PsychGirl1

We've all had arguments on this board before about which section matters most. :-D Let's be real- for clinical, BOTH are important, as well as your overall score. Many schools have cutoffs based on overall score. I've also seen cutoffs based on the quant score (ex. total score over XX + quant score over YY). I did extremely well on the quant section, and I think that helped me stand out during the process. Usually, math/stats are what psych students find the hardest- if you can show mastery of quantitative skills, you WILL stand out. It also depends on your program of interest and the amount of research focus within that program. For example, the average score for accepted students for UCLA's Clinical Psych program- a very competitive, research-based program- is about 650-700 verbal (old scale) and 725-770 quant. For say, Ohio University- also a research-based program but slightly less-so- the average is about 600 for both sections. If you want a very strong research-based, competitive program, having good quant scores are very important. If you want a program that is more equally focused on research and clinical work, then being decent on both sections is important. In addition to that, I think if you have an above-average score in quant (ex. 650 on the old scale) and apply to decent programs, nobody will blink twice at your quant score. But I think if you have an awesome score in quant (ex. 800), admission committees would be VERY excited. But I find it hard to believe that if someone had a 650 in verbal versus an 800 in verbal, it would cause the same amount of interest in that applicant as it would with the quant score. So based on what I've seen, I guess what I mean is that while both sections are important, I think more bang for your buck comes from raising your quant score above average compared to your verbal score. That being said, having your verbal section below average may raise more eyebrows than having a quant section below average, since most people tend to do fairly well on the verbal section. Make sense? I should probably draw a graph :-D

Transcripts: this is actually one of the first things I did. I actually had SIX places to send transcripts from (undergrad, study abroad, master's program, and then night classes at 3 different places over the years). You have to check each institution. Some of my transcripts were free, some were $10 each (including shipping). I applied to 12 schools and I probably spent about $300 on transcripts. The cost for transcripts is usually very easy to find out on their websites. I sent them super early so that later on in the process, I could check that they all arrived and re-send any that I need to. When two inefficient institutions meet, things get lost easily :-D. Also, it's easier to do all at once- if you're applying to 10 schools, you can just copy each institution's form 10 times and send them all in together. Keep in mind that some schools don't open their app til September- I'd say mid-to-end September is an appropriate time to start sending in transcript requests. For your CV: you already have the position, so add it. Put in the dates, and I would feel free to talk about what you will be doing. For example, "Will be managing xx study with xx participants blahblah". You should probably get your CV in a fairly final form now, and then update it right before you submit apps with any additional accomplishments/skills. But you don't have to do your final update until November or so. SOP: start now. Mine probably took about 4 months to perfect, and I had about 10 people read it (some twice). Throughout the whole thing and selectively taking people's feedback, it evolved significantly from start to end. You already know what you will be doing in your new role, and you should already have a sense of what you want to do for grad school and your career (or else you shouldn't be applying). You can add in some details, an extra paragraph, or change around wording as you go and spend more time in research, but I'd DEFINITELY start now. Master's programs: each program is different. Some master's programs are NOT mentor based, so you do not need to contact POIs. Some are, in which case, the same faculty members tend to be available to mentor PhD or master's students. That being said, usually it is the less-established faculty who are required to take master's students at these institutions. But there's no harm in asking.

Yes, it's standard. I got a range of responses. Sometimes I got more of a commentary of their future research interests, sometimes I got the "I am always looking for good students, I look forward to seeing your application", or the "I am taking a student next year, assuming funding- thank you for your interest". Sometimes I got very enthusiastic replies that didn't lead to an interview invite, and sometimes the generic responds led to an interview invite. Keep in mind these people may be getting literally a hundred of these emails over a few months, in addition to getting ready for the start of a new school year (getting their new students settled, preparing lectures, etc.). I'd say their response is usually a reflection of the number of emails they get and their personality. Besides, the whole point of the email isn't to have the professors fawn over you- it's to know if they are accepting students and to have their remember your name somewhat. Also, in general, I did NOT email them if the website indicated whether or not they were accepting students. Keep that in mind- sometimes they get huffy if it says that somewhere on their university or lab's website and you email them despite that.

Ugh, I need a good crush. Education sounds like it has WAY more guys in it than Psychology. Maybe I need a future career change :-D

Love the different viewpoints and experiences! I hope the OP comes back soon to read all our fascinating thoughts :-D

Great!! I'm glad. Good luck! :-D

^ Agree, SOP and interviews seem like the appropriate times. On almost all of my interviews, I got asked the "if you could do any study you wanted right now, what would it be?" type of question. Having a baller response to that is a sure way to impress your POI :-D. Whipping out a 10-page typed proposal, not so much. Then again, if you REALLY wanted to throw it in there, then maybe in the email to your POI, you could be like "I'm interested in studying XYZ, such as <one sentence study idea>." But then, you'll have to make sure it's a good and unique idea- it's probably safest to leave it out.

No problem! I'm not insulted, it's completely up to you. That's what you should do- collect as much info as possible and make your own decisions! And I'm sure some people on here will feel it's not necessary. So again, totally up to you!

