My Dean Says......

[classof2011]

---

Members don't see this ad.

Hello All,

Today I got an email from my dean addressing some concern over the lack of interview invites held by many (very appropriately competitive) applicants in all specialties. The consensus (by many deans) is that applicants are holding on to more invitations this year than normal. And as a result, many who would have normally been invited by "second pass of invites" have not received interviews at programs they would have otherwise been expecting. Apparently there is a very interesting gap among applicants where some are holding about 20 invitations and others hold as little as 5. I understand how this could be very stressful at this date.


Maybe you guys can help me understand this a bit more: it seems like us applicants are under an (unproven) belief that "everything is getting sooo much more competitive" and we are applying to a greater number of programs and (even worse) hording more invitations. And in order for this to be perpetuated, programs must be overestimating themselves, becoming more "selective" in attempts to draw in better than what they are appropriately competitive for (at this point).

I wonder how this plays out on match day: Will programs go unfilled?


Not too long ago I asked a fellow psych applicant the number of interviews they planned to attend; the answer was 15 (she was holding 18).....😱....just last year 96% of AMGs matched with anything more than 4 programs on their ROL....

So what exactly lends itself to the new idea that everything is "more competitive" and must hold on for dear life (or dear 20 interviews) to have a STABLE shot at matching at all? This does not seem to be the case in previous years.

I do wonder if this is related to the record breaking lack of spots to scramble into last year. However, this would only reflect the increasing number of applications from FMGs and independent applicants which appear irrelevant to the competitiveness of AMGs (by reason of preference).

Today I canceled 3 interviews....I am guilty of being a participant but (apparently) not nearly as bad as others..

 

[wannabeOBGYN]

Hello All,

Today I got an email from my dean addressing some concern over the lack of interview invites held by many (very appropriately competitive) applicants in all specialties. The consensus (by many deans) is that applicants are holding on to more invitations this year than normal. And as a result, many who would have normally been invited by "second pass of invites" have not received interviews at programs they would have otherwise been expecting. Apparently there is a very interesting gap among applicants where some are holding about 20 invitations and others hold as little as 5. I understand how this could be very stressful at this date.


Maybe you guys can help me understand this a bit more: it seems like us applicants are under an (unproven) belief that "everything is getting sooo much more competitive" and we are applying to a greater number of programs and (even worse) hording more invitations. And in order for this to be perpetuated, programs must be overestimating themselves, becoming more "selective" in attempts to draw in better than what they are appropriately competitive for (at this point).

I wonder how this plays out on match day: Will programs go unfilled?


Not too long ago I asked a fellow psych applicant the number of interviews they planned to attend; the answer was 15 (she was holding 18).....😱....just last year 96% of AMGs matched with anything more than 4 programs on their ROL....

So what exactly lends itself to the new idea that everything is "more competitive" and must hold on for dear life (or dear 20 interviews) to have a STABLE shot at matching at all? This does not seem to be the case in previous years.

I do wonder if this is related to the record breaking lack of spots to scramble into last year. However, this would only reflect the increasing number of applications from FMGs and independent applicants which appear irrelevant to the competitiveness of AMGs (by reason of preference).

Today I canceled 3 interviews....I am guilty of being a participant but (apparently) not nearly as bad as others..

This seems to be the case in many specialties. I have met a lot of students applying to ridiculously high numbers of ob/gyn programs and have heard from multiple coordinators that their applications are way up from last year (some had as many as 100-150 more this year). One coordinator said that students in the past applied to an average of 20-25 programs for ob/gyn and this year it seems to be closer to the mid-30s. I know of students interviewing at anywhere from 5 to 18 or more places, and most people have no intention of canceling any interviews anytime soon. The most frustrating part of this is that I'm sure many of them will decide at the last minute not to go to interviews, which screws everyone who's waiting, since most coordinators won't offer an interview the day before. Anyway, just wanted to give my 2 cents since the issue is more widespread than I thought.

