<p>I'm currently a Junior undergrad planning on applying to grad school next year in Psychology and have been trying to figure out which subfield I enjoy the most. </p>
<p>Over the past two years, I've developed a general interest in social topics within Psychology but have joined labs in different subfields to gain experience. The main reason I chose to do this was because I wanted to gain exposure to the various methods and perspectives. </p>
<p>The labs (cognitive, bio, social) all have a focus on similar social topics in psych, but I was wondering how graduate schools would see this? Would they think that I don't have a defined interest, and would that hurt my chances? Any input would be helpful, thanks!</p>
<p>Most people don’t know exactly what they’re going to do when they apply to grad school, and I think undergrad is seen as a time to explore the various subfields and try and find exactly what it is you want to focus on with a PhD. I worked in a ton of different labs in undergrad across all different fields. During my PhD so far I’ve actually found a use for the various kinds of knowledge I picked up in each lab.</p>
<p>Sounds good to me as well. Kudos to you for bothering to explore different areas. It sounds like you will be able to apply to grad schools knowing more about what you want than many students do.</p>
<p>Really? I am also currently doing this, 4 different labs, im afraid that the admission committee might view me as “no committment to a lab” and strike me out.</p>
<p>There is a difference between being uncommitted and wanting to explore. If you can demonstrate productivity and effective research in each and every one of your pursuits (and don’t drop any of them just for the heck of moving on), then no one will suspect lack of commitment on your part. In three years, I worked separately on three totally unrelated research projects, and I met 100% success during grad school admissions.</p>
<p>By “demonstrating productivity,” does it mean that you need to publish a paper? I didn’t get a chance to publish papers on the my first lab. I kinda got stuck on stupid things, but I really took the research seriously. will this look bad to admissions?</p>
<p>I’m really just working in these labs to help me find what I want to do and to gain general experience. I’ve worked in one of the labs for 2 years, one for 6 months, and one for only 2 months. I most likely will stop working for one of them next May.</p>
<p>In the case that it does make me seem uncommitted, would it be bad if I just left one of them off my cv completely?</p>
<p>If you do work in three labs, and have recs from the latest two, then that is sufficient, but if you left off a LOR from the PI you worked with for two years, that would be a red flag. When my D was applying to programs, she had worked with four PIs, and she had to leave one of them off when schools would only allow three LORs. You have to pick and choose – and programs know that.</p>
<p>I want to know because I worked in lab two years ago for just 3 months, but I left after some problems (I was taking 20 credits and the professor required a 12 hour commitment at least)-I want to omit it from my CV. I proceeded to do a year of research, and I currently am working on two research projects this year.</p>
<p>Sorry fo hijacking the OPs thread and my bad manners</p>