LuckyCat

Definitely feel free to contact students of your POI in advance. Grad students can be a tremendous source of informal information that you might not receive directly from a potential advisor that can make you feel more confident as you approach interview weekend. Some grad students are really helpful; others are non-responsive. It gives you an opportunity to feel out the lab culture indirectly. In my lab, we're very collaborative so as grad students we're highly invested in the interview weekend. This person (or persons) needs to fit our culture and be a strong match in terms of work ethic so we actually spend a lot of time answering questions and sharing information with candidates (if they contact us!). We want them to have a realistic picture of what it would mean for them to be in our lab because no one likes working with an unmotivated, "Debbie downer" personality. And, in our lab at least, we're impressed by the candidates who take the initiative to reach out to us, present themselves as friendly and interested professionals, and ask relevant questions -- nothing sophisticated research-wise, per se, but that demonstrate they understand what's important as an incoming student. Concrete examples would include: describe the lab culture and advisor's style, how often do you meet with your advisor, are there opportunities for interdepartmental collaborations (if this is of interest to you), how big is the subject pool, etc.

An interview weekend is intended to evaluate candidates (and also for candidates to assess program fit on their end) prior to an offer of admission. Recruitment/visiting weekends typically occur after an admission offer is made. The latter tend to be more relaxed and informal in nature.

Another option for closing your SOP: If you opened with an anecdote that was related to why you're interested in the research phenomenon you discuss in your SOP, you can link back to this at the end with a brief sentence or two. In my own SOP, I did this and found that it tied the narrative together into a complete whole.

You typically address the matter of who you want to work with by discussing it in your "fit" paragraph at the end. Of course, there is no rule that it appear at the end of your statement; if there is an organic way to mention it earlier in your statement, this is fine. Keep in mind, though, that admissions committees often read hundreds of applications so wherever in your statement that you discuss your interests and who you want to work with, make sure it's clear and easily identifiable. As you discuss your prior research experience, you can build in that these cumulative experiences have sparked your interest in studying [area of research interest] in grad school (assuming your prior research experience is related). You can also mention one or two research questions that you are curious about and want to explore in grad school. You can then talk about how Professor Awesome's work on XYZ would be a good fit for your interests because of ABC reasons. You can then say that Professor Okay and Professor Fine's work would also help to [inform, extend, etc.] your work through XYZ reasons. The key is to clearly link your interests with the interests of a primary advisor and a couple more secondary professors. Best of luck! LC

I agree with the above poster to get more exposure to your options in the field. Knowing what your ultimate career goal is will be helpful in planning what your degree objective should be. Keep in mind, too, that a masters can be preferable to a PhD for certain things. For example, having a MFT degree relative to a counseling PhD may be viewed more positively by health insurance companies because there is a lower bill rate for MFT practitioners. If you have access to a university library, I recommend checking out these two resources: 1. Getting What You Came For: The Smart Student's Guide to Earning an M.A. or a PhD by Robert Peters 2. Career Paths in Psychology: Where Your Degree Can Take You by Robert Sternberg Best of luck! LC

If anyone is still seeking a lab manager/RA position for next year, this position was posted today to the SPSP listserv. It is a terrific opportunity with a very well-known researcher in the field...and it's in sunny Santa Barbara, CA! Research Assistant/Lab Manager Position Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences Self and Social Identity Lab University of California, Santa Barbara A lab manager position is available in the Department of Psychological & Brain Sciences at University of California Santa Barbara with Dr. Brenda Major. Primary areas of research involve examining: (1) factors that shape perceptions of discrimination and reactions to intergroup feedback, and (2) impact of weight stigmatization on executive control processes, psychophysiological responses, and behavior. The duties of this position are diverse and will include assisting with study design and preparation, scheduling and running subjects, overseeing research assistants, performing literature searches, completing paperwork associated with IRB and grants, web page management, and generally helping with the organization of the numerous projects underway in the lab. As such we are looking for an organized, detail-oriented person with a bachelor's degree in Psychology, prior research experience, excellent writing skills, and proficiency in Microsoft Office (Word, Excel, PowerPoint). There will be an opportunity to collaborate on lab projects so an ideal candidate will also have an interest and background in the topics studied in the lab and possess additional skills such as familiarity with data analyses (SPSS), programming, and physiological (e.g., CVR) measurement. The preferred start date is September 15. Please send a statement of interest, resume, and 2-3 letters of recommendation to majorlabucsb@gmail.com (with 'MAJORLAB POSITION' in the subject line). The Department is especially interested in candidates who can contribute to the diversity and excellence of the academic community through research, teaching and service. The University of California is an Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action employer.

