No research?

[Farrah]

---

Members don't see this ad.

My major has nothing to do with science. it's in the humanities. I don't have any type of research that i've done and i'm wondering how that will affect my application. Do any of you know whether or not if doing research in the humanities would make a difference if i haven't done any in the sciences?

 

[vixenell]

Research isn't required unless you are applying MD/PhD.

 

[taehong81]

Hey Farrah. I am major in Econ and also don't have any research experience but that didn't hinder me at all during the application process. I already have two acceptance. So don't worry about it. Good luck

 

[topherius]

I'm in the same boat (history major), and I did some humanities research in college. I think it helped, actually--I listed it on AMCAS as "research," got asked about it in my first interview, and spent most of that interview discussing it. Wound up getting into the school on monday. Can't say that was what did it, but it couldn't have hurt.

I don't think, these days, that schools care whether or not you've done science research if you're just applying to an M.D. program. As long as you did well in your basic science reqs, they figure you'll do comparably well in your med school science stuff. The research part comes in as proof that you can get deeply involved in some sort of academic endeavor and see it through to the end. As long as you can demonstrate that (and explain it well when asked about it), it doesn't seem to matter what exactly you researched.

 

[Amy B]

I alos have no research at all. I met with a dean of admissions and asked her what I should say about not having any research and she said just tell them ...."I would have liked to do some research but never had the time with the volunteering, classes and my family, I just couldn't find the time."

I told her I was not into doing research, and she said never tell the interviewers you aren't interested in it, she said just make out like you didn't have the time and nothing more will be said about it ususally.

 

[dara678]

I agree with the comments about doing humanities research. Even if your major has nothing to do with science, do a project in your major. It shows your capability for independent work, dedication, and creative thinking.

 

[jlee9531]

Originally posted by Amy B
I alos have no research at all. I met with a dean of admissions and asked her what I should say about not having any research and she said just tell them ...."I would have liked to do some research but never had the time with the volunteering, classes and my family, I just couldn't find the time."

I told her I was not into doing research, and she said never tell the interviewers you aren't interested in it, she said just make out like you didn't have the time and nothing more will be said about it ususally.

yeah this is what i say too because i did have no time to do research. im not gonna half ass something because i know research requires a lot of time and effort. my time was already going towards working full time, volunteering at a couple places and class.

its an honest answer if that is your case and i dont think it will hinder your app unless you are applying to a strong research based school. i have an acceptance and some interviews without research like the others in this thread so its all good man.

 

[NRAI2001]

Originally posted by topherius
I'm in the same boat (history major), and I did some humanities research in college. I think it helped, actually--I listed it on AMCAS as "research," got asked about it in my first interview, and spent most of that interview discussing it. Wound up getting into the school on monday. Can't say that was what did it, but it couldn't have hurt.

I don't think, these days, that schools care whether or not you've done science research if you're just applying to an M.D. program. As long as you did well in your basic science reqs, they figure you'll do comparably well in your med school science stuff. The research part comes in as proof that you can get deeply involved in some sort of academic endeavor and see it through to the end. As long as you can demonstrate that (and explain it well when asked about it), it doesn't seem to matter what exactly you researched.

What if you did do research but never published a paper?

 

[NRAI2001]

The research part comes in as proof that you can get deeply involved in some sort of academic endeavor and see it through to the end.

If you never published a paper does this have a negative effect?

 

[topherius]

I don't know, actually. I think it depends. Of course, getting published would help. But if you can get the professor who advised your research to write you a rec that details the level at which you were involved and how much research you put into it, that might be sufficient as well.

There are lots of places to get published that aren't that competitive but are at least something that you can put down. If you go to a conference and present your research, look into getting published in the conference's proceedings. Or check to see if your department or college has an internal publication that accepts student manuscripts.

As some posters on this thread have pointed out, though, research is not even always necessary. If you've got other stuff going for you I wouldn't obsess about not having a ton of research credentials, especially as a humanities major. One thing, though--I think it's important to make sure your writing is up to snuff. Try to do well on the writing section of the MCAT and put a lot into your personal statement and essays. They'll expect you, as a humanities major, to be able to write!

 

[superdevil]

If you never published a paper does this have a negative effect?

absolutely not. at many universities, it is very difficult to even get an undergrad research position, much less publish. once again, i think the highly skewed responses of the people found on sdn have cast a strange light on a subject. many people don't even do research (of any kind, biomedical or otherwise) and are still accepted-typically at schools that emphasize primary care. schools know that if you went to a small liberal arts college that you probably weren't working in a Bio-Safety Level 3 HIV lab.

personally, i work in two research labs (one position paid, one independent study) and am happy with my experience, without necessarily bugging the profs with questions like "i'm gonna be in on that paper, too...right???" hell, go on the pre-MSTP forum and ask how many of them published as an undergrad. it won't be the majority.

to close, any type of research is better than no research, but not having research at all won't kill you either.

 

[piotr13]

The only time research will have some sort of effect on your app is when you are applying to primarily research universities.... like Harvard, Hopkins, etc... They would like to see some, but it isn't required. It would do nothing but help you. 🙂

 

[brats800]

yeah like everyone else has said, research definitly isn't the most important part of your application, especially if you aren't applying to a research-oriented and/or MD/PhD program...clinical experience is WAY more important. if you can get the experience, that'd be great. i did research for 2 summers, more to see if i like it and would want to do it in the future than anything else. good luck but if the rest of your package is solid, i'm sure you'll be fine.

