avidman

So, while I am totally being a hypocrite, I think it is kind of funny that we are all actively participating in this forum when really, we should be doing HW/research/etc. Kinda runs counter to the prototype of those who really deserve the award, don't ya think? EDIT: Downvoted for a comment that I myself am committing? Oh, the sensitivity.

I suppose we can focus on our March Madness Brackets while we wait.

Thanks for the positive comments everyone. Although my university is pretty good, not many people apply/get awarded the NSF GRF in my field, so I was worried that if someone got the award recently in our department/lab, the reviewers might be like "Oh, well we gave a student from this university last year, so skip it." Looking at the statistics on awarded students, the top schools seem to get the most awards (maybe the students are better? idk). Based on the low frequency at my school, I can't help but be worried. Nonetheless, phew.

Here is a worry of mine. What if someone in my lab got the award last year? Does that mean that my chances of winning are less so because of inherent biases? Or is it the case that reviewers are objective people who will look past that?

Thanks for the replies =). I am glad to know that it is possible.

Just out of curiosity, for those who got accepted into PhD programs with a sub-3.0 gpa, how much did money play a role? I guess what I mean is this - I can't imagine someone with little financial resources managing to get into a good PhD program with a sub-3.0 gpa without a master's. And in order to get a master's (in the US specifically), the student would typically have to pay out of pocket. Some master's programs offer awards and such, but again, a low undergrad gpa would probably get in the way of that. Anyway, I am just curious. I don't mean to offend anyone, but coming from someone who has been poor since birth, I can't imagine ever getting into a good PhD program if I had done poorly in undergrad. =/

Stanford's Center for Compassion And Altruism Research And Education has quite a bit on mindfulness, as it is a core component in compassion. I went to their conference back in 2012 and met a ton of great people. The site has a list of events and people, so check that out.

Hi alexmar2014, When it comes to grad school admissions, research experience matters (like, it really matters). It is good that you are trying to volunteer in a lab, but I don’t think that will be enough. From what I have heard, in order to “prove” yourself to the grad admissions committee, you’ll need good quality experience (not necessarily any publications, but more than a summer’s worth I believe). You will also need to take the Subject GRE test for Psychology. For that test, you need to get a borderline max score, since the test is relatively easy in the sense that most candidates who take it do very well. For psych programs, I think a 3.5+ is the normal, so with anything less, you’ll need to make up for it in other domains and such. As for your GREs, your math school is better than most psych applicants, but your verbal is just average for the top schools (especially for social psych). As for the school selection, you picked some tough ones to get into (especially U Oregon). The good thing is that you are graduate school material in economics, and social psych and economics go hand in hand. ALL OF THAT SAID, I do think you have a good shot if you play your cards correctly. Here are my tips: Do well in the Subject test, and I mean really well. Try to get a jam-packed summer’s worth or more for psych experience. Apply to programs or talk to professors that incorporate economics to their research, as it will help bridge the gap with your credentials (again, social and econ mesh well). Networking borderline supersedes all, so if you can find someone in a program that LIKES you, then you will have an edge on all of the other appliants. Your GRE scores are good. I don’t think you should bother retaking. Having a math minor will help with stats, which is important. If you have any technical skills (programming, task administration, etc.), make sure they shine in your resume. Otherwise, acquire some. It may be worth considering more/other schools, since you picked a tough batch. Best of luck!

Well it sounds like a pretty cool program. Back to the GPA bit, something like that makes plenty of sense. Unfortunately, admission committees have a tendency of not looking twice at any application from an applicant with a psychopathology (or signs of it). I would like to hear what other people have to say about that, but from what I have heard, mentioning or indicating anything like that in an SOP can only hurt you. That said, I think you have a chance with the right GRE scores, great LORs, some networking, some technical skills (programming helps), and some luck. Anyway, best of luck!

Here is my advice: - Get 165+ on both sections of the GRE - See if you can network with people in the departments you are interested in. Basically, if they like you, the GPA won't matter that much as long as your other credentials looks good. - Maybe consider getting into a master's program and try to get a high GPA to offset the undergraduate gpa. Out of curiosity, why did you get a low GPA? I mean, I know that may sound strange, but if the reason is understandable, then maybe you will have a better chance vs. a reason that isn't so great (decided not to study because reasons). Grad schools have the pick of the litter when it comes to admissions. Since you are operating on a busted leg (low GPA), you have to make it up and (quite frankly) be better than your competition in other domains. Otherwise, you won't have much of a chance. On a positive note, I like your optimism. EDIT: Also, please don't take this the wrong way, but Cognitive Science ≠ Cognitive Psychology. While Cognitive Psychology is a ramification of the domain of psychology in general, cognitive science is the union of a bunch of different domains (Anthropology, Philosophy, Neuroscience, Computer Science, Psychology, Linguistics, etc).

