nessa

While the stigma thing is important to consider, it still comes down to a cost-benefit.

If your problem is interfering with your academics, or you have a strong indication that it will likely interfere with your academics in the future, then you should bring it to the attention of relevant people and only relevant people. If you're having problems and need an incomplete, for example, your professor is more likely to think well of you if they know that you're having problems, are doing something to fix the problem, and have a specific plan in mind when asking for accommodation. Kind of a Hey, Dr. X, I've been having some problems with depression and I'm seeing a counselor about it, but it has interfered with my ability to turn in quality work. I'd like to revise my essay/project/report because I can do better, and will be doing better work in the future.

Otherwise, don't bring it up. It's not about stigma, so much as it's about the answer to one simple question: what do you want them to do with the information? If you don't have anything specific (such as help me find a way to solve the problem or adjust my academic plan), then they don't need to know. If you do have something in mind (other than keeping them informed), then tell them.

However, the best person to ask would be your therapist. S/he may not know the answer, but s/he can help you figure it out.

for a PhD program, you will want to have a relatively focused interest in one area of research, and have chosen your schools based on that focus. Although being interested in psych in general is great, you will want to demonstrate that you have narrowed your interests down to a few specific areas (child neuropsych is a good start, but will probably need to narrow down a bit further), and that people at the schools you are applying to work in those areas. Interest in schools based primarily on geography is generally a red flag- those are both great programs, but there are plenty of others outside of Michigan as well. I may be overly critical of this but schools will want to know where else you are applying, and may wonder if you only are applying to schools in Michigan. For schools like Michigan and Wayne State, it is all about research research research- experience and fit. That's what you should focus on to get in. Good luck!

I have an excellent advisor.

-He makes time to meet with me, and encourages a regular schedule of meeting.  We meet formally every two weeks but also communicate via email.

-He's flexible - we've met over Skype when I was away at conferences or visiting family, or when he had to be away.

-He's managed to balance allowing my independence while giving good guidance, and at different parts of my career.  He guided me much more in the beginning, but now that I am finishing up I do much more of the guiding of our relationship and he functions more like a support system.

-When I got burned out and discussed leaving the program, he remained calm and tried his best to help me deal psychologically.  He was a big factor in actually getting me to stay.

-He gives me really good feedback on my papers and drafts...although not always...prompt.  (However, I have adjusted for this and just try to leave some flexibility/extra time for him to look at my stuff.  Honestly, every advisor has flaws, and this is a tiny one in the large scheme of things.)

-He looks out for my career; he recommends experiences and postdocs and programs; he introduces me to people.  On the flip side, he allows me a lot of independence, and I have largely been able to choose what I want to work on, how much, and how intensely.

-He's just a genuinely nice person.  He encourages me to take time off, asks about my husband, and we chat for a little while about our personal frustrations.  He's had the lab over to his apartment for a party and comes out for drinks and dinner every now and then.  He even brought ice cream bars to lab meeting for my birthday once

Before I chose him to be my advisor we had a conversation that I used to gauge our working styles.  Part of what a good advisor is is consistent from student to student.  You need someone who will give you good feedback - both positive and critical when necessary.  You need someone who will read your drafts in more or less a timely manner.  You need someone who uses positive reinforcement more than any other technique of teaching.  Someone who knows how to strike a good balance between independence and guidance, and someone who is genuinely interested in your career and helping you become better.  You don't want someone who just needs an RA to be a grunt worker, who doesn't seem interested in you or your career, or who's going to micromanage your every move.  You don't need anyone who's never going to look at your work.  But you also don't want anyone who's always going be positive and never criticize you or push you to get better.  You need someone to tell you the hard stuff.

But some things are very personal.  I am highly independent; I like to manage my own time, and I don't want anyone else wanting me to account for hours or anything like that.  I think I would resent working for a professor who wanted that.  However, some people like being a little more managed.  I also don't want anyone telling me what projects to pick up; I can select my own projects, and mostly need someone to bounce ideas off or help me shape them a bit.  But some people prefer that their professors guide them to projects (at least in the beginning) or assign them something to work on.

You can find these things out - some of them - in a conversation.  I went to lunch with my advisor when I was admitted and we basically talked about working styles and his expectations and all that stuff, and it seemed that we were quite compatible both research-interest-wise and personality-wise.
 
