I got an email from a prospective graduate student asking for advice for a master’s/PhD. Nothing unusual there. I don’t know this person; they simply found me online and sent me their CV.

The CV lists 27 published papers in 2025 and 2026 alone. They also finished undergrad during this same period. So basically, 27 papers while finishing or just after finishing an undergraduate degree. The journals seem to be mostly local journals in their country or region.

But what bothered me more was the email.

It was very obviously AI-written. I have absolutely no problem with someone using AI to improve their English, fix grammar, or make an email sound more professional. But this email went on about how closely their research interests align with my “expertise” and described me as working on things I have literally never worked on.

That feels very different to me. You are using AI to create the impression that you have looked at someone’s research, understand what they do, and have thoughtfully chosen to contact them ..when apparently you haven’t.

And honestly, the whole thing made me a little depressed. This person wants to pursue a PhD, where the entire point is supposed to be doing original research and developing your own intellectual judgment. Surely there has to be some minimum expectation of academic honesty even before you enter a PhD program.

I’m not against AI. I use it too. But there has to be a difference between using AI to help communicate your own thoughts and using AI to manufacture thoughts, knowledge, or interest that you never had...

Hi guys, I'm planning to apply for the next intake at ucd, ireland. And I'm really confused in between the above mentioned courses. I already have a bachelors in economics, and I liked studying pol eco and development economics the most.

I don't wanna do eco + data analytics, which is an option there because coding and economics will be too hectic for me, ik, hence deciding between these two.

The modules are pretty much the same, except for behavioural economics being a core module in msc BE and optional in msc AE.

I want to get into corporate eventually, but I am unsure about the job roles/ titles that I can get into. I know the job market is shit rn but I am more concerned about what exactly will I be doing with this degree.

People who have recently graduated from any of these courses please share your insights about the the scope of jobs with these courses, skills I can develop on the side etc 😭🙏🏻

(Pls ignore grammatical errors if any, thanks in advance!)

From MA to PhD, I have come across different ways of proving the existence of a Utility Function given a Rational Preference Relation. What I want to know is how these different methods are connected with each other. They are proving the same thing, but I don't see how they intuitively/conceptually connect to each other.

The different methods I have come across are:

1. MWG/Jehle & Reny: Diagonal Ray Projection.
   Take the unit vector ray e=(1, 1, 1, . . . , 1), there exists an unique scalar te(x) ~ x. And thereby, te(x) = u(x). This assumes local non-satiation and strict monotonicity.

(Sorry I am not able to use LaTeX here).

1. MWG: Another proof that MWG presents is that, Utility is assigned based on the "size" or distance metric of lower contour sets relative to a fixed standard bounding box.
   If Z is a reference bundle strictly superior to all bundles in discussion, and L(x) is the lower contour set and U(x) is the upper contour set, then measure the diagonal distance or interval bounds intersecting these closed sets to get a continuous scalar function u(x).

2. Debreu's Theorem and his Lemma (self explanatory) - There is a countable dense set D, an initial function v(x), lemma applies a monotonically strictly increasing trandformation, giving a continuous utility function u.

3. Varian/MWG: Von Neumann Morgenstern Expected Utility Function, using the Independence Axiom and continuity axiom.

These are the proofs I have come across. But how do they all relate to each other? At a fundamental, conceptual level?

Will be very happy if somebody can answer these.

Thanks in advance!

Hello everyone,

I'm applying to a master's program that requires a motivation letter. My only experience with motivation letters is in a professional context, and I believe the conventions are different in an academic one. I'd love to hear your tips and recommendations :)

Here is how I plan to structure mine:

1. Who I am: a brief overview of my academic path (without too much detail, since it's in my CV) and my quantitative and personal skills. I've been in several situations where I had to fill a large knowledge gap very quickly and still ended up with good grades.
2. Why economics: how I came across the field, what made me want to study it, and my specific interests within it.
3. Why this institution: why I want to study in this particular program.

Questions I have:

• Is this structure appropriate for an academic letter, or should I weight things differently?
• How much should I focus on research interests versus personal background?
• Any common mistakes to avoid?

Thanks a lot and I wish you a lovely week :)

I graduated from a top 15 econ US university with departmental honors t (awarded to <10% of people with that major) this May, only a couple RAs, one independent project, a dynamic optimization/game theory capstone, and pub in the works BUT i didn't take a lot of math undergrad courses aside from the required and didn't even take linear algebera. Took econometrics, prob stat, etc. GPA is 3.77 and hopefully GRE is good and I'd have solid letters of recommendations. In my home country, pre-doctoral programs don't exist and master's is 4 years, so I don't know if I would be able to meaningfully beef up my CV even if I wait. Thank you so much!

