The content is very rigorous and the lab report was very objectively graded. The lectures were well-structured and the tutorial classes were very relevant. It was very interesting to learn about how biologically-based influences affect our perception and cognition.

Interesting content once you understand it which you really have to take time to do so especially with Bode's neuroimaging lectures. Really struggled to grasp some things in the beginning but took time in SWOTVAC and tried hard and ended up with an overall H1. I'd say it's helpful that it's objective especially in the exam as you know only one answer can be right unlike Developmental Psychology which can be a bit subjective thus you may think many answers are right on the exam. Lab report was easy as they give you all the information, lit review, limitations etc. unlike DEV where you have to do the research yourself and develop your own arguments. Carter's section on neuropharmacology is soooooo interesting! Best lectures I've ever watched, so interesting and she explains it all amazingly. The fact that she expresses how much she loves the content also helps get into it! Overall, hard to understand at first but really interesting content, wouldn't recommend for non-sciencey students who aren't doing psych in future.

The contents were so interesting for this subject. I recommend!

This subject covered four topics — neuroimaging techniques (Bode), statistical hypothesis testing (Cheng), sensory systems/memory/attention (Forte) and neuropharmacology (Carter). Bode was brilliant. Probably the best lecturer I’ve had thus far tbh, he was very funny/dorky whilst still explaining things in a comprehensible way. Great choice as the introductory lecturer to the subject. Forte’s lectures were a little monotonous and his first few lectures involved slides with no words and only pictures. Whilst it does force you to write notes, it concerns me that it may not be as accessible to some people. Carter is wonderful, she has such a grounded and confident yet receptive presence about her and her section is taught very concisely. She also makes a point to show and link multiple additional (optional) videos which I think is great. I’d say, overall, the neuroimaging section was conceptually the hardest. It involved (basic) physics and in general, there are a lot of processes to understand and is not as directly applicable to oneself (it honestly blows my mind how someone even invented MRI after learning about how it works lol). There are a lot of small nuances to wrap your mind around, and it takes the longest to revise too if you aren’t actively revising throughout the sem. Particularly MRI, fMRI and EEG. Though not as conceptually difficult, I believe that Forte’s section was the hardest to follow along with. It was hard/overwhelming on first run through, however upon subsequent visits of the material, it was easier to grasp. This section is a bit more geared towards rote learning, I’d say. Neuropharmacology was perhaps the most straightforward, especially if you have a background in biology. Nonetheless, it was quite interesting as many others have noted. The exam was a little difficult and less straightforward than I initially thought (and had hoped) it would be. However, it wasn’t terrible, and I think I went well in the end. Compared to developmental psychology, it is much more “science-y”, dense and objective. There is also more content but it is not as convoluted. If you’re an arts student, or primarily interested in the humanities aspects of psychology, some of this may be a drag for you.

Straightforward subject, easy to score well in. Forte's lectures were a major pain point, he forgot to edit most of his recordings which left us watching him rehearse and get frustrated at himself. Started out funny but quickly got sad. Content was mostly very interesting - lots of people found Bode's section dry but it is very relevant if you are interested in/have participated in research studies, and he is very engaging. Neuropharmacology was the most interesting topic to me. Lab report was as expected and marked fairly, exam was very easy and not rushed.

Do me a favour by not touching and doing this subject if you don't have to! The exam is stuffed, and too time-constraint, and the content is mostly dull (aside from pharmacology).

easy to score high in especially for the lab report (H1). the modules and content that is released though is kind of a mess at times because there was missing slides or wrong information in the slides that ultimately had to be addressed. the tutors and coordinators were super lovely tho and easy to get help from.

Very well taught/coordinator subject. Interesting too.

The content definitely wasn’t my cup of tea with an abnormal amount of MRI, TMS, neuroimaging stuff and weirdly not a lot of biology considering the subject name (coming from a biomed student). But if youre confident in your essay writing skills (and I mean H1 confident), this subject is an easy WAM booster because the lab report is worth a lot. I also suck ass at exams, but since it was all MCQ, it was also very straightforward (94%!). I ended up with a score in the 90s, but be warned, you HAVE TO PUT IN THE WORK FOR ESSAYS/LAB REPORTS! The tutors and coordinators were all so lovely (!!), but there were marking delays.

This subject isn't that great. Judging by group chats/general chatter, more people loathe this subject than like it. Cons: The first two modules (Bode and Jason Forte's Modules) were a drag. Bode's lectures (esp. the 1st fMRI +EEG lectures) were difficult to understand, and you need to rewatch the lectures to understand it well. Pay attention to the spatial/temporal resolutions of each technique. Jason's section focused excessively on visual neuroscience (eg: LGN, V1, understanding how your brain understands the object, V4, on-off surround cell structures, familiarity etc), and its a lot of memory/rote learning. Stats lectures (done by Jun, the co-ordinator) were okay, but mostly irrelevant to the lab report. All the aforementioned modules, especially Bode's, had really long REQUIRED readings. Eg: for week 1 we were told to read ~70 pages (REQUIRED), and it was irrelevant to the lecture content! Lab reports were marked harshly (av. 26/40, H3), but the lab report content itself is understandable (easier to write than the Dev psych report!). Pros: The saving grace of this subject was Olivia's section about different neurotransmitters and their relationship to things like illicit drugs, depression, rewards etc. She actually explained things well. The Exam was easy as it was all MCQ and open book. The quizzes were a free 15% since you can redo them as many times as you want. Still, don't be decieved: this subject has very little actual "biology" in it and is a drag, although not too bad to score in.