PokePsych

take your year off as long as it s relevant. It may help your chances too. PhD is a long ride, so you want to end up somewhere that you really like.

Being an RA is quite broad and RA duties vary. You want to think of RA experience as relevant experience in some sort of training. Not all RA experiences are equal; simple coding vs. being highly involved in a study are very different experiences. In a similar vein, what counts as 'relevant' experience also varies. Obviously the closer the topic is to what you'd like to pursue, the more things you learn that are potentially relevant for your PhD career.

I had people in my cohort who came straight out of undergrad (I was at an R1), but I do not know that much about their backgrouds

Ah yeah, having a Master's helps. You'd be surprised how many people from the US without a Master's apply each time to my university back in Europe. Not a chance. I guess you could just apply then and motivate based on point 2 & 3 + your interest in the project fields (note however that a lot of people from my social psych cohort ended up in different departments though, so I don't know if that's really 'enough' reason, since it's pretty common) Do note that often US PhDs are regarded as better/prefered over European PhDs.

Majority of schools would want you to live there at least at the beginning of your study. Often you have other duties (other than research) that include teaching, departmental duties, etc. UK may be an exception to this.

> You'd generally need a Master's to do a PhD at most European schools (except UK I believe, but you really want to check this). Bachelor (undergrad), Master's and PhD generally tend to be separate in (mainland) Europe (i.e., you enroll in a Master's before you do a PhD). Note that most places do require you to do teaching (the amount varies, but again, it also varies per university in the US). However, some of my friends in for example the Netherlands teach way more than I do in their PhD. > A lot of places (especially in Psych) do not have an annual application (like the US), but rather have an opening when a PI gets funding. This is because most universities don't treat PhDs as students, but rather as employees (i.e., researchers). Some schools have an annual grant you can compete for; you usually need to write a grant proposal for this. > Do you think you have a fair shot in getting into your university of choice? You may/may not be able to apply for permanent residence based on the country upon your PhD - some countries require 5 yrs of continuous residence (PhDs tend to be 4), income, or other requirements. However, doing a PhD somewhere does not automatically qualify you for permanent residence. Furthermore, although cost of living may be lower; did you check the stipened amount/paycheck (note that taxes are a lot higher in a lot of European countries). > What makes you think your advisor would be better at the other school? Note that you usually work only with the PI at most European schools (since you are tied to a specific grant - which is where the money comes from - this was actually a reason why I left), so whether or not you like other research in the department may be less of a concern. In terms of feasibility. Sure, it would be possible. There are tons of US PhD students in Europe. I don't think it is necessarily a deal-breaker to be enrolled in a PhD before, but you certainly want to come up with better reasons (e.g., you really like a certain project) than research-teaching balance (unless you do more than 2+ days teaching at this point, I don't think you'll get a better balance), cost of living, or an unavailable supervisor (my experience in Europe varied per person with how much they prioritized their students).

I don't think its aggressive given how the university is making a mess of things (I don't know if you have an Ombudsperson Adelaide, otherwise get them involved too..)

The shorter the better! I didn't include my CV but wrote one sentence about my background (completed my MSc... blahblah) Do ask 1) whether they plan on taking new students, 2) state your interests (and confirm they align with the direction the PI is moving), 3) potentially ask for other recommendations of people to work with if you feel comfortable (they understand you're not gonna apply to one university)

There's still a lot of time left until it is the end of the month! I know this probably won't help a lot, but try to stay positive (and otherwise, you have every right to throw a massive fit at your university since they're breaking policy, not you. I had a similar situation and ended up getting $$$ through the ombudsperson, since obviously the uni was at mistake (in my situation))

This.

contact each school - wouldn't expect people to know specific admission policies here (and still better confirmed by the school).

You could try, they won't move the interview weekends for you, but some people may make time to meet up with you. I think you can only do it after you receive some sort of 'invite' though (i.e., you made it to the 'next round'). Although it's better to visit, I ended up doing everything over Skype. Don't think it harmed my chances in any way.

