lewin

The best part about these exchanges is how utterly obvious it is that we are products of our disciplines. My position is so clearly anthropological. (cultural, post-representational, etc. obviously not all anthropologists)
 
And all of these replies are just as clearly informed by psychological approaches to understanding not only how humans work, but how we ought to study how they work.

Random thoughts about the GRE.
 
1. Those familiar with psychological measurement will know that the studies that correlate GRE scores and GPA with grad school success probably underestimate the relationship because of restricted range (i.e., only high-scorers are admitted).
 
2. There's measurement error in GRE scores (and GPA) so I doubt that someone in the 95th percentile that much different than somebody in the 80th. But when people say "GRE scores shouldn't matter" I think they must be talking about minor distinctions at the top end, right? Because I will never believe that somebody who scores the 50th percentile on the general and subject GRE's (or has a 2.0 GPA) is just as likely to succeed as somebody who gets 80th percentile or above (or has a 3.5 GPA). Yes there are contaminants like cultural bias and standardized test anxiety but there's also variance in GRE scores that's due to real knowledge and ability. In part, the scores still reflect ability to read, write, and do math (and, for the subject, psychology knowledge)
 
3. Standardized tests can be biased but so are more informal means of evaluation. See this article for example.   One proposed solution is to retain the standardized tests but bump up the scores of stereotyped groups, which is provocative but seems empirically supported.
 
4. This is completely anecdotal, but I've known lots of grad students and wannabe grad students. I can't shake my experience that good students get good GRE scores and the ones who bombed it I wouldn't take as my grad student on a bet. Frankly, I can't shake the feeling that somebody who studies hard and still bombs it (i.e., < 70th percentile on all subscales & subject) is not cut out for academia... especially bombing the subject GRE. If you don't know intro psychology you shouldn't be a PhD psychologist.

Seems like if you wanted to protest the use of the GRE, there are more useful and productive ways than to limit your career based on programs that don't require it.

Hi Canis,
 
I would be curious to know what content programs should measure when selecting students.  I have read some articles giving a pretty decent r between GRE scores (general and subject GREs) and first year grad school performance.
 
As someone who has a little bit of training in selection methods (through I/O and HR coursework), I think it's a good idea to base selection decisions on measures that can be standardized in order to limit selection bias.
 
Using qualifications such as research experience, letters of recommendation, publications may all be a good idea, however, these can be unfairly distributed to the privileged in the same way access to preparation for the GRE is.
 
Another consideration is the research that shows that GRE scores don't really increase all that much with prep courses (despite the advertising claims.)
 
How about GPA?  Would you also eliminate its use in selection decisions?  GPA can be an unreliable tool to compare students across schools - and even within schools if two students took the same course from different professors.
 
So how would you recommend that schools ensure that they are selecting the students with highest aptitude for success in their program?  I don't mean to be argumentative.  I really am interested in your plan.

I think calling a PhD by the title of "Ms." instead of "Dr." is actually a pretty rude act (intentional or not). "Ms." is a title. If you are going to take the time to use a title, why not use the professional one earned by the professor instead of one that refers to the fact that someone is a woman (and could potentially imply that she does not have a PhD). An exception would be cases where everyone, regardless of degree, is "Mr." or "Ms." and I think this post is important to read: http://science-professor.blogspot.com/2009/01/just-call-me-f.html

Don't say something racist. DON'T. White bear white bear white bear.

I teach and give my students extensions without hassle when they have proper documentation. But the sense of entitlement in this thread, by some, is off-putting. Accommodation isn't something that's owed to you, it's a compromise between professor and student for everyone's sake.
 
I get that life happens, but students should realize that every single deviation from the class procedure, however justified or reasonable, means extra work for the professor or TA's.

I teach and give my students extensions without hassle when they have proper documentation. But the sense of entitlement in this thread, by some, is off-putting. Accommodation isn't something that's owed to you, it's a compromise between professor and student for everyone's sake.
 
I get that life happens, but students should realize that every single deviation from the class procedure, however justified or reasonable, means extra work for the professor or TA's.

Don't say something racist. DON'T. White bear white bear white bear.

Don't say something racist. DON'T. White bear white bear white bear.

