Social Psychology Fall 2012 Applicants

[gellert]

For those who are applying to phd social psych in Ivy League schools (e.g., Harvard, Columbia) , do you mind sharing your gpa, gre, and a very brief CV (publication, research experience, etc)? Also, what are your backup schools??

Thanks!

I don't feel comfortable putting that much potentially-identifying information on the web linked to this account, but I can give you some vagaries!

1) GPA/GRE don't matter beyond a certain point, even for Ivy League schools. I'd say if you're above a 1350 GRE and a 3.5 GPA, don't worry about it, you'll make cutoffs. (You'd probably still get at least looked at with a 3.3 + GPA, but aim for 3.5 or over to be safe.) Keep in mind that there does exist a correlation between higher GPA/GRE and acceptance, but research experience is still the most important part of your application. It just so happens that there's ALSO a correlation between lots of good research experience, fit, and high GPA/GRE (because the type of student who would possess one is likely to possess the others as well). But I think if you're over 1350 + 3.5, truly stellar experience/SOP/LORs can get you in compared to 1500 + 4.0 with less stellar fit/experience.

2) Having publications is nice, but not mandatory (yes, even for an Ivy). I know there are members of this board who will claim you have to practically have two first-author pubs to get accepted, but fortunately, they're incorrect -- at least as far as straight-from-UG applicants go. What you want, bottom line, is to be exceptionally qualified given your other circumstances. So if you're straight from UG, yes, most of your competition will be publication-free. So wouldn't you think that HAVING publications under your belt would put you over the edge? (Again, not the 5+ publications some people here seem to be advocating -- I almost suspect trolling, haha -- but at least one paper and a poster or two.) Frankly, adcomms know how the publication system works for UGs, and they know that the fact your prof threw your name on the author list could mean nothing more than the fact that you existed and your prof is nice. Also, student journals aren't worth much. So the only publications that're going to make much difference are first-author posters that you presented at well-known conferences and first- or co-author publications at top journals with LORs which speak to you actually having contributed substantially to the idea and interpretation -- not just the grunt work or analysis -- of the paper. THIS can put you over the edge, but it's not going to be typical, not at all. This changes if you've been out of school for a while and have a Master's or paid RA experience. In this case, yes, I can see why people would say you need 5+ publications to be competitive ... because most people with that experience still won't have that kind of CV, and you want to be exceptional. POIs have no problem accepting students straight from UG, but you want to be so experienced and qualified that they think, "wow, if he/she did THIS much just in undergrad, imagine what he/she will achieve at our program!"

3) Research experience! Most of your competition, even at Ivys, will have experience limited to data entry and handing out questionnaires and coding video interactions. This will usually be 1-2 years worth, plus an honors thesis. Which, you know, that's great -- but if you want to stand out, you're gonna want more than that for an Ivy. Think 3 OR MORE years of experience designing and leading projects, working at every step of the process (from idea conception to implementation to procedure to analysis to interpretation to publication). This could be in UG or it could be as a post-bacc RA, but either way you want 3-4 years minimum of this kind of high-responsibility work. And you want LOR-writers who can speak to it. Just an honors thesis won't be good enough to be competitive (though it will certainly not hurt). You want that kind of involvement as a steady factor across your entire CV. The more directly relevant this work is to the research interests of your adviser, the better -- though you can spin just about anything into relevance.

4) SOP should be amazing, really identify your fit with the faculty, and show-but-not-tell. Work a narrative into it, using experiences to highlight your best qualities. Also acknowledge your weaknesses but then talk about how excited you are to learn more about whatever measure/topic is you're not yet totally-fluent in. Save talk about grade drops or poor tests scores for LOR writers. You want to use your SOP to talk about research ONLY. It'll sound a lot better in Tenured Prof of Awesome's letter than it will if you're trying to make excuses for yourself between Paragraph About Research Experience and Paragraph About Perfect Fit.

5) LOR writers should know you very, very well and be able to say more than just that you were a good student and got an A in their class. To be competitive at an Ivy, you want at least one letter-writer saying you are quite literally the best student he/she ever had, for X reasons, giving Y examples. The other two don't have to be quite as superlative, but if they are ... again, doesn't hurt.

6) Networking. At my school, my adviser only invited to interview people whose letter-writers were profs he knew personally. This obviously varies between POIs, but it's something to keep in mind. Even if you just talked to your POI for thirty minutes at a conference, check back in with them through email. Mention it in your SOP. Find out who they've worked with in the past and learn about THEIR research as well to show that you have a truly in-depth understanding of your field.

7) Other/EC Experience = unimportant. Icing on what should be, if you have #s 1-6, an already-flawless cake.

Source: I sat down for a nice long chat with my adviser, who is a department chair at a top psychology R1 institution and Knows Things.

Edited December 10, 2011 by gellert

[spsych]

I don't feel comfortable putting that much potentially-identifying information on the web linked to this account, but I can give you some vagaries!

