Good/right way to address extenuating circumstances in grad app statement?

[Skye18]

I would especially appreciate any insight from faculty/those with a role in grad admissions.

For the statement of purpose, is there an appropriate/elegant way of addressing difficult life circumstances that impacted your ability to pursue personal/professional growth opportunities during undergrad? And on a related note, is there a good heuristic for determining what should be mentioned, if anything?

Early on in undergrad, I experienced several extenuating life events in my family (including homelessness and death) in a fairly short time frame. Beyond the initial hardship of processing the resulting life-long changes, it also had a major financial impact on me. Although I was able to keep my GPA up, these ultimately prevented me from taking advantage of certain CV-builders you would expect from any competitive PhD candidate (such as an honor's thesis), and the ripple effects still affect my path now.

Admittedly, it is frustrating knowing that potential advisors can compare my CV to other candidates' and quite possibly come to the conclusion that I'm less competent or driven. This couldn't be further from the truth, but it's harder to prove otherwise "on-paper". I know it's generally considered poor taste to discuss your personal problems in an SOP, which brings me back to the title. Is it okay to make some sort of exception here? To reiterate, my aim would not be trying to get "sympathy points" from the reader, only to briefly explain I had significant external obstacles that affected certain outcomes. I'm highly committed to entering a clinical program, but I'm also greatly worried that no matter what I might say in my SOP, my relatively less interesting CV will work against me.

Any advice appreciated! Thanks!

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[YoungFrancis]

Better to have your letter writers speak to the upward trajectory of your work. If you have something you want to say related to the experience, I would be pretty careful because it’s easy for it to be seen as oversharing or unprofessional.

 

[Skye18]

Better to have your letter writers speak to the upward trajectory of your work. If you have something you want to say related to the experience, I would be pretty careful because it’s easy for it to be seen as oversharing or unprofessional.

My primary letter writers have no idea about these experiences (I formed these relationships post-BA), so I'm not sure how viable this approach is either. Doesn't feel appropriate to inform them of these sorts of events years after they happened. Wouldn't be the first time they wrote for me either.

 

[psych.meout]

I would especially appreciate any insight from faculty/those with a role in grad admissions.

For the statement of purpose, is there an appropriate/elegant way of addressing difficult life circumstances that impacted your ability to pursue personal/professional growth opportunities during undergrad? And on a related note, is there a good heuristic for determining what should be mentioned, if anything?

Early on in undergrad, I experienced several extenuating life events in my family (including homelessness and death) in a fairly short time frame. Beyond the initial hardship of processing the resulting life-long changes, it also had a major financial impact on me. Although I was able to keep my GPA up, these ultimately prevented me from taking advantage of certain CV-builders you would expect from any competitive PhD candidate (such as an honor's thesis), and the ripple effects still affect my path now.

What specifically are you trying to discuss or address? That you wish you could have done more research during undergrad (e.g., an honor's thesis) or that your CV as it stands now is lacking in experience? I.e., are you trying to shape a narrative arc for your experience or trying to explain away why you don't have more experience overall?

For the former, faculty don't really care if your research experience is post-bacc or not, just that you have it, that it's of good quality, and that your research and career interests fit with your potential faculty mentor and the overall program (e.g., not looking for a career in a specialty in which the program does not offer didactic or clinical training). For the latter, I'd be reluctant to use personal disclosure of hardship to try to explain why I don't have significant research experience. It comes across as making excuses and really doesn't help compensate for not having the foundation necessary to operate at the graduate level.

Admittedly, it is frustrating knowing that potential advisors can compare my CV to other candidates' and quite possibly come to the conclusion that I'm less competent or driven. This couldn't be further from the truth, but it's harder to prove otherwise "on-paper".

I mean, how else would you like them to compare you to other applicants besides considering the objective experiences you've had and the accomplishments you've achieved, as per your CV? I'm sure that most applicants are "driven" and feel "competent" (at least to some degree), but that doesn't mean that they have the requisite foundational experience to be ready for grad school at the moment or that they even have the aptitude to complete a doctoral program at all. While admittedly imperfect, each applicant's CV offers a relatively more objective way of assessing which applicants appear qualified for the program and the relative competitiveness between them, though this is not the only consideration, as they have many other data points (e.g., GRE, LORs, SOPs) on which to evaluate them.

