Mastershaakti

So I'm offering slightly more than what you are asking for, but this perspective might aid in your scope when searching for programs/POIs. There are certainly many psychology researchers that are population focused (e.g., Black/African American, people with certain disabilities, Asian American, women, kiddos, etc.), in that they are willing to study anything in the realm of their population of interest, sometimes even outside the discipline. The benefit of such is flexibility and, of course, interest in the population of choice; however, this can be daunting when searching for a program, POI, or even a specific research idea. To potentially narrow your search (and therefore interests), you could figure out which aspect of LGBT psychology research interest you most: social (e.g., prejudice/stereotyping, stigma/coping), developmental, cognitive, political, biological, health, educational, clinical, counseling, community, etc. My very limited scope of listed areas already cover a wide variety of research that relate to many programs/POIs that may not be labeled (or "branded") LGBT research/ers. Obviously, the downside to selecting POIs based on type of method/theory rather than population, means that you could, at times, may be expected to work on research that is not directly related to the LGBT population. But more often than not, that research can be conceptually replicated for the LGBT population. One way you can determine which area or aspect of LGBT research is most interesting is by reviewing an undergrad/grad text on LGBT psychology (one cheaply available on Amazon titled as such) which covers all major psychological research areas related to LGBT population. Another way to approach the search if find a POI that does interesting research and wishes to expand that research to the LGBT population. For example, a POI's main focus may be racial bias but wish to expand the lab research to include sexual/gender bias and maybe even the intersection of the two. In this way, you would be the de facto expert/consultant on the LGBT research topics for the lab, which may be desirable for some who prefer more research autonomy in graduate school. Sorry for the long response, but hopefully this will be somewhat helpful in approaching your search and research agenda!

That's really cool. Thanks for the info! I'm glad you enjoyed your study abroad at UVM. I look forward to exploring the town myself. Did you find there was always something to do or does it get sleepy there or somewhere in the middle?

This is all good advice. From someone who changed their research interests/discipline during my mid-masters to social psych, I might be able to offer unique insight to what you will face. First, be very careful approaching POIs with your econ background. The fields may be similar, but their not really that similar. For instance, most economic theories view human decision-making as rational whereas social psychologists tend not to share the same optimism. Moreover, some academics are snobs when it comes to field prestige as they believe their field or method to be somewhat superior (or at least more interesting) to another. This isn't a blanket statement, but you'd be wise to "feel-out" each POI's position on this before making or acting on any type of assumptions. In similar vein, make a compelling case of why you wish to switch disciplines regardless of how your POI feels. At the end of the day, they will be taking a big risk on selecting you over other equally (or sometimes more) qualified candidates. Generally, they would rather not waste their time and resources on a student who will drop-out because you become disinterested in the discipline or research, which is apparently what you're doing with economics. Lastly, the most important aspect in the process of finding a good "fit" (assuming you have multiple offers on the table), is going with a mentor/advisor whom you will be able to best work with, as the working relationship with one's mentor tends to be the strongest predictor of graduate school success. I hope this information helps with your application process. Good luck!

It seems like you are really eager to get into a program. Most of us come from that place, but deciding to which programs to apply or to apply at all is an enormous decision. Essentially, you're commiting 5-7 years of your life to this not including the prep and application years. It's not something you want to rush. Solid research experience not only demonstrates novice expertise but also that you understand the dynamics of the field and it is something you truly want to explore in graduate school. Also, top research-based psychology PhD programs have acceptance rates ranging from one to about ten percent, many of which are much lower than top medical or law schools. You want to approach the entire process as if there is no such thing as a safety school. It would be highly uncharacteristic of top programs to seek you out or fight for you to attend, because there are hundreds of qualified applicants from them to pick from. This is unlike many of the other social sciences or humanities where you churn out a perfect GPA and GRE and get into Harvard. Psychology is much more difficult than that.

To be bluntly honest, if you want a minimally funded PhD program in clinical psychology with a 2.6 GPA, you're f**ked. I don't even think a decent masters would accept or help you. First, consider doing something like getting a 2-year funded lab manager position before applying, although those are competitive. This can offset your grades with the best lab experience possible, with maybe even co-authorship on a publication. Second, consider moving to the location of your dream mentor, and volunteer in their lab for at least a year before applying. One reason the GPA is so important is to help paint a picture of what your capable of. If you've already worked well with the mentor, then they might look past the bad grades. Third, save yourself the headache and consider changing your career aspirations to something more feasible, such clinical mental health counseling, PsyD, or even social work. Although fundamentally different, these career areas overlap considerably with clinical psych PhD and is a plausible alternative for those with lower grades.

