Curriculum Vitae translates from the latin as "The Course of one's life. "Vitae" on it's own is apparently nonsense in latin. "Vita" on it's own however means "life" and is a sensible shorthand (as is CV). In the interest of full-disclosure I only looked it up after your attempt to correct me. I had just always heard Vita, and CV and occasionally seen Curriculum Vitae. More Info.

I'm pretty sure I didn't use the phrase, "Curriclum vita" in my post. Let me check. Nope. So it would be incorrect to say we were both wrong. I'd also like to note that along with my correction of your correction, I included a source. Oh sure maybe not a peer-reviewed source, but I think an English PhD who wrote a book titled, "Common Errors in English Usage" is a at the very least an expert witness. You were in fact attempting to correct me (I don't know about pompous), you don't need to shy away from it. Not only that, you were attempting to correct me in the very same public forum in which I might appear potentially foolish. It is exactly the same scenario if I were to question your teachings in front of a classroom of students, vs questioning in private after class. That is to say, that if you were truly wanting to protect my image, then you ought to have contacted me about my errors in private, instead of highlighting them in public. All that said, there's not a problem even if you were correcting me. I do appreciate that, and it is important for scientists to develop a thick-skin about criticism. In fact I think a future post is warranted about the peer-review process, defending your ideas, and admitting when you are wrong. I'm neither a Latin nor a grammar scholar and I very well could make foolish errors in those regards. Calling me out on such errors is perfectly acceptable. As it was though, I hadn't made an error; no harm, no foul.

Well I mean, I am a scientist...

Too peaceful.

Hi,

For what it's worth I had a couple of years of Latin and such mistakes are an ongoing peeve. To me, that's why this matters--some people who read your CV will know how it should be. By the way, I'm writing from the USA.

Standalone as a word by itself, "Vita" is acceptable. It indeed means life, and in this context it's indeed short for "course of life," as a prior poster indicated (BrianK on 6/15/08).

"Vitae" is indeed plural for life but that's not relevant here -- "course lives" aren't what's being said. More pertinently for this context, "vitae" is (also) the genitive case for the singular life -- meaning of life, or belonging to life. So "curriculum vitae" means "course of life."

"Vitae" stand-alone is incorrect and "curriculum vita" is incorrect.

"Vita" stand-alone is acceptable. "Curriculum vitae" is the real McCoy, the can't-go-wrong, formal expression. "CV" is totally acceptable as an informal abbreviation but I would recommend against putting "CV" on the top of a CV itself. After all, "CV" in Latin days meant a number -- the number we now write as 105 (C is one hundred, V is five)!

I agree, and was considering changing the focus of the blog to Latin grammar, but your positive comments have dissuaded me, so check back for a post about developing thick skin later in the week.

No clue about the vendetta, but Mitch is awesome in real life.

Back to you main question though. I'm a 3rd year in an I/O PhD program. Here's what might interest you (1 & 2 are must reads about persuasion):

1. Robert Cialdini's "Influence: Science and Practice" is one of the best books on persuasion. Outlines the different types of persuasive influences through a social lens.

2. Another is the Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM). Here are the key readings (sorry for the cut and paste):

Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). Communication and persuasion: Central and peripheral routes to attitude change. New York: Springer.

Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 19, pp. 123-205). New York: Academic Press.

3. Honestly, we get most our information from social psychology. So checking their journals should be next. I can't name too many specific ones here. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology is the big-dog, but I don't know how prevalent persuasive research would be there (they are quite strict nowadays).

4. For pure I/O, always check the usuals: Journal of Applied Psychology, Personnel Psychology, and Journal of Organizational Behavior.

5. Journal of Pragmatics has some information involving communication in I/O domains (e.g., interviews). Although I find it questionable, you might enjoy it.

I talked to some friends in the clinical program here at UMSL. It all depends on the program, what you want to do, and how you frame your experience in your letter of intent. Obviously if you want to be a therapist, clinical experience is good, if you want to be a clinical researcher then research will be good. But either experience can be framed in such a way as to improve your desirability. Lauren DeCaparole, a clinical PhD student here, volunteered in a nursing home as an undergrad so that she could get experience giving psych evaluations like the MMSE. This is a great example of how to get experiences to make yourself a better fit for your chosen programs.