lewin

Four potential problems come to mind: 1. If you want to take a SSHRC doctoral to the U.S. you're supposed to indicate that on your application. I don't know whether it can be amended after the fact. 2. The $35k/yr awards aren't tenable in the U.S. so the most you're eligible for is the $20k/yr. 3. SSHRC has rules about ouside work. I think it's a maximum of 10 hours/week. If your U.S. funding is contingent on RA/TA work, make sure it's not in violation of SSHRC's guidelines. 4. Many universities claw back their funding offers if the applicant recieves an external award. So if you get $20k from SSHRC the university might only give you $10k instead of 22. Check with your university. Big caveat: I'm going based on my memory from a few years ago and SSHRC's rules change almost annually. Check the "award holders guide" on their website and, if that doesn't answer your question, send them an email.

Stipend could mean different things at different schools, and it's not necessarily taxable. In Canada, for example, it's taxable if they classify it as salary but not taxable if they classify it as a scholarship.

I want to chime in and say don't contact BU for a "debrief" of why you were rejected. That's sad, especially if it was a safety school. What's the point?

It is hard to answer the pub/prestige question because those two factors are highly correlated. Schools are often prestigious for a reason, and by going you'll surround yourself with bright, productive colleagues and great resources. It's easier to get those pubs at a prestigious university. Of course, you could define "prestige" in terms of your subfield. Ohio State, for example, is not generally as prestigious as, say, Harvard, but it has traditionally been one of the best social psychology programs. Anybody on a hiring committee will know that.

It's a decision you have to make for yourself, but personally I wouldn't attend an unfunded program. I accumulated enough debt in undergrad and didn't want to add to it, so I deliberately refrained from applying to any program that wasn't funded 100%. I rather like that my undergrad debt will be paid off by the time I get my PhD.... it feels much better than having 10 years of debt ahead of me post-PhD.

Pretty common, especially if all grad students need to be approved by a departmental committee. Committee meets once to approve the admissions and that's it.

You got extra money so you needed fewer loans? That doesn't sound like a problem, it sounds like a windfall! (Though I see the irritation at poor planning.)

Your initial conversation seems odd but I wasn't there. It's hard to say what you were doing that might have appeared flippant or joking. It seems to me that she's harder on you in class because you're a grad student and the others are undergrads. Maybe the others need more encouragement to contribute. High expectations are good, and your paper mark suggests that you're meeting them. And her telling you that you should read the articles in depth is pretty mild criticism. The big indicator that she likes you (or at least respects you) is that research position. Advisors don't hire researchers they don't like, so to me that overshadows anything else that might be odd about your interactions. My snap judgement is that maybe you're being a bit thin-skinned. Learning how to take criticism is a big part of graduate school because it happens constantly. Your advisor isn't your friend and doesn't have to be nice, especially because she's rewarding you where it counts (grades, opportunities).

It's also kind of delicious that students thought the expert's version of the course was too hard and got the alternative: A prof who doesn't know as much. (Though It's not unusual for more senior grad students to know more than a prof in some niche area.)

I can't hurt to email the department and tell them that you're still waiting for other offers and ask whether you can have until April 15 to reply. The worst they can say is no, which is really risky on their part.

That's really bizarre, I thought all psych people had until April 15.... looking back, I have an old letter from Waterloo that also says 3 weeks but it was dated near the end of March.

This might be an obvious thing to point out, but if you don't have questions just reply and tell them that all your questions were answered on interview weekend and you'll email again if something new comes up. You're right that it's rude to not respond at all, but I don't think you need to make up questions just so you have something.

I don't think it's especially unusual to hear you're not the top choice. For example, the PI who says, "I can only admit one student and I've decided it is another candidate. But if he/she declines I'll make you an offer." It happens all the time on the job market. It's not like getting married to your second choice of beau, it's a professional situation. I think expecting to be the top choice is a little naive or unrealistic. ETA: I understand why it feels awkward and makes people uncomfortable, certainly. I just mean that it's not unusual and you shouldn't take it personally, and most certainly shouldn't decline a spot just because you weren't their first pick.

It's quick, but some schools interview just to make sure you're not crazy. So probably they were fine with you before the interview. At some places a committee meets to make offers, but maybe at your university it was up to your advisor so the decision was quicker. Regardless I can't see it being a red flag or anything.

Sometimes you can find discipline-specific rankings within that area's journals. A recent article in Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, for example, ranked social psych departments by research impact. (Top 20, woot!) ETA: Nosek et al. 2010

I think February is considered normal for post docs, but in some years they have bene late an only arrived in March, pushing back the doctoral awards.

SSHRC postdoc results have started to come out. That probably means doctoral awards are next but I bet it's still ast least six weeks.

Social psych occasionally adversises lab manager/research assistant positions on the SPSP email listserv. You might need be a member to subscribe. They're typically big name people and often volunteer (e.g., "Come work at Dan Gilbert's lab this summer, for free!").

It probably varies from school to school. I had one phone interview; my POI told me at the beginning of the call that she was phoning 4 or 5 people but could only invite 2 or 3 for a campus visit. Our interview was very brief, maybe 10 minutes. She asked things like: "Tell me about your honours thesis," "What research would you like to do with me?" and "What have you been doing this year as a research assistant?" I basically regurgitated things I had written in my statement of interest.

I feel like many candidates would like to "update" their applications based on CV improvements over the last three months. But a deluge of these types of emails to your POI might end up being an collective annoyance. So especially if you already indicated on your application that you submitted to those places, then my inclination is no, do not. On the other hand, if you've already traded a few emails with your POI then it might be okay because of the previously-established connection. Here, you could lead off with something like, "When we traded emails in the fall I had told you that I submitted posters to X and Y. I just wanted to let you know that they were accepted!" And practically speaking, especially given that you have some conference experience already, I don't think two more posters will move you into the accept pile if you weren't there already.

I know it's not your item but I hate the phrasing "I always prefer facts to theories." -- It's such a nonscientific use of the word theories. A better word would be "hypotheses". We use theories to explain facts and to make new hypotheses. Theories are awesome.

Good lord I am paranoid about this. I'm wandering off topic here, but my files and data are: (1) on a USB key (2) on my laptop (3) on an external harddrive (4) on my office computer and (5) on a cloud backup. These synchronize/backup nightly. .... now that I type that all out, it seems a little paranoid. But 1-3 are all in my apartment so if there were a fire I'd have to rely on 4 and 5. And a loss of these data would be catastrophic: > 7 years of work. ETA: They're encrypted everywhere too. Even one lost copy would be a disaster with my institutional review board.

I also use a blackberry memo, and I have a folder on my work USB key called "study ideas" where I have word documents for ideas that are more fleshed out (e.g., full study designs or ideas for DV's but no data yet).

3) You might find an overly trusting soul who will do your homework for you!

....p.s. by "every year we have this thread" I don't mean to disparage that fact, it just speaks to how many people are faced with the "NYU MA" dilemma.