Second author pub in peer-reviewed journal - does it help?

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
LAman10 said:
How would you go about looking for a paper? I know for sure that my paper wouldn't show up in pubmed, but I think it might show up on a google search. And of course, I have a VERY common last name, so I think googling my initials and last name would be futile hahah
Click to expand...

If you give me the citation, I can use Google Scholar, pubmed, Ovid or a bunch of other search engines.
Members don't see this ad.
 
gujuDoc said:
if you put a citation it shouldn't be hard if it is a peer reviewed journal and not a school journal. Not sure how school journals would work.
Click to expand...

And by "if you put a citation" she means "when you put a citation." As in, why would you not put a citation? Trying to hide your fraud? :laugh: I kid, I kid! (but only about the fraud)
 
What happens if they can't find a paper? I know certain papers require subscriptions.* I guess the abstract will be enough for that then.

*beyond the common subscriptions available at universities. I.e. some chemotherapy journals.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Red Leader said:
What happens if they can't find a paper? I know certain papers require subscriptions.* I guess the abstract will be enough for that then.

*beyond the common subscriptions available at universities. I.e. some chemotherapy journals.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I think abstract would suffice in those cases. After all, the Adcom is often just trying to get a general idea of the work. If they want to know that much more, that badly, they'd find a way I'm sure 🙂
 
LizzyM said:
I can't imagine anyone would stay in the lab for 4 years doing only what we would consider worthy of 1 point. Research assistant usually means the general scut work of placing orders, making gels and solutions, keeping the place tidy, etc. In clinical settings, it is the person who distributes & collects questionnaires, or interviews subjects without any input as to the science being done.

If you have some responsibility for the scinece, keeping a lab notebook, troubleshooting, consulting with the principal investigator, etc, then you'd be at 2 points. I don't recall if having a research grant that provides you with a stipend is a 2 or a 3, having done a poster or a presentation anywhere is a 3 and a publication in a peer-reviewed journal is a 4. This is a quick & dirty way to classify appliants according to the level of involvement they've had in research. An adcom might do the same in classifying leadership, clinical exposure, community service, etc depending on what they value in an applicant.
Click to expand...

This is great information. I have been thinking about this over the last week and I'm still not sure where my own research experience falls (1,2, or 3). I spent 2 quarters in a faculty mentorship program collecting raw data for a behavioral experiment. I kept a simple lab notebook, however a post-doc who over saw my work analyzed most of the data. We did meet to discuss the results several times a week and I was always asked for my feed back. At the end of the project I wrote a paper for the post-doc to review and presented the project at a symposium. Over the summer I was hired as a "lab assistant" to continue to help gather data for the experiment (mostly by handling animals, weighing animals, preparing/cleaning the testing chambers). Am I at a 1, 2, or 3?
 
JJThomson said:
This is great information. I have been thinking about this over the last week and I'm still not sure where my own research experience falls (1,2, or 3). I spent 2 quarters in a faculty mentorship program collecting raw data for a behavioral experiment. I kept a simple lab notebook, however a post-doc who over saw my work analyzed most of the data. We did meet to discuss the results several times a week and I was always asked for my feed back. At the end of the project I wrote a paper for the post-doc to review and presented the project at a symposium. Over the summer I was hired as a "lab assistant" to continue to help gather data for the experiment (mostly by handling animals, weighing animals, preparing/cleaning the testing chambers). Am I at a 1, 2, or3
Click to expand...

You are at least a 2, maybe a 3 or 4 if you manage to list in the experience section a presentation or publication, even if someone else was a co-author or presenter.
 
LizzyM said:
You are at least a 2, maybe a 3 or 4 if you manage to list in the experience section a presentation or publication, even if someone else was a co-author or presenter.
Click to expand...

Thank you. I began my research experience doing a Faculty Mentorship Program. A post-doc guided me in writing a proposal & paper, 2 quarters of lab work 15 hours a week, and a I presented my work at a symposium of people who also did the program (in other labs). It was the post-docs project but I learned a lot of good things. Next year I intend to present again at a faculty nominated undergraduate research conference. Hopefully that will push me up to a 3.

Also, does getting paid to continue in the summer look good after working during the school year fo course credit? It seems like that would show the person was a good worker and the lab wanted to keep them around. Or do Adcoms not look for stuff like that?
 
LizzyM said:
No, you'd be classified as a "4", in the top group as far as research experience goes based on having a publication. That plus very good to excellent MCAT and very good to excellent gpa, plus a consideration of the competitiveness of your school, clinical exposure, community service/leadership, the quality of the LORs, and some other stuff I can't remember at the moment would go into the decision to offer you an interview.

