PsychandPhilo

@TheMercySeat I can't give you much advice about the climate, I will be adapting to an environment that I am not a huge fan of either. As far as the culture aspect, this is something I have experience with (grew up all over the south and attended a very conservative undergrad when I'm much more of a moderate), so please feel free to pm me if you want an opinion or advice. @intrigue Thanks! The state is Ohio, much colder than what I am used to (was in the negatives when I toured ) but the program is a perfect fit.

Edit: I meant Fall 2015, not 2016.

Finally got the acceptance I was waiting for! Not sure how I am going to be celebrating yet (although shots sounds like a good idea neural-plasticity), but I know it will include me removing the results search page from my bookmarks on my phone and computer. Now I just have to undo the conditioning process of ritualistically checking it every spare moment.

To the person who was accepted but declined their offer to the Experimental Psychology program at Ohio University, can you pm me who your poi/specific department was?

Ah, that makes sense. The philosophy professor I work most closely with has pretty much stopped publishing at this point and the rest don't have similar research interests to mine. I was encouraged to rework an honor's thesis to potentially submit but I decided to devote more time to my psychology research and build up that part of my CV. I'm jealous of your continental focus, unfortunately there's a bit of a bias at my undergrad so there's hardly any way to do substantial work on continental philosophy here. My focus has been on concepts of morality, free will, moral responsibility, conceptions of fate, etc. in both psych and philo. I decided to go the psych route on paper but with the professors I applied to work with I will pretty much be doing experimental philosophy, which to me is the best of both worlds. I am applying for Fall 2016 and I have high hopes to receive an offer from a PhD program for which I interviewed, but if that falls flat than I will be pursuing a MA to build up my lab experience and add to my CV. My lack of formal lab experience, I have plenty of research experience, and the lesser name recognition of my undergrad is what is giving me the most trouble. I also didn't check with professors beforehand regarding funding, which has unfortunately also been a major factor working against me as some professors simply don't have the funding this year for a new student. Don't overly worry about your GPA, it's not as if it's horrible. I was simply pointing out things that would make you the strongest in all categories. Research fit and funding will be the biggest determining factors, your credentials seem strong enough where you will be able to hold your own in the applicant pool.

A fellow psych and philo! I'll comment on your background and then give you general advice. Note this is just my opinion on what I have seen/heard/experienced. I don't have any data. GPA: If you can meet your expected goals by application time, then great. As of now, they might be slighlty below PhD program average. You probably need a 3.5, or even higher 3.7+ if you're going straight out of undergrad. Multiple Majors: Good experience for workload. Math obviously will help if you choose quant. Philosophy is good at preparing writers and critical thinkers and will be more useful if you choose to stay in clinical research. Research Experience: Research experience is pretty solid for undergrad, I have trouble imagining what more you could do. Depends on the prestige of your institution as to how highly those will get rated though. Publications/Conferences: It will look good that you have experience, but people who are a little older or with MAs might have more experience under their belt presenting at major conferences. You stated you have several philosophy publications. I'm not sure where you got these published, as its very rare for undergrads to get published in respectable philosophy journals especially since we don't really have 2nd or 3rd author type deals very often. Not trying to be rude, I'm just curious. That being said, the writing experience will show that you're not a stranger to upper level academic work, and grad school research doesn't seem to be something that you just recently decided to do. GRE Scores: You'll hear opinions all over the board on this site. 170 Quant is obviously great. 158 is solid, if you can bump it up higher, then good, but I don't know if it's worth a retake. 3.5 is the only one I would want to bump up, but it's probably the least looked at of the 3 scores. Now for general advice. You're application seems pretty strong. GPA would be my biggest concern, but if you meet your goals then I wouldn't worry. The main thing I can suggest is find a perfect research fit, based on what you have done so far. It sounds obvious, but a lot of people apply to programs that aren't perfect fits. Even looking at my programs, I feel as if some were research programs I "wanted" to fit into and would be happy in, but weren't necesarily reflective of my undergrad work. Also try and make sure those professors will have funding available, that has bit me hard for a few schools. I am in the social and decision making fields, so I can't give you specific advice on programs. I do know clinical is a lot more competitive than quant though in terms of applicant numbers. Quant usually doesn't get as much interest despite probably being the most practical field within psych for job hunting. Potentially think about looking for programs that might reflect your work in philosophy as well, since you seem to have done a lot of work there. Finding programs is somewhat difficult. You can always look for contemporary authors in the fields you work in/papers you've read and enjoyed and try to apply to their schools. Apply to as many school as you can safely afford. Be sure to start your personal statements very early and see if you can get an advisor to look over them with you. Good luck with the search!

I'm in the same situation... To email or not to email... I really just want to know the answer, but I also know I need to be patient.