^ All good points, which is what he can discuss with the POI and the lab members if he gets an interview :-D. Just to play devil's advocate... I'd suspect that if the professor has a lab full of students with a social psych leaning, he attends social psych conferences, his PI is well-respected in the field, and that there are a handful social psych classes to take, that the student wouldn't be missing SO much that his career would be affected (and that it would be a big enough gap that having a well-respected PI and good research experience wouldn't eliminate it). And it may be interesting for him to combine social and developmental knowledge within his field of interest (I'm always surprised how narrow-focused research becomes within such small areas of research, but then again, this is probably my background speaking). Plus, I just glanced at the requirements for UCLA's social psych program, for example, and they only take 5-6 social psych specific courses throughout the entire program. As a clinical student, I'm required to take 1-2 social psych courses. Of course, classwork is only one piece of a program's requirements. But in summary, I just don't see how it would change a career path THAT drastically. But then again, I work in a very interdisciplinary area of Clinical Psych, and I applied to multiple types of programs myself (social, health, clinical, and health clinical). It could definitely be my biases talking. Anyway, to the OP, I'd say you need to figure out your career goal and see if going dev psych instead of social psych would drastically change the outcome. Then, look at the program's reqiurements, coursework, the people in your POI's lab and what type of research they do, and the POI's research. If you could see yourself fitting in, then go ahead and apply. It's much easier to add on ONE application to the pile and see how things play out and what your general feeling is during the interview than to regret not applying. Especially because you're figuring out your list now and you won't have to decide until April- a LOT can change in your interests between now and then, especially once you start interviewing and talking to students and professors. Just my 2 cents!

Also, I was originally told to attach my CV by my old advisor, who receives literally probably a hundred of these emails a year :-).

I may have been the one who said to attach your CV. When I contacted POIs, my 2-paragraph email basically went like: Dear POI, My name is XYZ and I will be applying to ABC programs this fall. I wanted to introduce myself, to check if you are taking resaerch students next year, and to see if you think our future research interests would align. <3 sentences on background and experience>. My career goal is to do <topic> research with a focus on <specialization>. I have attached my CV to this email. Thank you for your consideration, <my info> If they're interested, they can looks at your CV. If they are fascinated by your short email, then they can print it out and study it :-). But it gives them the option of learning more about you in-depth if they are interested, and it will help them remember you when you apply. It also helps you keep the email itself short- you don't want to be babbling on trying to list your major accomplishments and background. And if they don't want to look at your CV, they don't have to. Also, a handful of professors commented on my CV when they replied, so I'm sure more than a handful actually looked at it before responding to the email.

I don't see the harm in applying if you're a good research match- if you get an interview, you can always talk to the professor about this in person. Are you interested in social psychology for a specific ideological reason, or just because it tends to be the area where most intergroup violence is studied? I would guess that your PI would attend and submit presentations/publications to relevant conferences and articles. After all, I only have 1 professor at my program who studies my area of interest, and people in my lab do just fine networking with other people in our specific subfield across disciplines- from clinical, to health, to social, etc.

It's likely this book: http://www.amazon.com/Insiders-Graduate-Programs-Counseling-Psychology/dp/1609189329/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1376220728&sr=8-1&keywords=counseling+and+clinical+programs

What I would do, if those are going to be your stats when you apply... may be a bit more tedious than other people's approaches: Get one of those Psych Program books that list all of the programs and their stats (they have those for dev psych, right?). I used 2 for clinical psych for mine. Then go through and look at representative stats for each program, as well as info about each program, and start a spreadsheet where you list all the programs that look interesting and you might be a good fit. For example, if the average GPA is 3.9/4.0 and the GRE scores are significantly higher than yours, it would be a stretch program- but that doesn't mean you shouldn't apply if it will still be a great fit. If it's a so-so fit, take it off your list. Then once you have a list of programs (mine was probably 100 long), read about each program in-depth and the professors/research, and start narrowing down from there. Then when I had a shorter list, I ran it by some people in my field, and took off a few programs/profs and added a few based on feedback. To be honest, I think stats are less important than fit- it becomes quite obvious on an interview whether or not it will be a good fit. I got interviews at more competitive schools that were better fits, and no interviews at less competitive schools that weren't. So this is really the most important process. Don't be scared to apply to some schools that have better stats than yours, but be realistic in the number you apply to (ex. don't apply to 3 programs and expect to get in). Good luck!

There are a lot of threads on here about master's programs- both paid and upaid. Try searching past threads and you will be able to compile a long list. Then visit each program website, figure out how they are organized (ex. mentor model or not), look at prof's research, and start narrowing down your list. Good luck!

Honestly, you're probably better off just taking a gap year and reapplying next year then starting the master's program. I went through a master's program before my PhD, so normally I'm biased the other way, but it just doesn't make sense in your case. I'd ask school B what you can do to strengthen your app to get into the PhD program, and spend the next year doing that and reapplying.

When I lived in Cambridge, I took the test at the Commonwealth center- I thought it was very nice and I didn't have any issues at all!