It is all part of a well-rounded application.
Click to expand...

LizzyM said:
What we are trying to do is classify applicants on a scale of 0 to 4 and then pick those that have distinguished themselves academically and in other ways as evidence by having scored 3 or 4 in several different areas (gpa, mcat, research, clinical, service, etc). So no, you don't get points that are added up.

Let me add that each school is different and a school may change the way it does things over time. Having done some research and giving some indication that you might like to do some in med school will impress some medical school adcoms. AT other schools, it may be less of a priority.
Click to expand...

LizzyM said:
I can't imagine anyone would stay in the lab for 4 years doing only what we would consider worthy of 1 point. Research assistant usually means the general scut work of placing orders, making gels and solutions, keeping the place tidy, etc. In clinical settings, it is the person who distributes & collects questionnaires, or interviews subjects without any input as to the science being done.

If you have some responsibility for the scinece, keeping a lab notebook, troubleshooting, consulting with the principal investigator, etc, then you'd be at 2 points. I don't recall if having a research grant that provides you with a stipend is a 2 or a 3, having done a poster or a presentation anywhere is a 3 and a publication in a peer-reviewed journal is a 4. This is a quick & dirty way to classify appliants according to the level of involvement they've had in research. An adcom might do the same in classifying leadership, clinical exposure, community service, etc depending on what they value in an applicant.
Click to expand...

LizzyM said:
:banana: staying alive, staying alive :banana:

Adcoms for medical school may be interested in whether or not an applicant has had some research experience as they believe that it is a predictor of participation in research in medical school/residency/career (in academic medicine). Basically, we ask, "Have they had a taste & do they like it?"

Any publication puts the applicant in the top 10% of the applicants I see with regard to research experience. We really don't need to distringuish among the applicants within that top 10%; it isn't worth the effort for what we are trying to assess.
Click to expand...

LizzyM said:
Having a publication accepted for publication or published is a +4 at one top tier school. Having been funded for a project is a +3, having done a summer program or a couple of semesters is a +2, and having been a research assistant is a +1. (You get categorized into one of these groups or 0 for "no research").

Impact factor is not taken into account. Position in the list of authors (particularly second rather than first) is not taken into account.

A case report (asked earlier) might not be counted because it is not related to a research endeavor. Basically, a research publication is used as a measure that the research came to its intended end which is to advance the field through the development or contribution of new knowledge. However, a case report does contrbute to new clinical knowledge so maybe some would give you brownie points for a case report. It couldn't hurt. 😉
Click to expand...
having you on sdn is nothing short of clutch 😀
thanks for the clarification. this is awesome information. 👍
 
It is so much more than 0-4, though. Sure, adcoms utilize this discrete numerical rating system as a means of categorizing applicants. I will assume that research experience is likely to make a strong impact when it is a 3 or 4. 3's and 4's should consider their level of involvement, number of publications, etc. I am just trying to discourage people who seek comfort in numbering systems such as these. In terms of earning an interview, maybe the system is valid. Ultimately, you will be asked to actually describe what went on in the lab. With that said, thanks a lot LizzyM. I've picked up some great info from your posts.
 
FeatherPen said:
It is so much more than 0-4, though. Sure, adcoms utilize this discrete numerical rating system as a means of categorizing applicants. I will assume that research experience is likely to make a strong impact when it is a 3 or 4. 3's and 4's should consider their level of involvement, number of publications, etc. I am just trying to discourage people who seek comfort in numbering systems such as these. In terms of earning an interview, maybe the system is valid. Ultimately, you will be asked to actually describe what went on in the lab. With that said, thanks a lot LizzyM. I've picked up some great info from your posts.
Click to expand...

I see where you're coming from, but at this point I am just concerned with getting my foot in the door. If I can get that opportunity then I will make the most of it. I'm sure a lot of people here think the same way.

Making the most of each experience is important, but if you don't look good on paper nobody will ever hear what you actually learned.
 
JJThomson said:
Also, does getting paid to continue in the summer look good after working during the school year fo course credit? It seems like that would show the person was a good worker and the lab wanted to keep them around. Or do Adcoms not look for stuff like that?
Click to expand...

Grant or fellowship or summer research funding looks very good. 👍 Be sure to mention it if you have it.
 
LizzyM said:
Grant or fellowship or summer research funding looks very good. 👍 Be sure to mention it if you have it.
Click to expand...

