PsychGirl1

Thank you for the feedback! Okay, so it sounds like I can have reasons to do it either #1 or #3. I definitely agree with you about treating my measured variable as two conditions. However, this is how we designed it for my thesis, as I'm on really tight timelines and for ease of analysis as well as interpretation, my committee and I agreed that this would be simplest. I already have a really complex thesis, with 3 IVs and 3 DVs (which is reality is 8 DVs, as some of them have multiple variables within them), and set up and ran participants with a 90-minute visit. That being said, when I write it up for a manuscript, I'll be running the analyses either as an ANCOVA (using the continuous measure as the "covariate") or as a regression.

I didn't look at number of citations. However, I did have grad students and a well-known adviser to guide me on who is known for what, or how reputable someone was. Then I looked at things like their CV (which I guess included all their citations, but I didn't look at it as a pure number- just made sure there were a decent amount and they regularly pushed out papers), their funding, their research focus, the size of their lab, and whether those lab members got papers and if so, what the author order was. But this was more of a holistic process, just to get a general feeling of the research productivity of the lab and the professor. In my personal opinion, you don't want someone with just the most citations. For example, you could end up with someone who has been around for a long time, complacent, not as motivated to publish, etc. just because they are at the end of their career. It's better to find someone whose research interests match yours well, who has a good reputation, a good track record, and is somewhere between "up and coming" and "established" and still has enthusiasm and motivation. I can't speak for Bren, but I know that some people prefer that option because if they decide to drop out of the program, they will at least be able to do so with their master's.

First off, there have been about 5000 threads on here and StudentDoctor in the past few weeks about this very topic. That's why you're not getting many replies- it's exhausting to keep typing the same thing over and over again. Look at past threads and then maybe ask more specific questions on this one. As far as the advising style- I figured this out a few different ways. First, reputation- ask other grad students who went through the application process before you about different professors. Some have a reputation for being difficult, crazy, unstable, not letting their grad students do their own reserach, etc. Each psych specialty is actually rather small, so these sorts of things get around. I wouldn't base an entire decision to apply on this, but it's something to consider when weighing the pros/cons of a program and a prof. Second, meeting them in person- just meeting someone in person can give you a lot of insight into their personality. I know it's not quite the same thing as advising style, but you can make SOME of the appropriate leaps pretty easily. This can be at a conference, or during the interview. Third, ASK- I asked every professor this in my interview- "what is your mentoring/advising style?". Some deflected and said to answer their grad students, but most told me what they strive for as their mentoring style. Then I asked almost every single graduate student what I met in their lab the same question. Look out for euphemisms... for example, "he gives us a lot of independence to do our own projects" could easily mean anything from what it says to a completely hands-off, unhelpful adviser. Pay attention to how they say things, what they aren't saying, and their non-verbal language :-).

Thank you for the replies! Agree about #2, then that one is off the list :-). What is the reasoning for doing #3 over #1? Since it's something like BMI, you wouldn't expect it to be influenced by experimental manipulations, so why would you care about the interaction terms?

I have a stats question that I just can't seem to answer. My adviser keeps telling me to do one or the other depending what day of the week it is, I've gotten mixed answers from other grad students, and I'm having trouble finding anything about it in my textbooks or online. I have 3 IVs in my thesis, which equates to 8 conditions. Two are randomized conditions, and one is based on a score of a measure. I want to check and see if there are baseline differences between groups- for example, BMI. I've come up with 3 ways to do this, and I don't know which is correct: (1) A one-way ANOVA across the 8 conditions. (2) Three t-tests across the three IVs. (3) A 3-way ANOVA with BMI as the DV (my primary analysis is a 3-way ANOVA). I originally thought I should do #1 or maybe #2. My adviser told me I should definitely do #2. The other day, he told me that was wrong and I should do #3, since #3 is the format of my primary analysis (2x2x2 ANOVA), so I should test my BL variable the same way. Has anyone seen this before? Does anyone have a good guess on what the correct option would be? I found some research papers, but they are usually quite vague and say something like "examine whether there were baseline differences between conditions"- however one somewhat detailed paper I found referred to their results with F, suggesting they did option 1 or 3. Thank you all!! I appreciate your help.

