I would imagine that the "We have accepted applicants from these programs" section would be the most helpful resource in answering that question. Sorry I don't have any personal insight.
I think Crime documentaries and podcasts are great for self-care!
Some internship sites actually prefer students from professional schools because of the clinical training focus/high number of clinical hours. If you get an interview, they think your training is good enough that they would take you on as an intern. I personally wouldn’t address why you went to a professional school unless they ask ...or unless they have maybe never interviewed a professional school student before.
I think someone posted the APPIC stats on this earlier in the thread if you want to hunt that down, but if I remember the data correctly, 7 - 8 interviews gives you a solid chance of matching (in the 90ish percentage). If someone saved the link, maybe they could repost it on the thread 😛
Not from neuropsych but when I got my interview offer for the health track they said we had 2 weeks to pick a day or the spot would be gone so my guess is that they are planning on using those same dates for the neuropsych interviews. That was 2 weeks ago so my guess is you can probably expect something this week! Good luck!
Wanting at least 6, but 7-8 would be perfect. These are the numbers my supervisors have told us to aim for and what a 2014 article indicates improves chances of matching.
I guess I should be expecting a rejection soon.
‘Twas me, your friendly neighborhood koala 🐨 I had cited this research publication by Callahan et al. (2014, pg. 76) where they calculated a cut-off of about 6.92 interview offers that separated matched from unmatched applicants. From their data, they also found that applicants will have a 99% chance of matching if they obtained 12 or more interview offers.
I thought 7-8 interviews was almost a guarantee for matching?
Nothing is a guarantee. The stats are very good, but ultimately it comes down to how students rank sites, how sites rank students, how many spots a site has, and whether a student is a better fit over others who were ranked (which relates to how sites rank students). Moreover, it’s common for students not to rank every site or track after interviews and getting a different impression than what is in a brochure.
While this has been haunting me, I have also been curious about (and looked but not found) more recent updates. I see in the match stats from previous years they provide stats on how many interviews applicants receive but not the correlation with matching. I believe the 2014 report was most relevant to the matching process when there was still an extreme imbalance between # of sites and applicants so I wonder how the more balanced situation that may have shifted the "magic" interview number (or not).
I was also curious about whether this finding would hold up to the potentially unique COVID impacts. I feel like from my casual observation on here and with peers that some types of sites (hospitals, bigger name institutions, and integrated care) are getting a huge number of apps. Feels like if that's the setting you want you may need to apply to more/get more than 6 interviews/have some backup settings to be safe. It would be interesting to see this study done again for this year with correlations broken down by site type or some sort of a name recognition index.
I'd like to chime in about this situation (not having a lot of options to get experience in a given setting). As a TD I understand that there may be limited options for trainees to get the experiences they want. What makes a difference for me when I review an application is how the person communicates their interest in and passion for working with the population at our site. If a letter just says, "I think I would be a great asset to your program because I am excellent at all these skills," that does nothing to convey genuine interest in our site and the people we serve. What I appreciate seeing is "I haven't been able to do X, though it is my long-term career goal. These are the A, B and C ways in which I have prepared myself for work at your site/with the people you serve, and these 1, 2, 3 reasons are why I will do well there." Or something to that effect. Don't count yourself out. But do convey your interest and passion.
Neurpsych track too. Mass email and same interview dates.
Congrats on the interview!! Seemed like a great program. Just got my rejection from them 😕 Ahh this process is hard.
Thank you, and I’m sorry to hear about your rejection. You’re right, it is hard! Rejections sting.
Congrats! Looks like an awesome site. I debated applying but ultimately other sites won out for me.
Still waiting to hear from them...A friend of mine interviewed there last year and told me they called her instead of emailing.
This is the kindest gesture 😭
I haven't yet, wondering the same thing! The site to which I applied said they would be in touch again sometime in December, so probably not unusual that we haven't heard yet (I hope)!
I have not and am anxiously awaiting responses!
I'll be watching my phone then! Fingers crossed that it comes soon, good luck!!!
no!!! any seeing the interview for general has me on edge!
Agreed - it was done really well and that helped a lot.
Yessss, agreed, and definitely attracted me to consider them for post-doc! 🙂 Hugs, hope you get some awesome offers soon!
Thank you - same to you as well! 🤗
To add to this, when I was applying two years ago, I saw exactly one site that said they did not want applicants from clinical science programs (and it wasn't a great site in general) and one that stated that PsyDs were "preferred" over "acceptable" PhDs (this was before they changed the descriptions on the APPIC program).
Congrats!
Thank you! Sending positive vibes your way! Hope you hear soon!
