Frequently asked questions for prospective doctoral students who might want me as their PhD advisor

Are you competent to advise me on my chosen topic?

My broad domains of interest are Clinical Psychology / Validated psychological interventions / Evolutionary Psychology and Evolutionary Psychopathology / Anomalous psychological phenomena.

I might be able to supervise topics that do not fall in these categories, but this determination is made on a case by case basis.

What qualifications do you have as my potential PhD advisor?

I have a doctoral degree in psychology from the New School University in the United States. I am a professor of psychology at a university in the United States and I am also affiliated with the University of Bucharest. I am also a licensed Clinical Psychologist in Romania.

I worked for many years as a clinical researcher in the Department of Psychiatry at Cornell University, department ranked on the first place in the United States.

I am the recipient of research grants totalling over 1.5 million USD and my publications have been cited thousands of times in the international literature. Read more about my academic credentials at www.giosan.com. Go carefully through my publications, as they will inform you greatly of my specific domains of interest.

What are the steps in the admittance process?

First off, you need to have the informal approval of your future PhD advisor (s/he, in this case, me, must want to take you). Once that crucial element is taken care of, read the info from the Doctoral School site for details about the exam, deadlines, etcetera.

The admittance exam consists of a defense of your PhD proposal (more on this below) and a multiple-choice exam. The bibliography for the multiple-choice exam is presented on the Doctoral School site.

OK, you mentioned something about a proposal. What is that?

The PhD program at the University of Bucharest is four years. This means that in this timeframe you should successfuly collect and analyze the data and also publish at least one paper in an ISI journal.

Top notch research is measured via ISI articles (and nothing else, really – not through books, conferences or proceedings). This is why, by the end of your PhD journey, you must publish as first author at least one article in a journal with an Impact Factor >1. You will not be able to defend your dissertation if you do not meet this criterion, so you will not be able to get your doctoral degree unless you publish an article in an ISI journal.

Since the publication of a paper in such a journal takes substantial time (in most of the cases, years), it is crucial that, when you are admitted into the program, you already have a solid, impeccable research proposal, with the literature review fully done and the methodology fully spelled out, so that you can start data collection on Day 1.

A doctoral program is fundamentally a research journey of the highest caliber, at the end of which you will have become a reputable expert in your field and add a substantial contribution to knowledge.

Do not underestimate how hard it is to write a PhD research proposal that can lend itself to ISI publications. For hints take a look here and here. (I only accept doctoral students who have a fully developed research proposal that aligns to the guidelines mentioned in these links).

A well-written PhD proposal takes at least half a year of contemplation, thinking, literature review, revisions, etc.

Trust me on this: it is extremely hard to write a really compelling, well-argued PhD-level research proposal.

I am unsure about the topic I would like to develop into a doctoral dissertation. Can you help here?

If you are unsure about what research avenue you would like to pursue, it means you are not ready to start this journey yet. I will not tell you research ideas because I do not know what your passions are. They must come from you. I will only guide you. You are the driver here and I am the copilot, advising you how to navigate successfully. But, at the end of the day, you choose the direction where you're heading.

A good analogy here is music production. You are the composer. You write the melody and lyrics. I help you to record it, but the message you want to convey is yours.

You will eventually become the expert on your topic. By the end of your PhD journey, you will know more about your subject than me and most other scholars.

I suggest that no matter what topic you choose, it must be something you have a real passion for. Do not choose topics that you think might interest me or others. The easiest way to choose a topic that conforms with this suggestion is to ask yourself:

"If I were a millionaire, with no need to work anymore, what would I like to research? What psychological phenomenon would I like to better understand? What aspect of human behavior truly intrigues me?"

Your answer to questions like these should guide your decision. For instance, if you say "If I had money, I would not do a PhD, I would just travel around the world", then you should not pursue a doctoral degree.

Read pages 33-47 from this book for additional tips on how to generate good research ideas.

OK, but how can I be sure that what I want to study has not been studied before? After all, there are hundreds of thousands of articles out there and nobody can read them all!

