Research Career, without a PhD??

[PsycGeek]

I currently have my B.S. in psychology and have been graduated for about 2 years now. I spent a year as a research assistant and transitioned to a research coordinator a year ago. I went though two unsuccessful application cycles for a doctorate in psychology, keeping in mind that my goal laid in academic psychological research.

(Just in case you were wondering about my stats, I had a 4.0 as my psychology in-major GPA. My overall GPA was 3.98. I had an average GRE score, but good letters and plenty of research experience. I also had some graduate level courses.)

I am beginning to wonder if one can find success into breaking into research, without a PhD. I could be interested in pursuing a master's, but I wonder if there is a point to do so. My primary concern with a master's is the expense, without the pay-off.

Is getting a doctorate the only way? Has anyone regretted that path? Does anyone have any advice for someone who wants to do research, without a doctorate? I have noticed that most research associate positions can be for persons who are post-doc, so I feel like there is little advancement in research with only a B.S. I have also heard that academic positions are hard to come by even for those with a PhD, which makes me jaded towards applying a third time. Is that true? I feel like even if I were to try again, it would be hard to find a career in academia.

Additionally, I have have found an opportunity to advance in research for a non-profit, but it does have a political agenda. I worry that since the topic can be quite polarizing (e.g. the pro-life/choice debate) that it might turn off future employers. The position may be good experience, but it is a big concern for me. Additionally, I do not know if future research positions would find that endeavor very scientific as the results may be biased toward one particular view. I would hope that any future employer of mine would focus on who I am and what skills I have, and not focus on who I worked for.

Should I apply?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[PsychPhDone]

I only know of one person sans-doctorate that does research, and she is a high-level research coordinator (with a masters). She can't get her own grants from NIH or anything, and so she basically gets to do research, but doesn't get the primary say in research design or anything like that.

 

[Member6523]

Have you considered experimental psych programs? They are generally easier to get into than clinical programs.

 

[AcronymAllergy]

Have you considered experimental psych programs? They are generally easier to get into than clinical programs.

I would agree--if your research interests can possibly align with non-clinical areas, such as cognitive, biological, or social, you could try casting a slightly wider net and seeing how that goes.

Academia is indeed pretty brutal right now, particularly for non-clinical folks, but there are non-university research jobs available as well (although they're of course competitive). There's also the armed services, if you'd be at all drawn toward that option, as they hire research psychologists.

With your stats, unless your GRE was a particular sore point (e.g., ~1000), I'd imagine you should be getting some solid interest from various programs. Were you applying to a wide variety of schools in terms of competitiveness and location?

 

[LM02]

Depending on your interests, you might consider a PhD in public health. The work tends to be more macro than micro, and you won't get clinical training, but there can also be points of overlap. If I hadn't gone into clinical psychology (I'm now on faculty in a medical school), I would have pursued a PhD in psychiatric epidemiology. I actually do some related work now, so it would have been a nice fit for my interests. It may or may not for you...

 

[paramour]

My master's was in an applied experimental psych program. I know of previous individuals from my program who did quite well in research positions with "only" a master's degree. (Of course, the ones who did really, really well were the I/O folks... 😎) Anyway, I know of folks who made it to heads of companies, research coordinators/consultants, stats consultants, working at VAs, academic med centers, so on & so forth. They also busted their arses, doing considerably more than was expected of them, to make it happen. Networking also was extremely vital. So, yeah, it's possible. Also depends on your location and the opportunities (and your competition).

 

[futureapppsy2]

My concerns about going for a research career with just a masters degree would be a) viability for grant funding (esp. government grant funding b) much less time to develop a research body while in school.

I just got my masters. I was extremely lucky and productive during both undergrad and those first two years of grad school; I came straight from undergrad. For context, I have 9 journal articles (plus another just accepted with revisions), a co-authored book chapter, some other invited stuff, a small (<$1k) internal grant, etc., and I still would not feel remotely prepared for or competitive in the academic/research job market, to be honest. In fact, knowing that I "only" have 4-5 until I get my PhD (hopefully!) already makes me feel the time pressure, especially with the increasing emphasis on having proven ability to get "big" (i.e., NIH 😉 ) grant funding.