There doesn't seem to be a large graduate population at UVM or presence on Gradcafe, but I thought I'd try this to see what happens. I'll be starting the PhD social psychology program (moving approximately early August). If anyone else is a starting or continuing graduate student, please feel free to comment or message me! I'm interested in connecting with new/current grad folk, housing/moving advice, Burlington/school quirks, where you are coming/came from, and anything else that seems appropriate! thanks!

I agree with you, Arcadian. Interdisciplinary study should be seen as a positive advancement, but I don't think the field of psychology, as a whole, is to that point. Given the extreme competition of PhD psychology admissions, I think interdisciplinary experiences aren't given a fair evaluation. But this probably not only varies by field (and sub-field) but also by program and professor. Also, it might be beneficial to look toward mentors (their advice, experiences, CVs) whom you'd like to be like when you "grow up." Reflecting from my mentors and the most influential currently in my field, their CVs usually don't report graduate degrees from other disciplines. But health psychology might be different!

I highly recommend against doing so, at least if your long-term career goal is to go into psychology as a higher education research and/or teaching professional. Doing so would be perceived as you're not sure what you really want to study. Given the competitiveness of PhD psychology admissions, programs only want to select the best students they "know" will do well and not drop out. Past performance is the greatest indicator of future performance. And if you've pusued another discipline on the graduate level, then they will read that as you are unsuited and/or truly uninterested for psychology. Undergraduate work in a different discipline is somewhat common among psychology applicants (with some psych training, of course), but that is undergraduate work, which is like a general education with minor discipline emphases. Graduate work is job training intended for future academics. To give an anecdote, I have a friend who graduated with a BA in psych at a top 50 public research institution. At that point, she wasn't sure what she wanted to do, and seemlessly enrolled into the same school's sociology MA program. She realized quickly that sociological perspectives were VERY different from social psychological perspectives, and wanted to switch back to the psych world. She continued to RA for the social psych lab to be competitive for social psych phd programs. Even with over 4 years of research experience in social psychology, independent projects, one decent publication, and awesome GREs/GPA/LoR, she has been flat out rejected for the second year in a row to over 26 social programs. With most POIs citing "concerns" of the purpose of her sociology masters... Also, I suspect those fields are much more different than you allude to in the eyes of each field's respective experts. Just something to keep in mind when approaching the topic with them.

This was my second round applying. All of my application materials were much better this round! I received six on-site interviews (three of which I was waitlisted). This may not sound like many to some, but considering I received ZERO interviews last year, I was pleased. My primary regret this round is that I didn't properly prepare for my interviews. I was very nervous and awkward which is why I probably only received offers from three interviews. I tried the "be yourself" thing. POIs saw that I was my own person with my own research goals that did not 100% overlap with theirs. Some POIs told me they liked this, others conveyed that they "preferred" students with better research fit. I think after all is said and done, it worked out best for me; however, having more options in selecting programs would have been nice. One the graduate students from a program I was waitlisted told me I should have put their program as #1 and completely wanted to do the POI's research and then change my interests once I actually got accepted and started the program... okay, lying is a great way to start grad school?... If I were to do this again (which I'm not, accepted an offer), I would request informal phone/video interviews with potential POIs BEFORE submitting an application to see how much I would have liked them. Although unorthodox, I think many POIs would be open to this (just be careful to not come off stalker-ish). This could also be accomplished by briefly meeting at a professional conference for coffee. Doing so you would give you a glimpse into your research compatibility with the POI (how much overlap you have and what is needed for this POI), what they value in a student (grades, GRE, experience, ethics, etc.), and probably most important their mentoring style (hands-off, helicopter, encouraging of risky research, wants you to be a carbon copy of them, etc.). From there, I would have only applied to POIs/programs I felt really good about. That would have save me ALOT of money, and it would give you an advantage when applying (pleasantly pairing a real face with an application) against the competition. Also, you can still be yourself without comprising your research interests to just get accepted. Hope this is somewhat helpful for those reapplying next year. Best wishes. btw-gpa/gre are not everything! I'm have low of both (3.2 gpa at a state school, no honors/thesis, both GRE scores between 56th and 60th percentile). All my interviews were at the top 20-30 fully funded social psych programs. It seems you just need the bare minimum grades/scores (varies by program and professor) to have you application considered. It's what is on the application (not gpa/scores) that get you invited to interview.

Congrats to the Tennessee-Knoxville experimental-social offer! Would you mind sharing your POI and whether you interviewed? Thanks a million! :-)

I actually didn't since she reported on her website that she was accepting students, but I probably should have to build rapport. But they are mostly nice and reasonable people who know we are anxiously waiting to plan the rest of our lives! Best wishes for the program you select!

