PokePsych

No if they return there is no difference. My advisor participated in the search last year even though he was on leave (a year of skype/zoom haha). If they're taking students they will participate. Everything is on Zoom now anyway, so locatio wouldn't make a huge difference. Matters more if they actually plan on taknig students..

Ok - well all I can say is that my grad school literally send out an email to not tell bullshit (not with those words) to international students after some faculty member apparently made a promise to an incoming international student about the current situation they can't (legally) live up to. This seemed to be the case because the student was part of a grant that didn't this. And can say I have been misinformed by my own International Office also more than ones (regarding work authorization on campus for J1s and it not being needed - my friend got in trouble over this), but that was in person (their website is correct). But then again, my advisor also told me last year there wasn't an issue if I would arrive about a month - month and a half late (so I could take more time of some other paperwork issues), even though that is not allowed. it will generally be correct indeed in official communication. I don't know what rumors I'm spreading other than to cross check any information you're given if it is not through 'official' channels (e.g., your advisor saying things with the best intentions; other grad students). All I'm spreading here is the offical information I got from MY international office - I guess you could also call them facts? Or because they're from a different school they're rumors? I may not be in your situation but I am just as much an international student Just FYI: Policies vary a lot per school too (Duke for example has an excellent webpage; but see also how it differs from for example Cornell)

Is this from the department or International office/HR? Departments are horribly uninformed about the legal aspects in general. Have seen them almost break the law for international students now a couple of times and stories are common in that regard.

which field is it?

private funds are usually used for PhD students, not for master's students in MOST of Europe. They could potentially secure you an RA-ship, but the visa generally limits how much you can work (note: PhDs are usually seen as employees, so they don't have that issue).

Just FYI - immigration lawyers in the US are making a fuzz that potentially ALL non-immigrant visas will be canceled in the coming days/weeks (i.e., the sticker thing to enter) so everyone who is abroad (or traveling abroad) has to re-apply anyway. Received emails that ALL people who can return should do so ASAP, so at least they can stay/be here (you can legally stay as long as you have a valid I20/DS20--(whatever your year was)) So even if you manage to get a visa soon, it may be cancelled again :')

This strongly varies per university, and the only way to know is to ask them. Plus what Quals are may also vary. Other things to consider are 1) what is your offer in terms of funding and the like in the US (and did you get an offer? Usually you have apply before you can just hop over, although exceptions are there). Given that funding is tight, this may influence a lot. Also, just because you have an advisor there doesn't necessarily mean they'd take you. 2) What are resources like in general (e.g., money, RAs, etc.) and other things such as classes that may benefit you. Similarly, do you feel fit to the department etc. 3) If you want to stay in academia, which university may give you an edge on the job market 4) Is there any other faculty you want to collaborate with. At both places, not necessarily as an advisor but also as someone to run a project with. In the end, if you want to stay in academia, you also want multiple people to vouch for you 5) Which place do you also prefer to live/work/etc.? Do you have a partner that may complicate things? Visas you need to consider? Etc. My advisor moved around due to unforeseen circumstances and we've always made it work - I would also ask your adivsor for his/her advise on this to be honest. They may know other things that matter to you too.

nothing different from other international students really. Also - there will be a decline of international students in general, as nobody is able to obtain a student visa at the moment - regardless of nationality (Canadians may be an exception, they have slightly different procedures). So I guess things, at least in psych, will just become very American-centric if this continues and takes the American, white, middle/upper class psych as the standard of everything. Nothing new, but at least that was changing, partly due to the presence of international students.

Be mindful of whether you really want to study clinical psych and what to be practitioner, or whether you want to do research on cultural differences in health/pain disparities - the latter is commonly found in social psych department (but wouldn't allow you to be a practtioner).

It is - evo psych has a pre conference. Let's just say it's a good 'party' where usually 'something' happens.

For most schools, unless those who really want to go out of their ways, unless you have an American social security number and bank account, it's going to be an issue. Already heard of places informing people that they are unable to pay people without that information.

