The Accepted People

[Luna]

So, for those of you receiving acceptance letters to graduate psychology programs I pose a question:

What do you think differentiates you from other applicants? Why you?

[LaraAnn85]

Not because of my GPA! My GRE scores were pretty good (~1300), but it wasn't that either. I busted my butt for 3 years working in labs and making connections and doing internships and pretty much everything I could, all in one area of psychology. My resume now looks pretty good for still being an undergrad, and I know that my letters of rec are glowing. I think the LORs are really what gave me any chance, because I have a huge deficit from my first 2 years' GPA. A focused statement of purpose probably helped also. It's funny because of all the 10 schools I applied to, I'm interviewing with/accepted to the ones with the best 'fit' of research interests. There were a couple of schools I now realize I shouldn't have even applied to because I just wasn't a good match for what they are studying. But it seems that they do a pretty good job of not accepting you if you're not a good match! :?

[Luna]

Thanks for the reply. I have been seeking a realistic perspective of my odds through the conventional venues (Petersons, US News, Siop), but in the scheme of things have not found them very helpful in my area of specialization. For example US News ranks IO from 2005 and the admissions data in Siop has not matched what all the schools themselves have reported. Hence, I'm hoping to collect some qualitative data so that other graduate hopefuls like myself, pursuing psychology can better understand "what it takes".

I found this article:http://www.psichi.org/awards/winners/hunt_reports/kaiser.asp (recipient of Hunt Grant Reward 2005-2006) that explored what factors determine admission into psychology clinical and counseling programs. Apparently the type of research one does can statistically influence how likely they would be reported to be accepted by an institution if all other variables (scores, gpa) were kept constant. Perhaps there really are an overabundance of qualified people in the applicant pool.

I myself have worked my butt off to immerse myself in the world of research. For example I have worked for a research organization, collected data as a survey interviewer and field interviewer, and volunteered my time for an IO group in the span of 1.5 years. It's not always easy for undergraduate students to get involved in research endeavors. It can sometimes take persistence and a strong resolve.

I dunno yet if I will obtain admission into a program this year; I truly hope this will be the case. There is still hope; I have found this forum helpful. If you are one of the "accepted people" let us know what you believe got you there. Thanks!

[Luna]

I suppose that now that I am "one of the accepted" I think a big reason I got into the program was because I had contacted the professor I wished to work with and we had good rapport. It was this same professor who called me and told me he would be my mentor. I also found out from him that I did not make the top ten according to a formula they used - my score was very close, but I am pretty sure that if I had not contacted him in the first place I probably would not have been accepted.

[schoolpsych2]

I think part of it is also networking. If someone is familiar with you and what you do, your chances are higher than someone who looks really good on paper.

[jhmoss1812]

To be honest, I am not really sure why I was accepted. I did my research this summer and contacted all the professors at each university to see if they were accepting students. I have solid credentials (4.0/3.6, 1370 GRE, good letters of rec) but I think the fact that I will have a master's degree might help as well. It shows that I am dedicated to the field, especially with a few professors I applied to work with previously and has given me extra research experience. Also, it might help that the program I did get accepted to might not be as heavily applied as other schools. I am very relieved to be accepted into a doctoral program, but I am hoping for options.

[juror#1]

This is really hard to answer and am not sure I can. My best bet is my research experience, yes I have good grades, decent GRE etc. but I feel like everyone does. I have been conducting research in the exact field I want for almost 2 years now, have helped with over 10 studies, have 2 publications, and a huge list of manuscripts in preparation. My CV is 4 pages long! My knowledge of complex statistics is not necessarily good, but I can discuss mediations like no one's business haha and it got me a TA position for a statistics course. Really that is my best guess, because I know of so many people who have also worked their butts off that I think should have been accepted as well. I really think it is kind of like the lottery Oh and I was a bad potential student, I didn't contact a single professor, so it is definately not that.

[socialpsych]

I think part of it is also networking. If someone is familiar with you and what you do, your chances are higher than someone who looks really good on paper.

Last year I felt like I'd have a hard time answering this question, but a year later I'm pretty sure that networking is a huge part of it. Having LORs from famous people will definitely get your app considered seriously, as long as your GRE/GPA are good enough.