Sand Storm *Put your hands up in the air*

Sorry, after hearing that I am a bit in awe. Did you every receive feedback as to why you were rejected? Based on your creds, you seem to be very competitive. That said, I have friends who on paper are less competitive than you and got into pretty good clinical programs (multiple in fact). Are you secretly a vampire (or something that would disqualify you from the admission pool)? @ Lady Grey Here is my advice to you: - Get research/clinical experience (most important imo) - Get 160+ on GRE for verbal/quant (if you can't, prioritize verbal) - Meet people. Networking is super important/often necessary in order to get into graduate school. At the end of the day, many people applying will have credentials similar to yours. When that happens, you have to rely on best of fit, luck, and networking. If there are conferences nearby and if you know about a person you want to apply to, go there and meet them. It helps. Anyway, good luck!

That is a good point. I have to pay about $2500 a year for health insurance through the university.

Your scores are pretty good (personally, I think they are very good). I know people who had lower scores get offers from multiple programs. If possible, what are your other "specs?" As you mentioned, sometimes (often really) luck plays a big role. Even if you are great, you may not be who they are looking for, etc.

Maybe it is different for some places, but the two offers I received included funding and such (and one of them included a fellowship) before I accepted. I ended up choosing the school that didn't give me a fellowship right off the bat (though I ended up getting a fellowship from that school anyway about a month after accepting). Both were for PhD programs, so maybe that makes a difference.

Well, based on what you said: - Villanova has a good track record for getting students admitted to a PhD program, and it is cheaper, but you don't know who the mentor will be, so that can be scary. - American is more expensive and you like the fit, but you aren't super passionate about your potential mentor's research and you don't know the stats when it comes to PhD admittance. I suppose the way I'd look at is in the following: If your main goal is a PhD, then pick the school that will help pave the way. You know Villanova can, and it is cheaper. Although you aren't completely in love with the theory behind the research, you need research experience, and getting experience in a field you aren't super in love with can help broaden your perspective on the research you do care about. As for American, you like the mentor, but he is not a first choice, and although it is a good school, you don't know too much about it. So then: Good Mentor + Unknown Track Record VS Unknown Mentor + Good Track Record Personally, I'd go with Villanova, since it seems better in terms of achieving your PhD goal. However, I would definitely like to hear from others too, haha.

Thanks, I'll do that. Much Appreciated =)

Has anyone heard from UT Austin? My online application status says "In review", but I didn't get an interview and haven't received a rejection letter yet.

From what I heard, the verbal section of the GRE is a better marker of whether an individual will do well in grad school, whereas the quant section doesn't really add much. Again, I don't recall where I heard this, but intuitively, I would think that that is really the case. For the verbal section of the GRE, you actually have to know "stuff", whereas the quant section is just high school math + trickery. As for me, I did pretty well in the quant section (161), but just average for verbal (155) and I got into pretty good programs. For psychology, if you do stellar in verbal and just okay/mediocre/meh in quant, you have a chance. From what I can tell, grad schools don't expect you to be a gre quant section genius; they expect you to at least be average at it. Now that said, I took the GRE 3 times. I was not competitive the first time, and I was less so the second time. I didn't get into any programs when I applied that application year. From what I learned about the GRE: - It is used as a basis for narrowing the application pool. - Should it be? Honestly, it is irrelevant. Why is it irrelevant? Because it is a damn test. Consider classes in college where you studied a crap ton, and it turned out that the material on the test was completely different from your study materials. In turn, you get a C+. Is the test a good predictor of your knowledge of the material? No. But at the end of the day, you got a C+. To some degree, the GRE is like that. It is a unfair test that is morally dumb and scientifically subpar in predictive value (sure, the GRE is predictive to some degree, and maybe the effect is robust, but still small). Still, it doesn't matter. What matters is the following: The GRE is a test, and it is up to you to do well at it. If it means studying months on end (like I resorted to in order to increase my score), then do it. If it means studying on How to Solve Tricky Math 101, then DO IT. Part of getting into graduate school is looking competitive. Sadly, the GRE is part of that criteria. If you are an intelligent individual, or at least somewhat so, you can do well on it with enough work invested. Now, one can argue that is it because I did wellish on the GRE that I believe what I believe, but honestly, it is because I acknowledge the bullcrapery of the GRE, pulled up my sleeves and studied for months, and studied on how to do well on it. *exhale* IN SUMMATION: - GRE is Lame. - GRE isn't a good test. - So what? Study hard enough to get somewhat competitive scores. - Get into graduate school, and be happy that you never have to take that exam ever again. Also, for those who believe that schools should consider other parts of one's application more so than the GRE, it is most likely the case that there is someone in the application pool that has very similar credentials and a better GRE score (it sucks, I know). In order to fix that, Listen to this: [www.youtube].com/watch?v=eGMN-gNfdaY and get on studying. Note: Just remove the brackets. I didn't want the video to appear on the post.