In short, the job market and the funding world is scary and super competitive. 😉

 

[cara susanna]

Did you apply to uber-competitive places like Minnesota and Wisconsin? Also, do you have any publications?

 

[wigflip]

Additionally, I have have found an opportunity to advance in research for a non-profit, but it does have a political agenda. I worry that since the topic can be quite polarizing (e.g. the pro-life/choice debate) that it might turn off future employers. The position may be good experience, but it is a big concern for me. Additionally, I do not know if future research positions would find that endeavor very scientific as the results may be biased toward one particular view. I would hope that any future employer of mine would focus on who I am and what skills I have, and not focus on who I worked for.

Should I apply?

I think this is worth worrying about, unless you are truly passionate about the organization's position. If at some future date you decide you like research more than psychology, and applied to doctoral programs in other social science disciplines like anthropology or sociology, a position with an anti-choice organization (if that is the position of the org) could be disqualifying.

 

[mewtoo]

I think this is worth worrying about, unless you are truly passionate about the organization's position. If at some future date you decide you like research more than psychology, and applied to doctoral programs in other social science disciplines like anthropology or sociology, a position with an anti-choice organization (if that is the position of the org) could be disqualifying.

I'm just curious, would it be disqualifying on a personal level for mentors because the field as a whole is more pro-choice or would something like that be disqualifying on a program level (I didn't think they could do stuff like that)? Would it be a "conflict of interests" sort of thing?

 

[wigflip]

I'm just curious, would it be disqualifying on a personal level for mentors because the field as a whole is more pro-choice or would something like that be disqualifying on a program level (I didn't think they could do stuff like that)? Would it be a "conflict of interests" sort of thing?

People get cut for all kinds of reasons. One area of concern is "fit" with the department.

 

[Ollie123]

Yeah - I do believe political views are "protected" most places, but hiring is subjective and especially for something uber-competitive like faculty jobs it is always easy to find such a "reason" to cut a candidate that no one could ever prove was due to illegal hiring practices.

 

[wigflip]

Yeah - I do believe political views are "protected" most places, but hiring is subjective and especially for something uber-competitive like faculty jobs it is always easy to find such a "reason" to cut a candidate that no one could ever prove was due to illegal hiring practices.

I think this is true of both faculty job searches and grad program admission (which is what I think mewtoo was asking about).

 

[Ollie123]

Hah, misread it. Though I think the point stands regardless!

I'm far from an expert, but from what I've seen it sees far easier to prove cases of discrimination in non-competitive settings than competitive ones.

 

[wigflip]

Hah, misread it. Though I think the point stands regardless!

I'm far from an expert, but from what I've seen it sees far easier to prove cases of discrimination in non-competitive settings than competitive ones.

Agreed.

On a related note: I've heard faculty openly dish big name academics (i.e. "Famous Prof X flopped during the Q & A of his/her job talk here Y years ago"). I have trouble believing they'd think twice about trashing (either literally or figuratively) a grad student or faculty application based on ideological grounds.

Edit: To OP:
Keep in mind that you're not just gaining research experience, you're positioning yourself as a scholar, whose body of work is grounded in particular theories, methods, etc. This is particularly true if you are publishing. It's not impossible to reinvent yourself, but if, for example, you went and worked for the Heritage Foundation, then later wanted into a public health program with a specialization in women's health, you might have some serious 'splainin' to do.

 

[futureapppsy2]

Yeah - I do believe political views are "protected" most places, but hiring is subjective and especially for something uber-competitive like faculty jobs it is always easy to find such a "reason" to cut a candidate that no one could ever prove was due to illegal hiring practices.

Yep, exactly--thus why anti-discrimination hiring laws (for any protected class) are almost impossible to enforce.

 

[treecity]

One option may be a research career as a master's-level epidemiologist. While some master's programs in epidemiology require science pre-requisites (such as biochemistry, physiology, etc.), there are several without any pre-requisite classes for admission. Epidemiologists study the distribution of disease. While this may seem limited, epidemiologists study much more than infectious diseases. Some study the distribution of psychiatric diagnoses, social risk factors for chronic disease, protective factors (similar to positive psychology), etc. They work for nonprofits, universities, the government--usually in research settings, though sometimes in hospitals. Take a look: http://www.bls.gov/ooh/life-physical-and-social-science/epidemiologists.htm