I like the Chase Marriott card. Useful if you travel often for conferences and such and occasionally have to pay for your own rooms- the rewards are decent for their own rooms. I also use the AmEx cash back, which has high APR, but since you pay off every month that isn't a factor. Also: opening a new card doesn't necessarily lower your credit score. It does ding you a tiny bit for having a hard credit hit and an account open in the past 6 months, but it also should (at least) double the amount of credit limit available to you, which will significantly decrease the amount of credit % you're using. :-D

This is a weird situation. I was going to suggest you propose some sort of qualitative research, but I'm not sure how that would work- for example, if you'd have to get consent from everyone you meet with? Maybe if you propose some sort of qualitiative research with completely anonymous data collection you can get it through. I'm really not sure how this sort of thing would work though, it doesn't really seem appropriate to go through the IRB as-is. I'd definitely call and talk to them.

Haha totally different from my experience. I had to have both my parents co-sign, and they had to go there in person with tax returns, their social security cards, a money order, ID, etc. Then I also had to go with the same things (tax return, social security card, check, ID, my offer letter, my current pay stubs) and complete additional paperwork. My mother said it required more documents and paperwork than getitng a mortgage on a house. They also had a 4x income rule. When I lived in Boston, it was less of a hassle, but they had a 3-4x income rule, so I had to get my parents to co-sign since as a RC I wasn't making enough money.

Also, Ellen Langer has a decent number of books on mindfulness as well.

First, Drexel is in Philadelphia. Boston is an amazing city and I love it- one of my favorite places. I lived there for a long time and now I live in Philaelphia. I like Boston better as a city (well, Cambridge most of all) and there are so many things you can do in Boston. It's also well-placed near cities like Portland (Maine), Montreal, Newport, New York, etc., so there are lots of opportunities to drive places and go do different things. However, rent is quite expensive and the cost of living is higher than in Philadelphia. Philadelphia also has a lot of the same opportunities (restaurants, museums, breweries, etc.) and is it a bit more of a "grittier" city. You can find cheap rent in certain areas or more expensive rent in the nicest areas. Honestly, you will enjoy both cities, but they both have a different "feel" to them. If possible, I'd spend a few days in each city and see how you like it. I've never been to Chicago or Denver, so I can't speak to those cities, although I've heard they are both awesome cities and people love them. But again, very different. I'd say you have all good choices and you should focus more on the school and the students than the city at this point.

There are tons of threads on here about MA and MS programs- search for them.

1. You don't need a master's, even th ough certain master's programs I would recommend- many others I would not. 2. I don't know if you'll be able to find a master's in Clinical Psychology. It will probably be general Psychology or counseling. 3. I don't believe there is an accrediting body for master's programs in psychology. 4. If you want to get a PhD in clinical psych, you should definitely be taking foundational courses (check out Harvard Extension School- the only online program I'm familiar with and is definitely legit) on the grad level if possible. I am currently graduating from a full-time, in-person MS program and going into a PhD program, and I would only recommend a full master's program if it is competitive, very strongly research-focused, and your mentor will be very close to you and in an area of research you would like to continue on in. So basically, no online programs are going to do that :-). So if I were you, I'd take my online foundation courses (possibly through HES), and then also work or volunteer in a research lab where you will have the ability to play a major role in projects or get put on posters/papers. The first (courses) is something you need to do to have the requirements, the second (research) is something you need to do to get accepted :-) Also, make sure you rock the GRE and psych GRE.