My insight - If the fit is perfect, then go for it! If you have any doubts and you (and your mentors) believe that with more experience you can get into a better program that fits just as perfectly, then do that if you can. There are a number of factors to consider, but I will name a few: - Money: If you go for a masters in the US, you will need money. If you have it, and don't mind parting with it, then go for the masters (but only do so if you believe it will actually help. This topic is up for debate, and I don't have a strong enough opinion to really provide valuable insight regarding whether getting an MA is worth it, etc.) - Age: If you are fresh out of college, then I would suggest getting a job and getting some (more) research experience. It helps, and schools like that sort of thing. Out of college, I had an offer for an MA at SUNY Stony Brook, and I turned it down because of the money. I instead got a job as a research assistant, then got into two of the best PhD programs in the country for Social Psych. I had a third, but I can't seem to remember... Anyway, Wake Forest (based on my brief google search) seems like a good school (one of the best schools that only offers MAs), but at the end of the day (and I know I have said this a lot, but it is important), do whatever you want as long as you don't regret it. EDIT: Just saw this: Oops, sorry, forgot to clarify that the MA is fully funded + stipend Good point about not following the advice of advisers 100%... but I'm just nervous because mine are eminent researchers and definitely know which unis will not yield good post-doc/job offers. And this is probably not indicative of anything because of the small sample size, but it seems like just about everyone who has posted Albany results on the site has been accepted... hm. Anyway, thanks so much for the two cents My response: Wuuuuttt?!?! That is a pretty sweet deal. I think in terms of bettering yourself (excluding the perfect fit factor you mentioned), the MA program seems great! However, you did say SUNY Albany is a perfect fit... hmm... Okay, I suppose you can think of it this way. Are there any PhD programs that you really want to get into in the top tier? If so, the MA is worth considering. If not and you think you will be happy with the SUNY Albany offer, then go for that. In terms of some places not yielding good post-docs/job offers, if you do great work, I don't think that will matter. If you are amazing in graduate school, it shouldn't matter where you go. Sure, going to a great school helps, but the school that you go to doesn't completely define you.

Thanks for the reply. I definitely do want to find out the details. 45k as a graduate student is just... wow.

Just out of curiosity, can someone clarify U Denver's package? 45k a year seems really high as a stipend.

I think this is a really interesting conversation and something that should be addressed. I currently work in a lab and my boss has told me time and time again the difficulties of getting a job in academia after getting a PhD. The realism is simply this: It is hard. But as difficult as it is, there is a crossroads of sorts that manifests during this time - Pursue what you (think you) love, or pursue what will likely get you a job. If you pursue what you love and can't get a job, will you regret it? If you pursue a career that will make you money, will you be happy? Maybe I am fortunate (or just masochistic or stupid for that matter), but I believe the best thing to do is to follow what your heart says. Whatever you end up choosing, just be sure it is something you won't regret. With that all said, I got accepted into the no.1 Social Program in the country, and I am not taking it because I received an offer from another school that fits my liking better. The chances of getting a Post-Doc after are slim, but I'm going for it, and the chances of getting a job as a professor are even slimmer, but to me, I'd rather pursue the chance than be a potato. Also, on a huge aside, regardless of whether you pursue Social or whatever, programming is borderline a necessity in this growing technological age. So no matter what happens, if you pick up that skill, there will be safety nets. So best of luck everyone. Not sure if this helps.

Just got officially rejected from Oregon.

Regarding UConn, I know that they already sent interviews for their cognitive neuroscience area, but no idea about social.