Starting to look at applications. How important is it to make initial contact with a PI before you apply

[dirkwww]

I have started to email PIs for programs I am interested in and I was wondering how much contact should there be. Several PIs have been very interested and asked for my CV while others just say "yes I am accepting students". Does anyone have any advice about this?

 

 

[EdNeuroGrl]

That is pretty typical.

 

I will usually approach a new PI by reading a few of their papers and then writing them an e-mail thanking them for their work and reiterating some of the points you find super interesting or have ideas about. I never mention that I'm looking at them to be a PI for me at this point. There is some strategy for this. First, unsolicited complementary emails of this sort in reference to their scientific contributions are EXCELLENT sources of evidence for them when they are gunning for tenure or some other evaluation process for salary or some such. You are giving them something valuable right to the start and asking nothing from them... and lets be honest, you love their work anyway (I hope) so you are actually being honest. Also, who doesn't like to hear that their work has drawn admiration?

 

If the person responds positively, yay! Good first impression! If you get an opening start a dialogue that has nothing to do with your application process. You may not get an opening like this but if you do, take it. Otherwise, in a separate e-mail thread ask them about their receptiveness to your application. Perhaps you can bring up a project you're thinking about doing and ask them their thoughts... there are lots of possibilities.

 

The problem I have with the basic mode of inquiry is that it really doesn't set up much room for genuine dialogue. How would you respond if you had a bunch of graduate student hopefuls e-mailing you the same thing over and over again?

 

Yes it is important to contact them. However I won't contact them unless I have something meaningful to talk to them about.

 

:-)

[ravyn]

Hello.

 

I think it's perfectly fine to get into contact with them. It's a good way to see who you can work with potentially. 

 

I called my school. I talked to the program director who is also a PI of a lab, and I am happy I did. I had a good experience talking to the director and 6 months later I still find my interactions with the director pleasant so far; it was a good way to test the waters, in hindsight. I called because I am almost WAY out of field, so I wanted to make sure I would be a good fit.

 

I don't think it should harm you at all if you call. Either they don't care to talk and will simply answer your question or ignore you; that's whatever. And at best, they will be really interested and ask for you CV and keep a bit  of a conversation going, showing that they are proactive about looking into prospective applicants that they honestly want students they like.

 

Edit:: And yes, the poster above me is absolutely correct that it's good to read their work first. Many people want to get into a psychology graduate program, so you got to really think about the work they are doing and how it will help you out in your own career. Asking if they are accepting someone is a small step. Thinking that you'll actually like doing what they are doing is a bigger one.

Edited August 10, 2015 by ravyn

[Jay's Brain]

As the above posters indicate, there is a myriad of good reasons to contact PIs prior to your application cycle. Some people even have it down to an exact science (the best time to email so that they receive it and don't lost it, what to include, etc). 

 

The best reason is simply knowing whether the POI is accepting students or has interest in you. Even though it seems tedious, the time you painstakingly use to craft an email to them, no matter how briefly they reply, is still a good starting point. You may think everybody will email the PIs ahead of time, but you'll also be surprised how very few people do it as well.

 

My tip falls closely with what others have said - read their papers, discuss what you found interesting, and briefly come up with an idea of how their research aligns with what you want to conduct or have been conducting. It's easier if you can mould your research interest to what they do so that they see a reason to speak with you further. Then go from there!

 

Good luck

[mb712]

Some advice I was given was to make sure you phrase the research fit part of your email as your interests fitting into theirs, not their interests fitting into yours. It sounds trivial but you are essentially trying to prove why you're a good fit in their world, not how they're a good fit into your world.

[1HeavyDiaper]

mb712 makes a good point. Someone once told me that PIs are lazy, they look at applicants and try to figure out who will need the least amount of supervision, mentoring, guidance while providing the most output in terms of research, clinical work, etc. Of course you want to pad their ego all the while, but keep in mind what type of person you would want to hire, and try to be that person. 

[Gvh]

mb712 makes a good point. Someone once told me that PIs are lazy, they look at applicants and try to figure out who will need the least amount of supervision, mentoring, guidance while providing the most output in terms of research, clinical work, etc. Of course you want to pad their ego all the while, but keep in mind what type of person you would want to hire, and try to be that person. 

 

Sorry to bump this thread -- but I figure this is a time many (including myself) are contacting POIs!

This is a good point, and totally true! It's not like they are lacking interested applicants, why wouldn't they want the person who needs least supervision and can hit the ground running from day 1? I would also say that reading papers too intently can be sometimes be fruitless as these can be projects have been done and dusted for months (given the timeline for publication can take FOREVER). I tend to look at publication "trends" (e.g. what is a theme for the last 3-4 pubs, preferably ones from this year/are in press), and most importantly, the methods they use (this ties back into mb712's point). 

Edited September 20, 2015 by Gvh

[lewin]

I tend to look at publication "trends" (e.g. what is a theme for the last 3-4 pubs, preferably ones from this year/are in press), and most importantly, the methods they use (this ties back into mb712's point). 

Good advice, though sometimes hard to predict. Looking back, I see that the places where I got interviews were often where--frankly, by coincidence--I had highlighted possible research questions in my statement that were exactly where the PI wanted to go in the future. A good strategy, that I definitely didn't consider at the time, would be to check their more recent conference presentations. Those tend to be newer or unpublished data. Or if you're really clever, look up the topics of their active grant(s).

Getting back to the point about PI's being "lazy" -- I think it's absolutely right but also no different than applying for any other job. Supervisors of all kinds want students/employees who will help them achieve their goals. To crib from JFK, don't write about what the program can do for you, write about what you can do for the program.

 

Edited September 21, 2015 by lewin

[artsy16]

Some programs state on their website that contacting PIs bears no effect on your admissions decisions. Most I've been interested in have lists each cycle with professors that are accepting applicants. Like lewin, I've been including in my personal statements possible research questions I'm interested in exploring that are in line with what those professors are looking for, too.