*
 
I agree, though that there's nothing inherently terrible about telling someone they are not well-suited for graduate school.  Some people simply are not, and a GOOD advisor tells you when you aren't well-suited for a pursuit rather than let you do it and flounder/flail.  And although an advisor should be overall supportive, I also agree with the above that they are not supposed to be unconditionally supportive.  If you do bad work, or they think that you are going into a research area that will not get you a job, a GOOD mentor will tell you that so you can fix the problem.
 
You may want to check out this book: Getting Mentored in Graduate School.  It's geared towards helping grad students select good advisors/mentors.

My advisor is amazing! He is extremely available to students, encourages us to do conferences and other resume boosters, offers constructive criticism, and goes out of his way to nominate us for fellowships. I have nothing at all negative to say about him.

I think when looking at grad programs, some good questions to ask are:
What is your mentor style... Weekly meetings, hands-off etc?
Do you expect students to be in the lab for a certain number of hours a week or can they work from home mostly?
Do you encourage students to come to you with questions?

Some of these questions might be better for a professors grad students than the professor himself. First year Rotations can also be useful in determining personality for before choosing a lab.

Don't be discouraged! Get experience there and then move on to something better!

Not to be an armchair psychologist or anything, but have you ever been tested for ADD or other learning disorders? Particularly the difficulty in reading test questions and transposing digits is a common indicator of certain types of learning disorders; if we see this in our students at the secondary level, we're supposed to encourage them to see our school psychologist.
 
That sounds unbelievably frustrating. However, I'm glad to hear that your advisor is so understanding of your situation, and he's 100% right: you are there for a reason! Keep it up!

Check out APA DIVISION 36 website... They have a list of schools and faculty who are interested in the study of psychology of religion and spirituality....

I have ADHD. I made it through two BAs with honors before I was diagnosed. I was not diagnosed until I was an adult and my kid got the diagnosis.

Your undergrad counselor was sticking to the letter of the DSM methodology of diagnosing disorders. According the DSM, having the traits/symptoms of a disorder is not enough. The traits/symptoms must impair daily life. A person with a high GPA is not obviously impaired by ADHD, or so your counselor thought. Your counselor is quite obviously not an ADHD specialist.

Get re-evaluated by someone that specializes in ADHD, or barring that, learning disorders. The problem with adults that weren't diagnosed as children is that with maturity comes coping strategies that mask the problem. For a lot of people, that's actually all they need in order to deal with ADHD in their lives. For people in grad school, where second chances aren't easily obtained, coping strategies may not evolve enough on their own. To compound all of this, most people who have ADHD without knowing that this is the thing causing their problems, won't know what to tell the doctor/counselor about how it impairs their daily lives.

An ADHD diagnosis is problematic in more ways than just figuring out if it's ADHD or some other problem, such as stress, lack of sleep, or proper nutrition. ADHD has been over-diagnosed to the point where "everyone knows" that if a kid doesn't sit perfectly still, teachers and parents want to shove pills down their throat to control them, rather than let a kid be a kid. Adults, particularly younger ones, have the added problem that "everyone knows" that they're just looking to score legal methamphetamines. Undiagnosed adults with ADHD are usually confronted with the things that your counselor told you, simply because ADHD is our cultural bad guy.

So. Find someone that specializes in learning disorders and get evaluated. If you are evaluated with ADHD, medication is the least part of the treatment. Behavior modification is the important part. ADHD coaches/counselors teach people coping strategies, and more importantly, how to modify their behavior to use those coping strategies daily.

If you aren't diagnosed with ADHD, or the evaluator thinks your ADHD is too mild for much in terms of treatment, you can still find the tips and tricks ADHD people use. It's pretty much about organizing, routines, habits, and creating an environment. For example, a person with ADHD would set aside a space that is used solely for study. No other activities allowed in that space. This helps to eliminate distractions that are internal, as well as external. ADHD has a strong impulse control problem, not just an inattentive and restless problem. If there's a space that a person, by habit and routine, has ingrained into a single-use place, it's easier to control the impulse. I don't write papers in the same place I surf the web, because otherwise, I'll find myself surfing the web when I should be writing, even when I don't have writer's block problems. The strategies that help a person get a handle on their ADHD can help anyone.

