MA in psychology?

[honkycat1]

I am sorry I thought I clearly said "not so much" not "not at all"

yes you did clearly say "not so much", and its also false.

so before you act like a smartass, get your facts straight.

600+ verbal can get you into the best research PhD programs.

Edited February 22, 2011 by donnyz89

[Arcadian]

Yeah, I would think your Quantitative score would be more important than your Verbal score for an experimental psychology program. This is science, after all. Granted, there is a heavy writing component, but it's more technical writing than anything. While better writers tend to get published more often, the majority of research papers are statistics-oriented.

[honkycat1]

Yeah, I would think your Quantitative score would be more important than your Verbal score for an experimental psychology program. This is science, after all. Granted, there is a heavy writing component, but it's more technical writing than anything. While better writers tend to get published more often, the majority of research papers are statistics-oriented.

obviously it is... I don't even know why people take this Mr."I only apply to schools because of their name" seriously... whatever, if not for these applicants, I would not get in any schools...

and I'm actually offended by your statement that you just want an ivey league school... its snobby, pretentious people like you that give real academics a bad name, and give people that actually go to those schools to do real work a bad name.

Edited February 22, 2011 by donnyz89

[HyacinthMacaw]

Hey folks, let's chill out here. It seems like the original poster was just trying to chime in with an honest answer, albeit one with which you may have disagreed. I, too, am concerned about how effective applying to Ivy League programs will turn out to be without consideration of individual fit (see my post on this thread earlier). Yet, we can't have a civil discourse if we resort to ad hominem attacks. For the sake of reason, let's keep it polite.

[bialetti-overdose]

Hey folks, let's chill out here. It seems like the original poster was just trying to chime in with an honest answer, albeit one with which you may have disagreed. I, too, am concerned about how effective applying to Ivy League programs will turn out to be without consideration of individual fit (see my post on this thread earlier). Yet, we can't have a civil discourse if we resort to ad hominem attacks. For the sake of reason, let's keep it polite.

Thank you,

I didn't mean to offend anyone with my post nor I would have ever expected to offend anyone for just my wanting to get into Ivys.

[PsychGirl1]

I am sorry I thought I clearly said "not so much" not "not at all"

Wow... you have some serious attitude.

Good luck with your applications.

[PsychGirl1]

yes you did clearly say "not so much", and its also false.

so before you act like a smartass, get your facts straight.

600+ verbal can get you into the best research PhD programs.

Thanks for the info... that's what I heard from my friends in PhD programs, but they are mostly engineers/math/etc. but I wasn't sure about psychology. I only took the GREs once and didn't really study, so I wasn't sure if I should be worried about my score. But, my background is really strong in math/science/stats/research and writing, and my GRE scores reflects my strengths well. I could go home and memorize 500+ words to artificially inflate my verbal score, but frankly I don't care that much and I don't see why schools would care that much. I did get 600+ verbal, and an 800 math and 5.5 writing. So I think I've decided not to take them again and just be happy with my score. I'm pretty confident in myself and my background, but I know that there are tons of equally competitive people applying and a lot of it is just luck, or meshing well with a professor and his interests. Fingers crossed! :-)

[digits2006]

I think fit should be more important than GRE scores. I had a low GRE schools and was waitlisted at three PhD programs because of my fit and research experience.

[waiting123]

A master's can be beneficial with so many budget cuts occurring. If you've already done a thesis the PhD program won't need to fund you for as long as students without one. This can be an attractive option for admissions committees.

[moralresearcher]

First of all, most Master's programs in experimental psychology are called "MS" rather than "MA." It's not really that important, but I'm surprised no one has pointed that out.

Several people in this topic have emphasized the point that we should only look for MS programs that are fully funded. Personally, I have never seen such a program. What programs are you talking about, and how can I find them? Any in Texas?

Wake Forest (NC) and William and Mary (VA) both have funded MA programs in experimental psych.

