for a clinical psychology Ph.D. graduate student to have by the time he/she is applying for internship???
What's the average # of Publications..
- Thread starter Thor2211
- Start date
Someone posted this a few months back from the APPIC report. I can't remember the number offhand, but I remember it being absolutely pitiful (I believe the mode was actually zero). This seems pathetic to me, even at a clinically-focused program it seems like you'd almost have to TRY not to publish anything. I'm hoping to have a few before I even finish my master's
Then again, there's alot more people not getting internships than ever before, so I wouldn't shoot for average😉
Then again, there's alot more people not getting internships than ever before, so I wouldn't shoot for average😉
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2006
- Messages
- 22,661
- Reaction score
- 4,989
APPIC has these stats on their website. Off the top of my head, 2 or less was the majority of students.
*edit*
Here are the 2006 stats:
-t
*edit*
Here are the 2006 stats:
-t
- Joined
- Sep 18, 2006
- Messages
- 74
- Reaction score
- 0
Well, it looks like if you have 2 or more publications, you're in great shape.....but then, the question is 'biased' (and this is the scary part) -- the question does not ask about PEER REVIEWED publications 😱
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2006
- Messages
- 22,661
- Reaction score
- 4,989
It it tough though, because some programs/mentors are very liberal with whom they include, while others set the standards quite high for authorship mention.
I'm better than average, but definitely not up in the top %'s...I'm not too worried since I'm not looking at primary research placements.
-t
I'm better than average, but definitely not up in the top %'s...I'm not too worried since I'm not looking at primary research placements.
-t
True, but most people should at LEAST have their master's published by the time they apply, unless it is going through tons of review rounds. I know different professors have different standards for what constitutes authorship, but it seems like most graduate-level contributions to a project (short of running a few subjects or processing some data) would be worthy of some form of authorship. Are people just not getting involved? Are they contributing at the undergrad level and just doing a few assessments on subjects and expecting authorship? Getting too caught up in classwork to even try to get papers out?
There's something weird about this. Most people I know in MASTER'S programs have at least 1 or 2 pubs by the time they get out. Since I'm aiming for research jobs I'm shooting for the 5-9 range (which should be easily doable unless some get caught up in the review process). If I hit double digits I'll be thrilled🙂
Edit: Oh, and I'd hazard a guess that the top ones (i.e. 20 or more) are probably people who worked research jobs for quite a few years and got tons of pubs for that before coming to grad school. I'm sure there's a few exceptions to that rule though🙂
There's something weird about this. Most people I know in MASTER'S programs have at least 1 or 2 pubs by the time they get out. Since I'm aiming for research jobs I'm shooting for the 5-9 range (which should be easily doable unless some get caught up in the review process). If I hit double digits I'll be thrilled🙂
Edit: Oh, and I'd hazard a guess that the top ones (i.e. 20 or more) are probably people who worked research jobs for quite a few years and got tons of pubs for that before coming to grad school. I'm sure there's a few exceptions to that rule though🙂
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2007
- Messages
- 673
- Reaction score
- 1
I have 2 and will have 2 more in press just in time for internship application. And I go to one of the professional schools that so many people around here think are garbage.
What is the best way to go about networking for internships? Meeting people at conferences and the like?
When I was researching grad schools, networking seemed inherently easier since multi-site studies are all the rage these days, whereas I get the impression many internship sites kind of "do their own thing". Of course, I guess I could always contact former students in the program who attended those internship sites and see if they can give me more information about it.
When I was researching grad schools, networking seemed inherently easier since multi-site studies are all the rage these days, whereas I get the impression many internship sites kind of "do their own thing". Of course, I guess I could always contact former students in the program who attended those internship sites and see if they can give me more information about it.
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2006
- Messages
- 22,661
- Reaction score
- 4,989
Definitely talk to other students who have been there previously. My buddy is two years ahead of me, and he applied to a number of sites I'm looking at, so I'm going to pick his brain about the sites.
Networking is everywhere, it isn't something you typically say, "Okay...i'm going to do it this week". You can make connections at conferences, sometimes via e-mail. The best networking I've found is talking about interests/opportunities with colleagues, and then having them refer me to people they know, who refer me to people they know...etc. Getting a referral is much more likely to lead to a connection than a cold connection.
-t
Networking is everywhere, it isn't something you typically say, "Okay...i'm going to do it this week". You can make connections at conferences, sometimes via e-mail. The best networking I've found is talking about interests/opportunities with colleagues, and then having them refer me to people they know, who refer me to people they know...etc. Getting a referral is much more likely to lead to a connection than a cold connection.
-t
"As an example: I had 12 peer reviewed pubs, around 25 presentations at varying levels, and two grants. . . I did not get my first choice. I know why. Sometimes there are variables that you cannot control.
You must be pretty bad at interviewing...
You must be pretty bad at interviewing...
- Joined
- Mar 14, 2007
- Messages
- 1,563
- Reaction score
- 58
Ouch. Not even a smiley to soften the blow?
