Social Psychology Program Handbook

Graduate and Curriculum Requirements

Overview

Graduate training in the social psychology area is designed to prepare students to conduct and present quality research, to develop theory that contributes to the scientific literature, and to evaluate and constructively critique the research of others (both within and outside the program). Developing abilities to effectively undertake such activities will enhance students’ later success in whatever career path they take after the program, whether that be in academic (including faculty) settings or in non-academic settings. Preparation for these activities include instruction in the findings, theories, and research methods of contemporary social psychology through a variety of course offerings, but they also include students’ own reading and preparation outside of class and a variety of program activities that vary in their (in)formality – everything from meetings with one’s research advisor, to lab group meetings or cross-lab research meetings (i.e., the Group for Attitudes and Persuasion or the Social Cognition Research Group), to area- or department-wide activities (such as First Year Presentations or Department Research Forums – department presentations by post-Master’s students). The overarching approach of the program is to give students many forms of varied practice at evaluating research (their own and others’), discussing research, presenting research, and conducting research. Each of these activities prepare one for likely later professional activities (e.g., involved in getting a job, advising future students, evaluating the work of students or colleagues, publishing, etc.). By providing many opportunities to practice and improve over the course of one’s graduate program, the program can (and has) put students in good positions to excel professionally after they complete the program.

It is desirable for students entering the social psychology program to have prior course work in social psychology, research experience, and a background of at least elementary statistics or mathematics. During the first two years of graduate work, students typically take three classroom courses and one laboratory course during each semester. Students take their candidacy exams at the beginning of their third year.

• They will need to take 8876: Professional Issues in Fall 2026 (in their Third year)
• International students might need to take English writing and/or speaking courses depending on their exemption or the scores of the placement tests (see page 40)

Core Course Sequence

1. 7871: Social Cognition
   Broad survey of classic and contemporary work on the cognitive foundations of social behavior
2. 7872: Social Motivation
   Survey of research on motivational underpinnings of social behavior
3. 7873: Attitudes and Persuasion
   Broad survey of classic and contemporary attitude theory and research

Research Methods Sequence

1. 7874: Research Methods in Social Psychology
   Introduction to the issues, ethics, and problems in conducting experimental laboratory research on social behavior. Among the topics covered are reliability, statistical conclusion validity, internal validity, external validity, construct validity, ecological validity, multiple operationalization, and experimental design. Additional topics include methods and tools commonly employed by social psychological researchers (e.g., surveys, implicit measures, physiological measures).
2. 8876: Professional Issues in Social Psychology 
   This course builds on 7874 by taking the student from the perspective of the investigator to the perspective of a peer in a science self-governed by peer review. In the process, students are taught to be objective in evaluating the ethics, strengths, and limitations of their own research as well as that of others. This course also integrates the lessons learned in courses on theory, experimental design, and statistics. Thus, students are taught how theory, methods, and statistics fit together in a single package. Students' critical and integrative thinking skills are fostered, as they learn to discriminate between strong and weak contributions to the field. The course also includes coverage of various professional issues such as the academic job search, activities involved in being a professor, writing journal articles, and seeking and evaluating grants. This course is generally taken in either a student's SECOND or THIRD year, depending on whether the first methods course (7874) is taken in their first or second year.

Statistics

1. 6810: Statistical Methods in Psychology I
   This is an introductory graduate level statistics course that covers the basic concepts of descriptive and inferential statistics. Classic descriptive statistics are covered in detail, and introductory treatments of the following topics in inferential statistics areprovided: estimation, hypothesis testing, analysis of variance, correlation and regression, and nonparametric techniques.
2. 6811: Statistical Methods in Psychology II
   This course will be a continuation of topics dealt with in 6810, with a focus on simple linear regression and correlation, multiple linear regression, and interactions.

Teaching

1. 6851: Seminar on the Teaching of Psychology
   Designed for first-time teachers of psychology, this course is designed for students to learn theory, philosophy, ethics, research, course planning and delivery, and practical strategies for teaching a psychology course. Students are encouraged to take this course during their first year but may also take it during their second year.

Advanced Seminars

(Offered periodically under the course number 7897; required minimum of two)

1. 7897: Topical Seminar
   In-depth analysis of a topic of current specialized interest in social psychology, such as: emotion, political psychology, automaticity, social identity, intergroup relations, stereotyping, social cognitive neuroscience, self-regulation, etc. The topic varies from semester to semester as a function of the faculty member who is offering the seminar. Ideally, one such topical seminar is offered each semester, but sometimes it is only one per year.

Laboratory Sequence: Research and Professional Issues

1. 8877: Current Research: Attitudes 
   Pre-candidacy students enroll each semester
   Current topics and issues in social psychology as presented by students and faculty and by invited visiting faculty
2. 8878: Current Research: Social Cognition 
   Post-candidacy students enroll each semester
   Current topics and issues in social psychology as presented by students and faculty and by invited faculty

As can be judged from the above list, the recommended course work emphasizes the traditional content domains of social psychology, coupled with a diversity of skills in research methods and data analysis. Although students enroll as indicated above, the rule is that students should attend at least one of these courses each week. Which course is attended could depend on the students’ schedules or interest in a particular scheduled presenter.

