Arcadian

OK, just to clarify, these two labs are located in different centers. While there is a lot of collaboration in the program generally, there is not collaboration between the two centers. (That's just how our program is structured - quite unique, but I like it.) So collaboration between these two labs is probably not an option, but nonetheless I agree with your overall assessments.

By the way, I am leaning towards Lab 2. I think I will be happier in that situation overall. I'm just curious to see what you all would do in a similar situation.

I have committed to a PhD program, and I am currently in the process of deciding whose lab to join. My program does not allow students to "rotate" in the first year; we are told to choose a lab and stick with it (although it is possible to change advisers if necessary). After visiting both labs and meeting everyone, this is a very difficult choice. On the one hand, Professor 1 is a distinguished professor with more recognition and grant money. On the other hand, my interests are a slightly better fit for Professor 2's lab (and I also find the style and atmosphere to be more appealing). It seems that the former is possibly a better career choice, while the latter is possibly a better personal choice. Do you have any advice for me? Lab 1 Pros +Research in same area as undergraduate research +Distinguished professor, prominent in field (older) +More grant money +Supports students as RAs (no TA obligations) +Newly launched, opportunity to be in the first wave of new grad students (Lab just moved from another state; PI hired as co-director of a research center here) Cons -Personality sometimes intimidating and imposing -High level of control over students -Relatively limited scope of projects -Stricter, more uptight atmosphere -Mostly consists of late grad students and post-docs Lab 2 Pros +Broader research interests, better fit +Personality warm and laid back (younger) +More established, more faculty and students +Preferable atmosphere (lighter, better vibes) +Easier to switch advisers (more flexible) +Will have another first-year grad student to work with Cons -Mid-ranking professors (borderline tenure) -Support through TAship only (first year)

I would recommend Berkeley. Let's face the fact that is is extremely rare to find anyone who got their BA and PhD from the same school. Besides, wouldn't you like a little variety in your life?

Since the professor agrees that you can get into a better program, then it should be fine to decline the offer and work in the lab. That was my backup plan as well - strikingly similar to yours. If you're thinking of joining and then transferring out, you should discuss that with the lab instructor. But wouldn't that just over-complicate things? It would be way easier to just work as a volunteer and then apply to other programs.

Dude, I've been thinking the same thing. I'm just going to do practice problems from my stats textbooks. Do you still have yours? Since I won't have anything else to do this summer, I think I'll take some time to brush up on everything relevant: stats, writing research papers, basic neuroscience, cognitive theory, etc.

I had a nightmare the morning that I found out I was accepted. In the dream, I was contacted by the department assistant, who informed me that there were some problems with my application. Specifically, there were some "inconsistencies" on my record that apparently I needed to explain. I wasn't rejected, I was told, but in order to be considered for acceptance I would have to write a letter to the committee justifying my past mistakes. In the dream, I was frantically writing the letter to justify my final attempt to get into grad school. I woke up feeling pretty discouraged. I knew the dream was just a dream, but perhaps it had some relevance to reality. At some unconscious level, I was truly terrified that I would be rejected. Then I checked my email and found out I was accepted. Haha, I guess in a way, the dream made it even more satisfying.

Any research experience (within psychology) will suffice. I have no experience in the particular area I'm going into, but the program basically said "that's fine, we'll train you." (Well, sort of - my undergrad research is in memory, but not memory neuroscience.) If you've demonstrated that you understand the methods of scientific psychology, then it shouldn't matter what particular topic you worked on as an undergrad.

Interesting. I've been wondering about that. I don't know what the annual "yield" of graduates is at my program, but I'll be sure and ask when I get the chance.

I just read the guidelines for my graduate program, and it's really intimidating. There are so many things that can get me dropped from the program. I was just wondering, does anyone know of graduate students who were kicked out for low grades or "unacceptable work"?

What project did you want to work on when you started with the program? Since you're so opposed to these simulations, that couldn't have been your goal from the start. What research attracted you to the program?

I know several people at my school who continued working in labs after they graduated (but before they got into grad school). They take volunteers, and some of them have paid positions.

