How much research experience is enough?

[tgf123]

Do most people who get into Berkeley/Princeton/etc have multiple publications, presentations? I'm trying to do as much as possible (as an undergrad), but don't really have anything to aim for.

Also, how do they regard research in divergent fields, like in social psychology?

Edited February 9, 2011 by tgf123

[Derrick Rose]

Do most people who get into Berkeley/Princeton/etc have multiple publications, presentations? I'm trying to do as much as possible (as an undergrad), but don't really have anything to aim for.

Also, how do they regard research in divergent fields, like in social psychology?

I think the purpose of research experience is to show that you are interested in sociology. I don't think the research itself is that important. I have done only one research project and no publication/presentation in sociology. Especially for undergraduate they don't expect you to do a lot of research.

[Karlito]

I think the purpose of research experience is to show that you are interested in sociology. I don't think the research itself is that important. I have done only one research project and no publication/presentation in sociology. Especially for undergraduate they don't expect you to do a lot of research.

Are you already in a Ph.D program? Thanks for the advice...Everyone here seems to have published and so on, it is pretty frightening.

[faculty]

Research experience shows that you know what to expect in graduate school. Graduate school is a lot more like a job than it is like undergraduate school. Some students enter not realizing this, thinking that they'll just get to have prolific people in their field as professors as they continue what they started in undergrad, and then flail around. Experience certainly isn't necessary and it's not a sure-fire way to get in. One could still construct a packet that demonstrates that they're not applying to graduate school because they're just in love with sociology and not ready to stop learning about it, but because they want to do research, academia, etc.

On a related note, the obsession here with stats is misguided. It's true that a weak score will hurt you and you should retake the GRE or at least address the score in your packet, but every department - and sometimes every committee member - is different with regard to how they interpret the scores. If you've got decent scores, though, your entire packet will be considered. After perceptions of potential for success (whether a school uses scores, the entire package, letters, or what), fit is what really matters. I'm in a department with specific strengths. We don't want to let people in whose interests aren't represented, as they won't have as many opportunities to succeed. We also don't want to only accept people from one area just because they've got fantastic qualifications, as there aren't enough faculty in that particular area to go around and ensure that everyone is included in research opportunities, etc., and this will ultimately hurt the students' chances. This is also a reason that students applying to programs might be wary of stressing POIs as you call them. A stronger statement indicates that they department as a whole has something to offer the student, not a particular faculty member. That faculty member might already have too many students, might be leaving for another job or retiring, or might not like your packet if it's shared with them to get a feel for its quality. Let the department know what you like about it - its enduring qualities, which can still be areas of strength - and not the (often transient) person that you might want to work with.

Edited February 9, 2011 by faculty

[Karlito]

That is some really excellent advice and I deeply appreciate. Cheers faculty