buttercup8d

I interviewed at University of Oregon recently and considering going there. Did anyone else who interviewed get the sense that: 1. They are not as diverse as they say they are? Especially reflected in the faculty and overall school. 2. The student body is not as happy as they say they are (and, surprisingly, more cliquish between the different ethnic groups) Idk, just intuitions that I picked up on there. The facilities and campus look amazing. Yet, in terms of research, I didn't get a lot of passionate research-related conversations from the graduate students. They mostly talked about how 'happy' they were there - which is important - but where is the research and career direction in their student body? Things seemed to be moving slowly there.

Personality fit, interest in their lab's work and demonstrating a sophisticated level of thinking are important criteria. I think managing your anxiety during these interviews is also super important because they want to see how you think on your feet. I've been going through several interviews and becoming more relaxed with each one, which means I can be more of myself. I did notice that some applicants have crazy levels of anxiety which is extremely off-putting (imagine how the faculty must feel) OR they don't have a true interest in the program (based on the questions they ask), which the faculty will most definitely pick up on.

I heard some of them are terrible (someone correct me here). They will ask questions like "how does everyone feel about this aggressive environment?" WHY do they do this? It seems unnecessarily sadistic to me. There are other ways to gain valuable information about applicants without damaging a person's dignity. I'm actually thinking of canceling some clinical ones because I don't want to go through this although I'd like to meet the faculty.

To me, choosing 250 out of 1-2 spots for my lab would be overwhelming, and I would want to make sure that I chose the right person. I really think programs would benefit if they chose a few more amazing applicants. Some POIs contacted me before I even submitted my applications so I would say this made the biggest difference between my 1st and 2nd cycle.

I wouldn't lose hope, especially if this is really what you want. I was unsuccessful with PhD applications last year, and now I'm hearing back from almost every program I applied to. I did a few things differently this year. Honestly, no one can really direct you on the 'correct' answer because no one knows it. I wouldn't blame any of your mentors. From what I've learned: 1) Fit is key - for both your POI and Overall Program. Your personal statement will reflect that. 2) Unique experience and showing that you know how to do research are key (Not necessarily that you have a specific research interest. This was my biggest mistake last year) 3) Having contact with your POI beforehand is absolutely key (I had several 'pre-interviews' with different POIs before the interview invitations were even extended. I did not know programs did this at all) Hope this helps. These programs are competitive for a reason. If you're planning to dedicate the rest of your life to psychology, I would say it's worth another shot.

Thanks, I'm curious. Can you clarify what you mean by "higher order" problems? Is there an underlying assumption in the tradition that individuals (i.e. low SES, disenfranchised minorities) who struggle with basic needs/immediate problems in their lives are not capable of philosophical thinking?

Hi all! I was wondering what are some detailed questions to ask current graduate students to assess whether: The program is the right fit for you as a potential student Whether most students are happy in the program and community Whether there have been unexpected setbacks or surprises from the program How prepared the students are after graduating from the program, and how they chose their career paths Whether students have good support/resources/flexibility Thanks in advance!

SO interesting! Never thought of the topic that way. I'll definitely check out the paper. Thanks for all of your responses! It's a good reminder to keep perspective on the value and contribution of each field

I realize this may start some controversy but I had this thought while interviewing with a few psychodynamic-oriented clinical PhD programs last year and wanted to get others' thoughts. To be fair, I am slightly biased because I'm a research-focused applicant (I was previously interested in psychodynamic theories before I became involved in more science-based and neuro-research while working after college). From my experience, it seems like psychodynamically trained professors have a narrow view of what "real" psychotherapy is (i.e. psychodynamic only) and believe that clinical training needs to be gained during graduate school. In contrast, the research-focused professors seem to think that critical thinking skills are rooted in good researchers, which translates to good clinicians. It also seems like psychodynamically trained clinicians are very focused on pathologizing their clients and even validating the pathology in their research topics (which doesn't necessarily make the pathology untrue but seems like an illogical approach to me and limits the discussion of evidence-based research). I have found research-focused faculty to be more open-minded and stimulating when it comes to discussions. With neuroscience becoming the forefront and computerized skills (Matlab, python, etc.) becoming more valued in the workforce, is the psychodynamic tradition dying? Do you think it is an archaic way of approaching the study of the human mind? If we think of how we moved from the history of psychiatrists who used to lock up sane patients in mental hospitals and use (what is now considered) insane techniques to relieve mental ailments, can I ask what the difference between that is and the validation and pathologizing of techniques used by psychodynamically-trained clinicians today?

