Has anyone here been accepted into a PhD program without significant research experience?

[Meteora]

x

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[GoPokes]

Spent like a year and a half on a research team. Only one poster, and I wasn't even first author. Still got in to a fully funded PhD program.

 

[Meteora]

Spent like a year and a half on a research team. Only one poster, and I wasn't even first author. Still got in to a fully funded PhD program.

Wow, so it is...possible!? May I possibly inquire on what some of your other stats were that aided in your admission into a program, or what factors you think really helped you?

Another thing that I am worried about is that my approach to volunteering/supplemental experience has always been to stay at one place for a while and try to contribute as much as I can. I could never be that person who worked in 2 labs at the same time while volunteering at a hospital and also doing a crisis hotline etc. In addition to my classes, half my time is spent at a research lab on campus and the other half at a clinic. I work hard at both of those places, but I wonder if not having more experiences at different places will hurt my chances.

 

[GoPokes]

Wow, so it is...possible!? May I possibly inquire on what some of your other stats were that aided in your admission into a program, or what factors you think really helped you?

Another thing that I am worried about is that my approach to volunteering/supplemental experience has always been to stay at one place for a while and try to contribute as much as I can. I could never be that person who worked in 2 labs at the same time while volunteering at a hospital and also doing a crisis hotline etc. In addition to my classes, half my time is spent at a research lab on campus and the other half at a clinic. I work hard at both of those places, but I wonder if not having more experiences at different places will hurt my chances.

Sure, feel free to PM me. Would rather not post all of that publicly.

 

[AcronymAllergy]

I had two years' worth of research experience (simultaneously in two labs) with no posters or publications and ended up landing an offer at a funded clinical Ph.D. program. My other stats weren't particularly staggering, either--3.4-ish GPA and mid-1300's GRE (the latter of which did help a bit). Apparently my then-POI just really liked my personal statement.

 

[Ollie123]

If the experience was high quality, I don't think this should be an absolute barrier to you. I assume you aren't looking at extremely research-heavy programs anyways - that is where you may run into issues in that regard. Even my clinical science program routinely accepted some outstanding candidates who didn't have any posters/pubs. I think I was 3rd of 4 authors on one regional conference presentation (and the presentation was about a student organization and wasn't even science-based) when applying and that was it. Still got into a clinical science program (admittedly now almost a decade ago). Its likely even less of an issue at less research heavy institutions (where I assume you will be looking given your goals).

Either way, don't let anxiety drive major decisions about your career/life path. Same advice I'd give a patient. I think its responsible for a lot of the bad decisions we see on this board ("I'll never get in, so let me just apply to the schools that accept everyone"). Worst case scenario - you don't get in the first round and have to apply again a year later. Whoopdee doo. The world won't end and you can adjust your goals downward as needed or build experience to be more competitive the year after.

 

[Justanothergrad]

It all depends on the program. More research intensive programs will be less likely to admit folks without research experience, but its not impossible and it still regularly happens. Those folks offer something else.

 

[Sendtrees]

OP, your anxiety is totally understandable given how competitive funded PhD programs are, but it sounds like you have a reasonable chance. More people than we realize apply to these programs with no research experience at all--they are probably not serious competition for you. When I was applying, I made sure to have at least a year in a research lab, but it was only a year, and it was a qualitative research lab at a small university. I think I got interviews in large part because of my personal statement and other written materials that accompanied each application. I worked hard to match myself to every single lab I applied to, which of course meant more work. (To be honest, my undergrad institution probably helped a lot--it's one of those that everyone has heard of and impresses people far more than it probably should!)

It seems like it's all over but the anxiety--you have done the work and you're planning to apply to good programs. Unless the anxiety motivates you to put more effort into each application, it doesn't serve you now. You can't do anything about your competition or where the field is, so just try to let go of some of those things you can't control.

 

[DynamicDidactic]

OP, the whole of your application is the most important. If you have good grades, good GREs, supportive letters, well thought out and written personal state, and research experience, but no posters then you will be ahead of 50% of applicants.

As other said, the top tier research places may not work out but many fully funded PhDs will be interested. In a case like this, you really want to make sure that your letter writers are impressed by your work.

However, you still have plenty of time to put together a poster. Remember, local conference by your local Psych Ass or a school conference would be fine.

 

[SharkBait13]

Last year, I felt very much the same as you did (and I only had my BA). Previously, I had spent a year and a half as a "lab assistant" (all I did was code), and helped out on two other projects with two other professors. When I turned in my apps last year, I had no posters, publications, or presentations at that point. I also had no clinical experience, unless you count 8 months working with an autistic student through our local school district.

Yet I still managed to get four offers to fully funded doctoral programs (three PhD: one clinical, two counseling, as well as a funded PsyD).

I definitely remember feeling super outgunned by others' credentials in this forum. However, I think my biggest strength was the amount of time I spent researching the application process, which was around 5 months (started in july) while only working part time, so it was basically my full time job. I applied to twenty schools and each app was specific to the program for the most part.