 

[classof2011]

But makes it very interesting because if what you say is true, the more "mid tier competitive" applicants will be good enough to match into programs that they have been able to consider, and more competitive programs (who are assumed to be offering spots to the more competitive bunch) will be offering interviews (later in the game) to those even less competitive than the mid tier bunch and hence be in a position to rank them (and for many, will match)....the more stellar applicants will not be big enough pool to fill the competitive programs and the mid tier applicants will fill any program lower to play the hand that was given...such a phemenomen causes a shake in bake in the match. Very interesting...

At this point, I highly doubt I'll accept any other interviews that may come to me. I already have my eyes set on many that I would love to attend.....accepting more would cause unnecessary stress as I become forced to consider what may be another (great) program....call me lazy but I'd much rather focus on the ones I've already been salivating/crushing over rather than figure out how to add another one to the list.

I already feel like how most other applicants are projected to feel a month from now: SCREW THIS! lol...

 

[Saluki]

It's a tricky issue.....

When I applied the professors in the psychiatry department that I spoke with all said that I had an incredible application and that I would get interviews everywhere I applied. My academic advisor warned me that everything has gotten much more competitive in the past couple years, and I should apply broadly. So because of his recommendation and because I'm a nervous Nelly, I applied to a bunch of programs.

And my advisor was right. Of my top ten or twelve choices before I started the application trail, I've only gotten interviews at about half.

Obviously I don't want to just interview at five or six places, but I still could follow the conventional psychiatry application wisdom that eight or nine interviews is enough. But after the initial predictions about the competitiveness of my application proved wrong in this year's application pool, I'm nervous about following the conventional wisdom on the number of interviews....

Maybe I'll match at my first choice and feel really dumb about how many interviews I did, but better that than feeling dumb about not doing enough when I'm participating in the scramble.

 

[Saluki]

As if to drive home the point, I just received a rejection email from another one of my original top choices.....🙁

 

[classof2011]

I hear you....and totally agree with your last statement.

I didn't get many (expected) interviews even though I was deemed "one of the more competitive applicants" by my advisers...

The theory is that there are applicants that are even better than I am applying to and going on many more interviews than they would have in the past, and hence building a picture of "pseudo-competition"... Whats interesting is that there may not be enough "more competitive" applicants to fill the number of spots by programs and they will most likely have to go farther down their ROL to fill.

( However it may be the case there are simply many more competitive applicants for psychiatry this year, doubt it though....)

 

[psych]

I hear you....and totally agree with your last statement.

I didn't get many (expected) interviews even though I was deemed "one of the more competitive applicants" by my advisers...

The theory is that there are applicants that are even better than I am applying to and going on many more interviews than they would have in the past, and hence building a picture of "pseudo-competition"... Whats interesting is that there may not be enough "more competitive" applicants to fill the number of spots by programs and they will most likely have to go farther down their ROL to fill.

( However it may be the case there are simply many more competitive applicants for psychiatry this year, doubt it though....)

I hear ya. I was told I could go ANYWHERE. Yet I'm waitlisted @ my #1 and my number 2 has given me the silent treatment. I had to call my #3 and beg for an interview and luckily a spot opened up for me there. Very frustrating to get a false sense of confidence from my mentors though. Quite humbling...

 

[Saluki]

I feel a little ungrateful complaining. I have interviews at some incredible places, including my original top choice....

But the difference between predictions and reality has shaken my confidence.... And thus I continue on the interview trail.... 😛

 

[digitlnoize]

I am certainly guilty of doing more interviews than probably needed. That being said, I am a DO student, with a mediocre step 1 (but great everything else, I think)...and I have my family to think about, so I'm not taking any chances with not matching.

I definitely got more invites than I expected to get, and declined many immediately. Now, I've had some trouble deciding who to cancel of my remaining interviews. Working on that now. I've done 7 so far, and have 11 scheduled remaining. Of those 11 remaining, I'm probably canceling 4-5 of those in the next few days...just trying to figure out which ones.

This would leave me with 7+6=13 or so interviews performed. Of those 13, I know of at least one program I'm not ranking, leaving me with 12. Which I think is a safe number. I've read the match stats, and I know that statistically, I probably don't NEED more than 5 programs. That being said, this is my life and my family's lives we're playing with here, and I'm not willing to risk that just to save my self a few miles of driving.