I know it's generally considered poor taste to discuss your personal problems in an SOP, which brings me back to the title. Is it okay to make some sort of exception here? To reiterate, my aim would not be trying to get "sympathy points" from the reader, only to briefly explain I had significant external obstacles that affected certain outcomes. I'm highly committed to entering a clinical program, but I'm also greatly worried that no matter what I might say in my SOP, my relatively less interesting CV will work against me.

Any advice appreciated! Thanks!

What do you mean by "relatively less interesting?" Again, it's unclear whether you think other applicants have more attractive/exciting CVs that will overshadow yours, or if you are referring to explaining a relative dearth of experience on your end, or something else entirely.

 

[Skye18]

What specifically are you trying to discuss or address? That you wish you could have done more research during undergrad (e.g., an honor's thesis) or that your CV as it stands now is lacking in experience? I.e., are you trying to shape a narrative arc for your experience or trying to explain away why you don't have more experience overall?

I'm struggling with all of the above to some degree or another. I always feel an urge to address the thesis issue outright, at the very least, as it seems de rigeur now. For example, when I look through the CVs of grad students in my choice labs, they always completed one.

Finding a meaningful way to convey my underwhelming undergrad experience outside of this context feels like a challenge sometimes. A bit like "While my house was burning down, I learned the methodological advantage of vacuuming in parallel lines", but ignoring the first clause. Perhaps something along the lines of "During my time in undergrad I was also juggling XYZ family challenges, but I made the best of my situation by doing ABC."?

For the former, faculty don't really care if your research experience is post-bacc or not, just that you have it, that it's of good quality, and that your research and career interests fit with your potential faculty mentor and the overall program (e.g., not looking for a career in a specialty in which the program does not offer didactic or clinical training). For the latter, I'd be reluctant to use personal disclosure of hardship to try to explain why I don't have significant research experience. It comes across as making excuses and really doesn't help compensate for not having the foundation necessary to operate at the graduate level.

I mean, how else would you like them to compare you to other applicants besides considering the objective experiences you've had and the accomplishments you've achieved, as per your CV? I'm sure that most applicants are "driven" and feel "competent" (at least to some degree), but that doesn't mean that they have the requisite foundational experience to be ready for grad school at the moment or that they even have the aptitude to complete a doctoral program at all. While admittedly imperfect, each applicant's CV offers a relatively more objective way of assessing which applicants appear qualified for the program and the relative competitiveness between them, though this is not the only consideration, as they have many other data points (e.g., GRE, LORs, SOPs) on which to evaluate them.


What do you mean by "relatively less interesting?" Again, it's unclear whether you think other applicants have more attractive/exciting CVs that will overshadow yours, or if you are referring to explaining a relative dearth of experience on your end, or something else entirely.

I'm actually a few years graduated now (have been involved in clinical/research activities since then), and I did apply during the last cycle with little response (COVID notwithstanding). I know that PI's depend largely on these objective measures, it's just challenging to navigate that as someone whose background has been disadvantaged in certain areas. In other words, there's no space for this sort of situation to be considered within the applicant's holistic assessment, maybe to demonstrate grit? Another way to rephrase things, is there a way to mention extenuating circumstances to emphasize desirable personal traits without inadvertently coming across as simply complaining?

When I say less interesting, I mean concrete experiences like independent projects/pubs, advanced application of particular technical skills, big-picture lab management, etc that I don't have. Getting some of these experiences has been difficult too, partly as a result of the aforementioned circumstances, but that's its own can of worms.

Basically, I'm still trying to make lemonade from lemons. Thanks for your thoughts.

 

[MidWestLass]

I'm struggling with all of the above to some degree or another. I always feel an urge to address the thesis issue outright, at the very least, as it seems de rigeur now. For example, when I look through the CVs of grad students in my choice labs, they always completed one.

Finding a meaningful way to convey my underwhelming undergrad experience outside of this context feels like a challenge sometimes. A bit like "While my house was burning down, I learned the methodological advantage of vacuuming in parallel lines", but ignoring the first clause. Perhaps something along the lines of "During my time in undergrad I was also juggling XYZ family challenges, but I made the best of my situation by doing ABC."?