You can google ADHD tips or ADHD tricks and get a ton of tips on how to manage daily life. University libraries will have books aimed at people who want to enter the learning disabilities field in some fashion, so they'll also have books on how ADHD counselors/doctors/coaches can help people with ADHD manage their lives.

Too many people think that all they need is an ADHD diagnoses and a prescription, then magically, the ADHD goes away. As if. The meds make it possible for me to read all of the words in a text in one sitting, from front to finish. They don't make it possible for me to understand it any easier, or to not be distracted when I'm reading, or to get my work done when I'd rather be doing something else, or to sit still completely when I'm doing it, or any number of things. Meds don't make me add stuff to my calendar so I don't forget to do it. They do make it possible for me to hit a golf ball consistently, or to drive with the radio on (when I get to drive). They make a huge difference, but they aren't a cure. That's where behavior modification comes in. And that's where, even if you never get diagnosed with it, you can do something for yourself anyway.

Are you sure it's not you? I ask because you say you had a crappy life before this. There are people who are just miserable no matter what happens. Are you sure that's not you? Also, are these feelings just your interpretation or are they legit? Are your professors really sexist, do they really favor the male students who just pull things out of their ass, do they really shoot down all the intelligent things you say, do you really say intelligent things, do your classmates really talk down to you, and do they really laugh at you?

Most of the math on the GRE is basic algebra and arithmetic, so yes, you do need to know it as a foundation to statistics.  There are also some geometric principles in statistics.
 
I got into a top 15 social psychology program with a 3.42 GPA.  I think with a 3.46 and a 3.6 psychology GPA (which was very similar to my profile) you will definitely be competitive for PsyD programs, and would also be competitive for some clinical psych programs especially with great research experience, strong recommendations and a strong statement of purpose.  Study for the GRE and retake it to get a better score (60th percentile or higher is ideal!)
 
If your eventual goal is a PhD, I honestly wouldn't recommend spending money on an MA or MS program.  If you have research experience...get a job as a research coordinator or lab manager in a psychology department's lab.  Your grades are not a problem, really; however, if you work as a lab manager, you could take graduate-level classes for free and prove your worth, and get a great rec from the PI of the lab.  My lab has had three lab managers and all three have gone on to great programs in psych, 2 of them in clinical psychology.
 
If you do choose to do a master's, then yes, an experimental psychology degree would be fine - but since you want to counsel, I would recommend doing one that would allow you to get licensed as an LPC.  Another option is an MSW and getting licensed as an LCSW.  The upside to an MSW is that you can then go get a PhD in social work OR clinical psychology, and if you have an MSW you could teach at a school of social work in addition to a department of psychology (even with a PhD in clinical psych).

I also agree that you have amazing stats! Many people wish they could have your CV, I'm sure :-). Also, I think that teaching experience is a GREAT use of gap years, especially if you want to be a professor in the future. I'd definitely stress that in your pstatement!
 
Here's my advice... I'm not a licensed psychologist, so this is not any sort of clinical advice, please take it with a grain of salt. This is just my personal advice that I would probably give a friend in the same situation as you:
 
1) First, seek treatment. You didn't mention if you were in treatment and/or taking medication. Personally, I probably wouldn't go through the application process if I didn't feel like I was relatively stable and had a solid treatment team to fall back on. I found the application process incredibly exhausting and stressful, two things that can be difficult for anyone to handle.
 
2) After you feel more stabilized and have good treatment resources, I'd go for it and apply. Make sure you get enough rest during the application and interview process, and keep in close contact with your psychologist or psychiatrist. You can read books by Elyn Saks ("The Center Cannot Hold") and Kay Jamison ("An Unquiet Mind") for inspiration- they both had mental disorders with some severe episodes throughout their career, and they still became 100x more successful than I probably ever will be. Before you transition to your new program and new city, work with your current treatment team to establish a solid treatment team in your new city. You can work with your treatment team to learn how to recognize your triggers, and they can serve as an important safety net to help you get through your program successfully. You will probably also want to check with the program to look at their policies for taking terms off for personal reasons, just in case you ever feel like you need to take some time off over the next few years. And lastly, I'd ask about their health insurance coverage and make sure they cover mental health services.
 