I can identify a number of things contributing to the increased number of applications:

1. Applicants are becoming more educated about how the match process works. We have learned that there is no penalty to ranking more places, thus are willing to interview more places to have a increased chance of matching.

2. Application fees are too low. I think it cost me ~$300 to apply to my 25-30 or so programs. Something like that. Not sure exactly. Regardless, it was a drop in the bucket compared to what I've spent so far. When applying to medical school, I was much more limited due to cost of secondaries (~$100 each racks up fast). If we want to decrease the "apply everywhere" phenomenon, increasing app fees would do it. Please, no secondaries. Ugh.

3. Increased influx of applicants. Tons of new DO schools have classes now entering the match. I think there are some new MD schools in this year too. Plus an increased number of FMG's each year = lots of extra students.

4. Increased applicant paranoia. I think this is actually happening. We've seen some very strange things happening in the match recently. Many people are applying to more backup specialties (which may be some of our difficulty in psych...some of "our" interview spots may be being stolen by, say, ortho applicants who just want a backup.

5. Increased strength/homogeneity of programs. This is actually a good thing. I know that I, personally, have had a hard time deciding which programs to cancel, simply because there are SO many great programs out there. I'm having serious trouble finding "reasons" to cancel a program. Is it enough for me to cancel, say, U Vermont, simply because I don't like the cold that much? By all accounts it's a great program, Burlington is a great small town, and every season that's NOT winter is awesome there. Why SHOULD I cancel it? For example.

I'm not sure what's up with the lack of interview offers for some people. I just roomed with some EM residents who had VERY few invites. One MD student had 1, 2 other DO students had 4-5 each. All had EM-applying friends who only had 1-2 invites. Then again, I have 2 classmates doing the couples match who have 10 EM invites each. WTF is going on?!? I have no idea.

Why was I so successful in getting invites? I have no idea, honestly. I wasn't expecting it, or I probably wouldn't have applied to 30 places. I know I have some great psych LORs, a well-written personal statement (if I do say so myself), some unique life experience, and a pretty decent COMLEX Step 2. But, I didn't take USMLE, I sucked at COMLEX 1 (stress mostly), and I was a very average basic science student with good clinical grades. I did 2 psych rotations 3rd year, and a few more electives 4th year (that weren't listed on my app.) I thought that if I was lucky, some places, who were willing to look past my mediocre step 1 score, and my "DO status" (lol), would actually read my PS and my LORs and deem me a decent applicant. I wasn't expecting that to actually happen though, but that's all I can figure, because if you look at the "SDN numbers", I am not a stellar applicant

I've talked about this with some places, with varying answers. One place said they liked to see a strong Step 2 score more than Step 1. Another said they wanted to have a talent show next year and I play guitar, so it'd be great to have me. Hahaha. Seriously?!? Is that what the match comes down to?!? I'm starting to think it is.

Anyways, I definitely know that I am part of the problem here. And it has been weighing on my conscience, knowing that hanging on to interviews that I may not need might be costing someone else a spot or something. If that wasn't a consideration, I probably wouldn't be canceling ANY of my upcoming interviews. I've already had a couple of places REALLY surprise me on the trail so far that I applied to on a whim and wound up REALLY liking, so it's hard to cancel a place that might be "The One." Ya know?

I will be canceling a couple of places this week though, so keep an ear out for possible invites!

 

[IAmAUser]

.

 

[Doctor Bagel]

I don't want to scare anyone, but please look out for yourselves. There are many people on this forum who did not match and it can be very personally and professionally difficult. I am a US allopathic graduate from a well respected medical school, was told it was "a buyer's market" and that I could go anywhere I wanted. I matched at my #9. It worked out fine and I am happy where I am, but had I cancelled some of those "extra" interviews I would not have matched. The consequences of interviewing at too few places could potentially be much worse than interviewing at too many (small amount of time and money compared to the real chance of losing a year).

I agree. It's probably always a good idea to go on more interviews than you need to because not matching is pretty horrible. Honestly, it's up to the programs to sort this stuff out, not you.