1) GPA/GRE don't matter beyond a certain point, even for Ivy League schools. I'd say if you're above a 1350 GRE and a 3.5 GPA, don't worry about it, you'll make cutoffs. (You'd probably still get at least looked at with a 3.3 + GPA, but aim for 3.5 or over to be safe.) Keep in mind that there does exist a correlation between higher GPA/GRE and acceptance, but research experience is still the most important part of your application. It just so happens that there's ALSO a correlation between lots of good research experience, fit, and high GPA/GRE (because the type of student who would possess one is likely to possess the others as well). But I think if you're over 1350 + 3.5, truly stellar experience/SOP/LORs can get you in compared to 1500 + 4.0 with less stellar fit/experience.

2) Having publications is nice, but not mandatory (yes, even for an Ivy). I know there are members of this board who will claim you have to practically have two first-author pubs to get accepted, but fortunately, they're incorrect -- at least as far as straight-from-UG applicants go. What you want, bottom line, is to be exceptionally qualified given your other circumstances. So if you're straight from UG, yes, most of your competition will be publication-free. So wouldn't you think that HAVING publications under your belt would put you over the edge? (Again, not the 5+ publications some people here seem to be advocating -- I almost suspect trolling, haha -- but at least one paper and a poster or two.) Frankly, adcomms know how the publication system works for UGs, and they know that the fact your prof threw your name on the author list could mean nothing more than the fact that you existed and your prof is nice. Also, student journals aren't worth much. So the only publications that're going to make much difference are first-author posters that you presented at well-known conferences and first- or co-author publications at top journals with LORs which speak to you actually having contributed substantially to the idea and interpretation -- not just the grunt work or analysis -- of the paper. THIS can put you over the edge, but it's not going to be typical, not at all. This changes if you've been out of school for a while and have a Master's or paid RA experience. In this case, yes, I can see why people would say you need 5+ publications to be competitive ... because most people with that experience still won't have that kind of CV, and you want to be exceptional. POIs have no problem accepting students straight from UG, but you want to be so experienced and qualified that they think, "wow, if he/she did THIS much just in undergrad, imagine what he/she will achieve at our program!"

3) Research experience! Most of your competition, even at Ivys, will have experience limited to data entry and handing out questionnaires and coding video interactions. This will usually be 1-2 years worth, plus an honors thesis. Which, you know, that's great -- but if you want to stand out, you're gonna want more than that for an Ivy. Think 3 OR MORE years of experience designing and leading projects, working at every step of the process (from idea conception to implementation to procedure to analysis to interpretation to publication). This could be in UG or it could be as a post-bacc RA, but either way you want 3-4 years minimum of this kind of high-responsibility work. And you want LOR-writers who can speak to it. Just an honors thesis won't be good enough to be competitive (though it will certainly not hurt). You want that kind of involvement as a steady factor across your entire CV. The more directly relevant this work is to the research interests of your adviser, the better -- though you can spin just about anything into relevance.

4) SOP should be amazing, really identify your fit with the faculty, and show-but-not-tell. Work a narrative into it, using experiences to highlight your best qualities. Also acknowledge your weaknesses but then talk about how excited you are to learn more about whatever measure/topic is you're not yet totally-fluent in. Save talk about grade drops or poor tests scores for LOR writers. You want to use your SOP to talk about research ONLY. It'll sound a lot better in Tenured Prof of Awesome's letter than it will if you're trying to make excuses for yourself between Paragraph About Research Experience and Paragraph About Perfect Fit.

5) LOR writers should know you very, very well and be able to say more than just that you were a good student and got an A in their class. To be competitive at an Ivy, you want at least one letter-writer saying you are quite literally the best student he/she ever had, for X reasons, giving Y examples. The other two don't have to be quite as superlative, but if they are ... again, doesn't hurt.

6) Networking. At my school, my adviser only invited to interview people whose letter-writers were profs he knew personally. This obviously varies between POIs, but it's something to keep in mind. Even if you just talked to your POI for thirty minutes at a conference, check back in with them through email. Mention it in your SOP. Find out who they've worked with in the past and learn about THEIR research as well to show that you have a truly in-depth understanding of your field.

7) Other/EC Experience = unimportant. Icing on what should be, if you have #s 1-6, an already-flawless cake.

Source: I sat down for a nice long chat with my adviser, who is a department chair at a top psychology R1 institution and Knows Things.

Thanks for the great advice!

[yubby]

yea i think what gellert said sums it up nicely. its congruent with almost everything ive read on other forums and from talking to my profs. i think 3.5 is a little low though, id say 3.7 is closer to the mark where gpa ceases to matter.

on topic: applying to stanford, university of toronto, and university of waterloo

gl everyone!

[gellert]

^ Mm, I'd say yeah, anything over 3.7 GPA doesn't matter, but the point I was trying to make is that 3.5 is the cut-off for looking at SOPs, CVs, LoRs, etc. It doesn't REALLY matter if you have a 3.7, if the rest of those facets are stellar. They'll take a look at your application with a 3.6 GPA same as they would if you had a 3.9. 3.7+ GPA just becomes icing; the real meat of your application is elsewhere.