I'm actually a few years graduated now (have been involved in clinical/research activities since then), and I did apply during the last cycle with little response (COVID notwithstanding). I know that PI's depend largely on these objective measures, it's just challenging to navigate that as someone whose background has been disadvantaged in certain areas. In other words, there's no space for this sort of situation to be considered within the applicant's holistic assessment, maybe to demonstrate grit? Another way to rephrase things, is there a way to mention extenuating circumstances to emphasize desirable personal traits without inadvertently coming across as simply complaining?

When I say less interesting, I mean concrete experiences like independent projects/pubs, advanced application of particular technical skills, big-picture lab management, etc that I don't have. Getting some of these experiences has been difficult too, partly as a result of the aforementioned circumstances, but that's its own can of worms.

Basically, I'm still trying to make lemonade from lemons. Thanks for your thoughts.

It’s not clear to me whether you are trying to explain away not having greater research experience while in undergrad or not having research experience at all. Having solid, meaningful postbacc research experience trumps any thesis you could have completed your senior year. Do you have research experience outside of undergrad? If not, I definitely think it would be much more worth your time to hold off on applying until you can beef up that area. There are basic experiential requirements that need to be met before a lab will take into account someone’s personal experience/disadvantages.

Has anything changed in your CV since you applied last year?

 

[summerbabe]

I know that PI's depend largely on these objective measures, it's just challenging to navigate that as someone whose background has been disadvantaged in certain areas. In other words, there's no space for this sort of situation to be considered within the applicant's holistic assessment, maybe to demonstrate grit?

Not faculty but my experience during grad school is that while some programs/faculty can be empathetic and even potentially temporarily very accommodating to life circumstances that occur while enrolled, at the end of the day, you're still expected to meet deadlines/targets that everybody else is and will be judged accordingly.

Academics are folks who have been successful in a wildly competitive publish or perish environment where ultimately, nobody cares if you did got pubs/grants/tenure while having a bunch of kids/major responsibilities or could devote yourself 100% to work, they just care about the accomplishments themselves.

Non-objective factors matter, including super subjective things like whether a PI finds you pleasant enough interpersonally to spend 4-6 years with but when a PI extends an interview invitation or makes an offer, they are already assuming that person has the requisite character/work ethic to be successful (which is probably largely influenced by what they have juggled and accomplished prior to grad school).

I'm highly committed to entering a clinical program, but I'm also greatly worried that no matter what I might say in my SOP, my relatively less interesting CV will work against me.

I think you're right. Everybody else that you're competing against is also highly committed and it sucks that some of them may have had more opportunities to demonstrate success than you. This might also be time to re-evaluate whether you're able or willing to boost your CV or whether something else in mental health (such as getting a MSW) could provide career satisfaction if the former option is not realistic.

(have been involved in clinical/research activities since then), and I did apply during the last cycle with little response (COVID notwithstanding).

Ultimately, if somebody's CV is minimal outside of basic undergrad coursework, they will be an early cut at any funded PhD and nothing will make up for that.

But assuming you've been engaged in meaningful postbac research opportunities (and that your idea of meaningful matches with an average PI's definition), how confident are you that you were applying to programs that fit well? There are definitely differences between what an R1 clinical science program where many students pursue academic careers and where profs depend on grants and what a scientist-practitioner counseling psych program where most everybody ends up in clinical careers expect from their applicant pool.

Were you geographically restrictive? Is your research interest 'exciting' and thus more competitive? Did you have your application reviewed by people in the field? Are there potential red flags in your application that would negatively differentiate you from an applicant pool and make you an early cut candidate (e.g., low GPA, low GRE, poor grades in core psychology courses, etc)?

I'd recommend doing a careful review of your last application cycle process and ideally, get feedback from others (including stuff you likely won't want to hear) if you haven't done so already. Good luck!

 

[MCParent]

It’s not clear to me whether you are trying to explain away not having greater research experience while in undergrad or not having research experience at all. Having solid, meaningful postbacc research experience trumps any thesis you could have completed your senior year. Do you have research experience outside of undergrad? If not, I definitely think it would be much more worth your time to hold off on applying until you can beef up that area. There are basic experiential requirements that need to be met before a lab will take into account someone’s personal experience/disadvantages.

Has anything changed in your CV since you applied last year?

Agree; the central question of “what are you trying to explain” seems unclear.

OP, your posts suggest that you think you’re being compared to people who were raised in palaces. I’d say the majority of applicants, at least the ones I see, have had substantial marginalization experiences. Hardships are not qualifications for graduate school.