Yes, good question. A good strategy to ensure that what you want to investigate has not been done before is to:

1. Narrow your topic down to the niche you have a passion for.

2. Find recent articles (e.g., 2014+) on that specific topic.

3. Read the conclusion sections from each of those articles carefully. All articles published in good journals have a paragraph about "limitations of the study", or "directions for further research". Read those paragraphs very, very carefully. They might give you ideas for novel research on the topic. In addition, you will have the literature review already done by someone else. You will just need to verify it and greatly expand it. Plus, you will know that that idea has not been studied before because it comes from a recent article which was peer-reviewed by experts in that field, who would (or should) have noticed any issues.

By using this strategy you might also get some inspiration for the methodology you will want to employ in your study. It is a safer bet to imitate a tested-and-published method than to reinvent the wheel for the sake of being different. The most important element in your proposal is its novelty/importance. If the idea is truly interesting, important, and adds substantially to knowledge, you do not need groundbreaking methodology to get published. You just need good execution of a validated, standard method. Conversely, if your idea is bland, mediocre, and you use groundbreaking methodology (e.g., virtual reality exposure therapy) then you will NOT be able to publish. In addition, most doctoral applicants are not at the level of knowing sophisticated methodologies (and you must include the full methodology in your proposal.) What happens is that many proposals contain simple correlational studies (they include a few constructs that will be tested for associations) which are never enough for a PhD. So, borrowing from the methodology used in peer-reviewed articles will save you from a lot of headaches later on.

Can you give me more details about the research proposal, besides the links you posted above?

Of course. Your PhD proposal should address the following (keep in mind that the requirements from the Doctoral School do not include everything I am saying below. For the purposes of the admittance, use the formatting and sections required by them):

(1) The objective/theme.

(2) History of the concept/theme. Make sure to include a history of the central concept you are addressing, along with the main theories and their evolution in time. It is very important that you anchor your narrative in a historical context.

(3) Current state of the art. This means what we know at the moment, what are the dominant models, etcetera.

(4) Gaps in the literature. In other words, what is missing and should be known, why don’t we know that (e.g., divergent studies, or no studies?)

(5) The motivation. In other words, why is the study important, who cares about this topic, what are the potential consequences/implications, etc. You are a sales person here, trying to convince me (and others) that what you are trying to investigate is worthy. So, include hard data/numbers in your "sales pitch" if you can. Naturally, the motivation for the study must emerge logically from the gaps you have identified.

(6) The proposals for the studies you will conduct. Your research proposal should contain a few independent studies (not just one, unless it is a really comprehensive one), related to the topic. These studies should not be too spread out however. They should address the same concept from different angles. So, go deep, not wide. (For instance something that you test on children, in organizations, and on a clinical population.)

Pragmatically, if you have more studies you have a better shot at publishing one in an ISI journal. (Like the Americans say: "Do not place all your eggs in a basket!")

The proposals, evidently, will try to fill the gaps you described earlier (i.e., each important gap is addressed with a proposal of a study to fill it). The studies you propose must include the direct objective, how your study "solves" the gap, your hypotheses (where appropriate), the research design in detail such as variables, scales, measures, experimental procedure, etcetera. Include the actual scales in English and Romanian, explain why you expect associations between certain variables (that would be your hypotheses), explain the statistical approach you will be using to analyze your data. Be concise, clear, logical.

(7) Tip: if appropriate, include a proposal for a meta-analysis, ideally for your first study. Pragmatically, meta-analyses are sometimes a little easier to publish in ISI journals. Justify the necessity of a meta-analysis and show, with data (e.g., ScienceDirect searches to list the number of articles for certain keywords, some data from a preliminary screening) that it is feasible. If a meta-analysis on the same topic has been done before, explain why a new one is necessary (are there enough new studies published to warrant a new one?).

Read more about meta-analyses from this source.

How should I format my proposal? 

APA style, and use Zotero for citations. (Go to Zotero.com and learn how to use this free and exceptionally useful citation program. I do not accept documents manually formatted in APA style, only Zotero).

Set your WORD document to English (American) as proofing language for both the text and comments.