I know this is bit of a gravedig...but is a publication the only way to get a "4" on your scale?
What if you have been doing research for 3 years, have 4 posters/presentations at national and local symposiums, almost 8000 dollars in grants, and a couple submitted publications and a few more in progress?

All in a well reputed ivy league lab
 
Last edited:
Members don't see this ad :)
Crash88 said:
I know this is bit of a gravedig...but is a publication the only way to get a "4" on your scale?
What if you have been doing research for 3 years, have 4 posters/presentations at national and local symposiums, almost 8000 dollars in grants, and a couple submitted publications and a few more in progress?

All in a well reputed ivy league lab
Click to expand...

In general, many top tier schools save the highest score for publication - it is another tier of accomplishment. Posters/Presentations/Funding all fall into Tier 2 or Tier 3 (assuming Tier 4 is highest), regardless of pure volume.
 
what about clinical publications that dont take years of research and data gathering to write? im about to finish a clinical publication with a plastic surgeon, and i did most of the writing. its going to a good national, peer-reviewed journal, though, and i definitely learned a billion new things.
 
camaras2480 said:
In general, many top tier schools save the highest score for publication - it is another tier of accomplishment. Posters/Presentations/Funding all fall into Tier 2 or Tier 3 (assuming Tier 4 is highest), regardless of pure volume.
Click to expand...

bummer...I hope tier 3 is good enough for the top schools- I know so much about my research...stinks I'm not in top tier just because we saved writing publications for the end, but I guess that's the name of the game 😀

just curious... I'll probably have a couple (hopefully accepted) publications by mid november
will top tier schools reject by then or will I have a chance to update them on a publication?
I have a good stats (4.0 and 42S) and a good amount of clinicla/volunteer/leadership so hopefully they don't weed me out too early but you never know!
 
Crash88 said:
bummer...I hope tier 3 is good enough for the top schools- I know so much about my research...stinks I'm not in top tier just because we saved writing publications for the end, but I guess that's the name of the game 😀

just curious... I'll probably have a couple (hopefully accepted) publications by mid november
will top tier schools reject by then or will I have a chance to update them on a publication?
I have a good stats (4.0 and 42S) and a good amount of clinicla/volunteer/leadership so hopefully they don't weed me out too early but you never know!
Click to expand...
why are you worried.
 
yea those are awesome stats. the S looks so sick lol.
 
Now I regret not noting that intra-departmental poster session I did. Oh well, I'm still at least a 2 if not a 3.

OP, I did almost two years of independent research where I was the only person working on my project, and I have 0 publications to show for it. Of course I'd prefer a pub, but oh well, it didn't happen. On the other hand, my PI is some hot young thing in the research world having just won the PECASE which is supposed to be the highest award given to a scientist in the first part of his or her career, so at least I have a good heritage. I'm surprised at the number of interviews where the interviewer suddenly goes "You worked with THAT PI?"

As far as journals go, as part of my departmental honors track, I had to take a seminar. At least half of the seminar was centered on reading BS papers which found their ways into PNAS or Cell for the sole reason of politics. It's amazing reading paper after paper that give a figure "lane 1: = Lane 2: -" and then reading "our research clearly shows 2>1" or seeing a figure "A: + A+B: +" and reading "clearly B inhibits expression of A." In the pathway that my PI is an expert of, there was a nature paper which claimed that C binds to E, but the entire field knows that the paper is BS and it is obvious that C and E do not interact. Nevertheless, talk to someone outside the field, and you are forced to say C binds to E. I'm sure such obvious examples are rare, but it has certainly given me a cynical view of any research reported even in the best papers that I haven't had the chance to examine myself.
 
theacks1 said:
As far as journals go, as part of my departmental honors track, I had to take a seminar. At least half of the seminar was centered on reading BS papers which found their ways into PNAS or Cell for the sole reason of politics. It's amazing reading paper after paper that give a figure "lane 1: = Lane 2: -" and then reading "our research clearly shows 2>1" or seeing a figure "A: + A+B: +" and reading "clearly B inhibits expression of A." In the pathway that my PI is an expert of, there was a nature paper which claimed that C binds to E, but the entire field knows that the paper is BS and it is obvious that C and E do not interact. Nevertheless, talk to someone outside the field, and you are forced to say C binds to E. I'm sure such obvious examples are rare, but it has certainly given me a cynical view of any research reported even in the best papers that I haven't had the chance to examine myself.
Click to expand...

Sad truth. Ive seen many an author tacked onto to manuscripts for the single reason to help with politics. Science is just as much about the people you know as anything else.
 
