Differences between Experimental PhD vs. Neuroscience PhD???

[recycleruminate]

Weird...i have some familiarity with Experimental Psychology PhD programs. And I understood them as totally emphasizing research, and many of the students hit the ground running, starting research projects from day 1. The classes are basically an afterthought.

I majored in Psychology, but I am getting way more into neuroscience. Even cell and molecular neurobiology. Many suggested I go for a PhD in Experimental Psychology, and just go for a lab that collaborates with cognitive neuroscientists and uses fMRI and other neuro methods.

However, I still think I want an even harder science level of analysis. So I started looking at straight neuroscience PHD programs, and the first one i looked at, Stanford, seems WAYYYYY different. It almost sounds like Med School. The first year emphasizes classroom work and the system mirrors that of med school--doing 'rounds' it seems to different labs and researchers before settling by the 2nd year. As I understand it, you already select your lab/advisor and research niche before applying to experimental psych programs.

Are they really structured as differently as this seems?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[BozoSparky]

Weird...i have some familiarity with Experimental Psychology PhD programs. And I understood them as totally emphasizing research, and many of the students hit the ground running, starting research projects from day 1. The classes are basically an afterthought.

I majored in Psychology, but I am getting way more into neuroscience. Even cell and molecular neurobiology. Many suggested I go for a PhD in Experimental Psychology, and just go for a lab that collaborates with cognitive neuroscientists and uses fMRI and other neuro methods.

However, I still think I want an even harder science level of analysis. So I started looking at straight neuroscience PHD programs, and the first one i looked at, Stanford, seems WAYYYYY different. It almost sounds like Med School. The first year emphasizes classroom work and the system mirrors that of med school--doing 'rounds' it seems to different labs and researchers before settling by the 2nd year. As I understand it, you already select your lab/advisor and research niche before applying to experimental psych programs.

Are they really structured as differently as this seems?

So, do you mean you will have rotations through different labs? That's different from "rounds" in medicine.

 

[recycleruminate]

yeah, rotations is the correct word.

im just really surprised that experimental psych phd programs have you apply directly to a lab and principle investigor, whereas neuroscience phd programs, you apply to the school or program, then rotate through different labs while really focusing on your first year of classes....THEN, decide on a lab/PI to work with.

 

[BozoSparky]

I think rotations are nice, I wish I could have went through a few...I had to choose and stick with it ("back in my day" ...I sound like an old man!).

Switching labs after the fact was pretty rough, politically...

 

[strangeglove]

It all depends on what experimental psychology and neuroscience programs you are talking about. There are some experimental psych programs that have an extensive "didactic" curriculum (and where you will be expected to teach undergraduates about these subjects that you learn about in these classes that are not necessarily related to your research interests), as well as neuroscience programs that de-emphasize didactics. However, on the balance, there is a heavier emphasis in neuroscience programs on classwork, even more so than in other basic biomedical sciences. The reason has to do with the fact that neuroscience is a highly interdisciplinary field. In most PhD programs you will be exposed to not only the specific area that is relevant to your dissertation research (e.g. cognitive neuroscience), but also molecular, cellular, developmental and clinical neuroscience. In contrast, the classwork in experimental psych programs will rarely require any molecular biology, beyond what is offered in an introductory neuroscience class that most undergraduates take. This, in my mind, makes a PhD in neuroscience more desirable. You can do the exact same research that you would do in an experimental psych PhD, but you will have a broader knowledge base.

 

[recycleruminate]

It all depends on what experimental psychology and neuroscience programs you are talking about. There are some experimental psych programs that have an extensive "didactic" curriculum (and where you will be expected to teach undergraduates about these subjects that you learn about in these classes that are not necessarily related to your research interests), as well as neuroscience programs that de-emphasize didactics. However, on the balance, there is a heavier emphasis in neuroscience programs on classwork, even more so than in other basic biomedical sciences. The reason has to do with the fact that neuroscience is a highly interdisciplinary field. In most PhD programs you will be exposed to not only the specific area that is relevant to your dissertation research (e.g. cognitive neuroscience), but also molecular, cellular, developmental and clinical neuroscience. In contrast, the classwork in experimental psych programs will rarely require any molecular biology, beyond what is offered in an introductory neuroscience class that most undergraduates take. This, in my mind, makes a PhD in neuroscience more desirable. You can do the exact same research that you would do in an experimental psych PhD, but you will have a broader knowledge base.

Thanks, very helpful.

I need to beef up my application. I took solid Neuroscience and Cog Neuro courses as an undergrad. This semester I am interning at a Neurobio lab, and before that I helped with some Social Psych research. But I did not take any general science (bio, chem, phys, etc.).

I'm debating between an informal post-bac pre-med program at SFSU (where I'll take all basic Med School science/math pre-req's) or if I should find something more tailored for Neuroscience. For example, SFSU offers an M.S. in Physiology and Behavioral Biology.

Any thoughts?