Breadth Requirement

During the first two years, students also take two courses to satisfy the breadth requirement. Here are the requirements for your breadth classes:

• You must get approval from your advisor for your breadth class choices.
• They must be outside of the social psychology area (other psychology areas or other departments). Note that you cannot use either of the two required first year statistics courses as part of your breadth requirement.
• You can choose to take your two breadth classes from the same area, or from two different areas. There is one exception to this rule: only one of these breadth courses can be in the Quantitative area. So, if you choose to take two additional Quantitative courses after your firstyear intro sequence, you are required to take one more course outside of the Quantitative and Social areas to fulfill your breadth requirement)

Because of the training emphasis on methods of data analysis, students often opt to take additional courses in the Quantitative area. Other areas are offered within the Department of Psychology (e.g., cognitive psychology, cognitive neuroscience, judgment and decision making, organizational psychology, psychophysiology, behavioral neuroscience, and developmental psychology); still other areas are available outside the Department of Psychology (e.g., sociology, political science, computer and information science, organizational behavior, and marketing). If you wish to obtain an official minor in some area, you must meet the requirements set by that minor area, which may be more than two courses. For example, for an official minor in quantitative psychology you must complete three courses beyond the first-year series. Note that only statistics courses offered by the psychology department count towards this minor.

Electives

Elective courses, as the name suggests, are courses taken outside of the departmental requirements. We have the privilege of offering courses taught by some of the leaders in the field; students are encouraged to take advantage of this opportunity. If you have finished your required coursework, but are excited about a course being offered, you should discuss enrolling with your advisor. These courses need not be limited to courses in the department. Students have taken additional courses in the business school, statistics department, political science, and more.

After students achieve candidacy for the Ph.D. (normally achieved early in the third year of study), they spend the remainder of that year in activities particularly directed toward their individual career objectives. Students can continue to take courses in the third and fourth years, primarily on an elective basis, but rarely take more than one classroom course per semester during these years. This lighter classroom load permits more extensive involvement in research, including the dissertation. The major activity of the fourth and fifth years is completion of the dissertation and continuing research, analysis, and writing on other ongoing research projects.

International Students: English Writing Courses

All international students who do not meet specific exemptions are required to take the Academic English Writing Assessment before the first semester begins. The assessment is taken online and requires $25 test fee payment. Students who are required to take the test will receive an instruction email regarding the test at their OSU email address. Students will get one of three possible scorescorresponding to placement into courses: EDUTL 5901, EDUTL 5902, or Qualify (“80Q”). If a student is placed in EDUTL 5901 or 5902, they are required to complete all Academic English Writing coursework within their FIRST academic year. That is, if they are admitted in 2024, they should finish taking all the courses by Summer 2025. If they are placed in 5901, they will have to complete EDUTL 5901 AND then 5902 in their first year (they cannot take two writing courses in one semester.) If they are placed in 5902, they are only required to take EDUTL 5902. 

Information about Academic English Writing Assessment

Information about elective writing courses

International Students: Spoken English courses

International students are required to certify their proficiency in spoken English in order to be able to teach as GTA. To be certified, scores of either (1) TOEFL iBT Speaking 28 or higher, (2) IELTS Speaking 8.5 or higher, or (3) Oral Proficiency Assessment (OPA) 4.0 or higher is needed. For those who need to take Oral Proficiency Assessment (OPA), Mary Jones sends emails about OPA registration every semester. Before they sign up for the test, students need to contact Mary Jones (jones.3308@osu.edu) to have the department pay for the test cost. Based on their OPA score (below 4), a student can be placed into a spoken English class EDUTL 5040/ 5050, and those students should take the course as soon as possible to begin working to get certified.

Information about OPA

First Year Talk

All first-year students give a brief (10 minute) talk in front of the department faculty and graduate students in late April or early May. This is an excellent opportunity to refine your presentation skills, and one of the few chances you will get to address the Social Program as a whole. (Note: this is in addition to a brown bag talk at either SCRG or GAP, discussed below). The first-year talks are a milestone to celebrate completion of the first year!

Secondary Advisor

If you have not done so already, prior to the end of your first year, you must select a secondary advisor. Discuss your selection with your primary advisor. You will need to select a secondary advisor and confirm they are willing to serve as your secondary prior to completing the Student Activity Report at the end of your first year. You can work with your secondary advisor as much or as little as you’d like to—some students meet with their secondary advisor regularly, some students attend their secondary advisor’s lab meetings, some students work on projects with their secondary advisors, and some students only see their secondary advisors at their Master’s Thesis defense, candidacy defense, and Dissertation Defense.

Master's Thesis/Second Year Project

Students typically defend their Master’s Thesis by the end of spring semester in their second year. Different advisors have different customs as to whether they like students to defend in March, April, or May, or later in the summer. If the defense is not completed by July 1, the student will have to formally petition the area faculty requesting an extension. Extensions will be granted only rarely (and it is generally good to avoid the need for extension if you can). Failure to complete the thesis early enough in the summer removes one’s eligibility to sit for the Candidacy Exam that year (this is partly for the protection of the student, as reduced time between the thesis defense and the Candidacy Exam is only likely to increase stress and reduce performance and to reduce the other potential benefits of preparing for the exam – discussed in more detail in the Candidacy Exam section of this document).

