Chubberubber

Totally agree with you that hobbies and other interests are incredibly important for one's sanity. I was talking strictly within the broad definition of "work life" that my thesis is where I can fully express myself (not being limited by someone else's ideas or needs, and not having to do things I really don't find interesting what so ever). Having said that- I would often take a day off (rarely even a week off) of working on my thesis to keep my head clear and to not feel like I'm burning out. Even while writing, and especially when things don't go the way I want, I almost always take breaks to do completely unralted (and somtimes unproductive things- playing music/ taking a walk), to achieve that same goal... But I think that your bottom line- the importance of balance- is the most important thing for any grad student!

If the interviewer does ask, you can always say that you wanted to expand your professional scope so that you'll have a broader perspective as a clinician though your promary interests remain with the field of your first job. Again- if it was me, I would have still said the truth becuase I think it would make me seem more personable (for the same reason it's customary to put DOB and marital status on one's C.V in my home country), but I realize it's not common in the U.S...

I never understood why not be personal, but Iguess it's a cultural difference kindda thing...

I see your point, but have to somewhat disagree. Aren't you more likely to "get it over with" if you actually somewhat enjoy it? I've been invested in my MA thesis for the past 2 years and am still very interested in it (we get 3 years to complete a thesis). It probably helped that I also did many other things (academic and non-academic) so my thesis was always where I felt like I can completely be myself (professionaly at least).

I liked being asked "What would you like to focus on" and "why are you interested in this subfield". But, as the OP indicated, the question I liked the most was "do you have any questions?"

I always think that honesty is the best approach. I even told a POI during an interview that part of the reason I was interested in their program is because my wife's family is in the area and it didn't seem to have negtively affect my application...

Do you know that feeling of bewilderment when a POI say "I'll be happy to work with you"? That utter confusion when faculty write in an e-mail "your application is being positively reviewed"? How about the constant head scratching following "someone will be in touch with you soon" after a really positive interview? Your're not alone! Who knew that such simple sentences could have so many hidden meanings?!? So, In light of all the "My professor said X what does that mean" topics, I figuered it might be a good idea to combine all the words of wisdom and our commulative experiences into one comprehensive POI/Adcom-Eglish dictionary! I'll start- (From a POI) "You sound like a good fit but our admissions committee makes all the decisions"= I'm not going to fight for you. you're on your own buddy. Anything else?

I asked mainly about research. Things like "what do you think you'll (and/ or your lab will be) focusing on for the next 5 years?", "How do you see your theory on X related to phenomena Y?" and we also discussed various research ideas that I have. I waspretty specific and wanted to let the POI know that I'm very familiar with their work so I even mentioned specific articles that I found interesting.

regarding the graph- If everything else is exactly the same, I'd go with one of the extremes. I'd rather know that I went with the best (either fit or ranking) rather than feel like I've compromised on both for the whole 5+ years... It might be just me though. But of course as people said here- there's a lot more that goes into such a decision, such as a "feel" for the place, location, company/ cohort etc. that might heavily influence the final decision.

Maybe a bit of a weird question given the title of this thread, but I think I overheard someone who used to be affiliated with the program refer to the prospective students' weekend as "admit weekend". Could that be, and what would be the difference between the two (sorry, I'm an international students so the whole terminology is new to me...)

Reading all th wise replies here, I just thought of another thing- as someone here (I think it was Jullietmercerdi) mentioned, the answer really does depend on what you want to do next. If you want to stay in academia researching and teaching (like I do) than rankings (alongside specific advisor's reputation and prestiege) probably matter a bit more. However, if you want to do field work (as in clinical psych programs) than fit is probably more important since good fit would make graduation more likely. I don't know though- it prestiege of institution being concidered when applying for internships/ jobs as a psychologist?

Off the top of my head: within top 10 programs, I wouldn't care about rankings. Below that, say top 20 programs- it's really case specific. If you widen the range more though (choosing between top 5 without good fit and a less than 20th ranked program with good fit)- I'd go with rankings. Having said that, I know I can get quite blinded by rankings so take what I say with a grain of salt.

