Signal vs. No Signal approach by programs?

[hfpefpepper]

With the increase from 5 to 10 signals this cycle, what has been the thought process behind programs regarding applicants who do not signal? Will places still look beyond only applications that signaled? Is this going to be a soft cap or too few signals still?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[wellbutrin.girlfriend]

I was talking with an APD about this, and she was saying that she suspects it will be program dependent-- when you consider that the average psych program interviews 10% of its applicant pool, small community programs will need to interview beyond just signals to get enough depth to reliably fill all their spots whereas large, more competitive programs will likely receive enough signals that they won't need to interview applicants who don't signal them.

 

[Celexa]

With the increase from 5 to 10 signals this cycle, what has been the thought process behind programs regarding applicants who do not signal? Will places still look beyond only applications that signaled? Is this going to be a soft cap or too few signals still?

It's important to understand that a) NO ONE knows exactly what programs are going to do and b) programs get very different amounts of signals.

The data shows that competitive programs got a disproportionate amount of signals last year (some, more than they had interview spots) and other programs barely got any. This means a LOT of applicants wastes their signals on programs they had no chance of interviewing at.

Programs that recieve more signals than interview spots MAY choose to interview only people who signal (I need to emphasize again: no one knows exactly what will happen because this exact iteration of match variables has never happened before). Other programs are likely to recieve fewer signals than interview slots and therefore will inevitably also interview people who did not signal.

Overestimating your own competitiveness and signaling programs you aren't competitive for is, imo, a preventable way to set yourself up for failure to match along the lines of submitting ERAS late or submitting a personal statement talking about how much you want to be a dermatologist.

 

[wellbutrin.girlfriend]

I looked at this when I was deciding how to use my signals, kind of helps you get an idea of some of the trends. Not terribly helpful in the end but definitely interesting:

Exploring the Relationship Between Program Signaling & Interview Invitations Across Specialties

 

[Merovinge]

It's important to understand that a) NO ONE knows exactly what programs are going to do and b) programs get very different amounts of signals.

The data shows that competitive programs got a disproportionate amount of signals last year (some, more than they had interview spots) and other programs barely got any. This means a LOT of applicants wastes their signals on programs they had no chance of interviewing at.

Programs that recieve more signals than interview spots MAY choose to interview only people who signal (I need to emphasize again: no one knows exactly what will happen because this exact iteration of match variables has never happened before). Other programs are likely to recieve fewer signals than interview slots and therefore will inevitably also interview people who did not signal.

Overestimating your own competitiveness and signaling programs you aren't competitive for is, imo, a preventable way to set yourself up for failure to match along the lines of submitting ERAS late or submitting a personal statement talking about how much you want to be a dermatologist.

Funny, this market can be modeled very similarly to the online dating markets. The top 10% get 90% of the attention. I doubt it's quite as severe a split with signals (if only due to geography) but there has at least been some research in this somewhat similar area.

 

[LeaveNoTrace]

It's important to understand that a) NO ONE knows exactly what programs are going to do and b) programs get very different amounts of signals.

The data shows that competitive programs got a disproportionate amount of signals last year (some, more than they had interview spots) and other programs barely got any. This means a LOT of applicants wastes their signals on programs they had no chance of interviewing at.

Programs that recieve more signals than interview spots MAY choose to interview only people who signal (I need to emphasize again: no one knows exactly what will happen because this exact iteration of match variables has never happened before). Other programs are likely to recieve fewer signals than interview slots and therefore will inevitably also interview people who did not signal.

Overestimating your own competitiveness and signaling programs you aren't competitive for is, imo, a preventable way to set yourself up for failure to match along the lines of submitting ERAS late or submitting a personal statement talking about how much you want to be a dermatologist.

Yeah. I signaled mostly community programs on this, my second try. Also a couple of programs where I had a connection. Only got one interview invite, so there's that...hopefully, it's not my only interview!