Third Year Contract

The third year (after passing the Candidacy Exam) can be a challenge for research productivity. To some degree, this may be attributable to an extended “exhale” after being geared up to prepare for and complete the Candidacy Exam. It could also involve the fact that the course load drops during one's third year (reducing structure in one’s schedule) and/or that people might often teach for the first time during their third year (tempting students to put much of their newfound time into teaching instead of research). Consequently, at the beginning of the third year (after completion of the written portion of the candidacy exam), students have the option to (and are recommended to) sit down with their advisors to think about goals for the year. Some students and advisors could find it helpful to develop a “contract” for the year. For some advisors this contract will be more formal than for others. The activities in which students will be engaged during the third year would be specified in the contract so that everyone is clear whether progress toward goals is being made. Any contract would likely include how the student will demonstrate proficiency in scholarly writing and teaching. (Contracts can be customized to some degree to fit the alternative career paths of students.)

For students interested in academic jobs, suggested goals for the year could include:

• Scholarly writing
  Students should indicate their intent to write-up and submit for publication one paper by the end of the third year. This paper can be a report of empirical work, often based on one’s Master’s thesis. If data are not available for such a submission, then a student could write a review-type paper (a la Psych Bulletin) or a book chapter. The third-year contract should specify how the student intends to accomplish this. Please keep in mind that an important factor predicting graduate student success in the program is the ability to bring a program of research from ideation and implementation toward a publishable manuscript in a top-tier journal (i.e., having a research question, testing your idea, writing your findings up, and submitting your work for publication).
• Teaching
  Students should review their latest teaching evaluations with their advisors. Students should submit to their advisor a written response to the feedback that discusses how they might use it to improve their teaching.
• Discussion of Career Path
  Students should have a discussion of their intended career path with their advisors. Relevant topics to be discussed are criteria for successful job applications for that path and current strengths and weaknesses of the student in regard to other applicants.

Any contract that is prepared could be discussed by the area faculty members at the annual student evaluation meeting, and the advisor should report on the student's progress toward meeting his/her contract at that meeting. If the student is not making satisfactory progress, s/he should directly address any lack of progress and reasons for it in their annual Student Activity Report (SAR; described in the Student Evaluation section).

Master's Thesis, Candidacy, & Dissertation Committees

Master's Thesis Committee (3 required members)

• Thesis Chair (normally the student's advisor, but another social area faculty member may serve as chair with the approval of the student's advisor; a nonsocial area member may serve as co-chair with the student's advisor)
• One additional faculty member from the social area
• Any other faculty member approved by the thesis chair (this is typically another social area faculty member)
• Additional faculty members could be added with approval from the thesis advisor.

Candidacy Exam Committee (4 required members)

• Advisor from social area
• Two additional members from the social area faculty
• A fourth member who is not a core social psychology faculty member. The fourth member could be a faculty member in another area of the psychology department or a faculty member from outside the psychology department. Faculty from other departments who are affiliated with the social psychology program may serve as the “outside” or fourth member of the committee. Often this faculty member is someone from whom you have taken a breadth course.

Doctoral Dissertation Committee (4 required members)

• Dissertation Chair (normally the student's advisor, but another social area faculty member may serve as chair with the approval of the student's advisor; a nonsocial area member may serve as co-chair with the student's advisor)
• Two additional members from the social area faculty
• The Graduate School appoints a faculty member (i.e., the Grad Rep) who serves on the oral defense committee.
• Additional faculty members may be added with approval from the thesis advisor.

*Note: For committees, the core social area faculty currently consist of Russell Fazio, Kentaro Fujita, Lisa Libby, Richard Petty, Steven Spencer, Dylan Wagner, Baldwin Way, and Duane Wegener.

Evaluation Criteria For Students

Student Evaluations

In the spring of each academic year, all social area graduate students complete the Student Activities Report (SAR). The form is online and due soon after the end of the spring semester. The report is intended to help students document research, teaching, and service activities and to prompt students to periodically reflect on their progress, take stock of their challenges, and formulate plans to overcome those challenges. This report is completed on-line. The Social Area Faculty Coordinator will send an e-mail with a link to the site and login information.

On this report, students document their academic progress and accomplishments during the previous academic year, including progress toward completion of a Master’s thesis or doctoral dissertation, grades in all coursework, research activities, presentations and publications, professional meetings attended, etc. In addition, students can report on any service they have performed for the social area or department (e.g., treasurer of GAP, colloquium jobs, etc.). Finally, the report provides opportunities for self- evaluation and preparation of a curriculum vita. The self-evaluation section of the report allows students to discuss their skill development in research, teaching, and service and their progress toward becoming a social psychologist. The inclusion of the curriculum vita requirement is meant to help students develop and maintain an up-to-date vita. On the basis of this information and other sources, the social area faculty prepare a written evaluation of each student. The letter of evaluation will be written by the student’s primary advisor but will represent the collective and official evaluation of the program faculty.