Grad school means priority: research>publications>adviser projects>classes>assistantship. Research and publications is how you get jobs and a job with your adviser contacts/recommendations. So if this means you don't sleep for say two nights so be It. It's gad school. About half of all students drop out. I fact I came in with 4 other students with my adviser and there's only two of us left. If your having trouble now reevaluate where your time is going because next year year you will at at least be putting together your reading this for comps, and the comps animal is much worst than any class load could ever be

I think you have a crush on Bob.

Don't say something racist. DON'T. White bear white bear white bear.

Don't say something racist. DON'T. White bear white bear white bear.

The prof took three months to reply to your last email so I wouldn't sweat it, unless you said something offensive in your scheduling email, e.g.,  "Thursdays aren't good because it's my weekly Klan rally." You didn't, RIGHT?
 
 
 

You got me confused. I do not think those 2 were "stupid mistakes" nor this person is a "really nice girl" solely based on her not showing any respect to others. While I never heard of any grad student try to fight a position for another grad student to join his/her lab, I just don't see the point here. Why wouldn't you do the same for the other person, who is supposedly "a guy you never met"?
 
 
What exactly does she say in Mandarin? And how do you know that she is calling you lazy and stupid in mandarin? From the think about it, I'm actually delight that someone who can spend all day by calling you names while still being a responsible / productive postdoc in a research lab.

By "psychology," you mean clinical and counseling psychology only, right?  I'm in a non-clinical social psychology program that is not training me to provide therapy.

Just to pitch in as a counterweight because really all we're doing is trading anecdotes: My PhD advisor hated these emails. His opinion was that it's people trying to game the system and get around the official process. He reads all the applications anyway, and would never even try to form an opinion until he'd seen the whole application package.
 
I get why people send their initial POI emails, if only to save the $75 if their person isn't taking students. But frankly a second email just to say that you applied seems excessive. "Acceptable", sure. Really, I can't imagine it would help or sink you, but that it falls into the category of "mildly annoying".

I consider myself an introvert who likes to keep a lot of my life private. I don't volunteer a lot of personal information: if you ask me how my weekend went I won't be giving you a 30 minute soliloquy on what I was up to. When moving to a new area I factor in 6-9 months to make friends, simply because it takes me that long to start opening up to folk. I also do not necessarily view the people I study/work with as "friends", nor do I assume that I'm going to become friends with them. (Doesn't mean I don't like or don't get on well with them - just that I view our relationship as more of a 'business colleague' one).
 
As an introvert I also dress really scaffily and prefer comfortable, baggy, second-hand clothes to clingy stuff that shows off my breasts. You won't catch me wearing makeup either. It certainly isn't because I'm self-conscious or dislike my body, I simply value practicality higher than personal appearance. Putting on makeup every day is a damn faff, too.
 
So, I don't think it is a sin if there's a girl in your cohort who seems to be that way too. No one should get judged poorly for being an introvert, seeing the world slightly differently & not rushing to become your new best friend. 
 
With regards to over-achievement and competitiveness: in a job market over-saturated with PhDs, you do what you can to stand out. Working hard, asking lots of questions to make sure the professors notice you & know that you're thinking critically instead of hiding at the back, going to lots of seminars to broaden your horizons, sitting on committees to network with other academics...I think your colleague is going about grad school exactly the right way. 
 
I'd say step back from the friendship a bit if it's making you unhappy: that's kinda the opposite of what a friendship is supposed to do. Spend a bit more time with extrovert folk outside your immediate sub-field.

Umm, I just read this and I still didn't get what was so bad about her behavior. What exactly is a go-getter? Someone who does their best?
Are we now supposed to shun people who do their best and expect them to do worse just so we feel better about ourselves?
 
From what you said, it seems like her crimes include being a bit of introvert in her relationships with people and not comfortable with unsolicited sharing about herself , invests most of her time in her work because she doesn't have much else going on, seems to enjoy it and works hard at it, has body image issues, and crime of all crimes, she actually asks questions in most seminars and presentations (gasp!) I mean, what is world coming to when you can't even expect your fellow grad students not to ask questions during a dissertation so you don't look bad.
 
I think you hit the nail on the head in your last paragraph. I would review any claim of friendship that includes a supposed friend feeling better when I did worse. Maybe she can sense that and that's why she doesn't share things with you, so as not to alienate you. Maybe she's been through people alienating her because of her achievements before. There are a hundred different reasons that could explain her motivations that don't have to be about you. We all come with baggage.
 
