I just finished my masters in Neuroscience after getting a 2:1 in Human Biology/Psychology, and I wanted to do a PhD. However, I applied for a good dozen and got nowhere. Therefore, I'm stepping back and trying to get an entry level graduate job in the research field.

To that end, I've been applying to a bunch of Research Assistant jobs at universities around the UK in my area of interest. Specifically, I'm interested in neurogenetics of schizophrenia, Alzheimer's and dementia [degenerative diseases].

However, I've been getting nowhere with this too. While I do have a good Bsc/Msc, I only have 6 months of research experience.

So, I've got a few questions and am desperate for some help.

How else can I get into research? Is there anywhere other than universities that do neuroscience research like this? In other words, industrial research? Where can I look for these sort of vacancies, as Newscientist, Reed etc are pretty useless for these kind of positions. Am I aiming too high/too low? What sort of jobs should I be aiming for?

Alternatively, are there any "guides to getting into scientific research" that you can point me at?

I'm really getting quite worried by this job searching. If it was simply a case of "I'm doing all I can", then I wouldn't be so bothered. However, I don't know enough, and I've got very few contacts who can guide me in this.

Any help would be appreciated. Mocking is only acceptable after providing said help.

Edit: Additional: Should I continue applying to PhD positions in the meantime? As I kept getting rejected without explanation, I assumed I was underqualified for a PhD position. However, reading around here suggests that there are a significant number of scientific PhD's who got their position without lots of experience beforehand.

If I were you I'd keep trying for a PhD. Make sure your CV is up to scratch and you are tailoring any covering letter appropriately.

You're more than qualified to apply.

Solo what I think the problem might be is that there are substantially fewer postdocs available these days for science PhDs because of funding cuts. Anecdotally at least, there seems to be a pattern where unemployed PhDs are applying for research assistant jobs just to keep connected with science, and thus people like you get cut out.
Did you get on well with your MSc project supervisor? I wonder if you could ask him/her to be brutally honest about how competitive you are for PhD places, as someone who works in your field will know the precise funding situation, and what sort of cvs s/he are seeing for places in their lab. You could also ask about the industry side - where have previous students gone for example. You could also google DHLE statistics for your MSc - or ask your old university's career service where they display this information. It will tell you where the cohort before you were 6 months after graduating and might give you some ideas of new avenues to try.

Bluntly; are you sure about that? The requirements for PhD positions are frustratingly difficult to find anywhere, and the total lack of feedback means that I got absolutely nowhere. I initially thought that the basic requirement was either a 2:1 or a 2:2+masters, but I've got a 2:1 and a masters, but didn't get squat.



Sounds plausible. I did get feedback on one of my applications, and they said that there were 150 applicants, and 14 PhD's amongst them. Yay.

I got along pretty well with my Msc supervisor. I've been planning on asking him for help when my actual Msc grade comes through this week. I actually asked him back in April, but he wasn't too much help. I'm also planing on bothering the careers service at my old uni for help at the same time.

I'm positive. Most of the UK PhD students I know don't even have a MSc, They mainly just have a 2.1. I guess it depends on your area and the institution to which you are applying though, as always. It's also the people you know of course - and by extension, the people your referees know. If the interviewers respect the opinion of your referees you're in with a much better chance of getting the PhD/job.

In my experience of interviews, making the interviewer like you is most important. You don't have to be the most qualified or experienced candidate to get the job or PhD if you can get them to like you as so much of the process is subjective.

Asking your uni for help is good. See what advice they can give you about CVs and the interview process.

I'm glad that you are so sure. I don't have that many contacts, and equally few in this field. However, I will be trying to make a few in the meantime.

I'm fine with interviews. Its the part of this process that I am least worried about. Do they quiz you on the area in detail during the interview, or is it the same as a normal job interview? I'll of course be reading the supervisors work in the field prior to the interview, but without access to subscription journals it would be quite difficult.

I think all PhD interviews are different and I can only comment on the two that I have had. Both times they were panel interviews. In these, knowledge of the area and research output of the interviewers, department and university were important. I found many papers available on the research pages of the academics so I didn't need a subscription to access them.