So as you can see by my scoreboard, my first round of admissions isn't going so well. I have high hopes for my last PhD program, but we shall see. So in order to take my mind off the waiting game, I am interested in hearing how either: 1) you celebrated admittance into a program or; 2) you recuperated from an unsuccesful first application year and built determination for the next attempt

Easy Answer: YES. Longer Answer: Politics and networking plays a role in PhD admissions just like any other occupation in the professional world. If you worked with someone well-known and in your subfield, you have a bit of a benefit getting into programs. This is part of the reasons students from bigger universities have better chances than a student who went to a small liberal arts college. If your POI knows your mentor and respects the work he/she does, then the POI is more likely to take your applciation seriously and give it stronger consideration. Politics isn't everything though. Your general intellect and experience conducting research are also gonna play major roles in your admission, as well as interviews and such. The logic is not "I am a student of someone well-known, therefore I get in wherever I want". But if there are two strong students, and one of them is from a more well known college/department, then that will work in their favor. As far as the presentations and publications go, don't assume those are always strongly respected. A student with less research experience, but engaged in independent self-run meaningful research, can sometimes be rated more highly than a student who was maybe X author on a paper and really only helped collect a little bit of data and did not engage in any of the substantial work. Presentations typically indicate you had a larger role, but there's always exceptions. There's no magic formula for getting in, but politics does play a role. Remember, however, that what you know about an applicant might not reflect everything the POI knows or that is on his/her CV.

No problem. I realized that my post might not come off exactly the way I intended, I only meant to help. As I said, we're all in the same boat. A boat that we know is prone to sink at any moment but is our only chance to the mystical land of tenure track position. Pessimism is good to an extent, keeps us grounded and forces us to self-improve. But too much pessimism and we forget why we took this path in the first place. Good luck with whatever you decide to choose, and take comfort knowing you at least got into a respectable program. I'm still waiting for my first acceptance. I have reasonably high hopes about one of my PhD interviews but we shall see...

If it perhaps comforts you, there was an article I heard about a year or two ago (I can't source it at the moment, if I can find it I will), that said the job market is supposed to be better in the next 10 years or so due to the baby boomer generation retiring all at once. Of course this is just a prediction, I can't remember how valid the statistics were, but it might be something to think about. It might also make you feel better that everyone here is in the same boat. Luckily in our field, unlike philosophy which is my other major, there is a sense of solidarity. Unlike law school or medical school or some graduate fields, we are not cutting throats to get where we are. Graduate applicants and students are willing to help each other out with advice at all times. If you are able to remove your doubts (or at least mostly remove), I wish you the very best of luck. I have the same concerns that you do, but this is the field I want and I'm just going to have to make it work one way or another. It might sound naive, but to me its determination. Or best case scenario your spouse will make a ton of money and then you can just do research for the hell of it!

I think you're taking this personally. By no means did I mean it to be, this was somewhat of a general message. However, I'm not sure where your statistics are from(they may be valid) but according to the US Department of Labor even part time professors make more than unemployment. However, you said yourself you are having doubts. So no need to get defensive. I apologize again if it seemed personal. While it is reasonable to expect to make money in life, I think you are exaggerating (I'm guessing due to worry). As someone whose parents aren't college educated and were below the poverty line a good part of my life, trust me when I say that there's a bit of a gap.

I think you're looking at this the wrong way. Perhaps what I say will comfort you, or perhaps not. Social psychology is crowded. It blew up as a field very quickly, is currently facing a lot of methodological criticisms from the sciences, and still is continuing to expand. That means there are a lot of applicants, and a lot of people with PhDs. As far as applications go, its a mix of luck (in the sense the causal agent was outside of your direct control, no metaphysical luck) and experience. Everything you do will get you a step closer. High GREs, more research experience, more lab experience, high GPA, good letters of recommendation, good fit with the program, good interview abilities. There is also outside variables though. Funding, strength of other applicants, professors moving schools, etc. These things are outside your control and you have to accept that. People are getting accepted places, but you have to be very careful about where you send applications and make sure to send enough. I've seen too many people here focus way too much on ranking (which is somewhat understandable) instead of research fit. You should not enter a PhD program thinking "I want the best ranked school so I can get the best ranked research program". That's utter crap. You need to go somewhere where you are a good research fit and then get a job (whether it be teaching at a smaller liberal arts school or research at a university in your subject area) that you fit at. We go into PhD programs (mostly) because we want to do research, because we care about the field and our subject areas. If you're in this for the money, you're in the wrong field and should consider the STEM fields. Too many people apply to PhD because they think it's the next step or they want the prestige, this is a wrong way to look at the process. Remember that while you have to be smart to pursue a PhD, it's more about endurance and dedication. Many people, between high school and finally being awarded that doctorate, are going to drop this dream because its a long hard road with few material benefits. (Not that most people with PhD's live as paupers, they just see themselves as that. Most live modestly albeit not expensively.) If you're having doubts, take some time and ask yourself if this is your dream in life and you want to do it no matter what. If so, work hard at it and accept the consequences. Otherwise, this might not be the field for you. There's no shame in stopping now, but be dedicated to whatever you do and commit.

I think in person helps you make a better impression since it makes the process just feels more natural for you and your not just a voice or a face on a screen. I just had an on campus interview for a PhD program and I learned so much more (from grad students, unrelated professors, feel of the program) than I would have got from phone or Skype. So it's to your benefit as well. That being said, I understand the money problem. I got invited to the same MA program weekend and I'm considering the money factor too.

It's not checkmate but if they made it to the interview phase then it will most likely be an advantage to them. That being said, it's not absolute and at the end of the day the professor wants the best researcher/fit for the program.