 

[digitlnoize]

I matched at my #9.

And this is exactly why I'm doing more interviews than needed. Maybe I'll cancel less...but I am SO done interviewing.

 

[classof2011]

And this is exactly why I'm doing more interviews than needed. Maybe I'll cancel less...but I am SO done interviewing.

But cumon now guys, this is still very VERY rare, not only for a US senior not to match, but even for a US senior to match at their 9th choice...

IAmAUser, I dont know you from adam or eve but the match statistics (from last year) dont lie...there had to be several flaws with your application (or interviewing skills) to go through 9 programs to match.

If those are pre-interview flaws, you probably didnt get interviews from more competitive programs which means you wouldnt have to worry about having to rank TOP TIER programs only and sliding down to your 9th choice...

If those were post-interview flaws, that may mean many programs didnt think that highly of you at all and would have much rather had 95% of the applicants theyve interviewed (and even a sizable portion of IMGs over you)....


Again, I dont know anything about your application, but what I do know is that statistics are statistics for a reason....and if the assumptions I made above are totally negative, you are truly an extreme outlier for american grads (from reputable medical schools)....

I hope this post doesnt come off as rude or bashing. I'm keeping it real. Number 9 is not only rare for SDN, its rare for US seniors applying to psychiatry in general.

 

[wannabeOBGYN]

I don't want to scare anyone, but please look out for yourselves. There are many people on this forum who did not match and it can be very personally and professionally difficult. I am a US allopathic graduate from a well respected medical school, was told it was "a buyer's market" and that I could go anywhere I wanted. I matched at my #9. It worked out fine and I am happy where I am, but had I cancelled some of those "extra" interviews I would not have matched. The consequences of interviewing at too few places could potentially be much worse than interviewing at too many (small amount of time and money compared to the real chance of losing a year).

Agreed. I think the major problem is the people who cancel at the last minute or just don't show up, leaving empty interview slots that other interested candidates could have filled. That bothers me much more than someone going on a lot of interviews if they're not sure what place they want.

 

[pysch4sure]

😱

I'm an MS3. In regards to this whole thread: Yikes.

This is the sort of thing I regret reading right before bed. Maybe I should of played it safe and watched something not quite as frightening as Matching, like, say, the second season of The Walking Dead.

Good grief, us future mediocre applicants are screwed.

 

[peppy]

I don't want to scare anyone, but please look out for yourselves. There are many people on this forum who did not match and it can be very personally and professionally difficult. I am a US allopathic graduate from a well respected medical school, was told it was "a buyer's market" and that I could go anywhere I wanted. I matched at my #9. It worked out fine and I am happy where I am, but had I cancelled some of those "extra" interviews I would not have matched. The consequences of interviewing at too few places could potentially be much worse than interviewing at too many (small amount of time and money compared to the real chance of losing a year).

I agree with you about this. I too was told "It's a buyer's market!" and I regret listening to that. Now, granted, I'm a DO, and I was probably naive to assume that "the DO stigma" would not be a factor at all because I thought I had proven myself by getting a really good Step I score (good by any standard, but especially for Psych).
When I received interviews at most of the places I applied, I became a little cocky and I thought I would surely get one of my top 3 choices. I only ranked 7 programs and ended up not matching at all.

It was horribly embarrassing to have to tell everyone I didn't match after having spent months deliberating with my loved ones how exactly I wanted to rank my top 3 programs. And in a way, it was worse thinking that I could have prevented the outcome if I had just gone on a few more interviews.
I cancelled on a few places because I was just so tired of all the travel and stress and thought I was all set to match at one of my top places. Sadly, I know that some of the places I cancelled on would have likely ranked me, because I interviewed at them the following year and they loved me.

When I give applicants advice, my number one priority is to try to prevent anyone else from going through the terrible disappointment of not matching, so I always recommend erring on the side of too many interviews rather than too few.
It's really easy for other people to say Psych is an easy match and not to worry about going on many interviews, but they're not going to have much to offer to you if you are one of the unlucky people who somehow "slips through the cracks" and doesn't match.