The evaluation letter serves two primary purposes. It is designed to foster student development by pointing out particular areas of strength and/or weakness. The letter also provides a basis for decisions about student support and retention in the program. In the event that a student fails to make satisfactory progress in the program, the specific problem area(s) will be noted in the letter, and the steps necessary to correct the situation will be outlined. That is, the reasons why a student is deemed not to be making satisfactory progress will be described, the actions necessary to restore good standing in the program will be stipulated, and the consequences of failure to take corrective action will be specified.

Access to evaluation letters will be restricted to the student involved, the social area faculty, the graduate studies committee of the department of psychology, the psychology department chair, and appropriate parties of the Graduate School.

Coursework

Students are expected to receive a grade of B or better in all coursework. All required pre- candidacy exam social psychology coursework should be completed by the end of the student’s second year (though the professional issues class – 8876 – will be taken in year 3 by roughly half of the students – i.e., those who take 7874 in year 2). Ideally, all coursework for the breadth requirement should be completed no later than the first semester of the student’s third year. Completion of breadth requirements must occur by the end of the 4th year of graduate study.

Master's Degree

Students are expected to complete and defend their Master’s thesis by the end of their second year. To find additional important dates regarding this process, check the Graduate School’s website. If you have other questions about this process, your advisor, the graduate coordinator (currently Mary Jones) and the Graduate School website are wonderful places to start. The department Master’s degree is a Master of Science (M.S.) degree.

Candidacy Exam

Students will typically complete the sit-down written portion of their candidacy exam two weeks before the start of fall classes and the take-home portion one week prior to the start of classes of the fall semester of their third year. The oral defense of this exam is expected to be completed within one month of the written portions of the exam. See the later section on the Candidacy Exam for more information.

Doctoral Dissertation

Students are expected to complete their doctoral dissertation by the end of their fourth or fifth year in the program. Under approved circumstances, students can petition to extend their stay (and funding) in the program for a 6th year to complete the dissertation. To find important dates regarding this process, check the Graduate School’s website. If you have other questions about this process, your advisor and the Graduate School website are wonderful places to start. For students requesting sixth year department funding: No later than December 1 of the fall semester of the student’s fifth year, the student will identify the social area members of their dissertation committee. The student will convey to the committee either individually or as a group the plan for what will be included in the dissertation and receive feedback from the committee regarding those plans. These steps are necessary in order to be able to submit an application to the department for 6th year funding.

Research and Brown Bag Meetings

Students are expected to be actively engaged in research throughout their graduate studies. Students are expected to complete and present an oral report on a first-year research project prior to the end of their first year in the program. This is known as your First-Year Talk, and will last about 10-15 minutes. You will have this short prestation along with the other members of your cohort during the normal colloquium time. Following this, students are expected to be engaged in conducting, writing up, and presenting their scholarly efforts in appropriate forums. Students will be evaluated on their contribution to their faculty lab groups, service as research assistants, and on their progress in becoming professionals (e.g., contribution to publications, presentations at conventions, etc.). Students are expected to maintain the highest scholarly and ethical standards in their research activities.

The social area has two brown bag meetings. The Social Cognition Research Group (SCRG) and the Group for Attitudes and Persuasion (GAP) are two groups in which students get a chance to present their research to other students and faculty in the social area. Both groups hold meetings in Lazenby 120; SCRG occurs on Wednesdays at 12 noon, whereas GAP is on Fridays at 10:30 am. The meetings each last an hour and a half, and they provide great opportunities to get feedback on your current research. It is also a good way to learn about the research that is being conducting in the social area. You are not required to go to every SCRG and GAP meeting; however, it is required that you attend at least one of these meetings regularly. Also, the faculty expect each student to present at either SCRG or GAP at least once during each academic year, students in their 4th year and beyond are expected to present twice per year, ideally once in SCRG and once in GAP. Sometimes one’s first presentation at GAP or SCRG (during the spring of one’s first year in the program) might split the time between presenters (i.e., 30 - 45 minutes each). To be clear, your first brownbag presentation (at GAP or SCRG) is a separate presentation from your First-Year Talk. 

Teaching

Students are expected to obtain teaching experience prior to their completion of the doctoral dissertation. Students will be evaluated on their teaching competence based on undergraduate student evaluations and faculty assessments. Students are expected to maintain the highest scholarly and ethical standards in their teaching activities. During the spring semester of their first or second year, students take a seminar on the teaching of psychology.

Service

Students are expected to contribute their services and skills to fostering program goals. Roles change across one’s years in the program, but they can include support for the colloquium series, new student recruitment, and other program-wide activities. Students will be evaluated based on their contributions to the area colloquium series, the recruitment of new students, and other program-relevant activities.

Colloquium/Social Behavioral Interest Group

The Social Behavior Interest Group (also known as SBIG) is an official OSU student organization run by graduate students in social psychology. The primary purpose of SBIG is to sponsor the social psychology colloquium series and the receptions that occur after the talks. You may hear faculty refer to our colloquium series as SBIG. There may be dues, which are used only to pay for the food and beverages served at the receptions. Dues are paid at the end of the spring semester.