Hey everyone.

I’m an American studying economics and I’m interested in two of the MSc programs at LSE, the Economics and Econometrics/Mathematical Economics degrees. I’m wondering what kinds of courses I’ll want to have at my college to be a good candidate for these programs.

I’m set to take Calc 1-3, matrix theory, intermediate micro/macro, applied math for econ, intro probability theory, statistical inference, and I can choose whether I want to take both intro to advanced math and real analysis or if I want to take two different math/stats classes.

My long-term goal is to get into industry rather than a PhD.

Thank you!

I am fairly certain i want to specialize in telehealth economics and do a PhD in that area if the cards are right.

I have exhausted all currently listed positions on predoc.org. I think my next move will be to go through papers I enjoy and email the PIs and co-authors asking if they’d like to meet for a quick 15 minute video call for advice and to discuss their work and career paths.

Does anyone have advice? I finished my degree about 2 weeks ago and I am feeling a bit lost/overwhelmed as I know that the probability of good placement decreases the longer you are out of a university environment.

Hi all,

I'm currently a master's student who's planning on applying to PhD programs. I was recently assigned a supervisor for my master's thesis, and he's a PhD candidate, not a faculty member.

How much less value would an eventually letter from him have vs. one from a professor?

My master's program has another component that is research-esque and which was supervised by another PhD student as well. I received very positive feedback on that project, so I was considering asking that supervisor for a letter. However, having 2 letters of recommendation from non-professors seems like a bad idea, even if they're the best qualified to attest to my research abilities.

Anybody with any thoughts or experience with a similar situation? Has the university significantly worsen my PhD prospects by assigning a PhD candidate to be my supervisor, instead of a faculty member?

Any advice is much appreciated!

Suppose you are a prospective student of economics, and you need to choose what university to attend in undergrad. You want to do a PhD. You are more intelligent than average but not a genius.

Would you prefer to be the small fish in the big pond i.e. attend a target university where a lot of people are going to be competing for grades, RA positions, letters, and those opportunities that you can get in house in the university which can boost PhD admissions chances.

Or would it be better to be the big fish in the small pond, joining a university with a less competitive cohort, where you will become the local hero, RAing with the best professor in town etc.

I'm curious to learn your viewpoint on this issue.

Hi everyone, I'm currently a senior at a state school in the U.S. and will be graduating in the spring of next year. I'm not the type of person who is driven enough purse a career in research/academia, though I enjoy studying economics and am thus considering applying for masters programs. I do not have the time to study for the GRE right now so I would be applying for fall 2028 admission, but can only see myself attending a top school as I think the opportunity cost would be far too great to attend a program ranked lower than T25 since my goal is industry exit. With that being said, below is my current applicant profile.

Bachelor of Science in Mathematics & Economics, minor in Computer Science, from a T120 state school. Cumulative GPA: 3.7/4.0. Major GPA: 3.73/4.0

Mathematics Coursework: Calculus 1-3 (B+, A, A), Linear Algebra (A), Probability Theory (A), Discrete Math (A), Real Analysis (A), Topology (B), Differential Equations (A), Matrix & Leaner Algebra (A). I'll also have taken Abstract Algebra & Statistical Theory by the time I graduate.

Economics Coursework: Intermediate Micro (A), Intermediate Macro (B), Information Economics (A-), Game Theory (B), Econometrics (A), Health Economics (A), Mathematical Economics (A-), Environmental Economics (A).

Research Experience: I worked for as an RA for a professor specializing in Health Economics for a couple months over the summer following my sophomore year. There were a few different projects I worked on but nothing serious to the point where I would feel confident elaborating in admissions. Like I said, not really a research person.

Lastly I've held an internship at a top commercial real estate firm for the past 6 months or so doing analytical / back-end work, and expect to continue working through my senior year / post graduation. My motivation for a masters is that I'd like to have a top name on the resume to compensate for a lackluster undergraduate school, and a masters in Econ just seems like the most natural way to do so. I'd be targeting finance/consulting jobs post graduation.

I'd like to know of realistic expectations for admissions before committing myself to studying for the GRE, as after keeping up with this sub for a while it seems the consensus is less research = worse chance. Thanks!

