Realistically, how significant or important is the prestige of a doctoral program?

[Stauce]

I know more highly ranked/prestigious programs are more competitive to get into, have stronger coursework, have higher requirements for GPA/GRE, and yet whenever the topic of prestige being factored in the decision of where to attend your PhD, I hear people dismiss prestige as a non factor or insignificant, and emphasize research fit instead. This seems to be a contradiction itself. If strong research comes out of prestigious programs and people are hired out of highly ranked programs, doesn’t that matter?

I suppose what I am wondering is if it is overly idealistic to suggest research fit is all that matters and that prestige doesn’t. Of course research fit matters, but should one factor in prestige at all (although less than fit), as it does have some sort of implications or effect on future outcomes?

For example, in my case, I am deciding between two highly ranked programs and both faculty are great fits. However, the faculty at the less prestigious university is probably a marginally different fit and approaches the questions with different methods. If prestige were truly a non factor, perhaps I would go to the less prestigious program to work with marginally better fit. However, if prestige and ranking is a factor and does have implications for job prospects, placement, receiving grants, etc. then the different rankings/prestige of the two programs could act as a tie breaker or deciding factor for me.

 

What do you all think?

Edited March 12, 2018 by Stauce

[rising_star]

Prestige and ranking matter. However, it's important to keep in mind that there's the university's overall ranking, the departmental ranking, and the ranking of your subfield within the department, which could differ widely. Inside of academia, people in your field will be familiar with the top programs in your field, even if those aren't the top overall psychology programs. Outside of academia, brand name tends to matter most.

[PokePsych]

There's a big difference between marginal fit and big differences in fit. I've been in contact with a POI who does EXACTLY what I want to do and people who I can see myself work with but not necessarily on a topic I'm as passionate about as the other. That said, don't forget to take the bigger picture into account in terms of also which line of research may be most fruitful to build a career on (this may also differ).

I'd personally investigate placement of graduates if possible - this may tell you more about actual prestige/value. Also POIs within a department may differ in this (some people are just better connected/have a better reputation).

[CgnNrs]

I think that  the prestige (or whatever) of a university tends to get undersold on these forums, but that's just my impression. There is of course no way for me to know given my current position (just an applicant). 

Just to give my perspective; I've been lucky enough to interview at a handful of places.  One of those schools typically gets ranked as a top ten school in the area I'm applying.  To me it was very blatant that this school's training program was of a higher quality compared to a university of much lower prestige. It was clear that more thought had been put into the structure of the program. It had a more thoughtful curriculum and first year project structure. The faculty were more influential and had strong collaborations with other impactful faculty. The students also had more presentation opportunities, higher impact publications, and more sensible mentor-trainee relationships. Unsurprisingly, the placements were much much better at this higher ranked school. This could be unique to this university and not true for all of the prestigious schools. However, speaking to students at lower ranked universities, they also tend to be of the mindset that they will have to work harder to make up for the fact that they don't have brand name recognition when they're applying for post-docs. So, I think that going to a prestigious university has clear advantages for people looking to go into academics. 

That doesn't mean I'm going to default accept the higher tier school though. At least for me, other things are just as important. Like how I get along with students and faculty. Or how I like the city. Or thinking the research is something I can thrive with.  

[jk616]

The general advice I've gotten on this topic is that, as far as rankings go, they don't really matter unless you're on the far end of the spectrum. If you're choosing between a program ranked 10th and a significantly lower ranked program it would be better to go with the higher ranked program unless you have a really compelling reason not to. If you're choosing between a program ranked 25th and a program ranked 45th it really doesn't matter as much. As others have mentioned, the rank of the program might not be representative of the prestige of the POI. 

I was also advised to choose fit over a slightly better ranked program because it's much easier to be productive when you're working on projects you are super excited about. I think the idea is that the excitement about the topic will help push you through the hard times. I was concerned about career prospects as well and was told by a few people that your success has more to do with how productive you are as an individual, rather than the prestige of the program. Hope that helps!

[Timemachines]

what are people referring to regarding rank? U.S News ranking? EPPP pass rates? etc

[lewin]

Reputation matters - of the advisor and program if you're interested in academia, of the institution if you're interested in industry. People here talk about "research fit" or "productivity" and "prestige" as if they're independent dimensions but they're often not. 

Interesting twitter thread relevant to this from about a month ago.

Some quotes: 

- "The fact is that an astonishingly small number of elite universities produce an overwhelming number of America’s professors. One study found: "just a quarter of all universities account for 71-86% of all tenure-track faculty in the U.S. and Canada"

- "The most ‘‘efficient’’ program in the US placed about 1 of 5 admitted students into PhD training positions (essentially research intensive faculty jobs)[though this data does not track positions obtained outside the USA]."

- "There is a lot of variance *between* schools...But no one talks about the variance *within* schools. My guess is that a small number of labs/mentors at the top programs place most of the students. At places I've been this is often obvious to faculty, but not to students. "

[Oshawott]

This topic comes up a lot but the last point @lewin quoted is probably the most important by far. Programs get their reputations because of their faculty. Sometimes excellent faculty mentors just happen to be at smaller schools because of their own choosing. Above all else, look at where your POI is placing people, because they could be amazing researchers at amazing schools but are just not great mentors and have students falling through the cracks.