Bottom line: 3.5 GPA won't get you rejected outright, even when compared to a 3.7 GPA. A 3.2 might.

Edited December 10, 2011 by gellert

[watson]

Hi All...I just wanted to post this before the season gets too crazy as I know this is an issue every year on this board. If you're applying to Northwestern there is a website where you can check admission status...however you do not get an email telling you when that status has been updated (a rude shock to many people when they realize it was posted long ago and they were kept in agony waiting on the email telling them to check the site). We interview the first week of February, so if you haven't been contacted about an interview by January you're either waitlisted/rejected but you may want to start checking the website to learn your fate around Jan/Feb even if you don't get an email (this may seem early, but NU has an early application deadline too).

[William_James]

anyone else applying to Columbia and have no information in the application status form (under 'downloadable forms')? I submitted about 3 weeks ago and still nothing showing for required application materials received.

[spsych]

anyone else applying to Columbia and have no information in the application status form (under 'downloadable forms')? I submitted about 3 weeks ago and still nothing showing for required application materials received.

Same here! I ended up calling the admissions and found out about the status.

[BlueCamel]

Does anyone know when (end of January? February?) we will get an interview or some sort of response??

[gellert]

^ I recommend checking the results survey to see when your schools have historically gotten back to people. It seems to range the gamut anywhere from late December (rare) to mid-January/February (common) to March (rare again).

My adviser has noted that the date of interviews seems to be getting earlier and earlier each year. It follows that the date of interview invites would be doing the same. However, keep in mind that for some schools (e.g., Cornell) who delayed their application deadlines due to the delay in GRE score reports, things might get pushed back a little later than usual.

tl;dr - It depends on the year and a number of circumstances. Check for the biggest wave in mid-January or thereabouts.

[BlueCamel]

^ I recommend checking the results survey to see when your schools have historically gotten back to people. It seems to range the gamut anywhere from late December (rare) to mid-January/February (common) to March (rare again). .

Hey thanks!! Good luck to all of us

[William_James]

Judging from the results in the past 2 years around mid Jan is when you will start getting some notifications if you've done well

[newpsyche]

Mid-January sounds like the norm indeed...so why am I so jumpy about my Inbox? This is terrifying!

[svh]

Who got the Duke interview? Who's the POI?

[socihealth]

I am the same way! I keep refreshing the page of my check app status links and I am checking my email constantly. I know it is early (some of my application deadlines were not until this past week!).

Do adcomms ever review apps before the deadline?

[absolute1513]

hey all,

i applied to usc, uva, umd, brown, cornell, yale, nyu, upenn, umass, utoronto and berkeley. i heard back from usc (graham) and uva (nosek) saying i am one of the final people, but no offer yet.

this process just pure sucks, too much stress. good luck to all.

[svh]

hey all,

i applied to usc, uva, umd, brown, cornell, yale, nyu, upenn, umass, utoronto and berkeley. i heard back from usc (graham) and uva (nosek) saying i am one of the final people, but no offer yet.

this process just pure sucks, too much stress. good luck to all.

Hey, see you at the UVa interview!

[absolute1513]

Hey, see you at the UVa interview!

cool, who are you interested in working with?

[brilartist]

Following the Notification thread can be a little tiresome given that many posts are not about Social psychology. Anyone hear news from UCSB? UC Davis?

[humankoko]

Someone posted an acceptance to UCSB either here or on notification thread

[galipettes]

Following the Notification thread can be a little tiresome given that many posts are not about Social psychology. Anyone hear news from UCSB? UC Davis?

I haven't heard back from UCD but I checked their program calendar (it's on their website). It says something about a recruitment day on 2/27...so I'm wondering if all the interview invitations have been extended.

[adh06h]

Applied to UC Davis, no word yet except from interest email response from prof saying that funding was essentially non-existent for him this year...not very encouraging.

Applied:

UC Davis

U of Colorado

U of Washington

Portland State (interview)

Kansas State

U of Kansas

UT Austin

Texas A&M (Interview)

Northeastern

U of Mass

WUSTL

UT Arlington

Mizzou

All the forums are so helpful and yet so anxiety-inducing at the same time...thanks!

[EastCoasting]

Would you mind sharing the name of that professor? Thanks!

[sweetnighter]

Would you mind sharing the name of that professor? Thanks!

Seconded--also applied to Davis social. PM?

[socpsy123]

anyone apply to stony brook's social & health program? haven't seen anything in the results survey and haven't heard from the school aside from an email that was sent early january....any information would be greatly appreciated!!

[crazygirl2012]

But yes, this process does suck. Especially when you're scheduling interviews and haven't even heard back from your other schools yet. Then there's the cost of travel (the part that you have to cover if they don't give you enough) and the fact that you have to miss classes during your last semester of undergrad...

The expenses suck, yes. The part where I'm still an undergrad with a full course load? I keep conveniently forgetting.