Generally, colloquia are scheduled for 4:00 PM to 5:30PM on Thursdays. There are also informal sessions in the morning with just the graduate students and the speaker from 11:00 AM to 12:00 PM on Thursdays. These meetings can really be great, so don't miss them. (Plus, you are required to attend these talks as part of receiving course credit for 8877 and 8878, and attendance is taken). In addition, there are opportunities for a subset of students to go to lunch with the speaker. All students are invited to talk with the speaker at the reception following the colloquium. A sign-up sheet for lunch is circulated via email. 

You should keep these times on Thursdays open every week, regardless of whether there is a colloquium. Even if no visiting speaker is scheduled, this time is occasionally used for brown-bag and OSU faculty presentations or student workshops. 

All students have colloquium jobs which they rank preferences for and then are assigned before the beginning of the next academic year. First-year students are always in charge of setting up Morning Meeting (meeting with the visiting speaker and current social area students) by arranging chairs and morning snacks, setting up a reception for the speaker, and maintaining the colloquium closet. As such, you will need to be available around 10:30 AM on Thursday mornings to set up for morning meetings. More details will be provided about these responsibilities by the student designated as the colloquium chair. Designation as colloquium chair is an honorific position selected by the social area faculty.

The Candidacy Exam

The Candidacy Examination is composed of sit down written, take home written and oral defense portions. The written portion is given in August each year before the start of the fall semester. Students then schedule the oral defense within one month of learning the outcome of the written exam. Students take the candidacy exam at the beginning of their third year of graduate study at Ohio State. Under rare circumstances, students entering with a Master’s degree might take the written portion of the candidacy examination at the beginning of their second year in the program.

The Candidacy Examination is a requirement of the Graduate School at Ohio State, but its construction is determined by the social area faculty. The exam is designed to achieve a number of goals that benefit students’ preparation for a productive career beyond Ohio State. The exam provides an opportunity and necessity to integrate knowledge across domains within social psychology as well as to think beyond the specific area(s) in which one conducts research. There are many different settings in which one will have to think about and discuss research or theory without the ability to step back and think about it or look up relevant material. Such settings include job interviews, informal meetings with other faculty at conferences or at their universities, or internal lab meetings when reacting to students’ or colleagues’ research. The Candidacy Exam offers both written and interpersonal practice at such activities, and they build on previous practice that is ideally developed through one’s own active participation in lab group meetings, GAP or SCRG, or the colloquium series (e.g., at lunch or morning meeting with speakers). The different portions of the exam allow students with different strengths (e.g., written vs oral) to shine in different ways, and strong performance on one portion of the exam can definitely make up for difficulties encountered in another part of the exam. 

The Candidacy Exam is designed so that any student who survives the rigorous screening for admission to graduate study in social psychology, and who has completed the first two years of course work and the pre-dissertation research requirement with normal diligence and reasonable application, should expect to pass.

The Written Portion

The written examination consists of two sections: a sit-down portion, which lasts four hours, and a take-home section, which the student has one week to complete. The sit-down (closed book/note) section of the examination is designed to ensure that the student has developed a breadth of knowledge about theories and key findings in social psychology and has at least 
a general familiarity with the ideas and people in it. Greater emphasis is placed on how one reasons about and justifies one’s answers than on detailed content knowledge (of the type that would be more common in content courses). The examination typically consists of six medium-length essays. Content of examination questions is drawn from courses offered in the social psychology area, colloquia given at Ohio State by visiting researchers, and from recent articles in journals such as PSPB, JESP, and JPSP. Examination questions from previous years are available along with materials previous students have used to prepare. Students should realize, however, that some of the content of previous exams reflect that a particular topical seminar had been offered or that a particular current issue in the field had been salient at the time. Therefore, although past questions can give one some idea of the scope or nature of 
exam questions, inclusion of certain material in a previous question does not mean that similar material is likely to be included in a current exam (especially if different seminars or substantive classes have been available or different current topics seem relevant to the field or academia more generally at the time of the current exam). 

The take-home (open book/note) section typically focuses on analytic judgment. Past take-home exams have asked the student to summarize developments in an area of interest, to design a research program on a designated topic, or to integrate literature for purposes of course development or policy recommendations, etc. Obviously, the best way to develop such critical and professional judgment is to practice it on the material encountered during the first two years of graduate study.

Although students are encouraged to work together in preparing for the examination (discussing new developments in the field, comparing course notes, informing each other about valuable reviews, etc.) the examination itself, including the take-home section, must be strictly an individual effort. (On the take-home section, the student is free to use all ordinary library resources, as well as lecture and seminar notes.) The first two years of graduate training are designed to prepare students to do well on this exam. Thus, doing well in courses and learning the material thoroughly (not just for semester-specific exams) would serve incoming students well in their ability to demonstrate knowledge of the field.