With the pre-med program, I'll have the option of applying to Med School. Also, even if the M.S. curriculum seems more relevant to Neuroscience, the lack of a basic bio/chem/phys/calc foundation may come back to haunt me.

Obviously, I have a lot of work to do.

However, I could actually possibly apply for Neuro PhD programs as early as next fall (2009).

I start taking classes at SFSU this spring (since I finish my BA this semester), and I will finish the final 2 pre-med/general science courses during the summer of 2010 (while not overloading my class schedule, so I can also substantially be involved with Neuro research labs at UCSF), and (if admitted!) matriculate into a PhD program that fall (2010).

However, the PhD program would have to admit me with only 4/8 of the SFSU post-bac pre-med courses completed.

Just how competitive are these Neuroscience PhD programs? I know I have the passion and commitment, but does it sound like my application will look competitive enough by next fall?



This is why I am excited that the first year emphasizes classes and rotations, since I worry I may seem too 'green' to hit the ground running with my own research questions and designs.

 

[strangeglove]

Most undergraduate neuroscience programs require all the premed classes for the neuroscience major. In addition, you will need to take a couple of classes in psychology, statistics, neuroscience (molecular and systems/cognitive), and molecular biology. This should be more than enough preparation for a neuroscience PhD program. Many people go into these graduate programs with only a psychology or biology background, though people with pure psychology backgrounds sometimes find the molecular biology stuff to be somewhat challenging.

 

[recycleruminate]

Most undergraduate neuroscience programs require all the premed classes for the neuroscience major. In addition, you will need to take a couple of classes in psychology, statistics, neuroscience (molecular and systems/cognitive), and molecular biology. This should be more than enough preparation for a neuroscience PhD program. Many people go into these graduate programs with only a psychology or biology background, though people with pure psychology backgrounds sometimes find the molecular biology stuff to be somewhat challenging.

Yes, I actually had to get permission to take the introductory neuroscience course this semester, since I did not take the bio or chem pre-req's. I am not a neuroscience major, but rather a psychology major who should have majored in neuroscience.

I will probably take the pre-med courses in bio, chem, phys, and calc.

I am just wondering if it would look better/make my application more competitive if I do a 1 or 2 year M.S. program in Neuroscience (e.g. at tulane) instead of the post-bac pre-med general science courses. However, it seems that some people enter neuroscience PhD programs with even less Neuroscience-specific backgrounds, so I should just do the general science courses. This way, I fill the gaps in my general science knowledge foundations.


How hard is it to get into a Neuroscience PhD Program? its obviously like apples and oranges compared to medical school, but the criteria seems to be alot more ambiguous and less defined. I wonder if there are any informative acceptance percentages

 

[strangeglove]

In my view, there is little value to getting an MS in any biological science. These days, this isn't even really offered at most programs. Some people obtain these when they can't finish a PhD. In any case, the MS is simply the first 2 years of a PhD program. So, my advice would be that you are better off doing some of the classes, along with an advanced mol bio class, molecular neuroscience and systems/cognitive neuroscience. This will give you enough background for a neuroscience PhD, along with whatever you've already taken in psychology. However, my guess is that with a couple of more classes in added on in something quantitative (e.g. statistics, computer science), you would probably qualify for a neuroscience major.

It's as hard to get into a neuroscience PhD program as it is to get into any other biomedical science PhD program. How hard will depend on the schools you apply to. Places like Harvard, WashU, Columbia, UCSF, Cal Tech, UCSD, Rockefeller University are difficult to get into. Of course, the most important factor in your admission to any graduate school is not the classes you take, but the research experience you have, along with the letters from your research advisors. The place where PhD students fail or thrive is in the lab, and classwork (or GRE scores, for that matter) doesn't predict performance here very well.

 

[recycleruminate]

ok, thanks...this is very helpful...

i am just a little intimidate about applying for a neuroscience PhD

I love learning about the brain...but I was never a general science nerd growing up. i am interested in chemistry, biology, and physics only now that I see they are essential toward understanding the brain. before this, I was studying social theory, and social psychology, then cognitive neurosience...and it is from this broader perspective that I have become deeply fascinated by the brain. I am a right-brainer, and growing up, academia always felt very left-brain, but I think neuroscience definitely has creative potential. social psychology is interesting, but it feels very descriptive, whereas my particular interests or questions with neuroscience have an active and operative aspect.

 

[URHere]

I am just wondering if it would look better/make my application more competitive if I do a 1 or 2 year M.S. program in Neuroscience (e.g. at tulane) instead of the post-bac pre-med general science courses.

I would only suggest doing this, if you are doing it to improve your research record. While many MS programs are based on coursework, there are some that actually require a thesis project. These research-focused programs require a student to propose, carry out, and defend a thesis and (in my opinion) they are a great way for future applicants to immerse themselves in an independent project and to prove that research in a given field is something they enjoy and are capable of doing.

