Which subfield is more competetive? (terms of Ph.D. and academia career)

[kksho]

In balancing out my goal fields in social and developmental as a Junior, I was wondering what the balance of competetiveness is, in terms of Ph.D. programs and academia job, for different subfields. In high paticular, I'm curious about social, developmental, and cognitive psychology.

 

Does anyone know if one field is easier/harder to get an academia job in the future, in terms of competetiveness? Is one field known to be significantly harder or easier? Or are basically merely the same in level? If anyone has any personal experience with academia job searches, that would be great. I'm also wondering about Ph.D. programs competetiveness within different fields (for example, Clinical is notoriously more competetive than all other subfields).

 

P.S. Also, I know it's not good to look at competetiveness as a deciding factor to follow your research passion and career, but I just wanted a realistic scope in mental preparation.

[Lisa44201]

They are all competitive in their own right. That said, they are also all in demand. 

[spunky]

 

Does anyone know if one field is easier/harder to get an academia job in the future, in terms of competetiveness? Is one field known to be significantly harder or easier? Or are basically merely the same in level? If anyone has any personal experience with academia job searches, that would be great. I'm also wondering about Ph.D. programs competetiveness within different fields (for example, Clinical is notoriously more competetive than all other subfields).

 

your question reminded me of a chart APA did a while ago. i do need to mention it's somewhat old so things have certainly changed  but they showed # of PhDs earned VS # of job openings:

 

http://www.apa.org/research/tools/quantitative/index.aspx?item=6

 

from the looks of it, Developmental Psych has the hardest time whereas Quantitative Psychology is the easiest.

 

i don't know as many people in other departments but from experience (i'm in Quant Psych/Psychometrics) it's really easy to get a job if you're willing to re-locate to the U.S. (seriously you get weekly emails with tenure-track positions that don't sound too shabby).

Edited January 18, 2014 by spunky

[kksho]

That's a great chart!

 

If only a more contemporary version existed...things are surely to have changed in 10 years

[spunky]

If only a more contemporary version existed.

 

 

i know!!! and, trust me, i've been looking around for it. still, in this economy, the only thing i can assume is that things have taken a turn for the worst (less people retiring, more people graduating, less job openings). 

[lewin]

It's definitely worse since 2008. There is no way that there is 1 job for every 2-3 PhD graduates. Or that might be true if you consider nontenured positions; almost half of university teachers are adjuncts nowadays. [ETA: The New York Times reports it's three-quarters.]

Edited January 20, 2014 by lewin

[spunky]

There is no way that there is 1 job for every 2-3 PhD graduates

 

UNLESS.... you're a quant!

 

(sorry, i have to promote it everywhere i can. i was going over the Psychometrika yearly report of PhD graduates in Quant Psych and the outlook is dismal. it seems like this lack of readiness in mathematics from high school is translating into programs shrinking rather quickly. in last year's conference in the Netherlands someone even jokingly said that if it were not for international students, many of these programs would already be extinct, like it's happening with Mathematical Psychology...)