amazingbutternutsquash

I applied to some Have you heard back from any yet?

Hello! So I agree with what everything everyone else has said about analyzing existing data (I got 9 poster presentations that way, 7 of which were first author AND 3 under review pubs, 2 of which are first author). Even if you're not working with them, some faculty also welcome students contacting them with interesting research questions related to their existing datasets. But I also want to add that completing a meta-analysis is fantastic if you don't have access to an existing dataset. Meta-analyses are more quantitatively rigorous than literature reviews, and consequently are more meaningful to publish and more highly cited. There are several excellent books out there on how to conduct one, and if you have a mentor who is well versed and/or interested in learning more about this technique it could be a good option.

I'm really glad you posted this! You gave me hope, lol. Two of my interviews are going to overlap, but I'm not ready to throw out either program if I can help it (I know I won't accept an offer without visiting -- that just seems like a bad idea). Also, I had a colleague who applied last year who said certain schools were willing to let her interview on other weekends by herself. Has anyone else heard of this/know of a tactful way of asking about it? I didn't apply to any schools I wasn't sincerely interested in, and ideally I'd like to visit any that give me the opportunity.

I didn't apply there, but have you tried contacting the graduate school or grad school admissions? They should be able to help you out.

I didn't apply, but according to the results search one person has been accepted into that program. I know that Penn State sends out acceptances in waves, though, so I wouldn't take that to mean that no one will contact you.

I think the other thing to remember is that plenty of places send out invites in waves. Like, they'll see who accepts the first round and then send out others. I know one of my programs sent out interview invitations over the course of three weeks last year! Definitely don't lose hope!

I mean, I feel the same way about myself as an applicant (at least sometimes ?). I have weaknesses, but everyone I have contacted has been super excited to hear from me given my experience, my connections, and my expertise. But that isn't any reason to get complacent, you know? Sure, the admissions statistics are better than for clinical programs but that doesn't guarantee admission by any stretch. It comes down to a) how much your potential advisor wants you (read: fit) and b) whether they have funding. That requires selling yourself as a candidate. I'm aware that the people I'm competing against are probably excellent. Ultimately, my decision to contact PIs comes down to the fact that I am willing to do everything I can to get myself the opportunities I want. From what I've heard, contacting more than one person is fine, but contacting two people is slightly more acceptable than contacting three. It's better to be focused and know what you want from your PhD than to be an "anything goes" type of candidate.

I think you should go ahead an email them. It's not too late -- I got a responses from two PIs who want to set up a meetings to chat about my work before I apply yesterday. They're busy, we're busy. It's a little late, but don't worry about it too much. Don't get me wrong, it's super intimidating and I basically had a panic attack for each letter I sent ? But here are the benefits: They get a chance to talk with you and connect with you before you apply. It puts a face and personality to your name/application, and, according to my mentor, makes them more likely to champion your application/fight for you to get in. I like this part because they get to see how excited I am, lol, and they seem to like that. You learn more about the current direction their research is going. The papers they have published are snapshots of their research an unknown number of years/months ago. They could still be interested in the same things, they could not. You don't know. But if you find out, you have the chance to incorporate that into your personal statement. Apparently some mentors will not admit students they haven't talked to. It's hard to tell from the outside who these individuals are. If they know your current mentor, it's a chance to network. In some places, it's an expected part of the process and not doing it is a faux pas. (Unless their program/web page says not to email, I would do it). You get a sense of them as a person. Would they be good to work with? Are they kind? Are they supportive? How do they talk about their current/previous students? Getting in is one thing, being in an environment that supports finishing is another. You get a sense of their mentoring style. There are a lot of great people in my field who I might share research interests with, but we're incompatible insofar as mentoring style goes. My ideal would be someone who will meet with me regularly (weekly, biweekly) but who is still pretty hands-off. I don't do well with someone who wants to micro-manage me and the direction my research takes (think the junior colleague model of mentoring). Don't get me wrong, there are a number of places in the application process where you can find these things out. But when you consider the benefits, I think the downsides don't mean much. Here's a thread on GradCafe from last year that helped me out a lot. I recommend taking a look:

What does your mentor think? My quant scores are okay-ish (just above 50th percentile) but I have taken every stats class my program has to offer (about six classes including a number of advanced topics). Faculty I've discussed this with have said that this, along with my quantitative research, is likely to make up for the mediocre GRE score. The place they suggest I focus my effort is on the personal statement -- that's where you really sell yourself to the program. The main thing is to make it past the cutoffs. But other professors might give different advice?

Hi everyone! So, as I've emailed professors that I'm interested in working with quite a few of them have come back and said they would like to skype/talk on the phone with me about their current research, my current research, etc. Since (according to my mentor) this type of interview typically happens after applications are in, I was a little surprised but I'm taking it a.) as a good sign and b.) as a sort of preliminary interview. My thought is that they probably want to get a feel for me as a candidate (and whether I would be a reasonable person to work with). So my questions are these: Have any of you experienced this before? What sorts of questions were you asked? What do you think the purpose of a pre-application interview was in your case? What would you suggest doing to prepare? Thanks all!

I second this! Personally, I've found that the big differences between these fields aren't so much in the topic areas studied (especially between human development and developmental psych) but in how the research is conducted (e.g., experiments vs observational studies), how interdisciplinary the work is, and the way they consider personal context/what that context is. But all of that still depends on the faculty member and the department in question.