My thoughts on collaboration and competition in any avenue in life: Collaborate. Compete. Do your best and may the best man/woman win. This is the concept of good sportsmanship and knowing that some people are going to be better at something and it has nothing to do with you. You shouldn't view them as villains because of it nor should you think less of yourself because of it. You're both doing your best and that's what counts. If you can't compete and remain friends with people you are more or less competing with (which is fine, a lot of people can't do both), then just avoid making friends with people you'll have to compete with for positions, grants, etc.

To those hoping to take the psych GRE,
 
I just got my psychology GRE scores back, and I thought that I would post my study plan, as some part of it seemed to be effective. I got 99th percentile on my psychology GRE exam. I have an honours psychology degree, so I have taken many courses in psychology.
 
While in university, I had taken textbook notes for all of my psych classes. What I did was study my first year psych notes. I then purchased another textbook (Psychology by Myers - http://www.amazon.com/Psychology-10th-David-G-Myers/dp/1429261781/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1384895757&sr=1-1&keywords=Myers+psychology), and took notes for every chapter in this text.
 
I also created flashcards for every bolded term in the Myers Psychology text. 
I combined these flashcards with flashcards created from my university textbook (can't recall the name at the moment).
 
For both of these textbooks, I created a list of all of the major headings of each chapter, and I would highlight them when I knew all of the points contained within that particular heading or subheading.
 
I also bought the Princeton review, and went through and checked items off as I knew them. I found Princeton to be helpful for tidbits of information that you would find at a 2nd year course, that I wouldn't have thought of studying.
 
Thus, I initially spent a lot of time typing notes, then a lot of time creating flashcards, and then a fair amount of time going through flashcards and the princeton book. I also looked at the Kaplan text, and created flashcards for any concepts I hadn't come across in either of the two psychology textbooks, or princeton's book. 
 
I did all of this studying in 6 weeks time. I would say 2-3 hours, 6 days a week. The first month was typing out the chapter notes, which sometimes was quite painful. 
 
At the end of my studying, when I realized there would be absolutely no way to master all of the material I wanted to, I focused in on the areas that ETS more heavily weights (in the practice book). Those areas that I felt a mastery in, or only had 3-5% of questions related to the topic I just ignored, and worked on acing the areas worth more weight.
 
I cannot pin down what specifically worked for me. I think I did well for a few reasons. I long ago mastered what study habits worked for me, so what you have seen above, is what I did in university to learn material. It would probably be in your best interest to engage in whatever habits you find work best for you (which can be totally different than the above). I also found that many of the questions on the psych GRE were related to information that I had picked up through my university education, and didn't realize I still had floating around in my brain. Thus, if you have not had much of a history in psych, preparation will probably need to be a bit more thorough.
 
The last suggestion i can think of is that the GRE focuses on breadth more than depth. I found that having a general idea of main concepts was enough for me to be able to cross off certain names, and make a guess at the right answer. If you are in a crunch and unable to decide what to focus on, I would say basic knowledge of many more items. 
 
Anyways, I am pleasantly surprised with my mark. I had calculated that I had more incorrect answers than I did. Hopefully this is helpful to someone at some point. I remember feeling frantic when I had absolutely no idea how to study for this exam.
 
Best of luck to those writing it in the future. I found it much less painful than the general GRE. 
 
On another note: After typing all of the notes from Myers, I read Gleitman's textbook, and realized I would have done better to take notes from that text. So if you were to choose only one university text to study from, I would recommend Gleitmans. http://www.amazon.com/Psychology-Eighth-Henry-Gleitman/dp/0393932508/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1384896656&sr=1-1&keywords=Gleitmans

Top down and bottom up processes:
 
1. Find good programs and look through their faculty websites.
 
2. Find the people who are researching topics you like and see where they work.
 
I would expect it matters for masters programs too, for the good ones anyway.

I don't want to say that finding a one-year terminal funded masters in social psychology where they do great research and have awesome parties is like finding a unicorn, but...

I don't want to say that finding a one-year terminal funded masters in social psychology where they do great research and have awesome parties is like finding a unicorn, but...

I don't want to say that finding a one-year terminal funded masters in social psychology where they do great research and have awesome parties is like finding a unicorn, but...