Crash88 said:
bummer...I hope tier 3 is good enough for the top schools- I know so much about my research...stinks I'm not in top tier just because we saved writing publications for the end, but I guess that's the name of the game 😀
Click to expand...

Can't win em all, but you will be fine. Keep in mind that the "top tier research applicants" (Whatever that is) out of the applicant pool is going to be pretty much dominated by MD/PhDers. Keep it in context; to be at the level of most MD/PhDers you would have had to make sacrifices elsewhere.
 
ReptarBar said:
what about clinical publications that dont take years of research and data gathering to write? im about to finish a clinical publication with a plastic surgeon, and i did most of the writing. its going to a good national, peer-reviewed journal, though, and i definitely learned a billion new things.
Click to expand...

Counts. A publication is a publication.
 
Crash88 said:
bummer...I hope tier 3 is good enough for the top schools- I know so much about my research...stinks I'm not in top tier just because we saved writing publications for the end, but I guess that's the name of the game 😀

just curious... I'll probably have a couple (hopefully accepted) publications by mid november
will top tier schools reject by then or will I have a chance to update them on a publication?
I have a good stats (4.0 and 42S) and a good amount of clinicla/volunteer/leadership so hopefully they don't weed me out too early but you never know!
Click to expand...

No, most top tiers are non-rolling. Some of them don't make any decisions until January. Yet many others don't make any decisions until March.

Regardless, you will not be screened out with a 4.0 and 42S, unless your personal statement indicates how you plan on blowing up the school.

Congratulations on the excellent numbers.
 
theacks1 said:
Now I regret not noting that intra-departmental poster session I did. Oh well, I'm still at least a 2 if not a 3.
Click to expand...

Better than 50-60% of the crowd. And not mentioning it gives you an extra something to talk about at interviews.
 
unitofpain said:
i may just be a rising freshman, but i have had extensive research experience..if there's one thing that's worse than not getting a paper, its publishing a paper in a bad journal. Trust me. I would have had many more papers had my PI not taught me this valuable lesson early on. Generally speaking, IF~2 is respectable enough. Bad papers stay with you forever, and they are extremely detrimental for your name.
Click to expand...

Think of it like getting a woman. If you are 15, and you go out with a 15-year old girl, that's OK - not much cool points there, but OK. If you're 35 and you go out with a 15-year old, you should be put in jail (and absolutely lose cool points).

Now it depends on the field, but for a biology journal I agree with the above poster - impact factor <1 is embarassing. Of course an undergrad isn't worried about that, any publication is good for him, just like any date when you are 15 is good for you.
 
BerlinDude said:
Think of it like getting a woman. If you are 15, and you go out with a 15-year old girl, that's OK - not much cool points there, but OK. If you're 35 and you go out with a 15-year old, you should be put in jail (and absolutely lose cool points).

Now it depends on the field, but for a biology journal I agree with the above poster - impact factor <1 is embarassing. Of course an undergrad isn't worried about that, any publication is good for him, just like any date when you are 15 is good for you.
Click to expand...

I still have to disagree - any publication is worth the same value in an MD application. Admissions committees do not weigh impact factor - it just doesn't make sense. Each field of research has its highest point on the IF scale, obviously not counting nature/science/cell type journals.

Example:
Ophthalmology: highest journal IF: like 4.
Diabetes: highest journal IF: like 9.

So if you are in diabetes, a publication in a journal with IF 3 is good, but sort of meh. But for ophtho, you are nearing the top.

Regardless, this stuff is not a factor at admissions for MD only applicants.
 
How about publications in non-bio or non-medicine? what if it's in zoology or entomology? still regarded as highly?
 
camaras2480 said:
No, most top tiers are non-rolling. Some of them don't make any decisions until January. Yet many others don't make any decisions until March.
Click to expand...

That's really good to know!
hopefully a publication can put me over the top for some schools, but hey I'm having a great time in my lab even if they aren't accepted
 
gujuDoc said:
Publications are publications. In terms of getting into med school they are highly regarded especially if in a scholarly journal regardless of whether it is scientific or humanities in nature.
Click to expand...

that's good to know; mine's in an entomology journal with an impact factor of like 1.2 (but the highest entomology journal is only like 3.5 or something haha)
 
LAman10 said:
that's good to know; mine's in an entomology journal with an impact factor of like 1.2 (but the highest entomology journal is only like 3.5 or something haha)
Click to expand...

