GRE score vs research experience???

[NeuroBatman]

So, I took my GRE for a second time this week.  Unfortunately, due to a terrible family emergency (my wife had a grand mal seizure the night before so I didn't get any sleep), I performed below my potential.  I scored 155 Q, 162 V.  I was consistently scoring 161 - 163 Q and 163 - 167 V on practice tests.  I'm wondering if this will be good enough for admission into top PhD programs in cognitive psychology/neuroscience?  I am in the process of working with one of the top researchers in my field to write a theoretical paper to be published and also will be submitting a philosophy paper for publication this fall.  Additionally, I will be working at Dartmouth College in a psych lab from January until August.   On top of that, I have an upper class GPA of 4.0 with an overall GPA around 3.5 (I have some bad decade old grades), and I have a few years of experience working with faculty at my school and 2 independent undergrad research projects (including a poster presentation). Will the research/publication experience outweigh the GRE scores, or should I . . . (cringe) take it again?  Some places I've looked online say that an overall score of 317 is good and some say that it's not (for example this site says I can get into Harvard but I am skeptical http://magoosh.com/gre/2013/gre-scores-for-top-universities/) ,  So I'm a bit perplexed.  Ideally, I'm hoping to get into Dartmouth, University of Chicago, Arizona State or the University of Georgia, with backups including, Florida State University, the University of Arizona and others TBD.  I should also mention that I have been corresponding with PI's via email (which is how I got the Dartmouth gig).  If any one has any sense of where I stand, I would really appreciate the feedback.  Kind regards. - Justin

[spunky]

i'm betting my brownies that you'll be just fine with those GRE scores (contingent on everything else that you mentioned happening and working out for you).

in the very unlikely even that you get rejected from everywhere you apply (which will you won't, but still) at least you'll know it was those darn GRE scores coming right back at ya 

[NeuroBatman]

Thanks for the encouragement.  Would you retake the rest if you were in my shoes?  Or instead focus all of your attention on the research projects?

[Jay's Brain]

I'd say you should focus on your other components of your application. Your GRE bolsters your application up to a certain point. After that, it's just a numbers game. In a field like cognitive neuroscience, your researching prowess will be considered very closely. Given your relevant experiences, and, presumably, your strong reference letters, you should be more than fine with your GRE scores. Building on my own personal experiences, I took the GRE three times in a very redundant fashion. Eventually, I used my first scores. Given that experience, I always encourage people in these forums to think carefully on how many times they really need to write the GRE. Time, money, and energy are hard to come by with the application process being so gruelling. Make sure it's worth it. In your case, I really do think the other components to your application will do you merit.

Good luck

[NeuroBatman]

Thank you so much for your helpful response.  What I've read and heard from my profs and friends is that research experience and letters trump everything else; however, I've heard mixed things about GRE screening.  I've read in some places that schools such as Stanford and UC Berkley no longer have a minimum score cutoff and that programs are starting to ease up on that process; I've heard from others that applications are still being filtered based on GRE scores.  So I guess it's a crap-shoot.