Evaluation of Written Examination

The written examinations are graded “blindly” (without student identification) by members of the social psychology faculty. As noted above, greater emphasis is typically placed on how one explains and backs up one’s answers than on the position taken on the question. Rarely are questions formulated with particular “correct” answers in mind. Instead, most questions can be answered in multiple ways, depending on the students’ takes on the questions. The difference between good and not so good answers typically lies in how well or poorly the student explains the rationale behind the answer. Another matter of importance to students preparing for the exam is that the faculty do not expect students to have equal expertise in all areas of social psychology. For example, the core courses do not cover all of social psychology. The faculty would expect students to have a more thorough grasp of the material in areas covered by the core courses, in their own research area(s), and in areas covered by topical seminars that the students took than in other parts of social psychology (the offering of topical seminars in particular areas might be part of the reason for some questions in previous exams). In many cases, answers about particular domains might stem from application of material from the core course areas to a situation or phenomenon described in the question.

The grades on each section of the written portion are averaged from the scores of multiple faculty graders to give overall grades for the written exam. You will receive general feedback from your advisor regarding performance on the written portion. The overall Candidacy Examination grade, however, also includes the oral portion.

The Oral Portion

The oral portion of the Candidacy Examination is administered and evaluated by a candidacy examination committee made up of the student’s research advisor, two other core social psychology faculty, and a fourth member who is not a core social psychology faculty member. The fourth member may be a faculty member of your own choosing (in consultation with your advisor) in another area of the psychology department or a faculty member from outside the psychology department (could be someone you took a breadth course with). Faculty from other departments who are affiliated with the social psychology program may serve as the “outside” or fourth member of the committee.

In order to take the oral examination, the student (a) must have completed or be currently enrolled for at least 45 credit hours of graduate coursework, (b) must have satisfied the pre-dissertation research requirement (usually by completing the Master’s Thesis). In general, the oral examination should be completed within one month of the faculty grading of the sit-down questions. The oral examination is two hours in length, in accordance with Graduate School regulations, with all committee members being present (one committee member can participate remotely – online, typically using CarmenZoom). The student is usually asked at the beginning of the examination to spend 5 to 10 minutes describing his or her academic history and research interests and, often, to address any written responses that, upon reflection, they would have changed. Although this initial discussion can have an impact on the 
subsequent course of questioning, members of the examining committee are free to ask any questions pertaining to the adequacy of the student’s general knowledge of social psychology and fields of specialization.

Note: The rules concerning graduate students in psychology state: “A student has the option, on his/her first attempt at the Candidacy Examination, not to take the oral portion. He/she must, however, petition the Graduate Program Committee (of the Psychology Department) for permission not to take the oral portion. Failure for the written part of the examination must be reported to the Graduate School.”

Possible Evaluations of the Candidacy Examination

At the conclusion of the oral exam, the student will leave the room and the committee deliberates to evaluate the oral portion in conjunction with the written portion. If the judgment is Satisfactory, the student is admitted to candidacy for the Ph.D. degree at the end of the semester in which the oral examination is completed. In some cases, the examining committee may detect an imbalance in the student’s preparation, even though finding the overall Candidacy Examination performance to be satisfactory. In that case, the committee will usually agree on a course of additional study or experience to be pursued by the student and monitored by the committee chair (the student’s advisor).

An unsatisfactory judgment by the examining committee can lead to termination of graduate studies toward the Ph.D., unless the committee specifically recommends, as part of its judgment, that a repeat of the examination be permitted. In the event that the committee recommends no second chance, they (and other faculty) will provide advice and counseling to develop alternative career routes for the student. More typically, however, an initial unsatisfactory judgment by the committee allows for a second attempt by the student (to be taken when the next written exam is offered – the next August). The second exam committee must be the same as the first. Students are not permitted a third try at the exam if unsuccessful on the second try.

As a matter of training philosophy, the Social Psychology Area considers an Unsatisfactory result on the Candidacy Examination to be a failure for the Area as well as for the student. For this reason, annual student evaluations given at the end of each of the first two years of graduate study and the evaluation of the pre-dissertation research (or Master’s Thesis) oral are intended to ensure that the student remains on track to a Satisfactory outcome of the Candidacy Examination. Students who appear, on the basis of these earlier evaluations, to be unlikely to achieve a Satisfactory result on the Candidacy Examination should be informed of faculty concerns and be advised to take remedial steps and, in some cases, to consider pursuing alternative career paths directly, rather than postponing such considerations until their third year in the program.

When to Study

Suggestions offered by students ranged from starting the first semester of your first year to allotting at least the month before the candidacy exam to study. The essence of the advice can be summed up with: “Don’t wait until the last minute!” The best advice is probably to read broadly (beyond your courses and research areas) as soon as you arrive, so that you can accumulate knowledge over time. To this end, it is useful to keep up with the top-tier journals in our field during your time in grad school (e.g., JPSP, JESP, PSPB). Make note of trends in the field and how those relate to material you cover in courses. Though rarely the point of assessment, it can be a useful memory cue to take note of authors’ names and universities (as people often develop related programs of research, and training programs also sometimes develop areas of strength – each of these can help you to gain fluency with developments in the field). If you've been doing what you're supposed to do during your undergraduate years and your first two years of grad school, such as going to classes, doing the assigned readings, attending colloquia, and keeping up with your journal reading, then you already have a good start on Candidacy Exam preparation. You probably know more than you think you do. Candidacy also alerts people to how much more there is to learn. That is a common experience, and it is healthy. No one ever knows everything, but preparing for candidacy represents a major opportunity (that you will not have later in your career) to think broadly about the field and connect as many pieces of it as possible to the major theoretical and empirical themes you find through courses, talks, lab groups, conferences, reading, and other scholarly activities.

