Publications Needed for Internship (Clinical Psych PhD)

[hpxb]

Hey Guys,

I will be applying to internship locations next year and would love to get a little feedback regarding the ideal number of pubs to shoot for when hoping to place at a top-tier site. Based on where I stand now, I anticipate that I will apply with at least 10 peer-reviewed manuscript publications, 2 of which are first-author publications. I will likely have 3 first-author publications by then, but I am hesitant to count it at the moment, as it is presently under review. What might my chances be of getting a placement comparable to MUSC/Mass Gen next year?

Thank you SO much for your feedback!

-HP

P.S. My clinical experience is fairly diverse and I should have a decent amount of hours when all is said and done. Nothing absolutely phenomenal, but definitely at least in the middle of the pack (regarding hours). I do not have any grants

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Ollie123]

That is just about where I was at this time last year. I think I was only at 8 peer-reviewed pubs (2 first authored) with 2 first-authored chapters. Got interviewed at pretty much every research-heavy place I applied including the two you listed. Can't speak to where I was ranked though the overwhelming message from interviews is that I was extremely competitive for all those places. I did have pretty good funding success - though even "pretty good" for a grad student is negligible in the grand scheme of things. What journals the publications are in matters too though. I was definitely helped by the fact that mine were mostly APA Journals (including a first author J Abnormal Psych) and/or higher impact specialty journals (e.g. Cancer, Neuropsychopharmacology). If these were all in lower tier journals it would likely not have gone over as well. Still, it sounds like you are well on target for those places unless all your publications are in the journal of undergraduate research or something like that.

 

[cara susanna]

I got an interview at MUSC with five publications, so I think you should be fine. Didn't apply to Mass Gen.

 

[hpxb]

Wo

That is just about where I was at this time last year. I think I was only at 8 peer-reviewed pubs (2 first authored) with 2 first-authored chapters. Got interviewed at pretty much every research-heavy place I applied including the two you listed. Can't speak to where I was ranked though the overwhelming message from interviews is that I was extremely competitive for all those places. I did have pretty good funding success - though even "pretty good" for a grad student is negligible in the grand scheme of things. What journals the publications are in matters too though. I was definitely helped by the fact that mine were mostly APA Journals (including a first author J Abnormal Psych) and/or higher impact specialty journals (e.g. Cancer, Neuropsychopharmacology). If these were all in lower tier journals it would likely not have gone over as well. Still, it sounds like you are well on target for those places unless all your publications are in the journal of undergraduate research or something like that.

Wow, thank you both so much for your prompt responses! Seriously...that was awesome. To address your question, my pubs are not in journals entirely akin to J Abnormal Psych, but are still significantly better than journal of undergraduate research, lol. They tend to hover around journals like Personality and Individual Differences (where one of my first-author publications is), Psych Assessment, and Behavior Therapist. Hoping that the 10 pubs will at least give me a shot!

Thanks again and I appreciate any additional information/responses!

 

[WisNeuro]

Those are three solid journals, you should be fine, especially with a few more on the way.

 

[AcronymAllergy]

Agreed--you should be quite alright with 10 publications. I don't anticipate the lack of grants significantly hurting you when it comes to internship apps. If you're aiming for faculty positions in academia, though, I'd imagine you'll want to try and secure at least some type of funding while on internship and postdoc, if possible.

 

[Ollie123]

Wo



Wow, thank you both so much for your prompt responses! Seriously...that was awesome. To address your question, my pubs are not in journals entirely akin to J Abnormal Psych, but are still significantly better than journal of undergraduate research, lol. They tend to hover around journals like Personality and Individual Differences (where one of my first-author publications is), Psych Assessment, and Behavior Therapist. Hoping that the 10 pubs will at least give me a shot!

Thanks again and I appreciate any additional information/responses!

Those journals are fine. I'd say Psych Assessment is substantially more than just "fine." I think most folks recognize there is more than a little luck with RE: to whether or not studies work out and that can heavily play into where things get published. I think what is most important is that you come across as someone who is becoming a legitimate, credible scientist who contributes to the literature vs. someone who slapped together an opinion piece for their university newspaper because they heard publications would help them get an internship.

You should be in good shape.

 

[researchgirl]

I had 6 or 7 pubs, 2 first author when I applied and got interviews at many research-heavy places. My pubs were all in okay journals, but only one in a top-tier/impressive journal. At my current research-heavy internship site, I am in the minority for not having an F award on my CV, but, I still ended up here

 

[erg923]

It's 4 more than I have and I am three years post PhD.

 

[Stannis]

I'm in the same boat. You're fine, breath (talking to myself too). My thought from talking with previous interns at MUSC and similar sites is that if you're someone with a bunch of pubs, more than a handful, you're good. It's all about fit now.

 

[PsychPhDone]

You're fine. Some variability at my research-heavy site but you are well within range.

 

[EmotRegulation]

[QUOTE="hpxb, post: 15887249, member: 353532"
I will be applying to internship locations next year and would love to get a little feedback regarding the ideal number of pubs to shoot for when hoping to place at a top-tier site. [/QUOTE]

It also depends on what you mean by "top tier site." Just as a counterpoint, I applied to those research heavy internships too, and got interviews at them, but ultimately ranked them below training-focused VAs. I knew I planned to go into academia and I wanted a solid clinical year. I landed an R1 job right out of internship and no one gave a crap where I did my internship. If you want more research training, or a postdoc at one of the research type sites, that's awesome, but recognize that "top tier training" doesn't necessarily mean a research-heavy site.

 

[McClinas]

Ya, I'm in a similar position. I'll be applying for internships next year, and I currently have 6 accepted/in-press/published manuscripts (3 first author), another 2 in review (both first author), and 4 that could be sent to a journal next week. Most of the pubs are in mid-tiered journals (some APA, impact factors 1.5 - 3.5 range), including one like you in PAID.

I too want to secure a research-heavy, "clinical science" internship. Let the competition begin!

 

[psychRA]

Keep in mind that the process can be very unpredictable, too. I had 9 pubs (3 as first author) when I applied, plus about 15 conference talks/posters. I came from a good PhD program, I had more hours than average, plus several years of research experience before and during grad school. I was rejected for an interview by MGH as well as MUSC.

I got interviews at some very strong research-focused sites that are on par with the places that rejected me, and eventually matched to one of those sites. So I don't think that there was some flaw in my application that I overlooked, or an obvious weakness in my training. I was a good research match for both of those sites, too. Especially now that I'm on the other sides of things and have observed the selection process, I think that sites narrow their applicant pool as much as they can based on the standard factors (hours, pubs, letters, etc.) and they still have more candidates than they can interview. At that point, the selection process becomes a lot more subjective, and (honestly) a bit arbitrary.

 

[Ollie123]

I'm fairly convinced MUSCs process is a little fishy. I suspect the order they review applications does matter to some degree (even though they are adamant it does not). They also very much operate on a "mentor model" where the mentor has a large say in the admissions process...but two of the folks I had listed as possible mentors were not even aware I had applied there when I spoke to them after my interview. Fantastic program that I ranked highly...but their application/interview process was unquestionably the most bizarre.

 

[researchgirl]

+1 to Ollie. MUSC confused me a lot during internship interviews.

But, I agree with psychRA in general - you can be a great fit and have checked all the boxes for a site and still not get an interview, because there are just too many highly qualified people. So, even the most well-published, grant-funded superstar with great letters, essays, and experiences will likely not get a 100% hit rate for interviews.

But, those of you posting here with several pubs, etc., will probably get plenty of interviews at research-oriented places.