Is it just a crapshoot? How to really stand out...

[psychmusic]

---

Members don't see this ad.

.

 

[AcronymAllergy]

Honestly, I do think part of it is a bit of a crapshoot. As you mentioned, some programs might get you past the initial "cut," but then toss you if you don't have at least a poster. At the same time, with others, you might make it to the interview stage and beyond.

I can provide my personal experience, as my credentials were similar to yours, and hope that it provides some insight. I had a middle-of-the-field (~3.5) undergrad GPA, above-average (mid-1300's) GRE, two years in a cognitive psych lab and (concurrently) one year in a clinical lab with no pubs/presentations/posters. I didn't receive any interview offers my first year after applying to somewhere around 5 programs, so the next year, I applied to 12-15, got 3 interviews, and eventually received one offer.

In terms of what I heard from my then-future advisor, the GRE essentially got my app onto his desk/to his team to review. After that, I'm almost positive it was solely my personal statement that got me the interview (he quoted phrases from it to me years later in various contexts), and my consistent contact with him via email afterward that got eventually got me an offer.

Don't take that last part to mean that it's ok to incessantly bug your POIs. However, persistence is generally a good trait to exhibit, and you never know what might be possible unless you ask.

 

[heshmonster]

This is my first time applying, and I got into my top choice program. I had all the usual credentials (honours degree/thesis, 3.9 GPA, 95% percentile psych GRE, high verbal/writing, conference lecture and two poster presentations, a short publication in a small journal, etc.), but the thing that really made me stand out to my chosen POI is that I took the time, early, to email him, express interest, maintain a rich, and fruitful dialogue, and eventually, I actually flew out to Montreal to meet him, and talk with his graduate students. Then when application time came, I had already essentially interviewed with him and his grad students and made a good impression, and not surpisingly, he recommended me for admission, and I was admitted a week later.

So, though I agree that most of it is a crapshoot (since most applicants have a great CV), and there are, unfortunately, a number of factors always beyond the applicant's control (like if their supervisor is on the list to receive a student, how many people apply that year, funding issues, etc.), there are things you can do. Stand out to your POI. Demonstrate your ability to think at a high level in his/her area, and without becoming sycophantic, stay in touch and repeatedly emphasize your interest and passion for that field of research. For me, that's what got me in despite my poor GRE quant GRE and stats grades. There are ways to stand out to a supervisor and department despite having a CV that is similar to all the other applicants.

my $0.02

 

[psychmusic]

.

 

[AcronymAllergy]

I really appreciate your input. My problem really is that I feel like I've really worked hard over the past few years, and it just might not be enough. I'm sure there are ways to go above and beyond in order to make myself stand out, but it's obviously not realistic to do that for every program I apply to, and if I don't make the cut at those that I do make the effort for, it was ultimately a waste of time.

I think in the end, though, I'm really just complaining and feeling sorry for myself.

Understandable; we've almost all had similar thoughts, I'd imagine. At the very least, as heshmonster suggested, email POIs early on to briefly introduce yourself, say you're considering applying to their university and would be very interested in working with them due to their research in X/Y/Z, and ask if they're planning on taking students in the coming applications cycle.

 

[psychmusic]

.

 

[heshmonster]

I emailed my POI in October of my junior year ... a full year and a bit before application season. I then flew to Montreal to meet him the following summer, about 6-7 months before applications.

It's really never too early to start a dialogue with the people you hope to be working with in the future. Bright students who can sustain an insightful and meaningful conversation about the topic at hand over email, will certainly stand out come decision time.

 

[animaladvocate]

but the thing that really made me stand out to my chosen POI is that I took the time, early, to email him, express interest, maintain a rich, and fruitful dialogue, and eventually, I actually flew out to Montreal to meet him, and talk with his graduate students. Then when application time came, I had already essentially interviewed with him and his grad students and made a good impression, and not surpisingly, he recommended me for admission

I was in a similar situation/this is also my first time applying. I e-mailed my POI early on, met with him in person and spoke to one of his graduate students before I even applied to the program. I made sure to express to both of them why I was interested in their research, how I would be a good contribution to the lab and why I was going into clinical psychology. This was also how I wrote my statement of interest.

When I did submit my application, I followed up with my POI a few times, had already essentially interviewed, and 6 months later, received an offer of admission w/ full funding.

Don't give up if you didn't get in this round, lots of people don't get in their first time.

 

[lava12345]

I've been perusing these boards for the past few months, and I've come to one real conclusion- for me (and many others like me I'm sure) applying to clinical PhD programs is going to be a total crapshoot.

I have passable research credentials (two years in a lab working on memory, one year working at a medical school in drug addiction, no pubs), but none of my experience directly relates to what I hope to pursue (clinical neuropsych), apart from general techniques and theoretical approahces. My GPA is great, and my GRE will hopefully be fairly good.

The issue then, is how to stand out in a field where applications with credentials less than mine are often eliminated without serious consideration. It feels like any admissions group that receives my application will have fifteen more that are as good or better, and I just can't think of any ways to stand out at this point (second semester Junior).

Perhaps this belongs more in the WAMC thread, but I think that it merits some discussion. It is difficult to justify pursuing a field that may require two years post-undergrad as a research assistant, only to face an even more stressful application process once I actually make it through grad-school. Clinical psychology is a career I have planned on pursuing since my early teens, and any other career would simply be settling or going after money, but right now it just seems as if the years of repeated applications and stress may not be worth it after all.

I agree with all of the above. However, I am also amazed at the inappropriate/awkward/rude things applicants will do on interview day! A good interview can truly put someone who barely squeaked out an invite to the top of the pile.