I did twice as many interviews my second time of applying. Yes, it was expensive and tiring, but that's nothing compared to not matching.
Even if you are one of the less competitive applicants and end up not getting a lot of interviews, at least knowing ahead of time where you stand and that you are at risk for not matching gives you time to prepare a backup plan. Being blindsided by not matching is even worse.

 

[peppy]

😱

I'm an MS3. In regards to this whole thread: Yikes.

This is the sort of thing I regret reading right before bed. Maybe I should of played it safe and watched something not quite as frightening as Matching, like, say, the second season of The Walking Dead.

Good grief, us future mediocre applicants are screwed.

I wouldn't say you're screwed. I was complacent, never really thought there was a realistic likelihood that I wouldn't match, and that's what sealed my fate. If you go into it with your eyes open, apply broadly, prepare for interviews aggressively, etc. I think you'll be fine.

 

[notdeadyet]

Maybe you guys can help me understand this a bit more: it seems like us applicants are under an (unproven) belief that "everything is getting sooo much more competitive" and we are applying to a greater number of programs and (even worse) hording more invitations.

Keep in mind that applicant panic is pretty much a hallmark of SDN.

Every year, folks talk about:

• how much more competitive psychiatry is than last
• how many more interviews they're going on than last year

But when the data actually comes out (e.g.: Charting Outcomes), it shows that there's the usual ebb and flow and that some years are slightly more competitive than others (like in every specialty), but nothing earth shattering or anything to get worked up about.

One thing is tried and true, if you look back over actual data, psych was and still is one of the LEAST competitive specialties out there.

There's real selection bias on SDN. Although "everyone" seems to be going to loads of interviews and ranking 20 programs, that's just because it's a scary thought so it gets passed around. In actuality, those are odd outliers and most folks continue to rank 6-9 programs.

Apply early and broadly and go with an open mind and almost anyone will match somewhere. The data backs that up.

I wonder how this plays out on match day: Will programs go unfilled?

That part is interesting. DO schools and chapters have been sprouting up a lot and most DOs end up going for allopathic residencies that don't increase slots to accommodate them. So I think you'll find that while psych typically had a fair number of unfilled slots, this number is going to be getting smaller.

But again, you shouldn't have to scramble if you apply appropriately. If you have flags on your application, you need to apply more broadly. Only a very small population with a lot of red flags on their application (independent applicant with poor clinical grades and fails on USMLEs) will have a tough time even if they apply widely.

And don't worry about being worried. Every applicant, regardless of the strength of their application, gets the willies and butterflies going through this process. It's a very anxiety-producing process by the way it's set up for selection and announcement (when I described the Match process to my wife, she said, "My god, it's like the Sorting Hat" from Harry Potter). But know that if you keep an open mind in terms of where you'll interview, you'll likely find a home you'll be happy with.

 

[notdeadyet]

Also a PD told me that there was a consensus amongst PD that the competitiveness of applicants was really high this year.

That was the resounding consensus in my Match year as well, but when Charting Outcomes came out, it turned out that applicant competitiveness had actually dropped a bit from the prior.

It'll be interesting seeing how the data actually pans out. All of the concerns, worries and fears folks are talking about here were talked about last year as well and the data showed no big changes from year prior.

Apply broadly and intelligently. If you're an independent applicant (DO or IMG/FMG) apply to more programs than the norm. If this year shows a squeeze that hasn't been there in recent years, the independent applicants will likely feel it first.

 

[classof2011]

Keep in mind that applicant panic is pretty much a hallmark of SDN.

Every year, folks talk about:

• how much more competitive psychiatry is than last
• how many more interviews they're going on than last year

But when the data actually comes out (e.g.: Charting Outcomes), it shows that there's the usual ebb and flow and that some years are slightly more competitive than others (like in every specialty), but nothing earth shattering or anything to get worked up about.

One thing is tried and true, if you look back over actual data, psych was and still is one of the competitive specialties out there.

There's real selection bias on SDN. Although "everyone" seems to be going to loads of interviews and ranking 20 programs, that's just because it's a scary thought so it gets passed around. In actuality, those are odd outliers and most folks continue to rank 6-9 programs.