For the PhD I got, I was told that the interviewers were impressed with my background knowledge of the topic and techniques used (even though I couldn't answer some specific questions they said it didn't matter as I had a general idea of the area and was honest about what I knew and what I didn't). I picked up "all" this background knowledge in about 2 days by reading basic internet pages and a few specific papers. It doesn't take that long. They also liked my enthusiasm and determination apparently, so it didn't matter that I had very little practical experience.

They asked me a lot of normal interview questions too: strengths and weaknesses, describe myself in 3 words, what would I do if I was feeling demotivated, what would I do if I felt like I couldn't finish my PhD, if I was having problems, if I was stressed etc. Also questions about difficult times/colleagues/issues I have experienced and how I've overcome them etc.

You basically need to prepare for a normal job interview with criteria-based questions but also with a good knowledge of your own research area and the research area you hope to go into.

Wow Are you sure about that TreeofLife? Don't know what your field is but in my field NOBODY can proceed to a PhD without getting a Masters and a grade close to Distinction or a Distinction (high merit).

What is your field incognito? You're making me a little nervous now.

In laboratory based biomedical sciences (as is the OP's field) it was certainly the case a few years ago that all you needed to get onto a PhD was a BSc with a 2.1. The only reason anyone did an MSc first was if you'd got less than a 2.1 or if you wanted to specialise a bit/change sub-field. As such, I came across PIs who had a suspicious attitude of MScs (not sure that they were the best PIs though!)

I suspect that has changed as the credit crunch encouraged more people to try to stay on and do PhDs. My guess (and it is a guess) is that getting a first might give you more edge over having an MSc (unless at distinction grade). But really what reassures supervisors is research experience, so if I was making an application now I would really emphasise that over courses etc. Solo, you say you 'only' have six months research experience, but that's a reasonable amount. I wonder if you're not selling it enough on your CV/applications. Do you have an ex-supervisor who you could get to take a look at your CV and make sure it's coming across right\?

My field is molecular biology. In my lab there's only 2 of us with a 1st, everyone else has 2.1. Of those of us with an MSc, noone has a distinction. I've spoken to other friends of mine in similar fields and it's pretty much the same there.

Obviously if you do have a 1st / distinction it helps, but if you don't have other transferable skills and another candidate does, they are likely to get offered the PhD. After all, there's often only a few percent between a 2.1 and 1st and most supervisors are well aware of this.

I should add my uni is a pretty decent one too.

That pretty more or less puts me out of contention. :( You've all heard my situation with my degree course being shut down leaving me with a pretty big hole with the lack of honours. I have however had some interviews in regards of technician roles though and that is with a BSc in Applied Chemistry and a MSc in Science (I got 1% off a merit in the exam for one of my modules.)

I was rejected from Liverpool University for a PhD due to me not having lab experience! anddddd a few years ago, I did manage to get a PhD interview in neuroscience with my ordinary degree. Those days have gone now! I am stuck in an impossible situation.

I was told I didn't get the other PhD that I applied for due to lack of lab experience... maybe that supervisor thought it would be a problem, or maybe they gave to the only other candidate because they had just done their MSc in the same lab... I'd go with the latter. The point is that sometimes the reasons they give as feedback aren't true, sometimes because they can't tell you the truth and sometimes because they are afraid to be honest.

In my next PhD interview I was very experienced at interviews by then so did pretty well and guess what, they didn't care about my lack of lab experience.

The joke of it is that I did my PGCert lab module at a red brick uni LOL LOL

I have been rejected for PhDs where my PGCert module tutor was one of the supervisors.

I managed to impress the interviewers (I am trying to hide a learning difficulty which affects my speech) and I still never got a PhD. I have had missing PhD replies. Glasgow Uni didn't even get back to me about a non getting of the PhD. My ideal PhD is in Cannabinoid Receptors as I have studied it for the last 3 years and my local lab hasn't taken in PhD people for a while.

I#d probably be in a PhD by now if I did catalysis or something like that!