How many pages should my proposal have?

Follow closely the requirements listed on the Doctoral School site.

What language should my research proposal be written in?

English. As I said above, set your WORD document to English (American) as proofing language for both the text and comments. At the doctoral level, your English (both spoken and written) must be flawless. When you write your proposal, use WORD's spelling and grammar checking features, and also use the very good program Grammarly. I will test your English proficiency - our first meeting will be in English -, and I will not be able to take you on board if your English skills are sub par.

Can you give me a rough timeline of this endeavor?

Sure. To have a chance at publishing in an ISI journal by the end of your PhD, you should have at least one paper (ideally two – an empirical study and a meta-analysis or two empirical studies) ready to be submitted within 12 months after you begin your doctorate (i.e., by August at the latest). This means that you will collect the data for at least one study in the first 3-5 months, write it up in the next few months, then submit it. This is why the proposal should be in very good shape, to be able to start data collection right away.

Why the rush?

Yes, it may seem like I am rushing you, but – trust me on this one – publishing in ISI journals takes enormous time. It takes me 1.5 years on average to publish a paper (a paper of mine took seven years to get in!!!). You, being less experienced, will likely take more than that.

Can you guarantee that I will be able to publish in an ISI journal during my doctoral program?

No. I will do the best I can to help, but at the end of the day, you choose the topic. If the topic is meritorious, important, if it is executed well, if you choose the right journal, then you will have a good chance to publish it. So, identifying important gaps in the literature becomes critical. This makes the research proposal all the more important.

But look at the bright side also: Publishing articles in refereed journals, while the hardest thing in academia, is also one of the most rewarding intellectual endeavors there can be. You will never regret the years of effort you have put to get to this level. You will be among the best in your chosen field. You will have an objective reason to claim that you are among the smartest and most educated people in the world.

Besides all the above, what other factors play a role in your decision to take me as your doctoral student?

The most important criterion is if you are competent, in other words if the proposal is good. Also, if you have an idea/hypothesis that is really intriguing/interesting, that also helps my decision. I must like your idea, or at least not dislike it (again, go thoroughly through the links I listed above).

Another important element is your motivation. I need to understand what makes you willing to spend years on this very hard endeavor, testing hypotheses that might turn out to be false, making financial (and not only) sacrifices. Is it because the degree will help you professionally? Is it because you simply like research?

You should understand that this program is going to be very hard. It will be - by far - the hardest thing you have ever done intellectually in your entire life so far. You will not be able to have a full-time job during this time. You must be flexible enough so that you can allocate vast amounts of time to research, drafts writing, ideas development, etc. etc.

Another important element: we must like each other. We will have a very close professional relationship for a long period of time - sometimes a lifetime - and we will also be friends. It is important that our personalities match. This goes both ways: You also must like me and my style, not just the other way around.

If you do not know me from before (e.g., you have never taken classes with me), and want to find out more about me and my style, reach out to me and I will put you in touch with former and actual doctoral students of mine (who then can also put you in touch with others), with whom you can chat and get more information.

Last but not least, please also note that I only accept applicants "la zi". In other words, you must be based in Bucharest and be able to be "on the ground" at the University frequently. I am not asking you to be 8 hours a day there, because I know that you have other commitments (you have bills to pay), but you will have to help with seminars, courses and other administrative tasks at the University, and much of this will require your physical presence, sometimes on a very short notice.

What would be the best non-academic description of the effort required to go through this program successfully?

One word: Startup. The mindset, effort, and commitment that you will need to put into this would be the same as what you would need to put in a startup that you are developing from ground up. You should be a person with superb time management skills, extremely self-motivated, extremely well-organized, self-starter, capable of intense, sustained intellectual effort over long stretches of time, obsessive with details, but also able to see the big picture. You should be a person who thrives under self-imposed pressure and deadlines, because nobody will impose anything on you in a doctoral program. We, the advisors, will only guide your research journey. You are solely responsible for making it happen.