 

[StellaB]

When I started my application process about 10 months ago, I felt a bit hopeless. I went to a tiny liberal arts college no one has heard of to finish my undergrad degree as an adult student (read: nights and weekends school). There were no professors conducting research, and although I ran my own study for an experimental psych class, that was the extend of my actual research experience. I was basically clueless about how to get in to grad school, or what would be involved. I also thought I'd probably go the MFT route and so I wasn't really worried about it. Then I realized that while I love therapy, it's boring to do 24/7, and it burns you out. Plus, no one watches you do it - professionally, it's very isolating. I thought more and more about the research I did for that one undergrad class and I realized how much I loved it... and that I really wanted to pursue a PhD after all.
Immediately I got involved in 2 volunteer opportunities (not suicide hotline, but stuff that would be more interesting and stand out more) - working with foster youth and another one working with inmates at a local state prison. I started conducting research with a sociology prof at my alma mater - yes, not psychology, but none of the psych profs were researching, and so be it! The most important thing was to brush up my skills, make sure this is what I want to do, and get busy in the field.
Next step: JOURNAL. I thought a lot and wrote a lot about what I loved in my paraprofessional counseling work, and in the research. Then I wrote about 100 copies of my statement of purpose.
Next step: RESEARCH PROGRAMS. I must have read everything I could find on any program that seemed even remotely on the right wavelength with my experiences and what I want to do in the future. I made a gigantic spreadsheet. I made notes on how they synched up with my experiences and interests. In some cases I contacted professors, but not in all.
Then just WRITE FOREVER. More and more copies of the SOP. I wrote a unique one for each school, so that the entire flow hooked into my interests and fit with their program, not just the obligatory final paragraph. Have your friends and coworkers edit it, and just be brutal to yourself. This is the writing process. 3 pages is precious little space to convey yourself. Have a hook. Be interesting. Tell a story. Sell yourself. In two of my SOP's my hook was the story of how I got kicked out of my private high school. Both of the schools who got that version accepted me.
In the end, I applied to 5 schools and got 2 acceptances with funding. I knew applying to only 5 was a crapshoot and a real gamble - so I made sure they were 5 realistic opportunities. Also, these were to schools that are 3's and 4's on the research scale, so take my advice with that in mind.

The moral of the story? You can totally do it. If it has to be a crapshoot - and it does - make sure it's a calculated one! Good luck.

 

[psychRA]

Everything that's been said is great advice. With that being said, don't panic if you're not the typical applicant, or you haven't followed all of the usual suggestions. I ended up with a handful of offers. I had a low GPA (3.3) but a good GRE. I had a bunch of posters and a couple of non-1st authored pubs, but I didn't contact a single POI before the interviews, and I didn't stay in touch with them afterwards, either. I had some post-college lab experience, and I believe that I interview well, but I really think that luck plays a large role in this process. Definitely do everything you can to be a strong applicant, but also be realistic about the amount of control anyone really has over the process - you can drive yourself crazy otherwise!

 

[paramour]

I agree with all of the above. However, I am also amazed at the inappropriate/awkward/rude things applicants will do on interview day! A good interview can truly put someone who barely squeaked out an invite to the top of the pile.

+1. People complain about the number of applicants that some professors/programs invite, but we've had some truly atrocious folks show up to our interviews. Some were simply poor fit after they showed up and didn't belong there due to their research interests; they couldn't carry on a conversation based upon the profs' research that they had expressed undying devotion & affection for at the time of applying (just to squeeze an invite out of them). Some were poor fit for the lab due to interpersonal issues (I'm not going into all of those varied issues 😉). And then the folks who thought that it would be perfectly acceptable to show a leg, a breast, or even their undergarmentless crotch (Sharon Stone anyone?)... who thought it acceptable to overshadow and one-up other applicants at each & every opportunity... who thought it A-OK to kick their student hosts' cat... who thought it fine to get drunk (and then some)... I can see why some folks invite more than a couple folks when you have MULTIPLE folks like this in a group. 🙄 Some of those folks who look oh, so grand on paper were sent to the bottom of the pile after interviews.

Don't be one of these folks. And be nice to your grad students--You never know what role they have in the interview process (and we may "have our say" in those we think have better/worse fit for our labs).

 

[psychmusic]

To be honest, I'll be ecstatic just to get an interview the first time around, never mind worrying about embarrassing myself once I'm there

 

[CheetahGirl]

I don't think it is a crapshoot at all. Perseverance is key

In addition to others' comments, one awesome way to stand out is your personal statement. If you are a junior in undergrad, then you have time to build upon your uniqueness. One of the best experiences I had was my two years as a VOLUNTEER rape crisis counselor. I emphasize 'volunteer' because I spent my spare time in emergency rooms at 3am to do this work without pay. The actual commitment was not bad (after training and State Certification, you had to be 'on call' two nights per month & could pick up more shifts if available). This experience was pivotal in my interviews. (I'm near completion of a clinical psychologyPhD.) Look into volunteer opportunities. A couple of friends (who are in clinical psychology PhD/PsyD programs) did the same or volunteered for suicide hotlines. The training is usually intense, but it helps develop maturity, empathy, and compassion. All valuable traits that interviewers want to see when they meet their applicants.

Good luck!

 

[psychmusic]

Sounds like a good idea to me. Last summer I tried to volunteer at a suicide hotline, but they really didn't need me so they just asked me to make a brochure and the commitment stopped there. This summer I may have a few weeks off after school ends and before work starts, so I'm going to try to volunteer at a neuro-rehab center near my house. As you mentioned, though, sometimes the training process can be rather involved, and it may not be worth it given I could only commit for a month at most.