With that, it wasn't so much that my research experience was solid, it was how I wrote about it. With that, I did not inflate my experience or BS at all, but spent much time trying to translate what I actually did (mostly menial work) into things I learned that actually apply to the research process (which I did learn much, though I did not actually produce a whole lot).

Come interviews, I remember being up against applicants with several publications, years of masters-level clinical experience, etc.. The looked way better on paper, I'm sure. Yet here I am, and the fact that I got 4 acceptances means it wasn't a fluke. So you totally have hope!

PM me if you want to compare credentials, I guarantee you've likely got me outgunned

 

[smalltownpsych]

I just wanted to add that the people with

years of masters-level clinical experience

might not be as appealing to a doctoral program as a person without much clinical experience. We had one person who fit that description in our cohort and they were pretty frustrating at times because they "already knew it". They were also a big advocate of EMDR and no one could squelch that notion either.

 

[Meteora]

x

 

[EmotRegulation]

Faculty member here. It is typical to squelch your *talking* about wanting to be a therapist for most programs. Don't worry, it's not like we don't know that the modal career outcome is clinical. It's just that we don't want to take students who will moan and groan about doing research while in school or about learning the evidence base. There ARE programs that want primarily research focused students--those are Clinical Science programs, and they don't sound like the right fit for you. But it does make sense to focus on your research experience and what you'd like to learn about (study) in-depth while in graduate school.

Also, we got a LOT of applicants from people who don't have posters or publications. We also get a lot of applications from people who've never worked in a research lab. Students with posters and pubs stand out, but good applicants without conference or publication experience absolutely get offers.

 

[smalltownpsych]

Is this true (and something that could be generalized to most doctoral programs)? It is a real shame, because I am rather proud of the clinical exposure I've received through my volunteering. It's had a very strong effect on my understanding of certain disorders, and only reaffirmed the importance of evidence-based therapy for me (and thus the value of being able to produce and synthesize research as it will inform my clinical work).

That is actually a topic I've been worried about. In applying to PhD programs, the consensus from what it seems is that I should spend the majority of my application talking about my research experience and should not at all mention that my main goal is to be a therapist.

You misunderstood my point. I was commenting on how someone with lots of experience can often be difficult to train. Most balanced programs understand that they will be training clinicians more than researchers so you don't have to hide that, but research is a core competency. That is why psychologists are aware that the current best evidence on EMDR points to the eye movements not being additive to the effects of exposure therapy.

 

[SharkBait13]

You misunderstood my point. I was commenting on how someone with lots of experience can often be difficult to train. Most balanced programs understand that they will be training clinicians more than researchers so you don't have to hide that, but research is a core competency. That is why psychologists are aware that the current best evidence on EMDR points to the eye movements not being additive to the effects of exposure therapy.

I know this isn't the main topic of this thread, but I'd love to hear more about this. Most practitioners, teachers, and trainees I have encountered seem to hold such differing opinions on this, and I'd love some clarity on the topic. Can you recommend a few articles about this?

 

[deleted343839]

We had one person who fit that description in our cohort and they were pretty frustrating at times because they "already knew it". They were also a big advocate of EMDR and no one could squelch that notion either.

Excellent point! It's much easier to train than to un-train!

 

[WisNeuro]

I know this isn't the main topic of this thread, but I'd love to hear more about this. Most practitioners, teachers, and trainees I have encountered seem to hold such differing opinions on this, and I'd love some clarity on the topic. Can you recommend a few articles about this?

There are 3 or 4 prior threads on this. I'd poke around there, some may have some citations. Specifically, I'd check out McNally's and Acierno's critiques.

 

[smalltownpsych]

Here is one study I found http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16382428 At this point the burden of proof is on the EMDR people to show that the eye movements improve outcomes over other forms of exposure therapy.

 

[SharkBait13]

Thanks guys!

 

[ayerhead]

I'm struggling with this as well, as I went the MA route and received a few years practicing as a therapist. I'm now ready to continue my education and am feeling daunted by my complete lack of research experience (and now the thought that my clinical experience might be seen as a negative is rather overwhelming).

 

[SharkBait13]

I'm struggling with this as well, as I went the MA route and received a few years practicing as a therapist. I'm now ready to continue my education and am feeling daunted by my complete lack of research experience (and now the thought that my clinical experience might be seen as a negative is rather overwhelming).

I wouldn't see it as a negative by any means, at least for our program. You are evaluated according to your experiences during our interviews. I interviewed with MA holders and felt daunted when they had much clinical experience to talk about (while I sat there with only a BA feeling dumb). As long as you don't act like a know-it-all and give off a teachable vibe, I'm sure you're fine.

 

[clinpsyc87]

Counseling psych PhD programs are much more amenable to training someone without existing research exp