It shouldn't affect too much as they can technically still change it in the embassy (i.e., I put 7 years as my DS2019 said, bu tthey changed it at the embassy to 5 years as that is the maximum duration of the visa). As long as you're not dishonest or stating years BEYOND your I20/DS2020 you should be OK.

YOu'll be a non-immigrant (like J1 visa), so you are a non-immigrant. Immigrant announcement will therefore no apply to you.

@CeXra If you actually read what I said - I said I agreed that the OP may give the wrong impression BUT that I also agree with you that the opinion of worth and other things being said may have been prematurely formed by @Psyche007. Nor do I see anyone making assumptions about worth other than Psyche007. I do think the language was too strong for my preference and the judgement too harsh, but such judgments are commonly made in Academia (e.g., who is 'worth' of funding is a central question). I don't think it was Psyche007's job to call on people's worth, but I do think he/she/they raised something else important to which people primarily responded. I think most people felt OP may give the impression he/she/they don't want to fully commit to the PhD (i.e., invested enough), including the annoying parts that come with any job. Given that OP initially indicated he/she/they didn't want to do the 'fluff', people were questioning if he/she/they were really committed to a PhD. I don't think that is a weird response that people then question whether OP is 'motivated' enough, since a PhD comes with many downsides. Thus, rather than the right motivation, as you frame it, I think this was more a question of whether OP wanted to really commit to a PhD, including the bad parts that are sort of a requirement (i.e., motivated enough). Some people may have issues with OP's motivation, Psyche007's comments seems suggestive of that. Most people who responded did not seem to raise that. I don't see anyone else make it about 'morality' or the right motivation. Furthermore, knowing the Evo psych field quite well, they're very tight-knit AND some of the parts OP objects against will not sit well with this community - which in turn will harm their likelihood of completing a PhD (unhappy advisor = problems). He/she/they should be made aware of that. Similarly, asking whether a PhD is the right route for OP to complete his/her/their goals is not weird - and again, this is not necessarily questioning OP's motivation. Just because I don't go in a full-blown attack on someone and start calling people full of themselves and all sorts of other things doesn't mean we don't agree. Nonetheless, the way we say things is just as important as what we say - this goes for most things academia (including writing, presenting, and so on). There are many things wrong with our field/area of research but its just how it works unfortunately. I don't like it nor agree with it, but personally choose to confront people in other ways. There are ways to call people out on their assumptions and biases. It's not wrong to call people out, yet there are ways to do this in a more constructive way. I also don't think anybody said you didn't have a valid point - I think people have issues with the way you communicated it. Plus, the way you respond takes attention away from the very valid fact that you make that academia is not inclusive - however OP should be aware of that IF he/she/they want to get into a graduate program.As I literally wrote 'is that right? No.', because it isn't. But we all play the part until we get in, and then choose or battles wisely to try to change the system. @Belkis I would recommend looking into programs and their requirements. Usually their handbooks. You'll see that Europe usually has fewer and more independence, although the application processes tends to be very different. Evolutionary psychology is still a contested and delicate topic - you may still end up being called not a 'real' psychologist given how the field sits with the rest of psychology (particularly now recently a lot of its theories have been called into question - never a boring day in evolutionary psych). I also wouldn't use social media as leading - people who want to criticize mainly go on there. Plus, you may face the issue again that you don't have a 'clinical' PhD or whatever. I also don't think Kahneman and Gilbert are good comparisons AT ALL - Kahneman has a Nobel prize after all, Gilbert has developed some pretty good theories and has yeaaaaaaaaars as a professor under his belt and is rightfully a leading expert in his area of expertise. It's unlikely you'll establish yourself in that way during your PhD. These are also people with years of professor experience, tons of papers, won many awards and so on. It's unlikely that will happen during your PhD itself or that you will be seen as an expert in that sense (people may write but OP is not a Professor, etc.). You may want to also look into some advisors who have written books themselves in this area (e.g., Mark van Vugt, Mike McCullough, etc.) as they'd probably more open to this avenue.

just put what is on your i-20. This is what the school indicats as the length of your program.

