Use your signals wisely

[Celexa]

---

Members don't see this ad.

Free advice from a departmental advisor who spent much of the last week answering last minute ERAS questions, reviewing program lists, attempting to soothe anxieties, and currently taking a break from writing multiple LORs:

Be smart about your signals. If you want to spend one on a dream program, fine. But only one. There are a lot of uncertainties about signals, but there are a couple of things that are pretty clear:

1. They do matter, and make it more likely your application will be reviewed in its entirety and not filtered out

2. Signals DO NOT make you competitive for a program you weren't competitive for in the first place.

Yes, figuring out whether you are competitive somewhere is hard. Yes, psych cares less about step scores than other fields. Yes, research is not the only way to have a competitive psych application in terms of extracurriculars. But nonetheless, look at the profiles of residents on program websites and understand the name brand programs who always only take USMDs are now picking from a large pool of AOA/majority clerkships honors/top tercile step scores/standout extracurriculars. If you aren't certain you're in that group, diversify your signal list.

I may or may not answer specific questions in this thread in the next few hours because, well, I've got the aforementioned letters to write. I do ask anyone who matched 5+ years ago and doesn't know what this whole 'signal' thing is to refrain from giving advice because everything about the match is changing so quickly year to year, if you aren't immersed in it your info is out of date.

Good luck everyone.

Oh and take comfort that this is the last time it'll be like this. Psych fellowships are easy to get and there's zero evidence of any trends otherwise. And also unnecessary for most people.

 

[brosa]

It is a funny coincidence that today I was saying exactly the same thing you are to an applicant I am helping. Signals were all at top programs, with an incompatible application. This is very good advice and I really hope applicants pay attention to that.

 

[hfpefpepper]

How would you recommend an applicant divide their signals? Ex: 1 dream, 2 “reachable reaches”, 5 “target”, and 2 “safeties”? Or differently maybe.

 

[Celexa]

Double post

 

[Celexa]

How would you recommend an applicant divide their signals? Ex: 1 dream, 2 “reachable reaches”, 5 “target”, and 2 “safeties”? Or differently maybe.

It's hard to really get that specific because so much hinges on personal variables, including if the applicant is likely to match at their home program, or if geography matters more to them than program characteristics. It's also just really hard to truly separate safeties from targets these days even for me as an advisor. I'd a clear majority need to be targets and safeties. I would say zero dreams except that seems to be an intolerable option for most students.

 

[Celexa]

It is a funny coincidence that today I was saying exactly the same thing you are to an applicant I am helping. Signals were all at top programs, with an incompatible application. This is very good advice and I really hope applicants pay attention to that.

I've realized many students seem to view a signal (or an application) as something like a lottery ticket, which is to say every one has a small but non zero chance. This is false, because for most applicants the chance at an interview at the most competitive programs is zero. Before signals if someone was applying broadly, the the only real cost of these zero chance apps was money. Signals has changed the game, I am hoping overall in a good way, but I think some people are going to be in for a rude awakening.

 

[wellbutrin.girlfriend]

Any thoughts on applying to multiple tracks at the same program? (within reason, eg I wouldn't apply to a research or CAP track without any demonstrated interests in those areas)

 

[wellbutrin.girlfriend]

Second question-- thoughts about signaling a place where you auditioned? I asked the APD at the program where I just auditioned and was told, "Eh, no, you don't really need to," with a kind of shrug. Then later a senior resident at this same place (involved in residency selection) said he thought it would be a good idea to signal...

 

[Celexa]

Any thoughts on applying to multiple tracks at the same program? (within reason, eg I wouldn't apply to a research or CAP track without any demonstrated interests in those areas)

Nothing wrong with applying to multiple tracks. Very common for people to do this.

 

[Celexa]

Second question-- thoughts about signaling a place where you auditioned? I asked the APD at the program where I just auditioned and was told, "Eh, no, you don't really need to," with a kind of shrug. Then later a senior resident at this same place (involved in residency selection) said he thought it would be a good idea to signal...

This is a tricky question. Psychiatry has not issued specialty specific guidance on this, probably because aways are not a de facto required part of applying. If you are very interested in the place you did the away, I would lean towards signalling them unless it was clear they'd set a consistent internal policy that was communicated to all away rotators.

