more interviews for weaker applicants

[rkaz]

So I've heard some people saying that going on 13-18 interviews (for a less competitive specialty) is too many. However, I was wondering if this was not relative to the strength of an applicant. It might be too many interviews to attend for a strong applicant with strong board scores, who got interviews at 22 of the 30 places he applied to. However, for a weaker applicant with preclinical failures and low board scores in the 4th quartile of class who got interviews at 15 of the 100+ places he applied to,.... doesn't it make sense for him to go to all 15 interviews and rank ALL of them (with the presumption that he will be ranked much lower at nearly all places compared to the stronger applicant)? Would that person have an excellent chance of matching with 15 interviews, or would his low stats still put him at huge risk not to match (in a non-competitive specialty like FM, psych)? Would going on around 15 interviews STILL be considered too many?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[gutonc]

The answer to your question is pretty much embedded in it. You've elucidated pretty well the reasons why 13 might be too many interviews for one applicant but not nearly enough for another. Yes, in general a less competitive applicant, particularly one with multiple yellow or red flags, should go on as many interviews as possible.

FWIW, I was a pretty competitive applicant for IM (AOA, PhD, pubs, etc) and I went on 16 interviews. I didn't need that many, but it made me comfortable. Do what it takes you make yourself as comfortable as possible when No Match Monday rolls around.

 

[inmyslumber]

Rkaz,

It is good to see as many programs as you can in person. You will have a better understanding of what different programs have to offer. If you don't go on an interview, you will not be ranked at that program. Don't limit your chances of matching at a program that may be the right one for you.

To answer your question, 13-18 or so interviews is not too many for a "weaker" (or even a "stronger" candidate) regardless of specialty. If you have the time, I would go to interviews at all the programs you think you may want to train for the reasons I stated above. You can cut out programs you know you will not like because of location/probation/malignancy.

If you "just want to match" and don't care about where you end up then it is a different story.

-ims

 

[ohyeahbaby]

So I've heard some people saying that going on 13-18 interviews (for a less competitive specialty) is too many. However, I was wondering if this was not relative to the strength of an applicant. It might be too many interviews to attend for a strong applicant with strong board scores, who got interviews at 22 of the 30 places he applied to. However, for a weaker applicant with preclinical failures and low board scores in the 4th quartile of class who got interviews at 15 of the 100+ places he applied to,.... doesn't it make sense for him to go to all 15 interviews and rank ALL of them (with the presumption that he will be ranked much lower at nearly all places compared to the stronger applicant)? Would that person have an excellent chance of matching with 15 interviews, or would his low stats still put him at huge risk not to match (in a non-competitive specialty like FM, psych)? Would going on around 15 interviews STILL be considered too many?

thanks so much for making this thread. I've been wondering about this endlessly for the last few weeks

 

[rkaz]

.

 

[rkaz]

.

 

[shan564]

I went on 16 interviews in a not-very-competitive specialty (psych). I matched at my #1 choice, but I don't think I made a mistake by interviewing widely. It helped me get a better idea of what to expect in a program and gave me a wide range of useful experiences. It also gave me a better idea of different fellowship options down the road. And I'm an IMG, so I didn't know how many interviews I'd need... considering the stakes, I think it was the right decision to play it safe, even though the risk of failure was very low.

 

[Psychotic]

Wouldn't weaker applicants have a difficult time getting that large a number of interviews in the first place? Seems like a truly weak (below avg with red flags) applicant will not have the luxury of interviewing at 15 to 20 places; my guess is that the average (or better) applicants without red flags are the ones who receive 15+ interview offers.

To anyone who is contemplating this question of how many is enough, I will finish the interview season with 11 or 12 interviews. I received invites from 18 programs, so obviously I did not schedule them all and/or I have canceled a couple. There are 7 or so programs I either have not heard from (5) or I received an actual rejection email (2). I am an average AMG applicant in one of the below average competitiveness fields (psych). It has been expensive and tiring, but I am glad I will have attended 11 or 12 because of the ones I have gone to, I am more or most interested in approximately 6 programs, and less interested in 3 or 4 (and may not even rank one of those). That is the advantage of going on a couple of extra interviews, I think - it gives you the option of not ranking one or two places so long as you still rank "enough" programs overall; I think and hope that the magic number of ranks for me is 10 (or 11…or 12 if I chicken out).

 

[rkaz]

Wouldn't weaker applicants have a difficult time getting that large a number of interviews in the first place? Seems like a truly weak (below avg with red flags) applicant will not have the luxury of interviewing at 15 to 20 places; my guess is that the average (or better) applicants without red flags are the ones who receive 15+ interview offers.

I think the number of interviews needs to be in the context of the number of programs applied to. Using the numbers I gave in my original post, someone getting 15 interviews of 100 programs applied to has a 15% interview rate, vs nearly 75% interview rate for the person getting 22 interviews after applying to 30 places. Had the former applicant only applied to 30 places (instead of 100), he may have only gotten 4 interviews instead of 15. This is a simplistic way of looking at things, of course, as it does not take into consideration the level of competitiveness of the programs applied to.

 

[Law2Doc]

If you are a weak applicant go to as many interviews as you can. But as mentioned the really weak applicants won't get too many interviews. So it's really a self limiting problem.