The downside to a MS program would be the cost, the lost time, and letting people know that your MS was actually awarded based on research. Many people these days will see "MS" and assume minimal lab time.

 

[strangeglove]

ok, thanks...this is very helpful...

i am just a little intimidate about applying for a neuroscience PhD

I love learning about the brain...but I was never a general science nerd growing up. i am interested in chemistry, biology, and physics only now that I see they are essential toward understanding the brain. before this, I was studying social theory, and social psychology, then cognitive neurosience...and it is from this broader perspective that I have become deeply fascinated by the brain. I am a right-brainer, and growing up, academia always felt very left-brain, but I think neuroscience definitely has creative potential. social psychology is interesting, but it feels very descriptive, whereas my particular interests or questions with neuroscience have an active and operative aspect.

You would be surprised to learn how many people go into neuroscience PhD programs with this background. It's more important that you have a willingness to tolerate some of the molecular stuff. This at a minimum will include a neuroscience survey class, 1/2 of which will be cell/molecular stuff, an introduction to general cellular and molecular biology class, developmental neuroscience and neurophysiology. This, of course, will depend on where you go. Beyond this, you can probably focus to your heart's content on cognitive/systems neuroscience.

 

[recycleruminate]

You would be surprised to learn how many people go into neuroscience PhD programs with this background. It's more important that you have a willingness to tolerate some of the molecular stuff. This at a minimum will include a neuroscience survey class, 1/2 of which will be cell/molecular stuff, an introduction to general cellular and molecular biology class, developmental neuroscience and neurophysiology. This, of course, will depend on where you go. Beyond this, you can probably focus to your heart's content on cognitive/systems neuroscience.

yeah, I actually can tolerate cell/molecular stuff, especially now that i see the bigger picture, particularly regarding pharmacology and what not.

Now i have to educate myself more on life after neuroscience PHD, before I can make an informed decision. Tenure track is still mysterious to me, and sounds daunting. I think I could handle the political stuff -- and i sort of have a knack for PR. Money might be a concern, especially early on. I am also curious what type of opportunities are available in industry -- and if that is grounds for excommunication from academic circles. and what the pros and cons of everything are. aye yi yi.

 

[dl2dp2]

yeah, I actually can tolerate cell/molecular stuff, especially now that i see the bigger picture, particularly regarding pharmacology and what not.

Now i have to educate myself more on life after neuroscience PHD, before I can make an informed decision. Tenure track is still mysterious to me, and sounds daunting. I think I could handle the political stuff -- and i sort of have a knack for PR. Money might be a concern, especially early on. I am also curious what type of opportunities are available in industry -- and if that is grounds for excommunication from academic circles. and what the pros and cons of everything are. aye yi yi.

i strongly recommend against doing either a neuroscience phd or a phd in experimental psychology. if possible, do an MD, and you can go into research in either neuroscience or psychology after an MD.

The job market for PhDs are going from bad to worst right now. If you don't have a PhD from a top top school, don't even think about tenure track. The opps in industry is terrible for experimental psychology PhDs. It is highly likely that you'll be stuck in postdoc for 5-10 years if you carried through either of these career paths unless you are confident that you can get into a top 5 program. And even then the roads are perilous.

Now if you truly love research, of course, the lifestyle of a postdoc isn't so bad. 50-60k a year, little pressure, etc. Things to consider. I recommend you start by working in a lab at a local university and test the water out for a career in research.

 

[recycleruminate]

i strongly recommend against doing either a neuroscience phd or a phd in experimental psychology. if possible, do an MD, and you can go into research in either neuroscience or psychology after an MD.

The job market for PhDs are going from bad to worst right now. If you don't have a PhD from a top top school, don't even think about tenure track. The opps in industry is terrible for experimental psychology PhDs. It is highly likely that you'll be stuck in postdoc for 5-10 years if you carried through either of these career paths unless you are confident that you can get into a top 5 program. And even then the roads are perilous.

Now if you truly love research, of course, the lifestyle of a postdoc isn't so bad. 50-60k a year, little pressure, etc. Things to consider. I recommend you start by working in a lab at a local university and test the water out for a career in research.

thanks for the honesty.

the the industry opps for Neuro PHDs just as bleak as for Experimental Psych PHDs? Are Neuro PHDs not needed for psychiatry medication engineering, testing, researching, etc.?

An MD sounds ideal, but i don't have the pre-req's, and my research involvement is what carries my resume -- my GPA is mediocre. However, my friend (who is applying to MD schools right now), said that some schools seem to prefer older applicants instead of "run of the mill" fresh out of undergrad applicants -- which suprised me.

Yeah, some people have encouraged me to apply right away, but I feel like another year to bolster my application will increase my chances of getting into a top school. The clout/prestige of the program seems to outweigh the benefits of starting early. Granted, I probably should just apply right away, test the waters and get good feedback, and probably demonstrate my persistence and commitment -- even if I feel my chances would be exponentially better with another year of general science courses/research experience.