 

[Stagg737]

This is a tricky question. Psychiatry has not issued specialty specific guidance on this, probably because aways are not a de facto required part of applying. If you are very interested in the place you did the away, I would lean towards signalling them unless it was clear they'd set a consistent internal policy that was communicated to all away rotators.

Going to second this. Unless you hear straight from the PD that you don’t need to signal, you should still do it. Had several applicants on their elective/audition rotations ask us this recently and our new APD who is part of our team told one he didn’t think they needed to. He came back a couple days later after talking to PD and had to correct himself that they should still signal, so at least where I’m at PD still wants people to signal even if they auditioned.

If there is any doubt, just signal.

 

[nexus73]

Are applicants still allowed to just email the program and express their interest? Or are signals the correct way to do this now? Many years ago, I emailed the program I was eventually accepted to, basically just expressing my interest and desire to stay in the area after finishing training.

 

[Celexa]

Are applicants still allowed to just email the program and express their interest? Or are signals the correct way to do this now? Many years ago, I emailed the program I was eventually accepted to, basically just expressing my interest and desire to stay in the area after finishing training.

Allowed, yes for sure. But likely less meaningful than years past, bc if you email but don't signal, programs will know they weren't in your top ten choices.

 

[LeaveNoTrace]

Yeah.

- How competitive of an applicant are you? If you have a legitimate shot at MGH/Stanford/Hopkins, you might just signal top programs and apply to a lot of backups. That community program in Billings, Montana will probably be happy to have you. If you're average or below, signal mostly safety programs and some target programs. What are you most concerned about and why? The conservative approach is "signal all safety programs"; the aggressive, risk-tolerant approach is "signal programs where you are just barely competitive to receive an interview".

 

[wellbutrin.girlfriend]

Allowed, yes for sure. But likely less meaningful than years past, bc if you email but don't signal, programs will know they weren't in your top ten choices.

Revisiting this thread to see if anyone has any updated advice to share in this regard. Getting all sorts of conflicting information about letters of interest, especially timing (if we send them at all). Any input would be appreciated!

 

[LeaveNoTrace]

Allowed, yes for sure. But likely less meaningful than years past, bc if you email but don't signal, programs will know they weren't in your top ten choices.

What do you think of handwritten letters/cards? Over the top? Too kitschy? A good idea?

 

[Celexa]

What do you think of handwritten letters/cards? Over the top? Too kitschy? A good idea?

Wouldn't do it. Too likely to come off as weird and try-hard. If you're going to reach out to a program keep it to a professional email.

 

[psych_0]

Signaling at our program + being close geographically basically guaranteed you an interview this year. We are also not very competitive imo so your miles may vary.

 

[Ironspy]

What do you think of handwritten letters/cards? Over the top? Too kitschy? A good idea?

Don’t bother. I check my physical mailbox 3-5x a year. Judging by the volume, my colleagues don’t check often either. Send an email if you must but it’s not necessary and unlikely to help

 

[LeaveNoTrace]

Don’t bother. I check my physical mailbox 3-5x a year. Judging by the volume, my colleagues don’t check often either. Send an email if you must but it’s not necessary and unlikely to help

What do you think about reaching out by phone? I am a reapplicant, currently a first year FM resident. Applied to 150 programs; currently have 1 interview invite.

 

[Celexa]

What do you think about reaching out by phone? I am a reapplicant, currently a first year FM resident. Applied to 150 programs; currently have 1 interview invite.

Don't do it. Won't help and has the possibility of actively pissing off the resident coordinator, possibly the single most important person to respect during application and interview process.

I know it's hard, but this is the waiting time. You have one interview. That is more than some.

 

[LeaveNoTrace]

Don't do it. Won't help and has the possibility of actively pissing off the resident coordinator, possibly the single most important person to respect during application and interview process.

I know it's hard, but this is the waiting time. You have one interview. That is more than some.

Thanks. With one interview, my chances aren't great...but I might manage to get accepted. I'm suspecting that it may well be the only interview I get this cycle.

I saw that at some community programs they wanted or welcomed communication from applicants that were very interested in their program specifically. I'm not sure what this means: maybe they were talking about applicants that had very strong ties to a region or a program?