Definitely carries weight - congrats!
 
from what LizzyM has said. i am very bothered.

i know people who have worked in research labs for a very short time. they didn't have their own project, they did "scud work" other gradstudents/phds told them to do, and got their name on a publication with little effort (beyond the 2nd author). they get 4pts

but others who have had their own projects, worked much harder, but have no publication yet seem to be getting shafted on this "point scale". they only get 2 pts even though they did much more work and had more responsibility.

publications are so hard to gauge because they are easier to come by in some labs vs others. this should be taken into account!
 
JasonE said:
from what LizzyM has said. i am very bothered.

i know people who have worked in research labs for a very short time. they didn't have their own project, they did "scud work" other gradstudents/phds told them to do, and got their name on a publication with little effort (beyond the 2nd author). they get 4pts

but others who have had their own projects, worked much harder, but have no publication yet seem to be getting shafted on this "point scale". they only get 2 pts even though they did much more work and had more responsibility.

publications are so hard to gauge because they are easier to come by in some labs vs others. this should be taken into account!
Click to expand...

As true as this is, there just aren't very many applicants with a publication, so this is usually considered its own tier without further scrutiny. However, note that LizzyM speaks on behalf of her adcom, and this concept is true across many adcoms. But there are some other adcoms who do take note of first author. However, any other position is considered the same.
 
camaras2480 said:
As true as this is, there just aren't very many applicants with a publication, so this is usually considered its own tier without further scrutiny. However, note that LizzyM speaks on behalf of her adcom, and this concept is true across many adcoms. But there are some other adcoms who do take note of first author. However, any other position is considered the same.
Click to expand...

its just so much BS. i could have been someones stooge, done pretty much nothing, and gotten a publication in another lab. but i stuck with the one I was in because I liked the research and having my own project, but i get less from it applcation wise than others. it doesnt make sense.
 
JasonE said:
its just so much BS. i could have been someones stooge, done pretty much nothing, and gotten a publication in another lab. but i stuck with the one I was in because I liked the research and having my own project, but i get less from it applcation wise than others. it doesnt make sense.
Click to expand...

on paper, maybe...but come interview time, who is going to have more to talk about, a person like you who enjoys their research project, understands it, and can show passion for it or the person who just sat there and did "pretty much nothing" ?

i think there's a tendency on this site to try and look at everything quantitatively (such as emphasizing how many hours of such-and-such activity or, like in this thread, treating the 4 categories of research as more than a rough guideline)... and while I think it's probably useful to use these things to get a rough idea of your qualifications (or, for admissions committees, to quickly evaluate a person) i also think it's silly to forget that there's a significant qualitative side to everything...

...for example, would you rather have a letter of rec from a PI saying "well...this kid showed up on time and did his work" or one that says "this kid was basically performing experiments at a level of a 2nd year grad student...something i rarely see in undergrads" ?

so yes, maybe you don't get the official "4 points gold star" according to this guideline here, but you do get your recognition in other (perhaps more meaningful) ways.
 
JasonE said:
its just so much BS. i could have been someones stooge, done pretty much nothing, and gotten a publication in another lab. but i stuck with the one I was in because I liked the research and having my own project, but i get less from it applcation wise than others. it doesnt make sense.
Click to expand...

yeah, wait till those stooges get to the interview stooge <--- that's a pun on 'stage'!
 
bobsmith said:
on paper, maybe...but come interview time, who is going to have more to talk about, a person like you who enjoys their research project, understands it, and can show passion for it or the person who just sat there and did "pretty much nothing" ?
Click to expand...

+1 It's far more impressive if you can actually discuss the topics covered in the paper intelligently with an adcom.

LAMan10: "yeah, wait till those stooges get to the interview stooge <--- that's a pun on 'stage'!"

.....owwww:laugh:
 
It's not hard to get up to speed with what you are working on in lab though
 
This is true, but I have my name on a paper as a second author as well and I got absolutely grilled by the adcoms about the details...especially when I matched up with an adcom who was sin the same field.
 
If someone is going to list their publication on their application, they should expect to be questioned about it and will more often than not be prepared

nice avatar btw!
 
I agree completely...I personally made sure to be very well read on it and it paid off considering I was matched up for an interview with someone who was in almost the same field:scared:

She wasn't as bad as she could've been about it though...

And thanks!...I wish I could take credit for actually making it...but any attempt would definitely be a waste of melon 😀
 
while i agree with the above about having to speak at interviews, i do think that a student could prepare for such questions without having done much of the lab work. i am just saying its a bit disheartening to think some top tier med schools seem to be oblivious to the realities of publishing a paper.
 
