lewin

Here's a recent article that ranks programs and scientists by research influence: http://www.harzing.com/download/nosekpspb.pdf ...I'm biased towards liking it because it puts my program in the top 20 ETA: The traditionally 'best' programs for social psych are Michigan, Stanford, and WUSTL. The ivies are great too.

My impression is that it's a Canada/US difference. At UBC I had a phone interview before an offer, and University of Toronto also does interviews before offers. Or at least, they did in my application year.

Look up Elizabeth ("Liz") Dunn at the University of British Columbia and the people she publishes with. A lot of her work looks at how spending patterns affect happiness and she's really well-regarded (e.g., publishes in Science). One of her well-known studies is on how spending money on other people makes us happier than spending money on ourselves. Like above, judgment and decision making ("JDM") and behavioural economics are probably your best bet. These people could be in marketing departments or psychology (cognitive, IO or social).

They're basically trying to cheat the system because an April 15 deadline has been the tradition for decades. It's actually CPA policy too, but not binding or anything. I would check with a professor you trust first, but also agree that asking for an extension makes the most sense, explaining that you haven't even heard from all of your universities yet. But I'd also wait a few weeks, like maybe until March 8. Might give you a chance to hear back from other places, and give you more leverage if you have more than one acceptance

I agree completely with everything that everybody said above about likely repercussions. ....but still, it was viscerally satisfying to read that reply. It's the type of thing I would compose and delete.

Honestly, it probably means your'e not going to get in but they don't want to send out the official rejections to the people in the middle until they have all their preferred acceptances confirmed.

IAPS is the most popular one, sorry I don't know of others. When I requested access it was within a few days, but you need a prof to fax the forms.

Annoy "them": the editors or the reviewers? The editors might not even be picking the people you suggest so I wouldn't worry too much about it. Also, the reviewers won't know that you suggested them, right?

This might be a good starting point to get creative juices flowing, but usually we joke that "future directions" are the studies that are about to be sent out for review.

Unless this place is unusual, 'interview' is probably too strong a word. I meet a couple potential grad students every year and it's just getting-to-know-you and answering your questions. The only time I was concerned the conversation went like this: Me: "So what kind of research are you interested in?" Potential student: "I have no idea." Me: "I mean, I'm not looking for study ideas here. Like, who do you want to work with? What do you find interesting?" Potential student: "I'm really still figuring it out." Yeah, that person dropped out by Christmas.

...and it often matters because prestige and "experiences/support/productive colleagues" are not unrelated to one another. Places are usually prestigious for a reason--because they have money, labs, productivity, etc. and so they attract good people.

Oops, my mistake! Yes, definitely apply to OGS for next year.

Based on my experience, "wait for a letter" is bad news. Every place where I interviewed, I received a phone call. Sorry to be the bearer of (possibly) bad news!

Anybody else apply? Rumour is that letters will go out this week or next. The funding rate last year was 15 or 20 percent, so my hopes aren't sky-high.

I'd really like a source on this. I've heard the MA rate is more like 2/3rds. The PhD rate is < 50% and post doc is < 20%.

Not to be a debbie downer but I've heard the success rate (once passed on) is more like 2/3rds. I can't find anything definitive on SSHRC's website. Does SSHRC guarantee getting into "any program"? I don't think so. On the one hand, I do know somebody who didn't get into grad school but got NSERC, so she called up a few places and got admitted. On the other hand, profs at my school told me that getting SSHRC wouldn't cause them to admit someone to our program if they didn't want that person already. So there's two anecdotes, one on each side.

I had two admissions without interviews, but they were both in Canada.

You don't need to formally answer but you should acknowledge the offer. Something like this: Dear Prof: That's great news! I'm very excited to hear about your offer because I [really enjoyed my campus visit, love the research you're doing, etc.]. I am still waiting to hear from several places to which I applied, but I will get back to you formally as soon as I can. (You could also ask whether there's a formal offer coming in the mail, you should always wait until you get something on paper.)

Darwin and psychdork make good points. Me saying "don't go" was "don't go just for fun and networking."

If you don't intend to go, p < .01, then don't visit. More than the money, it's a waste of everyone's time to host you and you're potentially taking a spot away from another student. Sometimes they can tell too ("You got accepted at Harvard but you're still considering here? Hmmm...") and that reflects badly on you. I've organized lots of student visits and I'd be really irritated to go to all that work for someone who wasn't seriously thinking about coming.

Social psychology, though I'd rather not say where. I just meant it as encouragement that I think most places will take good candidates regardless of where they're from

In our program nationality doesn't make a difference; we accept Americans (and other international students) and they're funded so it ends up as the same level as domestic students. The more unfortunate issue (for you) is that you can't apply for the significant external scholarships like SSHRC, NSERC, CIHR, and OGS. At my school that means you're 'stuck' with the internal funding ($22-25k/year - $7k tuition) instead of having access to the big bucks.

Yes, frame your past research experiences as the reason why you want to join their program. "My experience X and Y led me to develop an interest in Z, which I'd like to research.." Keep it future-oriented.

Hey all, thanks for the responses I didn't see anything to suggest dire circumstances in the OP ("thinking of picking up...") so I didn't make that inference. I wrote stridently because I didn't want anybody under the illusion that it won't hamper their long-term progress because it will, and it should be avoided if at all possible. But obviously if you need to work to eat (and student loans aren't an option) then get that job. Working is the same as any alternative activity. I'm married and my partner works full time. That helps a lot with the finances, but does result in lots of time where we're being a couple and I'm not working. Is it worth it? Definitely. But it "hurts" my career in some sense. Once I got the advice: "Don't have hobbies. And if you are going to have a partner, make sure it's somebody who values work as much as you do, so you can keep each other working and not slacking off." I didn't follow that advice. "Food" is a pretty good reason to take a job but "I don't want a roommate" or "I'd like a car so I don't have to take the bus" might not be.

Apologies for being blunt, but I think that if you have time for a second job then you should be doing more research... if you want an academic job. It's not just about "degree progress", it's about getting enough material on your CV so that you can get a job afterwards. One PhD + 0 publications = no job prospects. I can carve out a limited exception for the people whose jobs are research-relevant or involved so little work that they could spend their time on homework, etc..