I only used Interfolio for Temple's program because they process the entire application that way. Not sure how you use it for the other programs if they're not requesting the website?

I didn't do well on my Psych GRE either. The test is all rote memorization, and I decided it wasn't worth re-taking for $200. It's been a few years since I took Intro Psych 101. Almost all schools told me it isn't important, and I ended up not even sending it to most schools.

I will not apply to faculty who are unresponsive to my emails (currently, there has been only ONE). Honestly, I know they are busy but this is part of their job description, and I think it is a bit rude as they went through the same process we did to get to where they are today. Ya know?

Awesome. Good luck everyone! I'm also writing different essay for a few schools and also considering pure research Developmental programs. Sending out good vibes to all!!

This will be my 2nd attempt to get into a clinical psych program. I'm surprised by how quickly the year is going but I also feel a bit exhausted having to do this again after giving it my all last year. I'm really afraid I won't be accepted since my projects have been pending, and my application will not be all that different. I also wrote an amazing personal statement that I worked on for months, and it did get me noticed by my POIs. However, I'm not sure how I can rewrite it (or if I should make my statement more general this time since I believe a flaw in my application was that I was way too specific with my research ideas/interest). I was wondering if most of you who are re-applying are applying to research-focused programs or more of the general dual programs (like Adelphi, LIU, etc.)? I wanted to ask how you are assessing which programs to apply for. I remember I saw a ton of programs on the interview page which I did not even consider/know about. How are you guys getting your info (just individual research?) What other alternatives than clinical do you have planned (counseling, PsyD programs?) Thanks in advance!!

1st cycle for clinical psych PhD programs- rejected to all. I applied to all top-tier programs (I was probably a bit too confident) and I had very specific interests which maybe I articulated too much in my statement. But I received positive feedback and can always improve my application for next cycle. I was anxious during the application cycle but now I'm thinking...eh as long as I'm alive, anything is possible. Michael Jordan missed over 300 important shots. I have a great and great paying job. More importantly, I know my priorities and what I want out of life, which is an achievement in itself. Good coping tactic: Exercise, eat healthy and take care of yourself! I've just been very focused on myself, esp. Cooking and eating organic/non-GMO food since the application cycle which is doing wonders to my stamina and energy levels ? I'm thinking of running a half marathon for the first time soon

Thanks! I really want to get into this program!

They're making decisions until April 15. Not sure what this means either

So if you haven't heard back and are seeing people receiving acceptance/rejection...does it mean you are waitlisted?

Unless you were not a psych undergrad, I would recommend against it. Basically, the program is a cash cow for NYU. Everyone rejected from the PhD program is automatically accepted to the MA program (I went to NYU undergrad and one of the faculty told me this)

Wow...all amazing programs. What have you done and how can I become more like you?

Hello, I'm right there with ya. Starting to plan my coming year now

Is LIU Brooklyn Clinical finished with acceptances?

Are LIU Brooklyn offers officially done?

Thanks. I applied to 14 programs but out of them, I think only 3 are nearly perfect research fits. I spent a year researching programs, and this is the list I came up with. The other 11 are faculty I've followed or what I am interested in but haven't gotten deeply into yet. I already work with prominent psychiatrists whose research has influenced/aligned with mine. I'm already thinking about doing my dissertation with the data we've collected so far. That said, I do not want to become a psychiatrist. Clinical psych seems to be the field that will give me the research background and training I want along with licensure so I can work directly with patients. I definitely want to give it at least another go next year if I don't get in this year. After considerable thought, I switched entire fields in the past 2 years so that I could gain research experience and finally apply to clinical psych programs. It wouldn't make sense at this point to switch again just because I didn't get into a program this year.

Thanks, I'm trying to keep my head up in this stressful process