Also, ASU West's campus has a semi-funded MA program. I don't know what the whole deal is, but I think most people are at least partially funded.

Edited December 12, 2012 by moralresearcher

[moralresearcher]

I think they are very concerned with Verbal and analytical writing scores.

Not so much for quant.

It's the opposite. Also, your percentile rank is at least as, if not more important than, your actual number score.

[moralresearcher]

A master's can be beneficial with so many budget cuts occurring. If you've already done a thesis the PhD program won't need to fund you for as long as students without one. This can be an attractive option for admissions committees.

Nope, they still fund you for 5 years. The main point of getting an MA is that you then have 2 extra years to get published (so people coming in with an MA have 7 years of grad school instead of 5). Theoretically, you'll be almost as competitive as someone with a 2-year post doc in that situation, but you don't have to do the post doc.

[Mtorey]

Based off of the average percentile ranks of accepted students posted by most of the psyc research programs I'm applying to, verbal seems to be more important although I'm sure someone with a decent verbal/ high quant can still be very competitive. It does seem to vary quite a bit, but I've noticed that the mediocre to good programs have average scores around: Verbal 83% and Quant 65%, and that trend generally stays the same with the so-called "Ivy League" schools as well. For example, UCLA's averages are somewhere around: Verbal 93% (163) and Quant 74% (158). I know that seems weird since it's research oriented, but I'm just calling it like I see it. Not to mention data analysis mainly requires you to abstract information from a data output page and put it into words. There isn't really a whole lot of math involved there.  

 

None of the research programs I've come across have listed that their average quant percentile was higher than their average verbal although I'm sure there are some out there. That being said, things like fit and experience definitely play a major role in admissions (for a good discussion of this topic go to Harvard's psyc dept page where they discuss gre scores) as well, and I doubt anyone would be disqualified based on his or her verbal score if the other is high. 

[sdt13]

A master's can be beneficial with so many budget cuts occurring. If you've already done a thesis the PhD program won't need to fund you for as long as students without one. This can be an attractive option for admissions committees.

From what I've come across, this is hardly true. At my current school they make you start fresh regardless of your background. When doing my own research on other programs, the best I've seen is a school that will allow 6-9 transfer credits pending department approval, and it's usually just for basic first-year stats. 

 

[PsychGirl1]

Most of the programs I'm interviewing at will let you use your empirical thesis at the other school for the new school, as long as it is reviewed and up to their standard. Having your thesis waived can make a big difference! As far as classes, most have said they will waive up to a certain amount as long as syllabi are provided, and only certain courses. But it's definitely a mix- one or two won't take anything and make you start fresh, one or two seem like you can get credit for just about everything as long as it's equivalent. Most are between those two extremes :-)

[PsychGirl1]

Also, some programs have already sent me their funding info, and will only guarantee funding for 3 years if you have your master's. But of course, I'm sure they will help you hunt down funding if you want to stay longer.

[olayak]

I am completing my third masters degree (MSEd, MSW, MA (psych)).  I also have half a doctorate (I had to leave for medical reasons) and I have reapplied to doctoral programs.  

 

I can assure you that a MA is not a guarantee in to a doctoral program.  Research and publications are much more important.  Your GRE scores look good, but your GPA could use improvement.  I would suggest a MA program to you so that you have the chance to improve your GPA, get more research experience and publish and present at conferences.  Then you would have a much better chance to get into the doctoral program of your choice.  They want someone who has a proven track record of success in the field.

 

I know many people who went straight from a BA to a PHD and I often recommend it.  However, if you think that you're not ready for the PhD, , you should do the MA at the same school where you would like to do your phd.  That way most of your credits will transfer and you will have a quicker route to the phd.  You will also connect with the faculty and be able to do research in that field that both you and they find interesting.  

 

You don't need a MA to get into a phd program, but if you are lacking in some area (no research, low gpa, no publications), then it can definitely help!

Edited February 9, 2013 by olayak