A note of hope; USCIS is facing massive financial issues due to the lack of visa processing. Knowing the president's attitude to money...

Okay let's try to be helpful instead of responding to other people, because a lot of your comments are just an attack to others and not helpful to OP. You obviously were triggered, but the way you go after people is not OK. OP seems to want to do a PhD and people have their own reasons for doing one. I agree with @Psyche007 (sorry @CeXra) that OP may give the impression that he/she did not want to go 'all in' to get the PhD. OP nuanced that in the second post though, and honestly feels what a lot of grad students may be feeling (and professors). The comment about what OP brings to the table was IMHO prematurely formed, but 'perceived motivation' may be one of the strongest assets a potential student brings. However the response was disproportionate (Plus you also call someone full of themselves, how are you not doing the same thing back?!). I think the response were helpful such that OP can maybe see how talking about a PhD in such terms can really rub people, particularly in academia the wrong way. Is that right? No. But so many things in academia are not right and problematic, but it's also a matter of choosing one's battles wisely and getting in is a whole different discussion. Yes, many people don't do a PhD out of a deep passion for the field, but very few would express that. That being said, I don't think its wrong to ask people whether they're really want to do a PhD. There are a lot of undergrads that I work with who want to do a PhD who would probably have better options around to suit their needs and goals, yet are just really suck into this grad school mindset. I don't think its wrong to raise that question. Anyway, yeah I also got a nice sum of money backing me up, but still my department requires me to teach, do 'professional services' as they call it (100% mandatory, although not found in the grad handbook), expects me to come to colloquium and 'support' the academic community in other ways. This is 'despite' the money I have, such that my advisor has money 'to buy me out', but the department won't let him. Even if not official requirements on paper, I'm sure I'll get issues if I don't do these duties. And I'm at a top-tier too and transferred from another top-tier. And I HAVE seen students being booted out of the program for not being 'integrated in the department enough' and 'cutting corners' in such services, even if they HAD money. Some schools may let you get away with it, but it will still set bad blood with other advisors and/or students, who just may as much 'harm' or 'help' you. Do I like going to every colloquium? No. Am I expected to go and do faculty make issues if we dont? yes. It's really considered a form of respect or something. Are they program requirements, officially no. But the department still uses them as an evaluative standard. OP may therefore really need to figure out what departments AND PIs do not have such expectations, and they'll probably be scarce. Such expectations may also be other things (e.g., who manages undergrad RAs? Who does certain paperwork), is there a lab manager who could take duties of? Having money doesn't mean one is always able to use it too, some places have (unofficial) requirements that they may still enforce. However, I've seen it in the EU a lot more often since you often won't take many classes and have fewer duties and expectations. That said, a Master's degree is required for mainland Europe, which will generally include more hours on campus. If you an EU citizen I would definitely look into places there and just start applying to things that interest you or see if there is any prof you can help to get into the academic network (lot more important there). If you were to common to the US or potentially another non-EU place, you'd also run into potential visa issues for family if you'd like to bring them and their ability to get a workpermit. Furthermore, getting a student visa is often contingent on proof of funding. Similarly, work on campus (TA etc) is often the way you don't have to pay tuition. I would be very mindful of how you frame things, and also whether you let your previous experiences influence what you expect graduate school to be. It is not normal, and shouldn't be normal to do certain 'chores' for your PI. That says more about the PI and is not something that I have seen happen a lot. If your friend can't do research because of that, he needs to discuss things with his PI. This is not common. Nonetheless, other things that have been raised. Academia may look like a cult, but I've been warned so many times by faculty and my advisor that it is really a small community in which everybody knows everybody (particularly evolutionary psychology, with their (in)famous SPSP party and so on). The fields you mention DO function like this. Furthermore, part of being part of the community is doing services (e.g., unpaid peer review, etc.; organize symposium for which you even have to pay to attend). Bottom line, who do you know, who do you work with, who likes you (and who doesn't) is a big part. Another thing to be mindful of is also how you frame your future goals. Particularly in psych (and those areas in psych), many advisors expect their students to be the 'next generation' of academics (although I know some exceptions in Social Psych). Some people in my program strategically frame it to their advisors as not being 100% sure about academia yet, while most grad students know they don't have that interest at all. Even if the advisor is OK, the admission committee may also make a fuzz/problem. That being said, there are also good things about being on campus a fair bit. Other grad students can be the best collaborators, there are many interesting people to be met. Even if you don't like the colloquium, you may still learn something (and usually good food afterwards).