I knew I wanted a research-heavy Clinical Psych PhD, so I went through the "Clinical Psych PhD" book and made a spreadsheet of all the programs that were very heavily research based (6s or 7s on a 1-7 scale). Then I went through all their websites and all their professors and kept the ones who had people with interesting research. A bit tedious, but reading so many research descriptions helped me figure out exactly what area I wanted to go into. I ended up applying to programs/faculty members within my area but also stretched my research towards other areas that were somewhat related that I wouldn't have necessarily thought of otherwise. I then also looked at faculty members and programs within my resaerch area that weren't on my spreadsheet (either because they weren't as heavily research focused or because they weren't Clin Psych programs) and added a few of those- names I knew from reading research, or word-of-mouth, or things like that. I then emailed professors to see if they were taking students (a good number weren't) and then I got feedback on my list from various people in the field at that point (other students, my current mentor, other grad students, etc.). At the end, I ended up with a solid list of 12 programs with decent diversity in the program emphasis, program type, and even research focus a bit. It gave me a decent number of options when I interviewed so I was happy with how I approached the process. Good luck!

If you want a more personal flair, I highly recommend Elyn Saks "The Center Cannot Hold", Kay Jamison's "An Unquiet Mind", and Temple Gradin's "Thinking in Pictures".

Where I'm moving, they are quite strict about the income rules. I had to have both my parents apply for the apartment along with me... and my stipend is quite high compared to other schools. I also needed to bring my offer letter and about 100 pounds of other things. It was actually fairly insane. The other cities I've lived in have been strict about the rule as well. If this isn't an option and where you're moving is strict about this, then you'd probably be best renting a room in a group apartment.

You're never too old. I'm 26 and applied to schools this cycle- I had multiple PIs tell me that they liked that I was older and changed careers after some work experience. I think it shows that you've tried other things and this is seriously what you want to do. Just make sure you build up a good foundation and write a stellar personal statement explaining the transition.

Do what interests you most- you will learn the most from it, and I think it's important to have other knowledge and experiences that you can draw from in your Psychology career. Also, you might regret being so narrow-focused later in life. Pick whatever interests you, and as long as you still have a Psych major, you're good. Plus, some areas of Psychology can overlap with areas of political science- you might find your niche.

I took a graduate-level online course through Harvard Extension School while working. I thought it was quality. It wasn't "hard" but it did take a few hours a week to "participate" on the online forums, watch the lecture videos, and then write the term paper at the end as well as a few other reaction papers. If you don't have a job, it should be very easy to do 4.

I'm "celebrating" in a panicked way! Last term, my thesis is due mid-June and is currently a hot mess. But I'm only taking one class this term and I'm ridiculously excited to peace out of this place and move on to the next stage of my life :-D

Definitely follow-up with them about the request, or if you were assigned a mentor, ask them as well- to speak to someone in their lab.

Ask to speak to current students in the program. Your questions are very program-specific and it's unlikely we can give you any good replies.

When I struggle with writing, I take a deep breath and go back to the basics: outline, all the way up through the specific points you want to cover to tell your "story" (you read the literature, you know your story). Then work backwards. Honestly, I read through the literature to get a sense of what I want to say/propose/whatever, and then after that, I mostly skim the abstracts, and when I want to use a paper to support my proposal/stance/whatever, then I read it a bit more thoroughly. Don't spend more time on anything than you have to, or else you'll just be running in circles and wasting time :-D.

Not sure... but are you sure that you can't easily turn on/off what is shown in the bibliography? I think it's normal to be able to do that. In psych, we list dois, which should be listed. I'm not sure about other fields or what other types of URLs it is listing.

Agree with everyone else. I applied to 12 schools this cycle, and I got invited to interview at some very high-ranking schools, and some fairly low-ranking places didn't invite me to interview. However, everywhere I got invited to interview, I was excited about- and everywhere I didn't get invited, I didn't care. And after interviewing, when I felt like the fit was RIGHT- I got accepted. And when there were some things I was hesitant about- I got waitlisted. Somehow, the application cycle becomes this sort of speed dating round where you're still disappointed when the other person rejects you, but you also know that you didn't really like them either. Factors like mutual research interests with the prof, where the professor is taking their research/lab in the future, the program (clinical vs non-clinical, social, health, etc.), the school location, and the other students in the lab/program all play a role in the matchmaking process. Because of this, many people apply to 10-15+ programs and are lucky to get into one or two programs that are a great fit for them. Honestly, this isn't something you rush. I'd take a few years off to do research, save money for application, and figure out your research interests and career goals.

Figure out your interests first, then you can figure out what is a good program.