The DOI matches its Crossref record.
The Graduate Student Caucus: A Model for Peer Support
Abstract
Graduate students are primarily socialized into the political science profession in departments, with networks of peers and informal mentors providing crucial sources of support. This article describes one model of departmental professional socialization that the authors have led—the Graduate Student Caucus—which can improve graduate students’ day-to-day lived experiences. In this model, a small cross-cohort group of students is elected for a year-long term to develop professional and social programming for graduate students and to assist them in navigating university bureaucracy, teaching and research responsibilities, and the job market. The Caucus also regularly compiles and presents student concerns to their department administrators to steer the program’s direction. We describe the structure of the Caucus and its activities to highlight the benefits of this model and its adaptability to other institutional settings. Governance mechanisms like a Caucus cultivate trust, boost confidence, and demystify the “hidden curriculum” in the profession.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“High-variability approaches involve active participation in activities, seeking external assistance, and altering lifestyle and thought patterns, encompassing aspects like time management, cognitive enhancement, and improvement of research abilities (Meehan et al., 2023).”
From A narrative review of anxiety regulation in PhD students based on Green model (2024) · cites this paper as Meehan et al., 2023
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 11
- 10.1080/13611267.2019.1686694 · DOI
- Hummel, 2021, Mental Health and Fieldwork, PS: Political Science and Politics, 54, 121
- Kim, 2022, Networking 101 for Graduate Students: Building a Bigger Table, PS: Political Science and Politics, 55, 1
- 2016, APSA Departmental Survey: Doctoral Curriculum
- Barham, 2022, Teaching the Hidden Curriculum in Political Science, PS: Political Science and Politics, 55, 1
- Almasri, 2022, Mental Health and the PhD: Insights and Implications for Political Science, PS: Political Science and Politics, 55, 1
- 10.1353/rhe.2002.0033 · DOI
- Bos, 2012, Mentoring to Fix the Leaky Pipeline, PS: Political Science and Politics, 45, 223
- Coulter, 2004, Assessing Graduate Students’ Needs: The Role of Graduate Student Organizations, Educational Research Quarterly, 28, 15
- Windsor, 2022, Grant Writing and the Hidden Curriculum: Mentoring and Collaborating Across Disciplines, PS: Political Science and Politics, 55, 313
- 10.33774/apsa-2022-wbmqb · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
A narrative review of anxiety regulation in PhD students based on Green model
Ma, Y., Yu, A., Ma, H., Zhao, Y., Liu, X., Zhai, H., & Gao, Y. (2024) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1351386 · Cited by 13
Metadata
- Authors
- Meehan, E., Albert, E., McQueen, S., & Syed, A.
- Venue
- PS: Political Science & Politics
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- Published
- 2022-07-11
- Volume
- 56
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 88-93
- ISSN
- 1049-0965
- 1537-5935
- Cited by
- 1
- References
- 0
- Language
- en
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Graduate Student Caucus: A Model for Peer Support. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1017/s1049096522000798
- The paper
- Meehan, E., Albert, E., McQueen, S., & Syed, A. (2023). The Graduate Student Caucus: A Model for Peer Support. PS: Political Science & Politics. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1049096522000798