Hi there. You'll find more complete answers to your questions by checking older posts. Briefly, though, the best way to figure out what you're interested in is to think about what articles or course readings you've done in undergrad that are most exciting and interesting to you. Then, read more work by those authors to figure out if you're still as excited about their work and way of thinking as you originally felt. If yes, you're on the right track. Also, talk to grad students and professors at your school to ask them about researchers they'd recommend you check out. And, if you think you're even remotely interested in pursuing a Ph.D. down the road, you should get involved with conducting or participating in research ASAP. Research experience is critical, as is completing methods and statistics courses. Experience can be gained in the form of working as a research assistant in a lab on an existing research project, completing an independent research project, and/or by completing a senior/honors thesis.

You didn't indicate your degree objective (M.S./M.A., Ph.D.) so it's unclear what type of program you are aiming to apply to. Many doctoral programs require a 3.0 minimum GPA for entrance into their program and at least a 1200 GRE-equivalent score. This is a hard cut-point, meaning your application will be automatically routed to the circular file upon receipt. Your best bet would be to apply to masters programs, which typically have less strict admissions requirements (although your GPA may still be a challenge). If you want to eventually enter a Ph.D. program, having a strong master-level GPA will be important to demonstrate that you've overcome whatever academic problems you experienced during undergrad. Also, if your grades were consistently low throughout school, you may want to do as the above poster strongly advised and take some time off to work in order to assess your educational priorities. If you had a low GPA at the start of college -- a challenging transition time for many students -- but your grades rose consistently over time, and you know you have the dedication and motivation to work hard and achieve good results, then pursuing a master's degree right now may be a feasible option. Best of luck with your endeavors!

I agree with DMP; based on the information you shared, you are a competitive applicant. Having completed an ugrad honors thesis will be well-received, too. Given your research interests, you may also want to consider adding Northwestern (Jen Richeson) and UVA (Sophie Trawalter -- she's awesome!) to your list of possible schools. Best of luck, LC

Given that you are currently pursuing a physics Ph.D., does your school have a clinical psychology Ph.D. program? If yes, speak with professors/grad students at your school (or a school in the surrounding area) to get their perspective on the best preparation to make the transition. Two of the biggest challenges that I foresee (caveat: I am a social, not clinical, psychology Ph.D. student) are the following: (1) From your provided information, it appears you don't have clinical experience. Most of the top clinical psych Ph.D. programs prefer that you have 1-2 years of clinical experience to demonstrate an ability and desire to interact in a professional, competent, and mature manner with community members and/or clinical populations. This experience can be gained in the form of an internship or paid work. (2) Your decision to switch from physics to clinical psychology will be viewed skeptically by some in the field. Are you interested in psychophysics that has a clinical application? If yes, this will make your transition more logical and, possibly, your background in physics highly valued. Best of luck with your transition!

Hi all! Here's a copy of the Social Stigma lab manager announcement from the SPSP listserv that NewScientist12 mentioned: Lab manager position at UCLA Social Stigma lab Jenessa Shapiro's Social Stigma and Social Interaction Lab at UCLA is hiring a full-time Lab Manager for a two-year commitment. The start date is September 2012. The Lab Manager will work closely with Dr. Jenessa Shapiro and her lab to coordinate and conduct research studies related to stigma, stereotyping, prejudice, and discrimination. For more information about our research, please visit our web site: http://shapiro.psych.ucla.edu/Home.html The Lab Manager will oversee the day-to-day research being conducted in the lab, such as scheduling and supervising the running of studies, planning research events and meetings, maintaining laboratory computers and equipment, maintaining lab websites, interviewing and supervising research assistants, managing grants, preparing stimuli, programming experimental tasks, processing and analyzing data, reviewing literature, and editing manuscripts. This position is perfect for someone with a BA or MA in psychology who has moderate to extensive research experience but who is looking for more time (2 years) to deeply engage in research before applying to graduate school in psychology. Qualifications: We are looking for someone with a strong background in psychology and psychological research. Previous experience conducting research in social psychology and the completion of an honors thesis or independent project in psychology is ideal. In addition, we are looking for a candidate with an extreme need for accuracy and efficiency, who is self-motivated, highly organized, and a good team player. Experience with Media Lab, Direct RT, SPSS, Excel, IRB processes, running experiments of all kinds in the lab and field is preferred but not required. Excellent social and communication skills are extremely important because much of this job is managing people (e.g., research participants, undergraduate RAs, and the support and administrative staff at UCLA). You may also need to work some nights and weekends when there are grant or study deadlines and at the start of the academic quarters, thus some flexibility in schedule is desired. We will review applications until the position is filled. However, for full consideration, we encourage applicants to submit materials by April 15th. Please send all application materials to Christine Chu (cchu@psych.ucla.edu) via email. Applicants should (1) submit a resume/CV, (2) submit a 1-page cover letter describing their qualifications for the position, relevant experience, and research interests, along with the names of 2-3 references, and (3) have 1 letter of recommendation emailed to Christine Chu. The University of California, Los Angeles is an Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer.