I think it's likely you will have a fantastic career in the field. :-D

How I stay motivated is getting out of the lab and doing what it is I love to do.
 
You and I seem to have similar interests and personalities: we both like methodology, and we both like communicating science to others.  Your dreams seem similar to mine as well!  I do like being a producer of research, but at a smaller scale than would be expected of me at an R1.  And I would rather communicate to the general public about healthcare science than to other scientist in my field.
 
So to give myself a more well-rounded experience, here are the things I've done:
 
-Worked as a hall director for residential life (this was somewhat unrelated to science, but I did get to interact with undergrads on a regular basis, advise them, and get experience in the student affairs side of education).
-Judged the New York City Science & Engineering Fair
-Joined the women in science group at my campus, which sponsors fun sciency stuff including a day to get middle school girls interested in science
-Taught a summer program in my field for two years, designed to get undergraduates excited about my research
-Served on advanced grad student panels giving advice and mentorship to less advanced students in the department
-Had a corporate internship one summer, to decide whether I really wanted to leave academia and work in a corporate environment (I liked it, and it let me know that I could leave academia.  I'm going to try to make it work first, but I know that there's a whole other world out there that I would enjoy in case I get tired or bored).
-Statistical consulting, which I really love.  It gives me the opportunity to help other people with their science, learn about other areas of science and teach people statistics.
-I currently work in an empirical research lab, that helps undergraduates use scientific data and quantitative reasoning in their classwork and research.
 
I also have a grad student in my cohort who just published her first book about popular science and is currently working on a second one - she published the first book shortly after she finished her PhD here.  She's also written for several magazines and newspapers, including the New Yorker, the Times and the Boston Globe.  I've had other friends in grad school write for HuffPo, the Times, Science Mag, the Chronicle...one dude from my department is currently a professor at a top 5 school in my field, but while he was here he wrote a regular column for the Huffington Post.  If you want to write about popular science, DO IT!  Don't wait until you've graduated to do so.  Start off freelancing - contact news outlets and see if they would be interested.  You could make a little side money and do what you really love!
 
P.S.: I hit a wall in my 3rd year, too.  You kind of have to work through it a little; it takes a while to find your passion.  Once I started balancing out my science work with other stuff (related to science, but more public) I felt much happier.
 
P.P.S: I hear you on the methodology thing, but even as a methodologist you need to develop a substantive area.  It doesn't have to be one that you devote your entire life to, though; you just need to pick something that you could conceivably work within for the next 4-10 years (depending on whether you can make a shift in a postdoc).  Like you, I have broad interests; I have settled within an area that I actually care a whole lot about and am passionate about, but there are other things I could work on that are also "oooh, shiny."  Once you get tenure you can do whatever you want, but it may behoove you to develop a substantive area or two that you can work within to publish.  As silly as it is in academia, you at least initially need to be "known for" something.
 
Also, you may want to aim at mid-ranked to less-well-known SLACs, comprehensive universities and baccalaureate colleges.  The reason I suggest that is because the top SLACs often have 2/2 or 3/2 teaching loads because they expect you to be doing research - maybe not quantity, but quality.  If you go to a comprehensive master's university or a more mid-ranked SLAC, though, the teaching load will be heavier (3/3 to 4/4) and the research expectations will be lower, which will free you to focus primarily on teaching if you want.  The downside, of course, is that you will have less time for writing that popular book on cognitive neuroscience and less time for communicating science outside of the university.  So you have to decide what your priorities are and use that to help you select the kind of job you want.  Now is the perfect time to start thinking about it.

I inquired about the status of my application and was told that notifications should be "around early April". So I think some time next week is likely.

While ya'lls are waiting. Reaction gif time.

Waiting for results:


When the grfp site is down for some unknown reason:



BUT IT'S A FALSE ALARM:

Year  Awards  HMs   Number of applicants
2012  2,067    1,770  ~12,000? (Thanks, vertices, for this and 2008-2010 Applicant numbers)
2011  2,077    1,987  ~12,000?
2010  2,051    1,974  ~12,000? 
2009  1,248    1,824  ~9,000?   
2008     913    1,640  ~8,100?
 