Apply early and broadly and go with an open mind and almost anyone will match somewhere. The data backs that up.

That part is interesting. DO schools and chapters have been sprouting up a lot and most DOs end up going for allopathic residencies that don't increase slots to accommodate them. So I think you'll find that while psych typically had a fair number of unfilled slots, this number is going to be getting smaller.

But again, you shouldn't have to scramble if you apply appropriately. If you have flags on your application, you need to apply more broadly. Only a very small population with a lot of red flags on their application (independent applicant with poor clinical grades and fails on USMLEs) will have a tough time even if they apply widely.

And don't worry about being worried. Every applicant, regardless of the strength of their application, gets the willies and butterflies going through this process. It's a very anxiety-producing process by the way it's set up for selection and announcement (when I described the Match process to my wife, she said, "My god, it's like the Sorting Hat" from Harry Potter). But know that if you keep an open mind in terms of where you'll interview, you'll likely find a home you'll be happy with.

👍 ....this is basically what I've been trying to say. You've extrapolated much more eloquently.
Lol med students have had a "falling sky" since the hmo. Psychiatry is probably not more competitive this year. The more competitive applicants are probably just applying to more programs and raking up more interviews than necessary and this propagating a pseudo competitive status among the specialty.

 

[pysch4sure]

One thing is tried and true, if you look back over actual data, psych was and still is one of the competitive specialties out there.

EDIT: Please disregard, I misunderstood the language in the post

 

[LEdaddy]

I think he/she forgot to include the word "least" in that sentence about competitiveness.

 

[Saluki]

Psychiatry is less competitive than most, but I think the easiness is often exaggerated. It may be far less competitive than derm or optho, but that doesn't mean that a strong applicant is going to get interviews everywhere or that "it's a buyer's market; a decent applicant can pick the program." I also think that it must have gotten more competitive over the past ten or fifteen years or you wouldn't have so many faculty giving advice to that effect.

Still, we're luckier than derm or optho applicants, because although we may not always get our top choices, we are very likely to match somewhere.

 

[classof2011]

Psychiatry is less competitive than most, but I think the easiness is often exaggerated. It may be far less competitive than derm or optho, but that doesn't mean that a strong applicant is going to get interviews everywhere or that "it's a buyer's market; a decent applicant can pick the program." I also think that it must have gotten more competitive over the past ten or fifteen years or you wouldn't have so many faculty giving advice to that effect.

Still, we're luckier than derm or optho applicants, because although we may not always get our top choices, we are very likely to match somewhere.

So the issue is this years application (in Psych) is masquerading as if the gap in competitiveness (to other fields such as derm, optho) is closing....and this is probably not true. The biggest confounder is based on more and more applicants (other than US seniors) applying to the specialty, some in desperation to get ANY american/allopathic spot whether it psych, peds, IM, or FM.

But this (technically) should not be concerning for AMGs, especially for MD brand ones. And yet my classmates are applying to and holding 20 interview spots taking up space from others (other AMGs, FMGs and DOs alike) who would be more likely to rank such programs highly and ultimately match there.

On charting the match outcomes 2011, I wonder how many of those "Unmatched" US seniors were from MD programs....there were only 28 total unmatched of all "US seniors" but I believe this includes osteopathic programs recipients.

What I'm getting at is my reasonable doubts that ALLOPATHIC Psychiatry is actually getting significantly more competitive for the people it was originally intended for (allopathic seniors) who have been historically more preferred.

 

[pingouin]

On charting the match outcomes 2011, I wonder how many of those "Unmatched" US seniors were from MD programs....there were only 28 total unmatched of all "US seniors" but I believe this includes osteopathic programs recipients.

What I'm getting at is my reasonable doubts that ALLOPATHIC Psychiatry is actually getting significantly more competitive for the people it was originally intended for (allopathic seniors) who have been historically more preferred.

If you read the description of "US Seniors", it includes only M4s at US MD schools. US DOs are included in the "Independent Applicant" group, along with all IMGs, FMGs, and other applicants (ie, transfers from other specialties).