FYI: Just posted to the SPSP listserv. I believe this professor is at University of Alabama in the event anyone has similar research interests and would like to be considered. from jchamilt@as.ua.edu via yahoo.com reply-to jchamilt@as.ua.edu to spsp-announce-l@list.cornell.edu date Tue, Mar 6, 2012 subject Social psychology doctoral training program mailing list <spsp-announce-l.cornell.edu> I have received late word that i will be allowed to offer a funded (4 yr guarantee) slot in our social psychology doctoral training program. I would like to ask your help in identifying any talented undergraduate students who are still looking for a graduate program for next year. > > The work of our research group centers on the study of excessive illness behavior (e.g., exaggerated or feigned physical symptom reporting or claims of disability, frequent unnecessary doctor visits), and particularly on the the motivational processes involved in these behaviors. We try to use self theoretic approaches to this research question, and so the theories and methods we employ are those of mainstream experimental social psychology. Even though I am a clinician, this slot is for a social psych grad student who will be fully involved in the social psychology program, as am I. There is no chance of transferring to the clinical program. > > If you know of anyone who might be interested, please encourage them to contact me directly. > > Thanks. > > jim

Yes, mj53, do send email thank yous following your admissions interviews! Typically, you send these to the faculty you had meetings with and to anyone who performed a particular support function during your stay (e.g., grad students/profs who transported you to/from the airport, hosted you, etc.) Best of luck to you!

Another resource to check out is the Society for the Scientific Study of Sexuality. My recollection is that they have resource information about what types of programs offer this type of training. Most professional societies offer some type of mentoring program that matches aspiring psychologists/therapists with researchers/practitioners. If SSSS doesn't have a mentorship program, I do know that APS (Association for Psychological Science) does offer one. Best of luck!

Agree with all the good comments above! I'll add a few more thoughts to the mix: Depending on the program, you may experience either individual interview meetings or be part of a group of students in an interview with one prof at the same time. The individual meetings are straightforward: do the things the posters above mention and aim to have a conversation with the POI. Some profs simply aren't good interviewers; they will appreciate your ability to keep the conversation flowing and to ask insightful questions. Once you know your interview schedule and with whom you will be meeting, read 2-3 of their most recent articles (more for the POI/lab you want to work in). This will make you feel more confident going into the interview and also asking a question if there is a lull in the conversation. (Tip: You can create a cheat sheet of brief notes about each prof you'll meet with and his/her research. Use bathroom / coffee breaks as a time to quickly check your notes between meetings.) Also, If you are asked an oddball or chicken-or-egg question, don't worry if you don't know the answer. These questions may be designed not to have a "right" answer but rather are being asked to test how you critically reason and think under pressure. This is a more rare interview situation but it does happen. For the group interview situations, this can be a little tricky to navigate. Profs are usually observing how well you can communicate in a group setting (i.e., don't dominate the discussion but also don't be a wallflower who says very little). Try to seek a balance in the exchange and be able to build on other people's points. This balance speaks to your ability to be an effective communicator and collaborator.

Hi JP, I'm not well acquainted with your area (humanities) but are there professional organizations or a national honor society for your field? If yes, these can be fruitful places to seek funding (although many require that you are an enrolled graduate student at the time of funding). Given that you are adjunct faculty, you may find a better, more knowledgeable response on The Chronicle forums. Best of luck! LC

It's difficult to say given that it's unclear the quality of research experience you've accumulated. I know of 3 students who've been admitted to competitive/top Ph.D. programs who graduated early (i.e., within 3 years due to AP credits) or at a young age (i.e., started college at 15 and finished at 18). All 3 were viewed as competitive based on the quality of the research experience they had accumulated, the quality of their undergrad program/training, and their recommenders speaking to their maturity. These students had simultaneously been lab managers while in undergrad and completed honors/senior theses and/or had some type of extra research experience (i.e., attended an intensive summer research program). Good luck!