What to Study

Look over Candidacy Exam questions from past years to get a sense of the scope of the questions. This may be more helpful after you have done some reading. This is because looking at the list of questions before you've studied can be very intimidating. Nevertheless, you can get an idea of the types of questions that the faculty tend to ask. Realize, however, that some of the past questions spoke to courses (e.g., topical seminars) that were offered at the time and might not have been offered during your time in the program.

Many students have found the Handbook of Social Psychology (5th Ed., 2010) really useful. Be sure to check for the latest edition of this resource. Handbook chapters allow students to get a handle on a research area without reading hundreds of empirical papers (perhaps especially useful for areas that start out being unfamiliar – e.g., those areas not covered in core or seminar classes). Also, the organization provided by the author(s) can provide a framework for thinking about a particular area, especially the chapters with historical perspective. Hopefully, as you study, you will begin to group different experiments and research areas conceptually. This emerging conceptual framework will be a huge help in answering generals questions. After reading selected Handbook chapters, reading in-depth on some of the prevalent topics in social psychology is a good idea. You can choose topics based on the syllabi of recent graduate-level classes, on topics from recent colloquia (especially if a given topic has been represented across talks), or on topics that seem to be mentioned often in GAP or SCRG meetings (e.g., in professor questions or comments – after all, they are the ones generating the candidacy questions as well). Remember not to rely solely on the Handbook, as answers should often be supported by classic and current empirical research that you won’t know intimately through only reading the Handbook.

Another potentially helpful source is Social Cognition by Fiske and Taylor (2013). Knowledge of the book's contents can help in answering a large variety of questions. Though the book is getting older, it is still a very useful tool. Read review articles and discuss them with your cohort and others. Don't concentrate on the specific examples too much, but it is useful to be able to cite at least one for any major idea or method.

Reread your class notes and articles assigned for courses; read Annual Review of Psychology chapters and other summaries of current research such as those appearing in the Advances in Experimental Social Psychology and the Personality and Social Psychology Review; read important original empirical papers; skim through some recent current journals. Take this opportunity to read some of the historical works in the field (Allport, Festinger, etc.). You should be getting a broader sense of the field—don't just try to memorize and cram. Use this opportunity to think about what the field knows, what the open questions are, and how we got to where we are. It is important to understand how things have developed historically. For example, how have core theories (like cognitive dissonance theory) evolved over time? From where did the idea originally come? Some faculty particularly like these sorts of long-term trajectory type questions.

Students should even be able to project into the future – what are the burning questions in some areas? What are some exciting and new developments? The ability to go backwards and forwards is a critical skill. This obviously involves developing one’s own perspective to what has happened and where things are going. Although the questions can cover any aspect of social psychology, they're most likely to cover areas that we study intensively here (attitudes, social cognition, social motivation). But, keep in mind that you should be familiar with research in all areas of social psychology, even those areas that are not strongly represented in the curriculum or the faculty. The faculty expect you to develop deeper knowledge of the core areas, but broad familiarity is also useful and valued.

Even though knowledge of every empirical paper is not necessary, it is good to know important pieces reasonably well. The important pieces come up again and again when reading the work of others. Some papers have had a much greater impact on the field than others. It is good to know the premises of the major papers, as well as why they are important. Methodological details are often not terribly important, but some empirical papers have a huge impact precisely because they introduce a new method. Additionally, it is often useful in your answers if you can provide a brief overview of what happened in an experiment that you're describing, much like you might describe an experiment in a journal article that you wrote.

When students have intimate knowledge of a subset of empirical papers, they can use these to derive ideas/concepts/methodologies/etc. that can be used to demonstrate a number of important points. Thus, the same paper could be used to exemplify different points in different questions. The important papers in the field may be important precisely because they may make a number of independently important contributions to the field.

Students should review the syllabi of major seminars and lecture courses. They should select major papers to reread. Also, there is a crate of readings that past Candidacy Exam takers have found useful. Keep reading up on the current research. Don't neglect current JPSPs as you comb through old Handbooks.

How to Study

There is so much material you could read that it can be a good idea to make a list of topics, and then schedule a certain amount of study time for each topic. Then identify the most important readings for each topic. You won't get through everything. But, you also don't want to spend 8 weeks learning everything there is to know about attitudes, only to realize that you have only one more week left before the exam to study everything else in social psychology (e.g., motivation, self, culture, person perception, etc.). When making your schedule, it's a good idea to leave the week or so before the exam empty—you can use that time to refresh your memory on earlier reading, or catch up on anything you didn't get to previously.

Try to understand how the research you're reading relates to your own work. If you can relate the material to the content you understand best, you'll understand it better. Try practice runs answering questions in a room full of other people doing the same thing before taking the actual test. Recruit an older student or have each person in a study group select or generate questions, and practice answering them in the allotted time, or take practice exams in the computer lab with your cohort and discuss your answers afterwards. It is often good to get practice organizing your thoughts on the spot. In reading research, you will likely become familiar with the names of the major theorists and contributors to the field and knowing the names of theories and theorists can be a useful organizing scheme. Importantly, your familiarity with major theories and figures in the field should be a product of your exposure to the literature, not just memorization.