 

[WisNeuro]

Agree; the central question of “what are you trying to explain” seems unclear.

OP, your posts suggest that you think you’re being compared to people who were raised in palaces. I’d say the majority of applicants, at least the ones I see, have had substantial marginalization experiences. Hardships are not qualifications for graduate school.

Well, our house was roomy. But it was way in the sticks and didn't have AC or electric/gas heat

 

[borne_before]

You're absolute correct that you are competing with a lot of people who have more stable and advantaged backgrounds than you. They may have done everything right and even been more qualified because those advantages. But that doesn't rule you out! You've got a unique perspective. You just have to sell it correctly.

From a PR perspective, I think the correct way is to acknowledge the personal challenges, but to not make the letter about them. Rather, you need to relay into how it helped you develop AND TO REFRAME THEM AS POSITIVE. Remember, your personal letter is their qualitative first glimpse into you. You need to pass the beer test. No one wants a ruminating, bitter, brooding student for the next 5-7 years.

Here's an excerpt from my own personal statement (the first two paragraphs):

While in the first grade I was placed in a room and made to take look at a few pictures, rearrange a few puzzles, and tell what some things were. After a meeting with my teacher, my parents explained to me about my learning disability, which would cause me to leave class and go to a special room that they called the “Resource Room”. This made me wonder to myself if I was dumb, and what made me different from most of my classmates. That day was the start of my academic carrier with a learning disability. While hard at first, it has been possible for me to succeed academically and overcome the challenge that learning disabilities intrinsically set forth.

The stigma of being “special” and “disabled” lingered in my every day life. Not only did my learning disability affect my academic progress, it had a profound effect on my self-concept and self-esteem. However, it is my pleasure to report that my learning disability has been the stimulus for much personal growth and self-awareness. Like some soldiers have said about their combat experiences, I would never want to repeat my learning disability experiences in school, but I wouldn’t trade them for anything. Overall, my learning disability has been a very positive experience educationally and psychologically.

Do you see how I'm pretty vague. I never write about very public panic attacks in middle school at the though of having to use cursive and being completely overwhelmed or spending hours in after school tutoring while my buddies had fun every week?

Next, I outline my work, research and educational experiences that are relevant.

In the final paragraph, I say this: "...Pursuing the Doctorate of Philosophy in School Psychology, is my top desire. Obtaining a Doctoral degree would provide me with a way to pursue my ultimate goals of helping people with disabilities in school settings, conducting research in academia, and/or working in a private practice. My personal experience with my own learning disability has allowed me to gain perspective that many may not have. Enthusiasm and my personal experiences with psychology will provide me with the tools needed to positively impact those who have learning disabilities much like my own. Becoming a School Psychologist would give me the chance to help those who are similar to myself and assist them in the realization of their own vast potential.

I tie into my goals, etc. I never mention others (unless my desire to help them) or talk bad or assume that anyone has it easier or worse. I acknowledge that it sucked. But my "story" is one of triumph and positivity.

I should also note, that I had to get a masters before I could be considered competitive for a doctorate program. So you might have to do some of that, too. BTW, I'm so glad I didn't get accepted for a phd right out of undergrad. I did my best personal work during my masters and had a ton of fun, learned lots off cool stuff, got research experience, found a quantitative niche, etc. I also learned who I wasn't.

 

[boba_psych]

Like others said above, an undergrad thesis is not make or break for admissions, but having other research experiences is important. I didn't complete an undergrad thesis, but did pursue several post-bacc experiences that helped make me a more competitive candidate.

Instead of describing your experiences to justify lack of research productivity during undergrad, I would use your experiences and display them in a positive light like others have mentioned. Something like... despite going through xyz hardships I managed to persist and obtained xyz research experiences leading to x conference presentation (and/or publication if you have one)

This is a bit of a vague format so I hope you get the gist. I think the story of perseverance in the face of hardship is an important point to touch upon in a personal statement and can set you apart from other applicants

 

[Skye18]

Thanks for the responses everyone. Sorry I wasn't as clear as I should have been in my OP, I was a bit tired when I posted. I'll qualify myself and I recognize I need to be mindful of the scope of what I can discuss in my SOP; if anything, I was most looking for advice on how to address the personal challenges as they impacted me in the very beginning. I know dragging it out and muddying the waters would not be advisable.