I'm still a few years away from applying to internships, but I assume it is comparable to applying to grad school in that even those with insanely good credentials don't get in everywhere (and not because they are bad at interviewing).
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2006
- Messages
- 22,661
- Reaction score
- 4,989
Yeah...I think we (as a profession) need to change that. I definitely fall on the more clinical side, but during training I think it is important to at least have that experience.
-t
ITDs are not so myopic as to focus exclusively on applicants' publication records. Look at the match rates per program. Applicants coming from competitive, academically-oriented aren't necessarily at an advantage when it comes to applying for internship. After all, internship is primarily a clinical experience.
Actually I have to respectfully disagree with that statement. You look at match rates and nearly all the competitive academic programs have match rates at or near 100%, whereas it is generally the PsyD programs that have extreme difficulties placing students.
There's plenty of room for debate on why that is (stronger overall candidates on average going in, quantity of publications, access to larger hospitals, bias by interinship sites, etc.), but I'd have to say that the research-oriented programs seem to do much better come internship time than other types of programs.
Of course, that isn't to say its a guarantee, you still have to do everything right clinically to be competitive at some of those places. There's certainly MANY other things being considered than publications.
There's plenty of room for debate on why that is (stronger overall candidates on average going in, quantity of publications, access to larger hospitals, bias by interinship sites, etc.), but I'd have to say that the research-oriented programs seem to do much better come internship time than other types of programs.
Of course, that isn't to say its a guarantee, you still have to do everything right clinically to be competitive at some of those places. There's certainly MANY other things being considered than publications.
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2006
- Messages
- 22,661
- Reaction score
- 4,989
If you go to a solid clinical program, you will get a good placement. Because of the odd matching process, a few people may fall through the cracks (if they only apply to ultra-competitive sites), but in general, good programs get good placement rates, regardless of PhD/PsyD.
Oh, sorry, didn't mean to imply that clinically-oriented programs COULDN'T match people. A student who excels anywhere shouldn't have a problem matching.
I do think the numbers speak though, and I'd be hard-pressed to say a school that matches 100% of its students year in and year out isn't placing its students at an advantage over a school who consistently struggles to break 50%. On average, it seems like research oriented schools have better match rates than clinically oriented schools, it just doesn't explain why.
You make a good point about closing doors though Jon, I hadn't thought of that but in looking at where many people here go, its certainly true. That doesn't worry me exactly, but its worth noting.
I do think the numbers speak though, and I'd be hard-pressed to say a school that matches 100% of its students year in and year out isn't placing its students at an advantage over a school who consistently struggles to break 50%. On average, it seems like research oriented schools have better match rates than clinically oriented schools, it just doesn't explain why.
You make a good point about closing doors though Jon, I hadn't thought of that but in looking at where many people here go, its certainly true. That doesn't worry me exactly, but its worth noting.
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2006
- Messages
- 22,661
- Reaction score
- 4,989
Struggling to break 50% is horrid, and isn't reflective of even average PsyDs, so the inference doesn't fit. I wouldn't consider those types of programs as in the same league. This is where Jon and I agree, that these are problematic programs, even though they don't tend to be in direct competition for most of the sites that students from quality programs are looking at, they still are a factor in the %'s.
Jon makes a good point about the self-selecting academic sites. There are a handful of sites that train with the explicit intent of having the interns stay and work towards faculty positions. Other sites have protected research hours and function much the same way....they just don't explicitly state it. Those tend to be coveted positions for those who want to be academics. I'm looking at a number of sites on the fence...they have informal research hours that they 'encourage' (but everyone does), but they aren't out and out research placements.
-t
Jon makes a good point about the self-selecting academic sites. There are a handful of sites that train with the explicit intent of having the interns stay and work towards faculty positions. Other sites have protected research hours and function much the same way....they just don't explicitly state it. Those tend to be coveted positions for those who want to be academics. I'm looking at a number of sites on the fence...they have informal research hours that they 'encourage' (but everyone does), but they aren't out and out research placements.
-t
To clarify, I was referring to a difference (or lack thereof) in match rates between those coming from the most research-oriented programs (which tend to be more prestigious) and students coming from other solid PhD programs that are less prestigious. For example, over the past 7 years, the match rate for the University of Pennsylvania was 76.9% while the individual match rate during this same time period was 74.9%.
Certainly, students coming from well known research-oriented program are at an advantage when applying to academically oriented internships, but these make up a small percentage of the available internships.
To clarify, I was referring to a difference (or lack thereof) in match rates between those coming from the most research-oriented programs (which tend to be more prestigious) and students coming from other solid PhD programs that are less prestigious. For example, over the past 7 years, the match rate for the University of Pennsylvania was 76.9% while the individual match rate during this same time period was 74.9%.
Certainly, students coming from well known research-oriented program are at an advantage when applying to academically oriented internships, but these make up a very small percentage of the available internships.
Similar threads