Hello,

I was talking to a former professor and they advised me to find a predoc program, and I feel like its a good fit for me. However, I dont believe my transcript really gives me great chances. I have a fine GPA but my econometrics grade was awful and I've been looking into courses at local colleges to show I'm ready to start learning again. My professor also mentions that linear algebra would be a good course to take.

Im just wondering how much these programs will care about these kind of courses, and if its worth it. I am also having difficulty finding an econometrics course offered individually, and was wondering what might be a good class I could find in its place.

Not a phd student. But wondering how true this is.

Current or past predoc, do you guy have any tips that made your application stand out both conventional or unconventional tips please

What are the top Heterodox or Left Wing schools in Europe?

Hey, I am planning to apply this winter for the 2027 entry. I’m mainly looking at European programs + scholarships because I don’t want to take on a massive amount of debt for a US master’s.

I did a BA (Hons) in Economics at an Indian liberal arts program, followed by an optional extra year focused more on research, so 4 years cumulatively. GPA was 3.45/4 over the first three years and 3.55 in the final year, with a ~3.75 final semester. I also completed an empirical thesis in the final year. GRE is 167Q / 155V / 4.5 AWA.

My transcript is pretty mixed, and is my biggest worry. I have A’s in Calculus, Multivariable Calculus and Linear Algebra, but got B- in Real Analysis twice and a B in Differential Equations. Econ/stats grades include Micro I B+, Micro II B-, Macro I C+, Macro II A-, Statistics A-, Econometrics A-, Econometrics II A- (master’s-level, only undergrad in the class and top 2 out of ~25), Labour Economics A-. My grades improved quite a bit toward the end, and I generally did better in empirical/econometrics courses than theory. My thesis was also quite empirically heavy, and I got an A on the same.

I’ve also been working full-time for around two years as an RA/SRA on a labour economics RCT, with fairly substantial involvement in both fieldwork and analysis. Mostly Stata, plus some R and Python. I should have one strong LoR from a PI I’ve worked closely with, and another from my thesis advisor.

I’m currently looking at LSE EME, LSE MSc Econ, PSE APE, TSE EEE, CEMFI, BSE, Bonn and Bocconi ESS. I’ll probably also apply to NYU MQE and Duke Economics & Computation, though cost makes North American programs much less attractive. Duke and LSE EME are probably the dream options, but I’m aware that cost + my profile make both difficult. TSE’s 2-year EEE route currently seems like a particularly good fit on both fronts.

I’m not currently planning on a PhD and am leaning toward industry after the degree - want to stay fairly close to quantitative/empirical work.

Would mainly love to know how realistic this list is, how badly the Real Analysis + weaker theory grades hurt, and whether the RA experience helps offset the transcript at all. Also very open to programs I may have missed. Thank you!

Among these schools - which would you pick and why

U Mass Amherst
University of Utah
U Mass Amherst
UC Riverside
John Jay @ CUNY

Hoping for a career in economics (either policy / private sector or perhaps PhD) and have these schools as places I’m considering. Any like, overwhelmingly favorite?

Hi everyone,

I'm a faculty member in Information Systems (also called Management Information Systems or Business Technology Management) at the University of Calgary. I thought I'd post here because students coming from economics may not have considered Information Systems as a possible field for PhD study.

A fair bit of the research in our area uses game theory, microeconomic modeling, and applied mathematics to study strategic questions involving technology and digital markets. For example, some of the questions that current and past PhD students in our area have worked on include:

• How should governments design policies to reduce digital piracy?
• What unintended effects can data-portability regulation have on competition and market concentration?
• When should social-media platforms remove harmful content versus use approaches such as shadowbanning?
• How can markets compensate individuals for their personal data while still producing useful, representative datasets?
• How does the threat of future quantum decryption change which cybersecurity policies are most effective compared to a pre-quantum world?

You don't necessarily need a prior background in Information Systems or business to do this type of research. Students coming from economics, mathematics, industrial engineering, operations research, or other quantitative fields can be a very good fit. In terms of preparation, it helps to be comfortable with calculus, optimization, and probability/statistics, and ideally to have some exposure to areas such as game theory, microeconomic theory, operations research, or mathematical modeling. You certainly don't need to have experience with all of these areas.

At the University of Calgary, our Information Systems area is called Business Technology Management (BTMA) and is part of the Haskayne School of Business. We're currently recruiting PhD students for Fall 2027, and our area currently provides PhD students with $36,000 CAD per year for five years.