I applied to social psych programs and these programs all had different processes: some had required interviews, some were recruitment weekends following formal acceptance, and some were straight out acceptances without a visit weekend. While it is standard in clinical programs to require interviews (which makes sense given the clinical component of their training), it is becoming increasingly common in social programs to require interviews. An additional note not yet addressed in this thread: Some programs also first perform a phone interview with select applicants after the AdCom creates the short list of applicants. The aim of the phone interview is to whittle down the short list to an even shorter invite list for interview weekend. What professors are looking for is how you talk about research and your prior research experience(s). That is, how well you understand the research aims, methodology, and, if yet known, the results of your research projects. This helps profs to assess how involved you actually were in the research process. For those of you who have completed senior or honors theses, or independent research projects, I recommend writing down how you would answer this question, and practice saying it out loud so that it sounds natural. You don't want to read it over the phone verbatim; your aim is to be able to speak intelligently, yet concisely, about your research. The prof will ask you to expand on any parts that s/he is interested in. Also be prepared for the question: "How do you, or would you, plan to extend this work in the future?" This is most relevant if what you aim to study in grad school is related to what you have previously researched. Also, it's okay if your research projects didn't work out. You can speak instead to how it fueled your interest in getting the design (or whatever didn't work out right the first time) correct next time [this demonstrates your resilience and passion for research] and you can talk about what you would do differently next time [this demonstrates that you've thought critically about your research project]. Good luck to all those applying this season!

If you can add in a research question that you're really passionate about, that will help to provide more specificity about your research interests. And, it'll help the adcom determine if you're a good research fit for their program, which is something that they pay a lot of attention to after ensuring you have the basic credentials. Most psych applicants don't end up studying the exact question that they talk about in their SOPs; it is sometimes a variant of that question or something altogether unrelated. Professors understand this and will not hold you to it. GL!

I'm a current graduate student and my advisor regularly tells undergrads who ask this question that it's best to have your recommenders address any obvious application deficiencies in their recommendation letters rather than the applicant him/herself. This allows the recommenders to qualify the situation for you and talk about how their observations of you as a student and/or their experience working with you in their lab has revealed that you have the requisite skill set and abilities to perform at a graduate level, etc. It also doesn't come across to adcom's as "excuse making" by the applicant, which is often how it can be interpreted regardless of the validity of the reason for your performance decline. Have a straightforward conversation with at least one of your LOR writers and ask him/her to address the issue in your letter. In general, if you have one area of weakness in your application, it won't sink you. However, it is best to show an improvement trend. If your performance is on the decline, it's good to have a valid reason for it being so. If you are coming direct from undergrad, this is particularly important, because it's indicative (in the adcom's eyes) of your motivation, reslilience, etc. If you have taken time off between undergrad and when you are applying, you can speak to the skills and maturity you've developed since graduating, which may serve to buffer against the deficiency in your application. GL!

Hi everyone, Prof. Shannon McCoy just sent out this announcement on the SPSSI listserv in the event any of you are interested in work in stereotyping, social stigma, and psychophysiology: Message From: Shannon McCoy <shannon.mccoy@umit.maine.edu> Position/Title: Assistant Professor School/Organization: University of Maine Dear Colleagues, Funding has just become available for a new social psychology doctoral student in my lab here at the University of Maine. This was very unexpected, and I turned away interested applicants early in the recruiting season. If you happen to know of students who are still looking for a PhD program in social psychology for next Fall, please encourage them to email me. A good fit with the lab would be someone interested in stigma and openness to (or experience with) psychophysiological methods (e.g., Biopac – EKG, ZKG, EMG, BP). For a recent example of related work by my senior graduate student, see Cosley et al. (2010), JESP. Current projects in the lab involve examining the role of weight stigma in academic outcomes, perceived sexism in women’s identification with the ingroup, and several projects examining the consequences of sexual prejudice for gay men and lesbian women. Interested students should email me directly to arrange a timely submission of application materials. Thanks! Shannon McCoy Assistant Professor Department of Psychology University of Maine, Orono 207 581 2029 shannon.mccoy@umit.maine.edu

Congrats, lafresca! UCLA has a great program so good luck with your interview!

You might want to check out Emily Falk, who is starting this year in the Communications dept at UMichigan. Her advisor was Matt Lieberman, too. Although her focus isn't primarily affective, it's pretty cool: communications neuroscience. Check her lab out here: http://cn.isr.umich.edu/