Unfortunately, pursuing an MA really isn't a viable option for me, especially anytime soon. Fortunately, I don't have any red flags in my CV and my GPA is quite solid. I am quite familiar with how the grad application process generally works, and I do have defined interests and specific programs/PIs in mind. I'm confident that a PhD is necessary for my professional goals (clinical forensic).

@borne_before, I appreciate your examples, they were illuminating. While my challenges aren't directly relevant to my research/applied interests, I have food for thought for framing my personal development, which is more than I had yesterday.

I've come to realize that even having a mentor that is actively engaged in getting you to the next step, or occupying a position in a lab that will ever see you as anything more than a grunt, can be a privilege. I've had to learn a bunch of things under my own steam (including in places such as this). I still wouldn't choose any other field.

 

[psych.meout]

Thanks for the responses everyone. Sorry I wasn't as clear as I should have been in my OP, I was a bit tired when I posted. I'll qualify myself and I recognize I need to be mindful of the scope of what I can discuss in my SOP; if anything, I was most looking for advice on how to address the personal challenges as they impacted me in the very beginning. I know dragging it out and muddying the waters would not be advisable.

Unfortunately, pursuing an MA really isn't a viable option for me, especially anytime soon. Fortunately, I don't have any red flags in my CV and my GPA is quite solid. I am quite familiar with how the grad application process generally works, and I do have defined interests and specific programs/PIs in mind. I'm confident that a PhD is necessary for my professional goals (clinical forensic).

@borne_before, I appreciate your examples, they were illuminating. While my challenges aren't directly relevant to my research/applied interests, I have food for thought for framing my personal development, which is more than I had yesterday.

I've come to realize that even having a mentor that is actively engaged in getting you to the next step, or occupying a position in a lab that will ever see you as anything more than a grunt, can be a privilege. I've had to learn a bunch of things under my own steam (including in places such as this). I still wouldn't choose any other field.

It's still unclear what you're looking to explain with your cover letter, but with a "solid" GPA it's seeming more and more like that you have insufficient research experience from undergrad and are looking to use your SOP to explain this away. As previously discussed, faculty don't care whether your research experience came during or after undergrad, so I don't think that the lack of research experience from undergrad moved the needle either way for you. Without self-disclosing too much, I didn't have any research experience from undergrad, in large part due to several hardships, but I never mentioned anything about that in any SOP. I had substantial post-bacc research and clinical experience that helped me get several fully-funded offers after a couple of rounds of applying.

And as MCParent said, most applicants have some kind of marginalization or hardship in their backgrounds, that's often why they are interested in clinical psychology in the first place, but most aren't discussing it in their SOP. It's one thing if you are using this as part of a narrative to explain your research or clinical interests, as @borne_before so eloquently did, but otherwise it might come across as making excuses for why your CV doesn't measure up to other applicants. And if you have substantial research experience post-bacc, you're probably creating more problems than you're solving by using your SOP to do this.

 

[PsyDr]

I swear, it’s like you people have never seen tinder or QVC.

You don’t sell things by explaining away your product’s flaws. You sell things by outlining the unique features of your product, descriptions of how it meets your buyers needs, flattering euphemisms, and camera tricks to improve appearances.

 

[psych.meout]

I swear, it’s like you people have never seen tinder or QVC.

You don’t sell things by explaining away your product’s flaws. You sell things by outlining the unique features of your product, descriptions of how it meets your buyers needs, flattering euphemisms, and camera tricks to improve appearances.

But isn't explaining flaws or difficulties in your background like the black and white portions of infomercials when a person can't do basic tasks like use a sponge and laments "There's got to be a better way!" And in this instance, the better way is whatever your research interests are?

 

[PsyDr]

But isn't explaining flaws or difficulties in your background like the black and white portions of infomercials when a person can't do basic tasks like use a sponge and laments "There's got to be a better way!" And in this instance, the better way is whatever your research interests are?

But it is.

Those infomercials don’t say that the device is made out of cheap plastic. They show what they do.

let’s say you have a low quant score. You’re not going to sell this to a mathematical psych PhD.

But you might be able to sell your other achievements to a program with a qualitative bent or a psychodynamic thing. Or maybe you can identify PIs that have a similar background, and play up those similarities.

