Ek psych

[yjj8817]

How is this book? I was thinking about supplementing with tpr psych

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[mcatjelly]

Content review-wise? Not good. I would primarily use TPR Psych. But EK does have good practice passages.

 

[baughlieve]

I'm going through it right now. It seems like a good first pass through the material but it seems really light on content. I think you would be ok sticking to TPR

 

[Enik]

I've used it and regret it deeply. It seems to cover only the tip of the psych MCAT iceberg

 

[655703]

Agreed. I think that EK does a phenomenal job of simplifying difficult scientific concepts so that students can better understand them, hence why I believe their science books are great. However, psych/soc is a different ballgame -- the concepts are not all that difficult (most of it is actually common sense ideas simply with names of people and theories attached to them). I think that EK has made a mistake in taking the same approach to psych/soc that they have with the sciences, viz. simplifying the material. Psych/soc concepts don't need simplification for us to master them, they need to be applied and explained within the context of both experimental and real-life situations -- EK fails at doing this. I got the sense reading EK Psych/Soc that I was simply going through a dictionary of terms. They would literally just define a term, followed by another term, followed by another term, without going over what the term means in the broader picture.

Take-away: I do not recommend EK for psych/soc, but I highly recommend EK for the sciences.

 

[DesitnationMD]

I think the EK too often simplifies too much. If you know the material great but, if you're a bit weak, they will leave you wanting. I have the NextStep books, which are ok, so I supplement with the FREE Khan videos.