Hey VZ yeah, I think I mentioned this, but I contacted the UConn POI directly. The POI replied with a very nice and personalized message back informing me of my rejection. I know you probably don't want to make waves, but at this point what could it hurt?

I feel you. I was the first in my immediate and extended family to even attend college, much less earn a degree higher than secondary school. As a result, I did horrible my first semester of college and average for the next three. It wasn't until my junior year that I began to excel with 4.0 terms; however, it was too late for my cumulative GPA. Due to my low GPA and research interests in prejudice, I made it a point to express my various disadvantaged identifies. I receive nothing but warmth and admiration, at least explicitly, from my POIs. Some even shared their similar backgrounds with me as a result. And yes, I concur: It seems as if there is a wealth of nuanced information that can only be retrieved via in-person contact, especially with current graduate students of each respective program exposing all the interesting and useful info (both good and bad). I also learned for many (BUT not all) programs, baseline GPA/GRE are required to get our apps reviewed. The "cut-offs" grades/scores varied heavily on the level of competition (namely frequency of apps submitted per subprogram and professor, thus it is really difficult to know what are good GPAs/GREs [if one could get a 4.0 and 99th percentile then you should be good anywhere]). Then, if your app is reviewed and you have some relevant (even impressive) research experience, strongly written PS (showcasing your writing style), and lovely letters of recommendation (but not inflated letters [praise without behavioral merits]), typically there is some type of pre-interview (via phone/Skype/morse code). I think this is is just to make sure you are real and not a bot--but also to check for any "red flags." Typically, if you make it to the on-site interviews, ANYTHING CAN HAPPEN--well, almost anything. Some of mine were uber pleasant (and completely free) while others were anxiety provoking and fake as hell. One interview included the grad students taking us to this exotic restaurant for the first night as a "social" in which we had to pay for our own meals. The cheapest item on the menu (of food I've never heard of and couldn't prouncounce) was $26! I almost shit myself (during and after, which is horrible for interviews). Besides the initial greetings, the grad students huddled together and convo'ed amongst themselves while the applicants just sat there like dumbasses. The rest of the interview followed a similar pattern of disdain. I realized soon the meaning of "fit" and for that particular program, I would only attend if desperate. Others were great and I even were able to drink with our POIs with liquor they paid for--how freaking awesome is that? Seeing the social professors to near drunkeness was absolutely hilarious. Needless to say this is the program offer I chose to accept (but not for that alone, of course). Even the notification process is strange and at times baffling (to be waitlisted via snail mail---whaaaaaaat? Or accepted at 6AM their time while they are at a well-known conference). I think it only gets better from here...

So, i was in a similar pickle last spring. My two close advisors/mentors both agreed that a masters wasn't the way to go. They said to some POIs/programs, students with masters degrees are somewhat undesirable, such that they may learn skills/habits from other advisors that they do not particularly like and would have to spend extra time and effort to correct it as their graduate student. But that was just their anecdotal opinion--take it for what you will. Since paid lab manager positions are competitively difficult to obtain, they suggested volunteering as a lab manager with a researcher you would potentially like to work with or at least one at your own undergrad department. This would give you invaluable experience for applications, and POIs will be impressed that you're dedicated enough to volunteer to do so. This would be especially valuable to do so with a POI that you want to work with. They could personally see how smart and hardworking you are and you could potentially be a "shoe-in" for admission. Of course, this is risky and financially difficult. To sustain yourself, you could work part-time in retail/food service or even in mental health as a behavioral health aid/tech (given our psych BAs). I decided to be a lab manager for my undergrad mentor (that I RA'ed for) gained so much more great research experience. I also got to know my mentor on a much deeper level and my recommendation letter was subsequently better. I also enrolled into a few grad psych courses (advanced psych stats I & II, multivariate stats, advanced social psych, advanced seminar in social psych theory). This also gave me additional time to study for GREs and up my scores significantly. This combo (additional/advanced research experience, graduate social/stats coursework, and higher GRE scores) made all the difference for my application luck this round. All my POIs were very impressed. I had six on-site interviews, five waitlists, and three acceptances (so far) all from decent (top 50) social psych programs. BUT most other applicants I interviewed against had masters, paid lab manager positions, or came from prestigious undergrad institutions (like ivy league and top 20 public schools), so I was very intimidated and didn't interview that well (hence the higher number of waitlists v. acceptances). So, it really depends on what you want and what you're comfortable with pursuing.