CogPsych2015

From a current CogNeuro student - @rtb16 is correct. Haha. Enjoy the next few months, everyone!

My only negative comments were my lack of pubs =/. I think the importance of that depends a lot on the individual reviewer.

What about the fourth? "Pretending you weren't as emotionally invested in this application as you really were post-rejection"

I feel this on a spiritual level.

Mine still says received as well.

I had a similar situation, though my low grade was in the basic Stats course and I took the advanced to make up for it (though, the advanced wasn't on my transcript when I applied). I had a lot of research experience, and so I just asked one of my letter writers to address the grade in his LOR. I didn't want to waste space on negative stuff in my SOP, but wanted it to be addressed. I figured it would work best if someone who knew my real-life Stats knowledge (i.e., first hand application of Stats knowledge to research) would be the best person to say that I didn't really suck at Stats. Apparently it worked :). Don't panic, one bad grade won't tank an otherwise solid application.

I had almost your exact scores (V165, Q157, W5) and was accepted to three programs with full funding and declined an interview to an additional one. I think your scores are high enough to get you through the initial cut, which it seems is all they're really used for.

Added the one I have funding info for:). Love this idea!

At an introductory level, I don't think it's necessary. There are so many things to teach in an intro class, it would be hard to find the time. I'm in an advanced stats class now, and even there we don't. He shows us how the calculations are done, which I think is helpful for theoretical knowledge, but we don't actually have to do them.

In the Methods course in my department, a solid chunk of the grade is devoted to a cumulative research project that gets presented at the end of the semester. There are too many students in the course to gather "real" data, but students come up with an idea for a project, make up stats, and then present it in research-poster format. I think it was a great chance to really show you learned something throughout the course. You had to use information from week 1 (what are IVs vs. DVs, operational definitions, etc.) all the way through factorial design and ethics. It was a whole heck of a lot of work, but I knew I was actually being assessed on what I'd learned, not what I'd memorized for an exam.

I have/had the same situation. This interview would have meant I was out-of-town for a full 10 days and missed more work/school. With an acceptance in the bag and interviews from schools I would like to attend more, I politely declined the interview. I talked with my mentors before doing so, but was comfortable in the choice. Considering I wasn't really contemplating that school anymore, it seemed like the only logical choice.

That is going to depend a lot school by school and even lab by lab. I've been in the same research lab since my freshman year. My first year or so, I really only had meaningful interactions with the graduate students. I saw the PIs at lab meetings, but didn't talk to them (or, have a reason to talk to them) outside of the lab. After a few presentations and more effort on my part at lab meetings and as a general lab citizen, I was given a project to manage. After another bit of time, a successful project, and another few presentations, I've been able to help this year with more of my own project. By my own, I mean that I've been involved in idea generation, project management, and data analysis. Basically, from start to finish. But, I really had to earn that trust and respect from my mentors and put in the time. However, I have friends who have never really interacted with their PIs. I've also had some who were more involved almost from day one. Like I said, it absolutely, 100% depends on each individual lab.

It's not an incredibly scholarly book, but I love How We Decide by Jonah Lehrer for an intro to decision-making crash course.

One of my friends has taken graduate level statistics courses, but had poor GRE quant scores. She was told by two different programs that her quant score was the reason she was rejected. It does happen, regardless of if it is the correct decision.

Oh, oh, pick me! Haha. My research is on decision making, mostly in risky contexts. Broadly, I'm interested in how feedback can be manipulated to improve decisions and how individuals represent choices. As I tell non-academics, I study why people, in general, are bad at making decisions:).

People want to know the POI because, in some programs, the timing is very different based on professor. So, if Applicant A and Applicant B are both applying to Professor X and Applicant A gets an interview, it's unlikely that Applicant B will if they haven't heard yet. However, if Applicant A hears from Professor X but Applicant B is applying to Professor Y, there's still hope. That looks more and more convoluted the more I look at it...hopefully it make sense. As for not revealing POI, I think it's just a way to maintain anonymity.

I got a question that kind of surprised me, so I thought I'd share. The prof asked what life experiences I had that would make me successful at moving across the country and being in a completely new place for five years. Luckily, I have some international experience that I could easily talk about, but I really wasn't prepared for that. In terms of questions asked, I asked what his last few graduates had done (all tenure-track positions, woot woot!), what the typical timeline was in terms of Master's, pre-lims, etc., and how he sees me fitting in with the general lab structure. I thought they all gave me good information while also showing that I had put some thought into the interview.

I asked the professor I was interviewing with for the contact information for one of his students. I could have found it online, but the profs are more likely to know who is willing to talk to students and which ones are going to give a complete picture. In my case, it went really well. She provided a lot of information that wouldn't have been available anywhere else and was really honest about things like mentoring style. I found it to be really valuable!

Ditto on the UPenn:)

Looks like someone posted from Stanford Affective Science today:(

Haha, when I first saw the name I was hoping there would be an accompanying doge picture!

Not related, but "Much Anxious Very Waiting" is a fabulous screen name!

Most likely Director of Clinical Training

I am definitely doing that! I know it's pointless, but it would still be nice to have applied to schools that were so early with news:)

Woot woot, got my first interview request:). Granted, it's via phone, but I'm still super excited! I may have started crying at work...whoops.