 

[Justanothergrad]

But it is.

Those infomercials don’t say that the device is made out of cheap plastic. They show what they do.

let’s say you have a low quant score. You’re not going to sell this to a mathematical psych PhD.

But you might be able to sell your other achievements to a program with a qualitative bent or a psychodynamic thing. Or maybe you can identify PIs that have a similar background, and play up those similarities.

100%.

 

[jdawg2017]

Thanks for the responses everyone. Sorry I wasn't as clear as I should have been in my OP, I was a bit tired when I posted. I'll qualify myself and I recognize I need to be mindful of the scope of what I can discuss in my SOP; if anything, I was most looking for advice on how to address the personal challenges as they impacted me in the very beginning. I know dragging it out and muddying the waters would not be advisable.

Unfortunately, pursuing an MA really isn't a viable option for me, especially anytime soon. Fortunately, I don't have any red flags in my CV and my GPA is quite solid. I am quite familiar with how the grad application process generally works, and I do have defined interests and specific programs/PIs in mind. I'm confident that a PhD is necessary for my professional goals (clinical forensic).

@borne_before, I appreciate your examples, they were illuminating. While my challenges aren't directly relevant to my research/applied interests, I have food for thought for framing my personal development, which is more than I had yesterday.

I've come to realize that even having a mentor that is actively engaged in getting you to the next step, or occupying a position in a lab that will ever see you as anything more than a grunt, can be a privilege. I've had to learn a bunch of things under my own steam (including in places such as this). I still wouldn't choose any other field.

I am coming in late here (not faculty, but a senior grad student who reads over apps for my lab and participates in interviews).

Maybe I am missing something from skimming the thread, but do you have any research experiences after undergrad, like working as an RA or CRC in a lab? If so, and especially if you have posters (and even better, pubs) on your CV, you are likely competitive for funded PhD programs. If not, then I understand this question of how to write about hardship and how it limited your extra-curricular opportunities in undergrad. Frankly, if you have no research experience at all, I would advise working for a few years in a lab full-time, ideally related to a topic you are interested in pursuing in grad school (at least loosely related).

Without disclosing too much, I asked several of my letter writers for grad school to peripherally talk about a hardship I had in undergrad and how they were surprised, etc. by my resilience, as evident by my involvement in other activities/work. If you have a good relationship with your current writers and you are comfortable, you should ask to meet to discuss your CV and mention your hardships to them. I agree with other people in this thread that our field is pretty crappy and often we value products over people and their life experiences, but I think letter writers can speak to your resilience if you do not feel like you can talk about these things in your SOP without significantly distracting from your successes. I like the QVC metaphor for the SOP -- sell in your SOP your strengths!

Hope this helps, OP!

 

[Skye18]

I am coming in late here (not faculty, but a senior grad student who reads over apps for my lab and participants in interviews).

Maybe I am missing something from skimming the thread, but do you have any research experiences after undergrad, like working as an RA or CRC in a lab? If so, and especially if you have posters (and even better, pubs) on your CV, you are likely competitive for funded PhD programs. If not, then I understand this question of how to write about hardship and how it limited your extra-curricular opportunities in undergrad. Frankly, if you have no research experience at all, I would advise working for a few years in a lab full-time, ideally related to a topic you are interested in pursuing in grad school (at least loosely related).

Without disclosing too much, I asked several of my letter writers for grad school to peripherally talk about a hardship I had in undergrad and how they were surprised, etc. by my resilience, as evident by my involvement in other activities/work. If you have a good relationship with your current writers and you are comfortable, you should ask to meet to discuss your CV and mention your hardships to them. I agree with other people in this thread that our field is pretty crappy and often we value products over people and their life experiences, but I think letter writers can speak to your resilience if you do not feel like you can talk about these things in your SOP without significantly distracting from your successes. I like the QVC metaphor for the SOP -- sell in your SOP your strengths!

Hope this helps, OP!

I've been involved in research since I graduated, will be almost two years in my current lab. The experience ended up being quite underwhelming, I was basically stuck returning to the same two tasks with very little variation. No posters, I'm supposed to get credit on a paper, but I'm not involved in the writing process and the whole thing has been extremely slow to materialize. I tried to push to be involved in more challenging tasks, but they ultimately weren't interested. I'm trying to start volunteering with another lab, although my options aren't looking great now. I've also been involved in separate clinical positions to a lesser degree, partially relevant to my clinical interests.

