be married, perhaps you should find a more equitable way of splitting the travel expenses. He has the good job and you're poor, so he should pay for more of your travel or come to visit you more.

When I started, the internal funding package at my university was $22,000/year minus $6000 tuition. Now it's more like $24k minus $7k tuition. In practice it's usually a little more -- an extra TA assignment here or there. We also offer conference funding, of about $1200/year. Students who have an external award get the award and a $10,000 top up in the form of a scholarship and reduced TA load, taking home anywhere from $25k (common) to $40k (unusual).

Another phrase you can use if asked is, "For my first two years I also had a chronic health condition that is now resolved." No need to elaborate; depression is a health condition. Hopefully nobody has the gall to pry.

If the research is good then it (in theory) shouldn't matter that you're an undergraduate. Send it to the best journal you can! If you're really concerned most places let you request double-blind review. The reason there aren't a lot of undergraduates with publications is because (1) the review/revision process takes a long time and (2) frankly, a lot undergraduate research is unpublishable, done more for the learning experience than the findings. (My undergrad thesis was published with me as first author, but I was a grad student when we submitted it.)

Oh, good is definitely subjective. I interpreted the OP's job as paying well but not very fulfilling, which is why I mentioned the third option of switching jobs. But unambiguously the job prospects for academics are terrible; it's easier to make partner at a law firm than become a tenured professor. And with current trends in higher-education funding and online education, that situation is unlikely to change. If anything, it'll get harder to find a TT job in the next decade. I'm not trying to be a dream crusher, I just want to make sure that the OP has a realistic perspective of what a social psychology PhD will bring, and one counterweight post to the flood of "Go to grad school, it's great!". If the OP can live with that then go for it, Admittedly, I'm also colored by my own situation, which is feeling poor and sick of job-related uncertainty

Do you want an academic job or just some graduate education and then something related to research? The latter might be fine but, frankly, I'd discourage the former. If I had a good job at age 37 I would never give it up and risk an academic career because A PhD is a hard slog with dim job prospects. If you spend next year reconnecting with profs to get letters and experience, it's still 5-7 years of graduate school and 1-3 years of post doc. Adding that up, you could be almost 50 before having a job again. I already feel like this process is taking forever and I'm "only" 30(ish). There's a third option, which is find a different job that you like more.

*faux pas I'd be surprised if "wait list" meant something formal. More likely it means that if another person your POI is trying to recruit declines, they might invite you instead. What I mean is, it probably depends on who declines and who they wanted to work with, not a specific number of people. So I doubt you'll get a useful answer from them.

Two candidates who visited my university recently said they had already interviewed at Indiana for social psych. Sorry... (I think they said Indiana anyway... let's say there's a ten percent chance I misheard.)

tldr: Yes http://pps.sagepub.com/content/8/2/208.abstract?etoc The outcome of a graduate student’s hunt for employment is often attributed to the student’s own accomplishments, the reputation of the department, and the reputation of the university. In 2007, a national survey of psychology graduate students was conducted to assess accomplishments and experiences in graduate school, part of which was an assessment of employment after completion of the doctorate (PhD). Five hundred and fifty-one respondents who had applied for employment reported whether they had obtained employment and in what capacity. Survey results were then integrated with the National Research Council’s most recent official ranking system of academic departments. The strongest predictor of employment was department-level rankings even while controlling for individual accomplishments, such as publications, posters, and teaching experience. Equally accomplished applicants for an employment position were not equal, apparently, if they graduated from differently ranked departments. The results also show the degree to which school-level rankings, department-level rankings, and individual accomplishments uniquely predict the various types of employment, including jobs at PhD-granting institutions, master’s-granting institutions, liberal arts colleges, 2-year schools, outside academia, or no employment at all. Another fun finding is that each publication increases one's chance of getting a job by about 15%.

I think this is unrealistically optimistic. For example, my department wouldn't. Direct quote from the area director: "If you fit as a student then we're willing to fund you, and if not then getting money won't help." Even with the one year of funding that master's SSHRC provides, there are still the 4-5 years afterwards that it will take to finish a PhD, and the department will be on the hook for most of that. (P.S., you know we can see that you're upvoting all your own posts, right?)

Travel funding. You want to attend a conference each year. TA releases are great too. And frankly, if it's a good school they should already provide software, equipment, and research assistants.