Students generally don't have things like property or significant savings (although partly depending on your age), so they would not really consider that. And it's not that Canada is a foreign country to you - you have family which you could stay with, a bank account, etc. So it is not unreasonable you may choose to head there after graduation. Plus your passport would allow you to stay there anyway, so its not like you have to apply for a visa to be in Canada. Strong ties are a bit of a weird thing. I applied for a visa in a third country, on a tourist visa, but they still thought it was OK because my husband is from there and has family there. So that was for me enough to prove strong ties, although I know I'm also from what is considered a very 'low risk' country in terms of (over)staying my visa. It really seems they mainly care whether you have a 'reason' to leave afterwards, so strong ties is something that would result in you leaving the US when your degree is completed. I don't think a Canadian passport would make them more suspicious that you're not going to leave the country.

Are you going to apply for an F1 visa? I remember there was something about Canadians being able to enter in a somewhat different way. I.e. strong ties - this is often really a question of 'could you feasibly go back to that country to live there' rather than where do you have the strongest ties (i.e., strong and strongest are different). I.e., is there a good likelihood you intend to go back. Do you have proof of ties there (e.g., a bank account, address where you would live, family). Similarly, your plans afterwards may matter (where do you intend to go after your stay in the US - in general, this should not be the US).

What are the questions that you 'keep' asking yourself. And try to find a common theme in that. As for research experience - it's very difficult to compare. Quality over quantity for sure. However, many skills are transferable, so it doesn't necessarily have to be int hat specific topic.

If anyone has any questions or wants a SOP proofreader, feel free to reach out

Did you got info on admissions in any other form? I got dumb set up your student account emails from places that forgot to tell me they rejected me (some schools never did - even 2 years later haha).

> the max visa duration is 5 years. I put on 7 (the time on my DS-2019 - which is the same as the I20 but for J1), but they shortened it to 5. Nonetheless, just follow what is on your I20. Worst case you get picked out of line and they tell you the max duration is 5 years. You did not make a mistake. > I would indeed say put your own country as permanent address (or home address, if it doesn't ask for permanent). I put 'post address' or something as the local one. In general, your home address is in your home country (i.e., the place you hold a passport or green card), where you will be able to return. There is however mixed information on this online (it should not be in the US though!). Some say you can put any local address as long as you have been residing from there longer than 6 months (e.g., I lived in a third country for 4 years, so I put that as my home address, but I also lived with my husband in his country, so we have strong ties to both places). Others say its a place you will return to after coming back. If you're on a temporary visa in your current location, I would probably put your original country. May just want to ring the embassy/hotline

Depends on the program overall. In Europe u generally don't apply for a PhD program as in the 'program' (with the UK sometimes as an exception), but rather a specific grant and/or project. European PhDs (especially main land) will generally expect that you have a Master's already. There are also very few evolutionary psychology 'programs' - rather some faculty that does research on it within a broader psych department. As for interest, any PhD program on a 'top school' is competitive, regardless of the specific area I would say. In general, more popular topics will have more applicans but generally also more faculty working on it.

contact your new international office. I left and came back with a new DS-2019 and that was fine. Didn't have a signature, because I wasn't at that school yet. They can't endorse it I believe until you actually took classes (they sign to show ur in good academic standing, but if you haven't taken classes yet, what can they do). But double check with your international office