One of the things to keep in mind is that a program/prof may look amazing now in your mind (or basically the image you are creating of it), but upon visiting/meeting this person may disappoint. This could also work out the other way (so a program/prof you may not have been incredibly excited turns out to be a great interpersonal fit + you love the program). I have people in my cohort that happened to, so they ended up being happy that they applied to some places that they felt they may have been a less good fit initially. One girl applied to about 12 programs and said her whole order basically changed after having done visits and meeting people. Keep in mind that programs vary in culture, requirements, location, expectations, etc. Some programs are very collaborative, some are not. Sometimes you'll get a secondary advisor, sometimes you don't, etc. Also think about what you need with regard to those things (some people thrive best in very communal type of departments, some are fine more independently). Furthermore, also keep in mind people's interests are changing - so double-check this with people they're interested in. I wanted to apply to some people, but their line of work was moving in another direction, but they recommended me other names. Similarly, I was not 100% sure about my advisor initially but turns out his line of work has moved so much in my direction (but not yet publications) that he ended up being the best fit (although it didn't seem initially so on paper). I also initially wasn't that much into that program because of the location, but it ended up all being great. Also, keep in mind that the majority of people apply to study one topic, but end up doing something related/different often. Very few people end up doing what they initially planned to study (what I do is highly related to my initial topic, but it has also moved a bit). So, I wouldn't be too firm on sticking to one person/one topic, but do keep to a general theme of things (e.g., I'm into macro-level influences, so I've applied to people who have a line of research on that - but not specifically only one macro-level variable or framework). I ended up applying to 7 programs (only people I really wanted to work with), got in at 2. My initial list contained 10 programs, but I dropped some due to finances/not having funding for internationl students/location. Some people applied to far more and got 1 acceptance. Some people are indeed lucky and apply to 1 - 3 and get in. But it's just a very risky strategy... I was recommended to apply to about 8 - 10 programs given my credentials (I also have a MSc. and a lot of research experience). Ask them if they can recommend people. Professors will understand you're not going to apply to one place (and would probably advise applying to one place anyway). If you're interested are indeed broad - then apply to multiple. Personality is a big field, whether it is people studying cultural differences, to whether there are 5 or 6 factors, origins, personality behavioral traces, etc. Evolutionary psychologists also are starting to enter the realm of personality and start trying to explain it. Try to make a list of other people and read up upon their work - see if it interests you as well as you think it could KEEP interesting you. I don't think you're expected to have read all papers by faculty at all. They're generally interested in why you want to work with them and you're interested, but rarely will they ever quiz you on their papers (a lot of profs will rather maybe ask some questions about the field and what you want to do, but not specifically their papers in detail).

I would recommend broadening your 'search' for PI's unless you have very strong reasons to expect that they will pick you out of the pool because you know them or soemthing

I'm already in a social psych program in the US - but happy to help anyone! Good luck everyone!

Could they also emphasize different parts of you as an applicant? I looked also for complementarity in my letters (and had one senior person in there).