JasonE said:
while i agree with the above about having to speak at interviews, i do think that a student could prepare for such questions without having done much of the lab work. i am just saying its a bit disheartening to think some top tier med schools seem to be oblivious to the realities of publishing a paper.
Click to expand...

I feel you on this man, but frankly, like everything else in life, the med school admission process can be unfair. You just gotta play the game...
It's the same way as how a 5 hour test is considered as important, if not more important than years of hard work in college.
 
JasonE said:
while i agree with the above about having to speak at interviews, i do think that a student could prepare for such questions without having done much of the lab work. i am just saying its a bit disheartening to think some top tier med schools seem to be oblivious to the realities of publishing a paper.
Click to expand...

the thing is, these top tier schools are all research institutions, so they AREN'T oblivious to the realities of publishing a paper. Along with the publication and having to answer interview questions about it (which, arguably, anyone can do even if they just cleaned beakers), you'll be expected to have a LOR from your PI. I think that'll carry the most weight because your PI can testify how much you actually put into the project, and if you were simply a lab slave, they'll know (unless your PI lies for you, in which case there's a completely different problem). I really do have confidence that they're not gonna short-change anyone in regards to research.

Now on the topic of clinical vs. basic science research, obviously it's easier to publish clinically and everyone knows that (data is easier and less time-consuming to obtain), although there's no reason to believe that a clinical pub is viewed in any dimmer light. but that's just life.
 
Adcoms need a quick and easy way of separating applicants, and the quicker and easier they become, the more people get lost in the shuffle. However, I doubt the difference between a 2 and a 4 will be so great that a good letter of rec and the interview won't cover. Sure, someone who does scut work can learn the science of their lab, but I'd think interviewers can pick up on the differences between someone who just know the science and someone who has actually done significant work.
 
A lot of people do "scut" work and don't get publications. It's more rare to get a publication as an undergraduate irregardless of what type of work you judgmentally *think* they did.

If your work helped your lab push out a paper, I don't see why your P.I. would not praise your hard work to make that feat possible. You can easily read up about what you're doing and know the ins and outs (and ask whoever you are doing work under if certain points confuse you)- not many people will be naive enough to set themselves up failure by not getting informed about their work prior to interviewing. My upper division bio courses had literature reading assignments and we had to know how to critically read some of the latest articles in Nature/Science/Cell/PNAS so there are people with no lab experience whatsoever, but if you give them a published article, they can effectively describe the research going on.

I don't think discerning between someone who does *scut* work and someone who *thinks* they do more than scut work is as black and white as some of you want it to seem. Publishing is highly dependent on luck - you don't know if what you are doing will work. A lot of post docs and grad students do *scut* work too- screens and gels nonstop trying to find that novel something (whether or not it will exist) that can reveal or explain some mechanism or whatnot.
 
Geez I don't know where I was going with my last rambling.

What I'm trying to say is quit projecting your insecurities and complaints about the process on situations that you don't fully know about. Worry about your own research and if you are not lucky enough to get a publication, then so be it. Let your accomplishments (i.e. research scholarships, senior thesis) and LOR speak for themselves. Trying to make yourself feel better by tearing down imaginary inept people is pointless.
 
I was wondering, what if I did research during the summer and I got a paper accepted to be published... Would that be a +4 for me, even though it was just one summer?
 
shindotp said:
I was wondering, what if I did research during the summer and I got a paper accepted to be published... Would that be a +4 for me, even though it was just one summer?
Click to expand...

I'm not LizzyM, but I think it would carry the same weight if you contributed significantly to the project. I'm doing summer research right now and we may get a publication out of it. I've made a lot of progress this summer because of my prior experience. So even though this is a distinct project, my success is based upon previous research experience.
 
shindotp said:
I was wondering, what if I did research during the summer and I got a paper accepted to be published... Would that be a +4 for me, even though it was just one summer?
Click to expand...

i wish people would stop obsessing about this +alpha thing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

F
Pub addition
Replies
4
Views
436
HappyRabbit
HappyRabbit
L
  • Locked
What does it take to get into Stanford BRUH
Replies
3
Views
821
chilly_md
chilly_md
X0001234
Abstract in journal supplement: is this a publication?
Replies
5
Views
3K
sapphire_fire
sapphire_fire
R
Publication in npj journal?
Replies
4
Views
2K
pazzer2
P
A
How Much Does the MCAT Actually Matter in the App Review Process?
Replies
11
Views
2K
Mr.Smile12
Mr.Smile12
Top