You have to be a match to get in- so what does that mean?

[psych for path]

.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[teacup11]

i'm interested in this question as well

 

[g0708]

This is just my opinion on the whole thing, so take it with a grain of salt.

1. Know what it is about your area of interest that is actually of interest to you. Saying you're interested in Axis II/BPD/Suicidality is SOOOOO general and VERY broad. There is so much variability in that. What about these disorders? What are the similarities between them and how can you focus your interest so that it's specific enough to come across as informed and general enough so that it can apply to multiple labs. Think of a psychological/cognitive/emotional process that is of interest instead--that is an area of dysfunction perhaps across multiple Axis II disorders.

2. Despite what I said above, I still think it's important for you to have experience directly related to what you are interested in. Imagine you are the faculty member taking a student. You get an application from someone with "deep" interest level (but no experience) and someone with more solid experience focused interest level... one applicant has 0 experience with the population you as a faculty member are working with or the process you're interested in, and the other has worked with the population--which would you pick to even interview? The person with more experience will AT LEAST give the faculty member the confidence that the student has worked with the population, is comfortable with that population, and is likely to be better prepared and focused to do the research.

3.Lets say for example you're interested in emotional processing as an umbrella "process"--this can be applied to health psych populations, clinical populations, suicidal behaviors, BPD, etc. Take advantage of the time you have before you apply and design a project that will explore your process of interest in the health psych population. In your statement of purpose, mention how your experience has helped SHAPE your interest in applying research on emotional processing to clinical populations x and y--which have emotional processing deficits, or whatever. The alternative is to take an extra year, join a lab doing research in the area you're interested in--publishing or presenting on it, and again still be as specific as possible in your statement.

Let me know if you have any other questions. Again, these are just me rambling on about what I THINK... I hope you get other answers to this question too.

 

[EmotRegulation]

Different faculty members care about experience in their direct area to varying degrees. Personally, I don't care about experience with a particular population or research on a particular topic, though I do care about experience with research methodology and I care about how you apply your past research experience to your interests.

If you can demonstrate, for example, that your work on therapeutic alliance has sparked an interest in the necessity of a strong alliance for dealing with Axis II issues, you might be able to bridge that gap. In a personal statement, you can describe what your past experience (e.g. my exposure to health psychology has given me valuable experience in a medical setting . . . ) and how it applies to what you want to do (e.g. . . . and I've realized that I am drawn toward the problems of personality pathology and extreme emotional distress).

Honestly, when I look at applicant files, I am looking for evidence that someone can think for themselves and has the self-reflection skills needed to learn.

 

[PhilAwesome]

Great question.

From my time during the interviews, I noticed a LOT of applicants didn't have direct research experience in the areas in which they wanted to work. I didn't even have any direct research experience at all (other than familiarity with research methods and APA style developed through work in college); I worked at an MCO for a year and a half and that was my "research" background, so I didn't work with populations directly at all.

I think what's more important is that you're specific about what you're interested in, and that you show that you can have good ideas about it. Having experience to draw from is important in that regard, but it doesn't have to be experience that goes on your CV. If you know someone who has BPD (or borderline tendencies) or has been suicidal, that connection can help you come up with different ways at looking at the problem and help you generate good ideas for research. That said, you're probably best served to let those ideas guide you in your application, but not explicitly mention personal (meaning non-professional) connections with mental illness; you don't want to make it look like you're saying "I'm an expert in suicidality because I had a friend who was suicidal." And if you don't have personal connections, try to learn as much as you can about your area of interest. Read as much as you can. Watch movies or documentaries that really capture the behavior and the mindset of people with personality disorders or suicidal behaviors. That way, you can form your own understanding or theories about their behavior, and have some good ideas about what sort of research you might want to do. One strategy I used in my personal statement was to cite a study by the POI I wanted to work with and say an idea that I had for expanding that, or how it related to an idea for a study that I would come up with.

I know I've made it sound a little bit like you need to have your dissertation topic in mind when you apply to grad school; that's really not the case. You just need to be able to show that you know enough about the disorders/behaviors of interest and are passionate about it to be creative (meaning you can come up with at least one idea for a study around the topic if you're prompted by the POI). If you can do that without having research experience that's specific to that population, I don't think that will hold you back with very many professors, and will generally make you seem like a very good match.

It's worth noting that, in my own application process, I got five interviews out of ten clinical Ph.D. applications. I got into two programs, and I think those were the ones where I was the most engaged in discussing new research ideas with the POIs. I generally tailored my application towards identifying populations with anxiety disorders (GAD and trauma) who responded poorly towards CBT and modifying treatments to better serve those populations, but for one of the programs that accepted me, the POI I applied to work with was focusing on gender roles and sexuality (including sexual assault). During the interview with her, despite not having read much academic on the subject (and not doing any clinical work related to it), I just had all of these cool ideas for research. A lot of them just came up on the spot when she was talking about her own research. I didn't need any specific experience; I'd spent so much time thinking about the topic in my personal life and with the people I know that I was able to show that I'd have good ideas if I worked in her lab, despite not having any specific work experience.

Sorry this is super long; I hope it's helpful to you in your application process. Good luck!