In my case, it's a smooth in-state transition, and my sister lives in the city to which I'm moving. Also I only had one offer, and it was to one of my top-choice programs, so the decision was easy and innocuous. That doesn't change the fact that it's a life-changing decision, and I have a lot of work to do (and inevitable hardships) for the next five years. In that sense, I'm also in shock. But it's an exciting kind of shock, because I know this is exactly what I want to do with my life. Everything is going exactly as I had planned. It couldn't have possible worked out better. I'm also in shock because I honestly did not expect to be accepted anywhere. I've been through some adversity as an undergrad, so the fact that I'm getting into a PhD program in the same year that I graduate is hard to believe.

Hey, thanks for the advice and encouragement. [quote name=hello! ' timestamp='1300937357' post='230604] The "cognitive neuroscience" programs are typically associated with the psychology department, whereas neuroscience programs are usually more associated with the division of biological sciences.

Yeah, no problem. And I'm just trying to figure out some basic info from people already enrolled, so thanks.

Well like I said, the grad students all said they were getting their degree for free and decent financial support. They apparently don't guarantee it, but they still seem to be giving it. Your response raises another question: How did you calculate the 26k stipend? Do you get paid year-round, or only for part of the year? I was given a monthly amount in my offer, but even when I multiple it by 12 it comes out to just under 20k. The professors DID say they were suffering budget cuts this year and would have fewer fellowships to offer. But I'm just thrilled I got accepted, haha.

OK. I spoke with several of the grad students there, and they all were being supported at their various stages, so I think the situation is pretty good. Of course it would be optimal to hear "five years guaranteed," but at this point I'll take what I can get!

OK, will do. Also, they offered me a part-time TAship, monthly stipends, and coverage of tuition/fees for the first year, with the remaining years "determined by student performance and availability of funds." Is that pretty standard? I'm being optimistic right now, but how does it sound from a more objective point of view?

I was just admitted to a program, and I have already accepted their offer (as it was my only offer). I have been in correspondence with three professors who are interested in working with me, and I am equally interested in working with all of them. Will I get to decide who is my graduate adviser, or will the program decide for me? Is it possible to work in more than one lab the first year?

I received my first (and only) acceptance today from my top choice program! Unbelievable. I'll post a blog about it later. ............YES!

I'm still waiting on UT Austin Psychology (Cognitive Systems). I emailed the admissions office, and they said the interviews are this weekend, so I should hear from them soon after that. I wasn't invited, so obviously I'm rejected or waitlisted.

After the interviews at Dallas, I have been in correspondence with three professors. One simply said, "Admissions committee will be making decisions soon, so hopefully we'll be in touch." Another said, "If things get to the point where you'd be interested in working with me, I will arrange for you to visit again and meet the rest of the researchers here." The other said he's going to call me on Monday for further discussion (since we didn't get much time to talk before). I guess this is a good thing...But I wish they would just decide already! Oh, and I was rejected by Santa Barbara. (Am I the only one still posting in this thread, or what?)

Professors are primarily researchers, secondarily teachers. Some institutions might emphasize teaching a little more, but the primary function of professors is research in an area of specialization. To take the term "professor" literally is misleading. It's definitely not just "one who professes."

It's all about your research interests and how well you fit with the program.

LOL, I just got back from my interview/visit, and I have an anecdote relevant to this topic. We (six visitors) were invited to go to a bar with three grad students and one high-ranking professor. This is probably an uncommon situation, so it won't happen to most of you, but this professor is particularly boisterous and overbearing (perhaps even arrogant), so he actually made fun of me when I drank water at the bar. It wasn't too bad; he just made one sarcastic comment like, "He orders water!" Don't get me wrong, he's a pretty cool guy - he was basically informally interviewing us in a casual setting - but his personality definitely clashes with mine, and I discovered that I would not want to work with him as a graduate adviser. His personality is fine for "hanging out," but he doesn't adjust his demeanor appropriately to the situation. He doesn't seem to take anyone or anything seriously - except himself, which he takes too seriously.