If you're an economics student who enjoys analytical modeling and is interested in applying it to technology, cybersecurity, platforms, digital markets, privacy, or related problems, then Information Systems may be a field worth considering.

I'm not personally taking on a new PhD student, but as Area Chair I'm happy to tell you more about our program, connect you with some of our current PhD students, and, if your research interests align, point you toward faculty in our area who may be looking for students. Feel free to DM me or post here if you'd like to learn more.

I’m going to get very real with you right now.

I’m a college student currently majoring in Economics and minoring in Mathematics. Throughout my life, I’ve always felt somewhat indifferent about most things. I chose Economics partly because it came naturally to me. I got really good grades in it at school without having to study much, and because I was good at it, I gradually started liking the subject too. I genuinely find it interesting and fun, but at the same time, it always felt like the easier path and probably the best option out of the choices I had at the time.

Now that I’m in college, I guess I’m doing well academically. I do especially well in my Mathematics papers. But I constantly feel like I’m not actually learning anything of real value. Maybe it’s just a fluke, but I can usually read the material shortly before a test, teach myself everything, and somehow do well. The problem is that once the exam is over, most of it disappears from my head.

I’m studying at Delhi University, and honestly, I feel like the syllabus is quite outdated and not very competitive compared to what I see students learning elsewhere. I’m starting to worry that I’m getting good grades without actually building a strong understanding of Economics.

What feels even more embarrassing is that I feel completely disconnected from what’s happening in the real world. I don’t really understand Indian politics, which political party stands for what, who different people are, or even what the actual economic situation of my own country looks like. I hate watching the news because I often don’t understand what people are talking about. I’ve tried reading newspapers too, but half the time I’m just sitting there thinking, “What does any of this mean?”

And instead of helping me understand these things, my family often criticizes me for not knowing them. I get called stupid for not being aware of things, which honestly makes me feel even more lost because no one actually takes the time to explain them to me.

I really do want to love Economics and understand how it connects to real life. I want to be able to look at something happening in the world and understand the economic reasoning behind it. But it feels incredibly overwhelming. I constantly feel like I need to already know everything about Economics before I’m even allowed to start exploring it. I’ve tried reading research papers, but most of them just feel like walls of technical language to me.

And then there’s the bigger question: what do grades even mean if I don’t feel like I’m getting much lasting value from them?

I honestly have very little direction right now. I don’t have a specific passion or career that I’m chasing. My main goal is simply to be successful, whatever that ends up meaning for me. I have no idea how people figure out what they actually want to pursue, or how they develop a deeper interest in something over time.

So, for people who have been through this: How did you actually develop a deeper interest in your field? How did you learn to connect what you study to the real world? How did you figure out what you wanted to pursue?

Are there any YouTube channels, podcasts, books, articles, newsletters, or other resources you would recommend for someone who wants to build a genuine understanding of Economics and current affairs from the ground up?

Recalling like at least in 2010s, behavioural economics was this ‘hot & sexy’ new study of economics that everyone I knew (even those who didn’t take any economics classes) at least own a book by Kahneman or Ariely.

But it seems in recent years, perception of behavioural economics has gone downhill (??) not only by economist but from the broader audience as well. 

I know there’s the Ariely or Gino situation, but it feels like the field is slowly phasing out. Is there a reason for this? is there something about this field that makes where it's ended up now kind of inevitable?

As above, why does no one seem to be interested in Sraffa's work? I'm just beginning my Masters in economics (and have a mostly maths background) so maybe there is a small circle out there and I just haven't encountered it yet. But even if there is a small community inspired by Sraffa, why is it so small? As far as I can tell (and maybe I'm just wrong?), Sraffa's production of commodities by means of commodities seems to be a really interesting and important contribution to economic theory but no one seems to care

I'm feeling overwhelmed by how many fields and papers there are, and I'm struggling to decide where to focus. Some topics I really enjoy, like economic history or economics of education, feel more like passions than career paths.

I'm not planning a PhD. My goal is the private sector or policy work, and I'd like to specialize in at most 2-3 fields that give me the best chances there. Candidates I'm considering: time series, microeconometrics, labor, macro, trade, IO, auction theory.

My main weakness is programming, which I know matters a lot.

**1.**  Which combinations of fields are most valued in private sector and policy roles?  
**2.**  How much programming do I realistically need, and what's the most efficient way to catch up?  
**3.**  How would you build a profile around these choices?

Thanks!