 

[LucidStupor]

I've realized many students seem to view a signal (or an application) as something like a lottery ticket, which is to say every one has a small but non zero chance. This is false, because for most applicants the chance at an interview at the most competitive programs is zero. Before signals if someone was applying broadly, the the only real cost of these zero chance apps was money. Signals has changed the game, I am hoping overall in a good way, but I think some people are going to be in for a rude awakening.

How many programs would you place in the category of "the most competitive programs"? Would UW / OHSU fall into this category?

 

[Celexa]

How many programs would you place in the category of "the most competitive programs"? Would UW / OHSU fall into this category?

Think big name programs that have never taken a single DO.*

*this does not reflect my personal opinion about DO students.

 

[samac]

Revisiting this thread to see if anyone has any updated advice to share in this regard. Getting all sorts of conflicting information about letters of interest, especially timing (if we send them at all). Any input would be appreciated!

We had over 100 signals for 6 slots. I’ll be surprised if we interview many outside of the signal pool since there were just so many.

 

[brosa]

Signaling at our program + being close geographically basically guaranteed you an interview this year. We are also not very competitive imo so your miles may vary.

For us it was more brutal, we got many signals and will initially only be reviewing signals. So signal got your app to be reviewed initially, not necessarily an interview.

 

[psych_0]

For us it was more brutal, we got many signals and will initially only be reviewing signals. So signal got your app to be reviewed initially, not necessarily an interview.

Yea, I'm sure there were people who signaled our program that didn't get an interview as well. But what I meant was, if you didn't signal us, we are not interviewing you. And this is coming from what most people would consider a weak or bottom tier program. Can only imagine that the stronger programs are doing the same but who knows..

Anyone feel like this whole "signal" thing is dumb? Back when interviews were real, signing up and paying to attend an in person interview was a "signal" that you were a serious applicant. I'm sure there are outliers of people who just went to any and every interview, but those are outliers. For the most part if you took the time/money to go to an in person interview, you had at least some desire to go there. Now with virtual interviews you can apply wherever and use weak programs as practice interviews with no real downsides. IMO, it seems like this whole "signal" thing is trying to hedge against that.

Why exactly are we still doing all virtual interviews?

 

[Ironspy]

Yea, I'm sure there were people who signaled our program that didn't get an interview as well. But what I meant was, if you didn't signal us, we are not interviewing you. And this is coming from what most people would consider a weak or bottom tier program. Can only imagine that the stronger programs are doing the same but who knows..

Anyone feel like this whole "signal" thing is dumb? Back when interviews were real, signing up and paying to attend an in person interview was a "signal" that you were a serious applicant. I'm sure there are outliers of people who just went to any and every interview, but those are outliers. For the most part if you took the time/money to go to an in person interview, you had at least some desire to go there. Now with virtual interviews you can apply wherever and use weak programs as practice interviews with no real downsides. IMO, it seems like this whole "signal" thing is trying to hedge against that.

Why exactly are we still doing all virtual interviews?

Virtual interviews save time and money for programs and applicants. Faculty can interview between patients and it’s minimally disruptive to the clinical schedule. Applicants avoid unnecessary debt and disruptions associated with traveling to interviews.

Seems overall an improvement. With a few manageable downsides

 

[ussmediprise]

Can someone explain getting interviews at "top" programs but not the "mid-tier" ones? Sam geographic location, same "signal" given on ERAS (ie I was born and raised within a 100 mi radius of both programs).

 

[Merovinge]

Can someone explain getting interviews at "top" programs but not the "mid-tier" ones? Sam geographic location, same "signal" given on ERAS (ie I was born and raised within a 100 mi radius of both programs).

Basically two explanations:
1) The programs you think are top vs mid-tier are not actually in those tiers. It can be a lot harder to tell for residency than say undergrad, med school, b-school, etc where it is very well delinated.
2) Chance. Get ready, it dominates everything in life and your future patients lives.

 

[hfpefpepper]

What are the overall perspectives on sending letters of interest then if you were not invited by a program and they’ve sent out a big wave?

 

[brosa]

Can someone explain getting interviews at "top" programs but not the "mid-tier" ones? Sam geographic location, same "signal" given on ERAS (ie I was born and raised within a 100 mi radius of both programs).

Most programs have not sent out all invitations yet, so there is that. There is also the concept of fit with the program. You can be local, but if you have 100 papers about epigenetic, the local community program is unlikely to interview you because they know you are not staying there, and it wouldn't make sense for both parties.