Getting Published Without Professor Support?

[BCB]

Hi all, I have been working as an RA for a professor at my local university in the I/O department. The experience has been great; however, she is the closest I could find to my research interests but they are still not that close, and no one else at the university or even in the metropolitan area has any closer research interests.

 

Is there any way I can produce something that would be valuable to the admissions committee that doesn't involve funding and studies? I would like to produce some sort of evidence that I really am interested in the topics I am (primarily goal-setting and motivation). I am happy to do a lit review or anything like that, but I'm not sure where to go from there. Will any journal actually publish a mere post-bac's lit review? 

 

Any other suggestions? THANK YOU for any and all help.

[Realities]

For what it's worth, I didn't have any hard evidence to prove I was truly interested in the topics that I am passionate about.  I will be entering a Clinical Psych PhD program in the fall, but my undergraduate institution does not have a clinical program.  Thus, I was an RA in two developmental labs and one human factors lab.  I used my personal statement to demonstrate my research interests, and then, at the interview, I was able to talk intelligibly about my interests in depth.  This is what I would recommend to you.

 

I also wouldn't necessarily view your research experience negatively - having some research experience, even if it is not in your immediate interests, is better than none.  Is there any way you can get a presentation or publication under your belt from your current position?

 

As for your question regarding publishing a lit review, I can't say for sure, but I don't think journals discriminate based on title.  However, I think it would be significantly more difficult to create a manuscript of publishable quality as a post-bac without the help of a professor.

[Gvh]

I agree with what Realities has said though I do slightly disagree that journals don't discriminate. It is not so much the title per se (e.g. RA vs post-doc) but if they aren't familiar with your name in terms of the rest of the literature, that can hold you back. For example, I am currently authoring a lit review that would be relevant to a developmental psychology journal (we are writing about neuroimaging in premature babies); though because we are a neuroscience lab that has never published in a psych journal (only neuro), my PI thought it a bad idea to submit to them since it might be taken with hesitation due to our lack of expertise in the rest of the field...

 

This may not be the case, but I would talk/think about it more carefully before you dive into writing the manuscript. 

 

Echoing what Reailties said, isn't there a way to publish something (even as a middle author) in your current lab? I don't think it's AS important to have published something directly related to your interests; this is still demonstrating your ability to do research, which is one of the main things they are trying to discern from your application...

Edited June 23, 2014 by Gvh

[VulpesZerda]

I know how you feel, and a few months ago I was asking myself the same thing. I ended up writing a lit review over winter break of my junior year with no help. I wouldn't necessarily recommend it as far as publishing goes. I had my advisor look it over then I sent it to an undergraduate psych journal. There are a few out there but I only sent it to one (due to copyright stuff). I got rejected. I don't blame them! If anything, I felt as if writing this paper was a great learning experience for me. Then I submitted the abstract to a regional conference for an oral presentation and it was accepted. Since I spent so much time on this topic it was incredibly easy for me to put together a 15 minute talk about it. So, long story short, pursuing research you're interested in is never a bad thing, but set reasonable goals for it.

[kaswing]

Glad you asked this-- I was wondering the same thing! 

[lewin]

Will any journal actually publish a mere post-bac's lit review? 

 

Some crappy journal might, but the good review journals don't publish papers that are just lit reviews; they need to make a novel theoretical contribution or synthesis (e.g., Psych Bulletin, Personality and Social Psychology Review). I'm not capable of this level of thought myself, and I already have my PhD  Some journals are (mostly) invitation only too (e.g., Psych Inquiry, Current Directions in Psych Science). They're darn hard to get into.  I'm speaking for social psychology, anyway, which fits with the topics you mentioned; maybe IO journals are different. 

 

So, realistically I think your chances of getting a review accepted somewhere worthwhile are < 1%. If you want to do it for the learning experience that's up to you, but the publication chances are so slim that, frankly, if you told a POI or professor, "I'm writing this review that I hope will get published," I think you'd come off as dreadfully--but hopefully endearingly--naive.

Edited June 23, 2014 by lewin

[BCB]

Let me just say, you guys are so great. Thanks so much for all the ideas. 

 

For what it's worth, I didn't have any hard evidence to prove I was truly interested in the topics that I am passionate about.  I will be entering a Clinical Psych PhD program in the fall, but my undergraduate institution does not have a clinical program.  Thus, I was an RA in two developmental labs and one human factors lab.  I used my personal statement to demonstrate my research interests, and then, at the interview, I was able to talk intelligibly about my interests in depth.  This is what I would recommend to you.

 

I will definitely be doing this, thank you! And congrats on getting into a Clinical program, I know those are insanely competitive!

 

Echoing what Reailties said, isn't there a way to publish something (even as a middle author) in your current lab? I don't think it's AS important to have published something directly related to your interests; this is still demonstrating your ability to do research, which is one of the main things they are trying to discern from your application...

 

Fortunately one professor in the lab let me help with a baseline paper about 6 months ago, so I will at least be a middle author on that. If I'm lucky there might be a couple other papers I can help with before applying. All the data have already been claimed by the actual grad students in the program, so I don't think there's any way for me to do my own thing with it.

 

Then I submitted the abstract to a regional conference for an oral presentation and it was accepted. Since I spent so much time on this topic it was incredibly easy for me to put together a 15 minute talk about it. So, long story short, pursuing research you're interested in is never a bad thing, but set reasonable goals for it.

 

That sounds like a really good idea, thanks for sharing it! I actually know hardly anything about the process of presenting at conferences. So it's possible they might accept me for something like that, even though it would be essentially an oral lit review and not a discussion of a new study?

 

So, realistically I think your chances of getting a review accepted somewhere worthwhile are < 1%. If you want to do it for the learning experience that's up to you, but the publication chances are so slim that, frankly, if you told a POI or professor, "I'm writing this review that I hope will get published," I think you'd come off as dreadfully--but hopefully endearingly--naive.

 

I laughed out loud at this. Thank you for the very good information, and being naive (hopefully endearingly) is why I come here to ask questions of the people who are in the industry. My background is in finance, and I have a lot of gaps in my academia-related knowledge.

[Applemiu]

Academia can be great, but it can also be a very tough place to be so it's better you try to catch up with the "academia related-knowledge". I know that's what you are doing now. Just a word of advice.

[VulpesZerda]

 

 

That sounds like a really good idea, thanks for sharing it! I actually know hardly anything about the process of presenting at conferences. So it's possible they might accept me for something like that, even though it would be essentially an oral lit review and not a discussion of a new study?

 

 

 

Well, I mentioned it was a regional conference because I don't think a lot of conferences accept talks like that (I assume). It was state-level and undergrad friendly. If you know of anything like this, go for it! Maybe I just got lucky but I wanted to make sure I shared that with you!

 

Edit: go for a really hot topic, it should help. Mine was chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE; boxer's dementia) and I was able to provide some very recent information on the topic because the NFL was battling lawsuits and lately there is a ton of groundbreaking stuff coming out about it.

Edited June 25, 2014 by VulpesZerda