PhD/PsyD Is my Profile Competitive for PhD in clinical?

[Justaguystudying]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Hi everyone y'all, hope you're doing well.

I'm hoping to apply next year, and wanted to know if I've got a good shot at clinical psych programs. I'm interested in clinical affective neuroscience, and behavioral medicine.

My current stats/experiences:

• 3.9x cgpa/4.1x psych gpa from an r1/ivy (and cum laude if that matters with a couple of other misc graduating awards)
• 3.5 years (or approximately 4800 hours) of research experience
  • 2 RA positions during undergrad (1.5 years)
    • Psychophysiology experiments (qualtrics, R, data analysis/cleaning, etc, non-clinical though).
    • social psych/justice related research
  • Full time clinical research coordinator (2 years) position at a competitive school on west coast:
    • running experiments, designing studies, IRB, analysis, etc.
    • My PI is great and gives me many opportunities to take the lead on my own projects.
    • I should have a few second/third authors and maybe even a 1st before applying but the 1st author is still a maybe
    • The research area is clinical affective neuroscience for helping medical patients cope with difficult disorders through a myriad of typical and alternative treatments + determining risk and resilience factors for adverse outcomes. (I LOVE IT).
• Clinical/Misc experiences
  • Worked in an intensive out patient clinic for ~ 2 years during undergrad. Got to do way more than I would have ever thought as an undergrad.
  • Teacher for people with dev differences
  • EMT-B (wanted to rule out medicine as a career choice. I actually loved it, but see myself more in the research domain)
  • Medical assistant

I'm curious if this profile is competitive enough to get into a program? I have some in mind that seem like a good fit, but I don't want to apply too early if I'm jumping the gun. What do ya think?

Thanks y'all I really appreciate it.

 

[Ollie123]

Short answer - Definitely yes.
Slightly longer answer - The further I get in the field, the more I realize luck is a factor in many ways (admissions, papers, grants, study outcomes). If you do NOT get in, do not take that as a sign you are not competitive, just unlucky. You never know what you are up against - unfair as it may seem, many labs may have current staff members applying to their graduate programs, all-stars from collaborating labs, etc. in any given year. You just never know. Keep doing what you're doing though and you'll get in.

 

[Justaguystudying]

Short answer - Definitely yes.
Slightly longer answer - The further I get in the field, the more I realize luck is a factor in many ways (admissions, papers, grants, study outcomes). If you do NOT get in, do not take that as a sign you are not competitive, just unlucky. You never know what you are up against - unfair as it may seem, many labs may have current staff members applying to their graduate programs, all-stars from collaborating labs, etc. in any given year. You just never know. Keep doing what you're doing though and you'll get in.

Thank you for your thoughtful response. The "luck factor" is in many ways an unsettling reality, but I can also see how important it is to be accepting of its existence. I feel like I have tried pretty hard for this dream, so I really appreciate the encouragement, and your observations of the field.

 

[Doctor Eliza]

Agree that you are competitive and it will be up to fit and luck. Don't do something to shoot yourself in the foot like being really picky about location or only applying to a small number of programs.

Also, I am curious: How did you get a 4.1 GPA? Isn't GPA usually out of 4?

 

[futureapppsy2]

Short answer - Definitely yes.
Slightly longer answer - The further I get in the field, the more I realize luck is a factor in many ways (admissions, papers, grants, study outcomes). If you do NOT get in, do not take that as a sign you are not competitive, just unlucky. You never know what you are up against - unfair as it may seem, many labs may have current staff members applying to their graduate programs, all-stars from collaborating labs, etc. in any given year. You just never know. Keep doing what you're doing though and you'll get in.

A mentor of mine said that grant apps are like a card game--skill is a lot of it but so is luck.

 

[futureapppsy2]

Agree that you are competitive and it will be up to fit and luck. Don't do something to shoot yourself in the foot like being really picky about location or only applying to a small number of programs.

Also, I am curious: How did you get a 4.1 GPA? Isn't GPA usually out of 4?

Some schools give 4.3 for A+'s.

 

[Justaguystudying]

Some schools give 4.3 for A+'s.

This. I actually had a lower GPA for the first half of school (difficult life circumstances + getting used to school) but then completed my last two years with A+s/As

 

[Ollie123]

A mentor of mine said that grant apps are like a card game--skill is a lot of it but so is luck.

I would agree with that. Skill drives average performance and gets you in the game, but it is skill + luck determines whether you "win" for any given submission. There are occasional exceptions (i.e., I've seen objectively bad grants do well because of generous reviews) but that is extremely rare. The grant review process is generally good at binning applications into roughly upper, middle and lower thirds, but I don't think anyone believes it is refined enough to reliably parse the 8th percentile from the 12th percentile and that is usually enough to dictate funding in the current climate.

I feel similarly about papers, at least at top-tier general journals (Nature/Science/JAMA). The work has to pass a certain threshold to even be in the running, but even once it does it all boils down to who happens to agree to review it (and how thoroughly they review it.....and their mood when they review it....etc.).

This is why I tell my trainees persistence is probably the #1 most important trait they need to possess to succeed in academia. It feels yucky to say, but luck plays enough of a factor in outcomes of all kinds that if you are the sort to give up quickly....you aren't gonna make it.

 

[cotn_psych]

You'd be well served going to a conference or two this year to meet potential mentors and network. You don't need to be aggressive about the networking, but just go to some talks, meet some of their grad students for a vibe check and put a face to your name. Go with your PI and ask them to introduce you to a couple of potential mentors. This will make it easier to connect your application later and you'll have something to follow up on when you apply or interview.

 

[R. Matey]

This is why I tell my trainees persistence is probably the #1 most important trait they need to possess to succeed in academia. It feels yucky to say, but luck plays enough of a factor in outcomes of all kinds that if you are the sort to give up quickly....you aren't gonna make it.

Years ago, before I went to graduate school for psychology, I went to a motivational interviewing training that was given by William Miller. I remember he said that the "P" in "PhD" stood for persistence and that really resonated with me. I had a lot of doubts about whether I could actually get a PhD, but I knew that I could be persistent.