 

[mlw03]

i didn't do research because i didn't want to, and i feel it's hurting me now, especially at the upper-tier schools. additionally, i'm not bashful about the fact that i didn't do research, and when asked why not i've just said that it's not my thing. i'm not going to lie to adcom people, but i have a feeling that's holding me back at some of these top schools. however, if you're just looking to stay at your state schools or other "average" schools, it's probably not going to hurt to not be a lab monkey.

why schools have this obsession with research is beyond me - i guess they like the idea of cheap labor for their faculty, but looking into some metabolic pathway of some bacteria isn't going to make you a better doctor.

 

[superdevil]

ok, i suppose a lack of research experience is bad concerning the very TOP schools.

why schools have this obsession with research is beyond me

well, its pretty evident. on a personal level, many adcoms and interviewers are PhD's. their life's passion is research, so they may take exception if you casually state that research isn't your bag. on a larger level, many schools (hopkins, harvard, you know the list) have made their name/reputation on the basis of the research going on at their institutions and they don't want to neglect their strong points.

 

[Gleevec]

Originally posted by superdevil
ok, i suppose a lack of research experience is bad concerning the very TOP schools.


well, its pretty evident. on a personal level, many adcoms and interviewers are PhD's. their life's passion is research, so they may take exception if you casually state that research isn't your bag. on a larger level, many schools (hopkins, harvard, you know the list) have made their name/reputation on the basis of the research going on at their institutions and they don't want to neglect their strong points.

Lets not forget, everyone talks about a "school's rank". What they really mean is a school's RESEARCH rank according to US News. So it makes sense they would want to train researchers. I dont see the purpose of going to a research-oriented school like Harvard, Hopkins, Duke, etc if you don't want to do research. Save yourself some debt that way.

 

[Bones2008]

why schools have this obsession with research is beyond me - i guess they like the idea of cheap labor for their faculty, but looking into some metabolic pathway of some bacteria isn't going to make you a better doctor.

On the contrary, research is what allows medicine to progress. How do you think drugs are discovered? Why doctors today are so much more able to diagnose diseases and prescribe cures than they were 100 years ago is because of the huge amount research that's gone on. Without people who desire to discover the unknown, we are unable to move forward. <i>That</i> is why universities care so much about research.
On an applicant level, research shows that a student is motivated to engage in self-directed learning and exploration. It's true that certain majors, etc. offer more oportunities than others; but it seems to make sense why a school might use research experience as a proxy for someone's desire to engage themselves in a project.

 

[spaz]

i did 'research' for one quarter but all i did was look at flies under a microscope for 10 hrs a week. it wasn't very significant, and in fact turned me off from research though i realize that it's not the best example, and everyone has to start somewhere.

anyway, for the most scholarly project question, should i just say that i haven't realyl done research? or should i write about something, like a research paper that i did for a humanities class? it's not an honors thesis or anything, but the most scholarly thing that i can think of.

 

[jlee9531]

Originally posted by spaz
i did 'research' for one quarter but all i did was look at flies under a microscope for 10 hrs a week. it wasn't very significant, and in fact turned me off from research though i realize that it's not the best example, and everyone has to start somewhere.

anyway, for the most scholarly project question, should i just say that i haven't realyl done research? or should i write about something, like a research paper that i did for a humanities class? it's not an honors thesis or anything, but the most scholarly thing that i can think of.

yeah i wrote about my research project i did for my south korean film class.
30 pages on how globalization has effected south korean film and the gender roles that are being portrayed onto society and what that means for the future of the sk society.

defintely my most scholarly project since it is still occuring right now and not too much research has been done on this topic.

 

[fun8stuff]

I did a lengthy primary research project on people's perception of health, but it has not been published yet...

1. How does one go about publishing work like this?
2. Is it worth talking about if it is not published?

My prof suggessted that I publish it, but she never told me where and she is on sabatticle (sp?).

 

[NRAI2001]

Originally posted by fun8stuff
I did a lengthy primary research project on people's perception of health, but it has not been published yet...

1. How does one go about publishing work like this?
2. Is it worth talking about if it is not published?

My prof suggessted that I publish it, but she never told me where and she is on sabatticle (sp?).

HOw did you conduct this research, was it through interview people?

 

[fun8stuff]

Surveys and Interviews.

 

[NRAI2001]

Originally posted by fun8stuff
Surveys and Interviews.

Did you do this work on your own, or through a professor?

 

[fun8stuff]

I did it on my own, but I had a professor for a mentor. I had to pick a topic and find some way to do primary research on the topic.. My professor just "steared" me in the right direction.

 

[NRAI2001]

Originally posted by fun8stuff
I did it on my own, but I had a professor for a mentor. I had to pick a topic and find some way to do primary research on the topic.. My professor just "steared" me in the right direction.

Wow, thats cool. What type of Journal are you looking at publishing in?

 

[fun8stuff]

Any kind that will accept me 😉 I am really unfamiliar to this. The chem research I did, the prof took care of the publishing. Heck, before today, I didnt even know Undergraduate Research Journals existed! haha! I really do not know how I am going to go about this....