It is hard to find information on the numbers of applicants...
 
I update the missing "Numbers of applicants" in all years except 2011 from vertices reply.  Thank you, vertices

RSS feeds. Much easier than reading through full journals, I can pinpoint what I'm interested in, read a brief summary and analysis, and download the related paper through the library system to read later. This has the added benefit of highlighting what others are reading and focusing on in your sub-field.

Unfortunately, you cannot survive without a car at Duke but your $1500 should not be too bad considering besides rent and food, there is not much opportunity to spend money in the area:)

Interesting! I was thinking about this the other day.

I am in a very clinical and applied research program. I work with humans, and like you, before I begin ANY bits of my experience, I need to read read read read read. I have a group of friends in biochemistry who just don't get what I do. They think I don't do ANYTHING. They spend HOURS every day at their lab doing things that I can only imagine looking like this:



While I'm at home or a coffee shop reading and writing. They just don't get what I do. And I guess on some level I don't get what they do. They don't go through ethics, they don't pilot test, their data is completely different, and even what and how they write is completely different. I mention a literature synthesis to them one day, and they were like: what? You have to do that? ...my mouth was on the floor.

I am like you sometimes, I do feel like I am some kind of slacker because I am not in a lab 24/7, or I haven't tried a step in my experiment and figured out if it's a go or not. I just remind myself that in good time, I am going to be wishing I had the freedom that I do now..because once REB is approved and data collection begins, I am sure we're both going to be up to our ears in dissertation tasks!

Also, I am in much the same boat as you...constantly reading and learning can seem like you're not doing anything. I often worry about not having something concrete to show my advisor for all the work that I am doing. So I started working on some chapters for my dissertation. There's some writing I can do without starting my actual data collection. Even outside my dissertation, there's background writing I can do for my REB, dissertation proposal, potential papers. So I try to read and write! Maybe try that, it might make you feel better having some kind of document to show for all of your hard work!

Good luck, and stay strong!!!!

professor of importance?? someone has apparently not lurked long enough...

professor of importance?? someone has apparently not lurked long enough...

professor of importance?? someone has apparently not lurked long enough...

I would extend that to "If you're looking to get paid well... ever".

@cokohlik--

Be very careful when using your experiences as an undergraduate as a reference point. That is, let your achievements as an undergraduate be a source of confidence but understand that as a graduate student, you'll be held to a standard that is both different and higher even though many of the assignments may appear to be essentially the same.

From the script for Men in Black.

Whoa...

Okay while it's a very important thing to get a diverse experience and education, not everyone who stays at the same institution is guilty of that extensive list posted above there!! I agree that if you are trying to learn as much as possible and trying to become a leader in your field, you should avoid "academic inbreeding". I think Universities prefer to hire people with a wide breadth of experience and can bring in new/fresh ideas, so it would be hard to get a tenure track position at the same University where one does both their undergrad and PhD.

That said, there are lots of legitimate reasons to stay at the same institution/lab. If I was told right now that if I went back to my UG institution for my PhD and I would be guaranteed some non tenure-track, research assistant type permanent position at the same school after graduation, I'd take the offer right away. I know one guy who has been in the same lab for ~19 years now (UG, PhD, Postdocs, now research staff) and he's happy since he can raise a family in a city he loves.

Just because someone chooses to prioritize things other than career development when making decisions doesn't mean that they are automatically lazy, unintelligent, cowardly, sleeping with the faculty, etc.

I have four cats, two from shelters and two I trapped as kittens from a feral colony. They don't take up too much time, and the apartment doesn't smell like cat at all because I clean the litter boxes everyday. The only tough part is that I had to switch them to an all-wet-food diet because one guy develops deadly urinary crystals with dry cat food, and even cheap wet food is more expensive than high quality dry food. Oh well, still love them lots.

Here's a picture of three of them sleeping on each other:

Looking at other people's reviews, this whole process seems even more arbitrary. I got E/E VG/VG VG/E which resulted in an HM. None of the comments said anything even remotely negative. I see other people in my discipline with equivlaent or even worse responses. I guess things like high school location, gender, and difficulty of reviewer really matters a lot.