PhD/PsyD Chances without science background

[eagle4life]

I tried searching for this question but couldn't find it so I apologize if it has been posted already.. .I'm interested in pursuing a phd in clinical psychology. I'm currently studying to take the GRE in the summer. I'm interested in APA approved clinical psychology programs. I graduated with a BA in psychology with 2 years of undergraduate research experience and a 3.98 gpa. However, my friend told me not having any "science background" would mean that no phd programs would take me seriously and urged me to take some Biology classes. I was wondering if this is true and if so to what extent. Thanks!

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[erg923]

Psychology is a "social science." Courses in the "life sciences" (eg., biology) is not a prereq, per se, for phd programs in clinical. St least not that I know of.

 

[A Blue Duck]

I graduated with a BA in psychology with 2 years of undergraduate research experience

Sounds like you have science experience to me.

If your friend was referring to the omnipotent "hard" sciences...not really. The courses on your undergraduate transcript are one of the least important parts of your application. It is a bit surprising you received an undergraduate degree without being required to take any basic science courses, however. Not intro biology even?

I think that you have more of a science background than you think... Did you take an experimental psychology course? Did you run subjects, analyze data, test hypotheses? These types of activities can all be appropriately tucked under the umbrella of science...

 

[WisNeuro]

Depends on what you're going for really. My lab was all about affective neuroscience. So, you better have had either coursework, or research experience in that general area. More about how well your prior experiences and future directions fit with where you're applying.

 

[PsychScience]

There are a few programs that may require basic biology or human bio, but the programs that require it are very much the minority. Rather, your training in scientific methodology, through hands on research and courses, will be much more important for the vast majority of schools than whether or not you took Bio 101.

 

[bcliff]

I was accepted to a program that required abnormal psych w/o having taken abnormal psych, so I think course prereq's are often more of a suggestion than a hard and fast rule.

^^ FWIW I had work experience in a private practice that incorporated a lot of on the job training in abnormal psych, so that may have helped

 

[473912]

General biology might help when it comes to sensation and conditioning or neuropsych when those things come up, but an Intro to bio class will only be beneficial for its skimming of evolution section... That's about it. Further bio classes could be beneficial if you're going for neuropsych, I'm thinking the fundamental theories represented in your psych coursework is far more valuable.

Apparently a person in my PsyD program got in with a BFA in Dance. I am not sure if they took all the pre-reqs required and still got in. If so... cool. If not.. *sharp inhale...*

 

[AcronymAllergy]

As others have said, not having taken bio/chem/physics isn't likely to hinder your application at many clinical psych programs. I've certainly used/built on the bits and pieces of my natural/life sciences background that I remember from way back when in undergrad, but that's mostly involved neuropsych and neuroscience concepts, and is mostly just a personal interest rather than much of it having been required (i.e., I'd likely have been fine without it, at least in the sense of understanding the "basics").