If you have multiple sources of income, you're often ought to report them to the university (and if not, there will be consequences). They may deduct some portion given that it could be seen as external funding. Support to go to conferences will depend on your offer, however, shit may hit the fan if they find out you're getting support from two places. Or they may start pushing responsibility on the other school. So you want to look that up first (are there any rules for outside income that you have to report). In that regard, also note that you're probably gonna get in some massive conflict of interest situation with both schools (who can claim your work? which school?), given that you're obviously compromised between the two. So good luck if you have to ever get past an IRB. If you need 'more money' - then consider your actual offers. I was able to save half my stipened over the last year, so if you feel you need to work two jobs - that says way more about your actual funding that is poor. On a side note, in a lot of N-European countries at least people do not work 3 jobs. You realize many places have an actual workweek of like 36 - 38 hrs these days right (on paper...), decent minimum wage, allowances (for which you may qualify), subsidized housing, and so on. Regardless, I agree that it probably not possible to be 'full-time'/fully funded in both places due to residency requirements and so on (e.g., places like the Netherlands would NOT accept you spending a lot of time in a different country and working in another country would most likely violate your visa status for a lot of countries.EU nationals may be exempt, although they're also subject to residency requirements). Visa requirements often also state a max. number of hours you can work on that specific (student)-visa. So you want to look up the ins and outs of each countries visa requirements, including residency, max. work hours, etc. Also look up taxes - you maybe double taxed (or triple if you're an American). Also look up if the school has a residency requirement (i.e., you have to reside in that country to get discounts on tuition or other things, etc.) As for large network. If both programs are in the same field, your PIs may know each other. I would not expect it to look good, given that it is probably received as a half-ass commitment to both schools. So yeah, you probably have a bigger network, but no clue if they actually will think highly of you. Also note that outside of 'class' there are a lot of other meetings you are expected to join, and both universities would expect you to be available the whole work week and probably couldn't care less about your other school/requirements. As for resubmitting the same or a very similar document. Good luck with that. You'll probably be extra monitored for (self-)plagiarism, given your situation. And self-plagiarism is a thing...

Is it legal? Well that certainly depends on the specific rules of each country and how much time you expect to spend in each location. Depending on the country, you probably need to claim 'residency' in one. This could have consequences for your enrollment as well. It may also influence how much you can travel (e.g., some countries have conditions on when and how you can claim residency such having to stay x days within a certain time period to be able to be a resident. Some places also do not allow you to be a resident in more than one country - unless you cannot 'give up' your residency in your country of origin - but certainly not a third-country). If you are not a resident, there's a good chance they'll revoke your visa. Probably also has consequences for your payment. If both pay, you are probably gonna run into issues with taxation given that maybe both countries claim you as a resident (so double taxation). Also check insurance. Some places have national insurance in which you have to enroll. You may run into issues with getting two visa's. You'd need a visa for both countries to work/study for third-country nationals. They may ask questions about why you hold two valid study visa's..

different countries have different accreditations for clinical psychology. APA does not necessarily allow you to practice in other countries (i.e., APA does not allow you to practice in a bunch of European countries that I know of), also check official registration requirements to be able to even use the title of (clinical) psychologists - these are often protected titles. In many countries 'coach' is not a protected title though. Academia maybe, but depends on your credentials of course. You could start here to look for requirements (when in English) https://www.apa.org/international/networks/organizations/national-orgs

People. chill.

comments. 1. People have different relationships with their advisor and even among their advisors. My first advisor during my undergrad was pretty distant, didn't really connect with him. My master's advisor basically treats his students like his children - so yeah we were close. I knew about his kids, sometimes even his relationship troubles, and he knows a lot about my life. My current PhD advisor is a bit more distant/professional but certainly takes my private life in mind. We have shared some personal info, but not to the same extent as my Master's advisor (obviously). Yeah I'd often shared personal opinions (including on faculty and those were also shared with me too for that matter) and things with the latter, but maybe not with the others. That's fine. So lets not start judging people's interaction with their advisors (or friends/family for that matter). Plus I don't think adeleide said it was her opinion that the examiner was jealous? but others have suggested. 2. It does indeed seem that the advisor, in this case, was overconfident. It's the 2nd person I've seen it happen to this year (although to my other friend her committee even told her to take out things her advisor suggested to put in....). And yeah, that's unfair, but well. It happens more often than you think. 3. Academia is just unfair. I mean, I'm not a huge fan of the peer review process (wish it was double blind for that matter), theres a lot of luck (and bad luck) involved, etc. I don't think anyone here is in self-pity, but I think its healthy to express one's frustration?

almost donated all my furniture to other grad students.

have a migraine for 2 days now

me. Admitted in 2018

Holy shit. Thanks, university. All I can say is try to get as many eyes (of anyone who can say something sensible) on your thesis as possible. You can do this!!!!!! And feel free to PM if you need some cheers or some venting.