The Concept of "Fit" in Psychology Training

[cara susanna]

The admissions process for doctorate psychology programs definitely seems subjective, for the most part. The process seems to be a hybrid between a job search and online dating, haha

That's what people in this field refer to as "fit." I will never understand what that concept actually means.

Mod note: I broke this discussion into its own thread.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[futureapppsy2]

That's what people in this field refer to as "fit." I will never understand what that concept actually means.

For a field that hammers the importance of operational definitions into the ground, I am always amazed by how much we just use this ultra-vague, ultra-nebulous idea of "fit" in training applications, without ever trying to make it more concrete or operationalized.

 

[WisNeuro]

Well, some of the fit question is pretty obvious. If you only have child/adolescent experience, and you apply to a VA for internship/postdoc. That's not exactly a good fit. I guess I've been lucky to be at places where this is more of a concrete thing. How have their previous experiences shaped where their career is headed? Does their narrative over the years make sense, or is it obvious that this person just applied to any and every spot in a certain geographic region?

 

[marylandpsych]

I do think "fit" can sometimes mean different things to different POIs. Some POIs are looking for students whose research interests are an additional match to their own, while others are more interested in students whose research areas just overlap with their own, probably as a way to expand and develop the direction of the lab.

 

[mssunshine7910]

for those of you who have been waitlisted, have you guys gone through the interview process? I assume if one hasn't been invited to an interview, there is little chance he ends up being put on the wait list. This is my first go-around with PhD programs so I'm a bit in the dark

For me, one of the POIs I interviewed with had emailed me saying I've been waitlisted. But I was waitlisted at another school that did not offer me an interview opportunity. So I think it's different from school to school too :/

 

[bcliff]

I like this fit discussion, but I think it should be split into its own thread.

Fit for me has been about meshing well with faculty in interviews and selling my credentials as a solid student and researcher and getting along well with the grad students in the unofficial social situations - Basically proving that I'm fun to hang out with outside of school and work (which is mostly true).

I'm a pretty reserved person, but I've really tried to push myself to be extra social and outgoing with all of the clinical psych students (not only the students in the lab I'm applying to), and I feel like this has been as important as doing well in the formal faculty interviews.

One program specifically made a point to tell me that I had the most positive reviews from all of the graduate students, in addition to good remarks from the faculty. I've seen applicants crash and burn in social situations, and I feel like that is a huge blow to their application. By the time you've gotten to the interview stage, all the applicants are highly qualified and good on paper, so proving that you get along well with both the current students (socially) and faculty (professionally) has been my operational definition of fit, but YMMV.

 

[cara susanna]

Well, some of the fit question is pretty obvious. If you only have child/adolescent experience, and you apply to a VA for internship/postdoc. That's not exactly a good fit. I guess I've been lucky to be at places where this is more of a concrete thing. How have their previous experiences shaped where their career is headed? Does their narrative over the years make sense, or is it obvious that this person just applied to any and every spot in a certain geographic region?

That's the obvious part, yes, but IMO it gets a lot more nebulous (to steal a word used earlier) after those basic questions are answered.

 

[WisNeuro]

Hasn't much been my experience in intern/postdoc selection. After the obvious fit questions are answered, it usually falls back to the application.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

"Fit" in psychology training tends to be a mix of the program culture, match between mentor and mentees, and a more practical consideration of skills needed.

1. Culture: This is part to do with model (scientist practitioner, practitioner-scholar, etc.) and part to do with the more general culture of the program and area.

2. Mentor/Mentee Match: It isn't so much that the mentor and mentee have to have the same personality (sometimes that is a volatile combination), it is more about having the mentee match up in regard to training style and culture of the research group. Some labs benefit from having a mix of personalities, while others will grind down a person who doesn't fit.

3. Practical skills: Some labs need someone who has more of a programming background, others need someone who has a particular strength in X topic area. Often this preference isn't really known to the applicant and sometimes it isn't something that is explicitly sought by a mentor, but it can pop up when considering contrasting backgrounds of applicants.

 

[docma]

"Fit" in psychology training tends to be a mix of the program culture, match between mentor and mentees, and a more practical consideration of skills needed.

1. Culture: This is part to do with model (scientist practitioner, practitioner-scholar, etc.) and part to do with the more general culture of the program and area.

2. Mentor/Mentee Match: It isn't so much that the mentor and mentee have to have the same personality (sometimes that is a volatile combination), it is more about having the mentee match up in regard to training style and culture of the research group. Some labs benefit from having a mix of personalities, while others will grind down a person who doesn't fit.

3. Practical skills: Some labs need someone who has more of a programming background, others need someone who has a particular strength in X topic area. Often this preference isn't really known to the applicant and sometimes it isn't something that is explicitly sought by a mentor, but it can pop up when considering contrasting backgrounds of applicants.

These categories can also be applied regarding "fit" for internship. And the variables moderate/mediate each other as well, so it is not an easy thing to assess from outside the organization as an applicant. I think internship candidates can be disappointed because on paper everything looks like a good match so if the interview goes well they are surprised not to ultimately be a match at a site. If they are ranked, they do have "fit" but it can be true that other candidates offered more degrees of "fit" on the variables above and also ranked the site.

This is why reapplying to a site where you didn't match the first time on externship or internship can be worth doing, because in a subsequent round you can be perceived as a good or even better fit relative to others in the field of "fit" this time around.

 

[smalltownpsych]

Any employer in any business is looking for a candidate that fits what their needs are and it has not been my experience that our field is any different in that respect. The only difference is in some of the variables that we look at that are more specific to our field such as research interests as opposed to ability to close deals.

 

[MCParent]

Hasn't much been my experience in intern/postdoc selection. After the obvious fit questions are answered, it usually falls back to the application.

This is my experience as well. To me "fit" just means "interested in doing something reasonably close to what I do and can train people to do," as well as "interested in doing something that is feasible to do here."

I suppose there's personality "fit" too but my experience has been that most assessors have room for all sorts, short of people who were raging boors during interviews.

 

[abiturient]

From my perception as an applicant (to a doctoral program, not internship), "fit" seems to be more personal. I got accepted to a program that was the farthest away from my research interest, but was the best fit in terms of personality match with the mentor. I got rejected from a program where my research interests matched perfectly with the professor, but we did not seem to connect on a personal level.

 

[SharkBait13]

From my perception as an applicant (to a doctoral program, not internship), "fit" seems to be more personal. I got accepted to a program that was the farthest away from my research interest, but was the best fit in terms of personality match with the mentor. I got rejected from a program where my research interests matched perfectly with the professor, but we did not seem to connect on a personal level.

I've had this exact experience for sure. Then again, I have also had the opposite.

On another note: In all my interviews, I am amazed at how stiff, quiet, and awkward some of the interviewees can be. Several would constantly be second guessing everyday behaviors that they would never question any other day. One applicant was genuinely freaking out that her POI had seen her walk on the grass instead of the sidewalk. Another asked a grad student if it mattered which color cup they grabbed at the student social. I don't think that level of anxiety carried over to a strong interview.

As far as I can tell, once you get the interview (as in you look good enough on paper), much of the weight falls on informal interactions. Just being a human being, being able to laugh at/make jokes, and making conversation that doesn't consist of scripted/obvious questions seems to go a long way.

For me, its been that and coming into interviews asking many questions and having POI-research-specific concepts to talk about (appearing hungry).

Then again, I've only interviewed at a handful, so who knows. I think no matter how much we try to hammer out a definition, there will always be programs that have a different idea of what fit is.