 

[koc123]

On charting the match outcomes 2011, I wonder how many of those "Unmatched" US seniors were from MD programs....there were only 28 total unmatched of all "US seniors" but I believe this includes osteopathic programs recipients.

"US seniors" only refers to U.S. allopathic graduating seniors. Everyone else is considered an independent applicant.

 

[Saluki]

So the issue is this years application (in Psych) is masquerading as if the gap in competitiveness (to other fields such as derm, optho) is closing....and this is probably not true. The biggest confounder is based on more and more applicants (other than US seniors) applying to the specialty, some in desperation to get ANY american/allopathic spot whether it psych, peds, IM, or FM.

But this (technically) should not be concerning for AMGs, especially for MD brand ones. And yet my classmates are applying to and holding 20 interview spots taking up space from others (other AMGs, FMGs and DOs alike) who would be more likely to rank such programs highly and ultimately match there.

On charting the match outcomes 2011, I wonder how many of those "Unmatched" US seniors were from MD programs....there were only 28 total unmatched of all "US seniors" but I believe this includes osteopathic programs recipients.

What I'm getting at is my reasonable doubts that ALLOPATHIC Psychiatry is actually getting significantly more competitive for the people it was originally intended for (allopathic seniors) who have been historically more preferred.

I don't think anyone is arguing that it is difficult for an AMG to match somewhere, but at least anecdotally it seems that it is getting more difficult to get interviews at the top programs. This in conjunction with some exaggeration and paranoia leads to more competitive applicants holding onto a bunch of interviews at programs the next tier down... And I'm assuming similar things are happening further down the competitiveness scale.

 

[classof2011]

I don't think anyone is arguing that it is difficult for an AMG to match somewhere, but at least anecdotally it seems that it is getting more difficult to get interviews at the top programs. This in conjunction with some exaggeration and paranoia leads to more competitive applicants holding onto a bunch of interviews at programs the next tier down... And I'm assuming similar things are happening further down the competitiveness scale.

Right.

Thanks for everyone who pointed out the "US senior" thing....I was always confused about that.

And yet and still, 28/640+ unmatched US seniors is plenty reassuring. Especially since more than half of those had under 5 ranks...therefore why should anyone be concerned of being one of the 3 applicants who didnt match with over 10 on their rank.

 

[Saluki]

Right.

Thanks for everyone who pointed out the "US senior" thing....I was always confused about that.

And yet and still, 28/640+ unmatched US seniors is plenty reassuring. Especially since more than half of those had under 5 ranks...therefore why should anyone be concerned of being one of the 3 applicants who didnt match with over 10 on their rank.

People will always still worry about the possibility of being in that group, even if the odds are against it. Look at IAmAUser's story. It's possible he has a third nostril or told interviewers that his hero is the unibomber, but he could just have been unlucky or overestimated his competitiveness.

Also, I think digitlnoize hit on something important- a lot of the programs are similar. There are a few that are much more prestigious or have a draw because of location, but after that it gets more confusing.

I certainly wish people would cancel interviews at my top choices. Maybe MGH would rescind my rejection letter🙂
I'm just saying that I understand what makes people go on 15 interviews.....

 

[belle54321]

I think the data gets really murky for D.O., caribbean grads, other IMGs, and other U.S. grads, since they are all lumped together as independent applicants.

 

[pysch4sure]

I think he/she forgot to include the word "least" in that sentence about competitiveness.

Ah, that would be more fitting for his/her post. I was confused, but i get it now

Looks like I proved a point then: many psych applicants aren't as bright! 🙂

EDIT: PS I was talking about ME when I was referring to psych applicants not being as bright. Wow, that's a double-whammy on my part.

Sorry for my poor attempt at self-depreciation Mr/Ms NotDeadYet

 

[notdeadyet]

I'm curious how you figure that.

I think he/she forgot to include the word "least" in that sentence about competitiveness.

You were right. I/I did. Corrected. That changes the meaning a bit.

 

[pysch4sure]

You were right. I/I did. Corrected. That changes the meaning a bit.

I too corrected my post. The mistake was obvious, and anyone with half a brain would be able to figure it out. But not me!

My bad

 

[IAmAUser]

.