During your first two years in graduate school, you will begin to pick up on what is going on in the field and who the major players are. There are limits to how much you can learn, but by reading chapters and reviews thoroughly, you may develop a memory for specific findings and citations for a very large number of experiments. Of course, as noted above, this will be much, much easier if you can plug these individual findings into a larger conceptual context.

Most cohorts also find it helpful to have group meetings; this time can be used for discussion of readings, creation of practice questions, writing practice answers, group stress relief, or whatever is most helpful for your particular class. You're all going through the same thing—lean on each other, support each other, and help each other.

• Make the studying fun by playing games (if your cohort is so inclined).
• Don't forget to look at the big picture... spend less time memorizing details and spend more time understanding what social psychology is.
• Don't quiz each other on small points. You will all suffer from the "quizmaster" phenomenon.
• Discuss more general concepts rather than smaller topics.
• The PhD grants individuals with the branding that they are experts in their chosen field of study. Take this perspective in your own studies. In other words, ask yourself: What would I expect an “expert” of social psychology to know, and how can I best be a source of this knowledge?

How to Take the Sit-Down Exam

Answer questions on the stuff you know best first. Remember that you can blow a question (or two!) and still pass. The oral portion is there, in part, to address any written questions that gave you trouble. Stick to the question; don't spend forever writing about something that is only tangentially relevant. Many answers suffer from not really addressing the question that was asked. If it has multiple parts, be sure to address each part at least briefly. The sit-down exam is 4 hours and taken on the computer. 

How to Take the Take-Home Exam

The faculty require the same independent on-your-own approach as you used for the sit-down exam for the take home exam, except that you may use printed and internet resources for the latter. You may not consult on your answers (no email, no phone, nothing!) with any person, including other students. The independence rule is only fair— performance on the take home exam should reflect individual merit rather than a person's ability to get help.

The independence rule isn't easy for some people, because it can require an abrupt transition from a group approach during exam preparation to a "loner" approach during exam taking. We absolutely value collaboration in many aspects of the program, but that cannot extend to completion of the Candidacy Exam.

** An important note: The sit-down portion of the candidacy exam is weighted a bit more heavily than the take- home portion. Allocate your resources wisely. In other words, do not depend on your ability to be a superstar on the take-home in order to make up for lost ground on the sit- down portion. You are getting a PhD in social psychology in one of the best programs in the world. Thus, you should be capable of generating thoughtful responses to Big Questions in our field whenever prompted (as the sit-down portion tests), and not only capable of producing such responses with a week to consider your answers (as the take- home portion tests). Remind yourself that a scholar of our field should be ready to discuss a 
wide array of relevant topics, even those outside his or her chosen sub-area of expertise, and apply one’s knowledge to important real-world problems. 

During and After the Take-Home Exam: Anonymity during Faculty Scoring

You will be anonymous to the faculty graders. Thus, you are requested not to include any identifying information in your exam answers (e.g., emphasizing your own research). The graders should evaluate just what you wrote and not take into account any other aspects of students’ lives and personalities. Therefore, post-exam it is important not to talk about the exam questions with faculty or other students. If you reveal your idiosyncratic reaction to an exam question, the faculty might know which set of answers was yours and thereby reduce the degrees of anonymity for other students. So, even if you don't care about being identified, please resist the understandable temptation to expostulate about selected questions to anyone here, because to do so will abridge protective anonymity for everyone.

Tips for Taking the Oral Portion

For the oral exam, look at your responses to the written portion which you should have from typing them up (again, you can get a copy of it from the area coordinator or a department assistant assigned to help coordinate the exam for the area if needed) and work through any questions where you are not satisfied with your answer.

Also keep in mind the faculty who are on your committee. They might be especially likely to ask you to elaborate upon your answers for questions related to their own interests. You will not know who wrote which questions, but you know what the interests are of the faculty on your committee. Make the request to the non- social-area faculty member you want to be in your committee as early as possible. Some non-social-area faculty might be in particular demand, and they might not want to be on your committee if they're already on several other committees. That issue can also arise with the social area faculty if there is a large class taking the exam. Some faculty members might have expertise related to a number of the students but be reluctant to serve on all of those candidacy exam committees.

The faculty understand that responding in real time orally is not the ideal “testing” environment in that people who might have formulated a very reasonable answer with a little time to think might have more difficulty in the oral exam setting. Yet, there are many settings in which oral responses are needed in real time (e.g., when providing feedback to one’s students, having a discussion at a conference, or answering a question in GAP or SCRG or at another university or company at your job talk or interview). Therefore, it is good to get practice in the oral (alongside other opportunities in lab groups, receptions, and other places). Getting comfortable with such settings while a student will help at many points in one’s career. The oral portion is not meant to make you feel anxious. It is an opportunity to help clarify or improve on answers from the written while also engaging in a conversation about your areas of expertise. Keep in mind that these people want and expect you to pass!