Plasticity

Political, Social, and HD programs have become incredibly competitive in recent years. Personally I would take some more time to get relevant research experience, narrow down your interests (you come across as someone who fits better in a political science program than psychology), and get some pubs/presentations to help offset your low GPA.

Right now the shift is going back to training you as a clinical psychologist first with some neuropsych experience, and then you specialize on internship, post-doc, etc. So neuropsych training is really 7-8 years. You really need to find an advisor who is a neuropsychologist and a program that offers some neuropsych training in its in-house clinic (you want a program with an in-house clinic!). It does not need to be a "neuropsych track", just an advisor and some experience within the program. Second, you need to look at what type of training model the school practices, clinical science, Boulder, etc. and if that aligns with your interests and career plans. Be warned, if you are into research, clinical science programs are more difficult because not only are your program benchmarks/comps about clinical training, but you also have to incorporate research into those program milestones. Students in my program are publishing 1-2 articles per year during their training on top of all the coursework and clinical hours.

Unfunded = waaaaaay too little return on investment, so run. As for rankings...Rankings don't matter unless it means you will be struggling to get pubs and clinical/assessment hours.

This happens every year and the funding card is a broad statement. In many cases it is due to funding but more about who gets to take a student. For example, some of "the waitlist" is because at many schools only 4 profs can take a student but 5 interview in case a prof does not get there top choice students (they accept elsewhere, etc.), then number 5 can select. It is common to be on the waitlist and be a top choice. A lot has to do with time, if your program interviews earlier (January) there is a better chance of waiting longer due to other candidates still interviewing elsewhere (February into early March).

In applying to UMB and UCONN last year, UCONN was very quick with interviews after the deadline (3 weeks). I did not receive and interview and actually never even got a rejection letter after having multiple conversations with the POI. UMB was all over the place with some interviews being extended a few weeks after the app deadline and some a month + later. Appeared to depend on the POI. It all worked out in the end though!

It's a small world and it absolutely will. It's just not exactly professional imo and once you know a little bit about someone you can easily play detective and see what other forums/stuff they are into.

Loving all the people creating accounts to ask for POI info. This is getting ridiculous.

1. Don't BS, don't name drop, don't rehearse answers. All these things are easily spotted and a quick way to give away a potential spot. Be yourself! 2. Don't be intimidated by people you are interviewing against. Don't get caught up in discussing accomplishments and pissing contests (if this is observed you can probably count yourself out). Be friendly and kind to all. 3.Make sure the program also fits for you and you believe you could work well with your advisor. Pay attention to current graduate students, their attitudes, their accomplishments, etc. Interview weekend is a two way street. You should leave the interview feeling impressed with the program and wanting to be there. If not, look elsewhere.

4.0 really seems to be the "unofficial cutoff" unless you have pub(s).

Some advisors truly receive hundreds of emails over the course of an app cycle, sometimes dozens per day. You cannot fault them imo.

I would definitely NOT discuss your disability in your statement, 9/10 times it is an instant turn off. Also, knowing a few people in BC's program, is not overly competitive so given your stats I would definitely say you are competitive there.

Extracurriculars don't matter and there is really no such thing as a "safety" when applying to PhD programs. For schools like UNC, Vandy, and Duke you are a little "light" on research experience. Cognitive Neuro is becoming VERY competitive. When I interviewed at some lower R1s there were applicants with 3-5 years research experience, 10+ posters, 5+ pubs, etc. Are your pubs in well regarded journals? What author are you?

Yes, "fully funded" just means it is the most money they can pay you. Not, here is full tuition and enough money to survive on. Learned that the hard way, still have a 1k bill each semester.

Have to disagree here. Spend extra time on schools you fit really well and are competitive at (GRE/GPA somewhat close to) and send 4-6 GREAT apps at programs and maybe a couple "reach" programs. Rather than 10+ apps to schools that you "could" fit at and send "decent" apps too. Spend weeks, months if you have them, on the writing parts of your applications and start a fresh one for each program. Admissions can see personal statements that have been copied/pasted or are a generic. First time I applied I got wrapped up in the number of programs (applied to 8 clinical and a couple neuro), I ended up not having a lot of time to make the best apps I could. Second time I really only fit at one clinical program that was accepting (and was a reach) and fit better at neuroscience programs. I got into 4/5 programs I applied to. Applying in numbers does not always increase odds unless you have the chance to send the best app you possibly can to each one imo.

Sounding solid. Everyone with a master's degree who applies generally has a 3.8-4.0 so make sure you hit that. Figure out what you want to research for the next 5+ years, get a narrowed down research/clinical focus.

Given your stats and plan to apply to many schools, I wouldn't worry about multiple cycles. Very, very solid, just finish it off with a great personal statement.

I would avoid LSU at this point. It was a dream school of mine years ago but now I'm quite happy I did not end up down there. The APA has put their accreditation on probation following something. If you think of the degree mills out there that get accredited, whatever was happening down there must have been pretty bad.

I have been reading up on this extensively to make the transition as easy as possible and have a life that is not completely consumed by my program and stress. Reddit has some great info on this and it seems widely agreed upon that learning to say "no", not biting off too many projects/service commitments, and keep a work-like schedule make life easier. I noticed when TA'ing last year many of the other TAs spent most of their days talking to other TAs or profs and then stressing and claiming their 20-hour a week position was more like 40. The TAs who kept their doors shut got things done, never complained about "all-nighters", and were much less stressed. This idea was echoed in a few threads where many posters who say they work (or thought they used to work) 60-80 hours a week acknowledge that many of these hours are spent off task and not actually working. I'm not saying there is not a lot of work in these rigorous programs, I just want to be as productive as possible and avoid wasting time to keep the number of hours spent "working" down. Another thing that has been echoed by current grad students in my program is practice the term "good enough grad school". In that, you do not have to be perfect in your coursework (dont abandon it either) but put more focus onto your research (Im at an R1 that employs a clinical science model and most benchmarks are research related). I believe the view is it is about building a CV, not a perfect transcript. My goal is to keep work like hours from 730-330 or so and limit work to being done while on campus so I'm not consumed once home. Keep the home area for relaxing and enjoying life. I'm also avoiding buying a parking pass so I have to use the bus, this should help me keep those hours and avoid doing unnecessary tasks during my work day. I've also put in some filters so between the hours of 7am and 4-5pm I cannot check FB, reddit, and other sites that I spend too much time on. That way during work hours I can stay focused on getting things done.

Many departments just view the psychology GRE as another hurdle and it helps cuts down on applications. For one program I interviewed for one prof mentioned that since they required the Psych GRE they went from ~350 apps a year to ~225. Nothing wrong with 72%. I got into my top choice program (R1, fully funded clinical neuropsych) with the same score. Depends how strong other parts of your app are.

To be blunt, an online PhD program and "School of Professional Psychology" should tell you all you need to know. It looks like the definition of a degree mill to me. That being said, programs can be what you make of them to an extent and I'm sure people have gone far coming out of there.

After reviewing CCNY it does not look to research oriented and looks more like a LMHC type program.

I don't what is funnier, your objection, citing one study, or citing one 15 year old study. You should also post some studies that suggest using tobacco does not increase the risk for cancer.

That is the way to go and focus on clinical program's that are more research based and a clinical science model of training. Do you think it is an issue of fit/research interests or your application?

Nice to see this. Clinical Psych PhD here. Been looking for a lot places through Craigslist. Seems like a lot more is opening up now that the semester is almost over.

One year I would just love it if everyone boycotted the GRE and applied to schools anyway. It is nothing but a cash grab for ETS.