I agree asking someone out on a "formal date" is scary, but you can take baby steps :-). For example, invite him and your friends over for dinner one night in a mass email, or ask him if he wants to grab a drink at a happy hour on Friday- something like that. Neither scream "I'm asking you out", but it will allow you to spend more time with him in a social environment- you can probably feel things out better from there. Also, if he declines a few times without a counteroffer, then he's likely not interested. :-D Good luck!

Just go for it and ask him out!! If he rejects you, then he gets to spend the next few months kicking his butt for missing an awesome opportunity. And you'll get over it in like, a week. If he accepts, then it could be the start of a fabulous relationship :-). Better to ask him now, before you waste more time pursuing him, and before you come even more attached (ex. a rejection would be way worse if you ask in 6 months than if you ask now). Not that I'm great at following my own advice...

I'm actually not sure... why don't you contact a few of the schools that require it and ask what the guidelines and recommendations are for the writing sample?

Most of the time I did, if I was allowed to load "supplementary information". Some of the online application systems just ask you questions from your CV that you'd copy and paste, instead of loading a separate CV. Example- "please list your past research experiences and main responsibilities; please list your past eployment opportunities and main responsibilities; etc."

^ Agree with zapster, much more succint than I was :-D

Maybe things are different in economics, but from my experience, it's highly unusual for PhD programs to let you take classes in other departments without justification, or just to spend time working in a lab unrelated to your field. If there is overlap with what you are specializing in within econ, then that makes sense, otherwise, I can't imagine that would be allowed to the extent that you would want- and even if it was allowed, I wouldn't imagine that you would have enough time to do it all. What does your econ program or professor specialize in? Knowing that would be helpful. Also, I can't imagine that if you are accepted to an econ PhD program, accept their stipend, spend a lot of your time on Psychology, and then withdraw from your program, that you will leave on good terms or have good LORs from that school. In fact, doing that could negatively impact your Psych PhD application and make for some awkward interview questions when you're applying to Psych PhD programs. What about applying to positions in your country that are focused on research? I'm sure there are plenty of places where you can work as a research coordinator or research assistant and make a decent salary- hospitals, universities, pharmaceutical companies, market research companies, etc.. You could do research in behavioral economics with a strong Psychology leaning, or in Psychology, etc- a lot of different things could be related to what you want to do. For classes, you can take some online- for example, Harvard Extension School offers quality online courses often taught by actual Harvard professors (I took their graduate-level abnormal psych class, since I lived in Boston, but then halfway through I just watched the lectures online instead of attending in person). I'm sure there are other programs like this that I'm not aware of. Again, if I were you, I would NOT enter your econ PhD program.

I majored in a mathy version of business and I'm entering a Psych PhD this fall. After college, I worked in business for a year and a half- hated it- then worked in research for a year and a half, but not in Psychology. You will need some courses to fulfill the basic requirements of many programs- depending what area, this is likely to be general psych, developmental, abnromal, cognitive, etc. I took night classes when I was working- if possible, do it at the graduate-level. Also, try to volunteer in some psych labs and get some experience and hopefully some posters and maybe a publication. I had a lot of encouragement to apply right to a PhD program after taking those night classes and workign in labs, but I wasn't sure of my research area and if this was what I really wanted to do. So I did a 2-year MS program which turned out to be the best choice possible for me. I really learned a lot, I feel like I made up a lot of lost ground compared to people who have been studying Psychology since their first day of undergrad, and I made great connections. Because of the program, I got into a really good PhD program with a well known PI. So that's something to consider as well- if I had to do it again, I'd make the same choice. Honestly, I would NOT start your econ PhD program. If there is someone in the econ department who does behavioral economics and they have a working relationship with people in the psychology department, then I could see it working. But otherwise, I wouldn't do it. There's nothing worse than looking back on your life in a crappy job that you hate, thinking "what if I had just gone for it". Maybe see if you can defer for a year and explore your options in the meantime- volunteer in labs as a research assistant, read a lot of books, and take some courses as a non-degree seeking student. Good luck! It can definitely be done!

When I interviewed for my MS program, some people told me they had tried to do that and they had all gotten rejected. It was awkward and a waste of an application cycle and a large amount of time. I also imagine explaining yourself in a PhD interview could be a bit awkward and that it would strain your relationship with your master's mentor. Honestly, 2 years for a master's program (which is really like a year and a half) goes INSANELY quickly. Focus on getting great experience (getting your name on posters/publications, getting new research experience in different areas, having a fantastic thesis you can talk about on interviews, making connections, going to conferences, etc.) and growing as a researcher. PhD applications are so time consuming that if you do it both year 1 and year 2, you're really limiting the amount of time you actually have to learn and wasting your master's program. Also, I think it's good for someone's long-term career to have experiences working with different people, both from the viewpoint of learning new things as well as forming new connections. You worked with profs in UG, now in your master's program, and then eventually in your PhD program. Think how much better you will do in a PhD program with the extra "grad school" experience that you will have. My advice would be to slow down, learn and grow from each experience, and don't try to rush each step.