You will most likely have to work on your research for hours and hours on end, burning through nights, and in many cases you will have very little time for weekend leisure. You will have to take your laptop with you on vacations, in an Elon Musk-style (who once said that his vacations are "emails with a view"). Virtually, most of your activity, if you really want to do a high-level PhD (and I only accept this kind of aim), will revolve around research.

There is a lot of burnout in programs like this, and you need to be aware and prepared for it.

The payoff of this extreme effort is that, at the end of this journey, you will become - and this is absolutely no exaggeration - one of the very few experts in the world in your subject. You will be recognized internationally. You will receive invitations to review papers of other researchers and decide if they are worthy of publication or not. You may receive invitations to write academic textbooks. You will be in a pole position to really move the field forward in your domain of inquiry.

You managed to scare the hell out of me. Is this really that hard?

Yes, it is. A PhD is not just a more involved Master-level research. It is many orders of magnitude harder. There is no comparison between the two. I absolutely do not mean to scare you, or to discourage you. I only want to set your expectations right, so that you are aware and mentally prepared for what you will embark on.

Reaching the rarefied level of true expertise in your field, where there are just a few other people in the whole world who are as competent as you, takes extreme training, as one would imagine. Most people who start a program like this know that it is going to be hard, but, without exceptions, all of them say at the end: "I knew it was going to be hard, but I never thought it was going to be that hard".

On a positive note, however, nobody ever regrets going through this. Getting a PhD on a dissertation that lends itself to several publications in peer-reviewed journals is a supreme intellectual achievement. You will grow intellectually immensely during this program. The thinking skills you will develop will help you understand the world at a much deeper level – not just in your domain of investigation, but also in general.

The highest intellectual validation one can receive is when their studies are reviewed by experts in the field, who decide that they are good enough to be published in a high-impact academic journal. Few other things in life compare with the level of satisfaction one experiences when their studies are appreciated (and cited) by some of the brightest minds in the world.

Are there any exclusionary criteria I should be aware of?

Some people just want a PhD for the diploma itself (because it will help them financially for instance or in politics). If you are in this category, please seek another PhD advisor.

Why did you write this in English?

I only accept doctoral students who will complete their dissertations in English. Therefore, like I said above, the research proposal will also have to be written in English. The reason is simple: ISI journals are in English, so writing the whole thing in English will make it easier to send manuscripts for publication.

How can I prove to you that I am PhD potential, before I actually start developing my research proposal?

If you were one of my students and got 10 in my class(es), you have already proven that to me. If you have never been my student, then your CV and the strength of your research idea(s) will count. Recommendations from people I trust also help.

Note: If you have an ISI publication as first author already, you're in, no questions asked!

What should I send you first, for you to consider me as a potential doctoral student of yours?

Send me your CV, and, most importantly, an outline of your proposal. Do not send me your full proposal, just a bulleted summary of it (an outline). An outline is a "schema logica", listing the theoretical arguments, how they lead to your hypotheses, the methodology briefly described and the potential implications of the study. All in bullet points. In English, no more than three-four pages. Include maximum 10 highly relevant citations.

How many PhD spots do you have?

It depends. Some years I have one or two, in other years I might have four or five. But this is irrelevant, as I do not take more students than the spots I have in one particular year.

I assume taking doctoral students comes with a financial incentive for you. Otherwise, why would anyone do this? How much money are you making per each doctoral student?

You'd be surprised to learn that advising doctoral students is not really compensated. In other words, I am doing this essentially for free, simply because I like research. Advising PhD students is one of the most rewarding, but also most time-consuming activities in academia. This is another reason for me to be extra-careful about who I accept.

I see on the Doctoral School site that some PhD spots are "cu taxa", others "fara taxa", yet others "cu bursa". I want one "cu bursa". What can I do?

Each year, all applicants are ranked by their score at the entrance exam (the multiple-choice test) and the score they have got for their PhD proposal, which is evaluated by an independent commission, which I am not a part of. The highest scores will receive "bursa", the next ones will be admitted "fara taxa", and the rest will be admitted "cu taxa" or declined. I have no say in this objective process.

I still have some questions

Sure. Email me. I am easy to find.