Seems like you're in a good place in terms of progress, especially since your advisor told you you've done enough. There's a time and a place to overachieve, you just need to decide whether now is right time for you to do it. If it is- use the fact that you're doing more than you have to as your motivation! If it isn't- remember that researchers often work on one "Mega Experiment" like yours for years and publish bits and pieces of it at a time. The full scale experiment you're planning can be the basis of a future PhD dissertation, so you don't have to feel compelled to sinish it all right now...

I'm convinced! For my next birthday I want a quantitative party!

I'd love to help you, but not on a public platform. I'll send you the info in a private messege.

Your scores are amazing in any context, but it's impossible to say whether they're "good enough" for anything. No program admits solely based on GRE scores and at best your very very good scores will get you past the intial screening. After that, your statement of purpose, letters of rec., research experience and most importantly- fit with the program/ POI play a much more important role. People have gotten into top programs with GRE scores worse than yours and people have gotten rejected with scores that are as good as yours. Figure our what you want to study, get experience (mainly research) and have an idea of what it is you want to research and why. Once you've done all that- use your GRE scores as a spring-board. Good luck!

Sorry to be a bit of a downer on this, but from what I know CAL places A LOT of importance on field experience. They require at least a year (~2100 hours) of paid or volunteer experience in a related field. Take a look here at past admitted students' experience: http://socialwelfare.berkeley.edu/sites/default/files/docs/Resume%20Template%20and%20Sample%20Work%20Experience.pdf Even without it being an official requirment, I would strongly suggest you take at least a year to explore what social work is about outside of academia. It would help you realize which population or area of society you're most excited aboout serving and what being immerssed in it full time is like... It would also help you realize is you feel your future is in direct practice or more in research and policy planning and then plan your MSW trajectory accordingly. For example after 2 years of working with a certain group pf population I realized that is would be very hard for me to only do therapy or case management, so I tried to take a route that would allow me to do research in the benefit of this population as well. It seems to me like the one relevant experience you had was teaching disenfranchised middle-schoolers, but if all you did was teachng (meaning no tutoring or some equivelance of "case work") then you might be at a disadvantage. Also remember that your application will be taken in a larger context, for example- what kind of diversity you'll bring to the cohort, meaning- your experience might be enough if you have a lot of extra "added value". I don't know much about UCLA, but would imagine it won't be very different there. Also, if you want to stay in CA I heard that in the MSW level, SFSU has a very good and highly competitive program... Good luck with graduation!

Wow, you guys make quant sound like something that might be actually fun! Hat's off to people like you who advance this science!

I like SPSS and wish I could've just stayed with it, but unfortunately one of the programs that sent me encouraging messages apperantly prefers R as the analysis program of choice. So if I do end up being admitted there, I'd rather hit the ground running next year and not having the statistical ground hitting me... On that note, if anyone knows of good study materials for R- please PM me (I have the "r-intro" from the website and also "r for beginners") Thanks!

From the results page, it seems like they sent notifications already- http://www.thegradcafe.com/survey/index.php?q=stanford+chemistry&t=a&o= Did you try sending an e-mail to the department/ a POI?

I know you guys are right, but it still doesn't make me any less afraid of those greek letters and formulas... I'm trying to get aquianted with R right now and after a week of work I've goten to the point where I can finally open the PDF manuel without getting an anxiety attack on page 2!

Sounds like everything I dread in psych yet know I can't do without! (me and probably 99% of applicants...)

Actually, especially if I'd get into a program- being a barista for 6 months doesn't sound like such a bad idea!

For what it's worth- you might want to get a masters' degree in a field other than psychology and then re-apply for a PhD. If, during your undergrad you've taken a lot of core psychology courses (in my home country the standard for psych UG majors is around 60 credits of just psych) then I'm not sure how much more you'd gain from a masters' program nor how much it would set you apart from other candidates. If, however, you'd get an MA in a related field (say in public policy or an MSW if you're interested in community psychology), then you'd bring something completely different to the table next time you'd apply. Programs will see you as having an "added value" that other applicants most likely lack...

Sorry for my ignorence, but what is quantitative psychology exactly? Is it like psychometric measures and assasment?