[neuroJ]

I dunno yet if I will obtain admission into a program this year; I truly hope this will be the case. There is still hope; I have found this forum helpful. If you are one of the "accepted people" let us know what you believe got you there. Thanks!

I hope you will be successful, but in the off chance you won't be I think there are a few common patterns I've seen from other applicants who are doing well. The first is simply age, just being a year or two older certainly helps. The extra time helps crystallization of your own research interests- which leads to a more focused (and easier) grad school search, makes your SOP way stronger and even indicates you are a more dedicated, mature candidate.

Also, many applicants seem to have had post-bach research experience. One thing that I wish I had known a couple years ago is that you can definitely can find funding for doing lab work even without direct help from contacts. There are post bach research programs at some schools or even at the NIH/NIMH. I have met several people who found positions simply by cold-calling profs and saying they were interested in their work and inquiring if they were hiring lab managers/RAs. These positions do a number of things for you- they give you time to further invest yourself in psych research, they broaden and expand your knowledge of your sub-field/practical research skillz, and can give you a really another outstanding LOR outside the network of your undergrad institution. Plus, it's really valuable to experience research outside of the context of something which you do in addition to undergrad classes. It's definitely not the easiest path; it can take a lot of effort and persistence to find a position in the first place (and if you are lucky enough to get funding, it is definitely not going to pay very well). But, it is a great mechanism to explore your own interests in research (not just topically but whether or not research is for you) and it's a good way to demonstrate your dedication and potential for a research career.

Good luck!

[Hope4Society]

I hope you will be successful, but in the off chance you won't be I think there are a few common patterns I've seen from other applicants who are doing well. The first is simply age, just being a year or two older certainly helps. The extra time helps crystallization of your own research interests- which leads to a more focused (and easier) grad school search, makes your SOP way stronger and even indicates you are a more dedicated, mature candidate.

Also, many applicants seem to have had post-bach research experience. One thing that I wish I had known a couple years ago is that you can definitely can find funding for doing lab work even without direct help from contacts. There are post bach research programs at some schools or even at the NIH/NIMH. I have met several people who found positions simply by cold-calling profs and saying they were interested in their work and inquiring if they were hiring lab managers/RAs. These positions do a number of things for you- they give you time to further invest yourself in psych research, they broaden and expand your knowledge of your sub-field/practical research skillz, and can give you a really another outstanding LOR outside the network of your undergrad institution. Plus, it's really valuable to experience research outside of the context of something which you do in addition to undergrad classes. It's definitely not the easiest path; it can take a lot of effort and persistence to find a position in the first place (and if you are lucky enough to get funding, it is definitely not going to pay very well). But, it is a great mechanism to explore your own interests in research (not just topically but whether or not research is for you) and it's a good way to demonstrate your dedication and potential for a research career.

Good luck!

I can't agree with this enough! I've been accepted to several of my top choices, and I really think that being a non-traditional student (late twenties; decade of post-bach research, management, and life experience; etc.) made a huge difference in terms of defining my research focus, and honing those skills (field, statistical, and otherwise) that best inform that focus. I also think time away from academia increased my confidence and allowed me to develop skills that aren't really attended to in undergrad, such as managing a team, budgeting, and networking across different fields/disciplines. Sure, you can head a club---and that's great---but the real-world impact may be negligible. That time also helped me discern what I really wanted from a program, as opposed to just hoping that someone would pick me. I only applied to top-tier programs because I wanted all of the attributes that those schools could offer: Research 1 institutions, dedicated research dollars, multiple profs in different fields studying things I am incredibly interested in, and the opportunity to gain international exposure. I'm not sure if I would possess the same level of confidence/awareness if I were a traditional student.

I also can't stress enough the importance of contacting POIs long before the start of the application season in which you'll be applying. You'll be able to discuss their current/future work, your interests, and learn more about the program when they're (slightly) less stressed re: applications. All things being equal, I would argue that fit/experience/recommendations far outweigh more technical factors, such as GRE/GPA. I think it's really important to keep in mind that this is a job interview, more or less. You're really not applying to be a student, but to advance the interests/reputation of the school's brand, your advisors' work, and the contribution of your own work as you succeed in the field.

Very best of luck!