Granted, this isn't directly relevant to the primary point of my OP, but it has compounded my frustration. Perhaps if I had been able to do a thesis, had time to work towards certain awards or fellowships, apply for more competitive internships, had better mentorship, etc, I wouldn't be in the stagnant loop I'm in now. When you've been stuck in grunt work for so long, it's harder to convince others to allow you the space to branch out. For a field that is all about the human, I sure have met a lot of people who tend to forget the human.

Thanks for sharing your experience.

 

[psych.meout]

I've been involved in research since I graduated, will be almost two years in my current lab. The experience ended up being quite underwhelming, I was basically stuck returning to the same two tasks with very little variation. No posters, I'm supposed to get credit on a paper, but I'm not involved in the writing process and the whole thing has been extremely slow to materialize. I tried to push to be involved in more challenging tasks, but they ultimately weren't interested. I'm trying to start volunteering with another lab, although my options aren't looking great now. I've also been involved in separate clinical positions to a lesser degree, partially relevant to my clinical interests.

Granted, this isn't directly relevant to the primary point of my OP, but it has compounded my frustration. Perhaps if I had been able to do a thesis, had time to work towards certain awards or fellowships, apply for more competitive internships, had better mentorship, etc, I wouldn't be in the stagnant loop I'm in now. When you've been stuck in grunt work for so long, it's harder to convince others to allow you the space to branch out. For a field that is all about the human, I sure have met a lot of people who tend to forget the human.

Thanks for sharing your experience.

Wait, you have less than 2 years of research experience, applied last year when you had even a little more than a year of experience, and you're disappointed and feel like you're in a "stagnant loop?"

You're getting way ahead of yourself here and are fixated on what could have been and all the things that were in the way of that. Your lack of offers last time had nothing to do with your undergrad, you just didn't have enough experience when you applied. You're very likely not going to do yourself any favors or improve your competitiveness for grad school by using your SOP to make excuses for why you're applying without sufficient research experience. Yeah, it sucks having to spend more time out of undergrad getting research experience until you can start grad school, but this is very normal. It would be best to just accept that what happened has happened and focus on the present and what you can do to get more experience, cultivate relationships for LORs, and other things that will help you get into grad school.

 

[Skye18]

Wait, you have less than 2 years of research experience, applied last year when you had even a little more than a year of experience, and you're disappointed and feel like you're in a "stagnant loop?"

You're getting way ahead of yourself here and are fixated on what could have been and all the things that were in the way of that. Your lack of offers last time had nothing to do with your undergrad, you just didn't have enough experience when you applied. You're very likely not going to do yourself any favors or improve your competitiveness for grad school by using your SOP to make excuses for why you're applying without sufficient research experience. Yeah, it sucks having to spend more time out of undergrad getting research experience until you can start grad school, but this is very normal. It would be best to just accept that what happened has happened and focus on the present and what you can do to get more experience, cultivate relationships for LORs, and other things that will help you get into grad school.

Apologies if I've been unclear, or if it's simply been buried in the mess here, but I was involved in a couple labs for a few semesters in undergrad. All totaled, I had a bit over two years in research when I applied last year, plus the clinical time. When I was referring to "stagnant", I meant in regard to the accumulated 3+ years I have at this point, which have not opened as many doors as I had hoped. And yes, I do realize that framing myself as simply trying make excuses ultimately won't help.

 

[MidWestLass]

Apologies if I've been unclear, or if it's simply been buried in the mess here, but I was involved in a couple labs for a few semesters in undergrad. All totaled, I had a bit over two years in research when I applied last year, plus the clinical time. When I was referring to "stagnant", I meant in regard to the accumulated 3+ years I have at this point, which have not opened as many doors as I had hoped. And yes, I do realize that framing myself as simply trying make excuses ultimately won't help.

This sounds like less of a dealbreaker. It seemed like you were talking around your research experience which suggested that maybe you had very little. I definitely think explaining away will do you a disservice. Highlight your work and strengths, speak about the projects you've worked on thoughtfully, as well as your research interests and fit. Maybe you won't get into UCLA or Berkeley, but I think you can be competitive for more balanced programs, or even a funded PsyD program. Be flexible about location, as well.