<p>I am a rising Senior who will be applying to colleges as a Chemistry major. For my high school elective, I have a choice between Economics or Psychology.</p>
<p>Which one do you think will be viewed more favorably by the colleges?</p>
<p>In a case like this, imo, they’re relatively equal in difficulty.
Econ is more quantitative though, so if you’re good at that stuff, take Econ.
Psych is really interesting. Are these AP’s?</p>
<p>No. AP is not an option for either.</p>
<p>oh. Then you can’t go wrong either way! :)</p>
<p>^Well, in Ohio, it is mandated by the state that you take Econ, while Psych is simply an elective, leading me to believe that Econ is generally considered more important.</p>
<p>You can also self-study for the AP exam with either, and I have heard that Psych is way easy to self-study, but I do not know that for a fact since I am going to self-study both econ and psych next year. Good Luck!!!</p>
<p>Actually Econ isn’t all that quantitative at the HS Level…I took AP/IB Econ and it was a breeze…VERY basic Math.</p>
<p>Indeed of the two disciplines psychology tends to be the more quantitative one. In the realm of social sciences, psychology is generally the one that has achieved its goal of becoming jus’ like a natural science, whereas economics is still playing catch-up.</p>
<p>Although that really says nothing about their intro level courses. Take whichever you prefer. Psychology is easier to self-study for an AP because A) it’s just an easier AP test and B) self-studying for econ is self-studying for 2 different APs, which while somewhat related, are still pretty different.</p>
<p>But I don’t know what that means for you, as you might want to study for the AP test as a supplement to your course or not</p>
<p>I think Psychology will better for a science major.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Most certainly not. Economics is easily the most mathematically intense social science. Most economics PhDs majored in math at the undergrad level. Linear algebra, diff eq, real analysis, topology, modeling, not to mention advanced probability, are all used by economists at the grad level.</p>
<p>
Well duh. Yet Psychology is essentially a science (especially the behavioral and cognitive neuroscience aspects of it). So is a course with advanced mathematical aspects more “quantitative” than a high-level science course?
So is Equilibrium Theory (a course that is mostly algebra and theory, but also incorporates a decent amount of multivariable calculus and differential equations into the mix) a more quantitative course than Human Neuroanatomy/Neuropsychology (a lab course that incorporates quite a bit of mostly statistics I guess, much like most high-level chem or bio courses)? I probably wouldn’t say so. But I guess it’s semantics</p>
<p>Take whichever one interests you more.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The whole notion of quantitative skill is attached to mathematics. Otherwise, using this definition, mathematics isn’t as quantitative as psychology.</p>
<p>Take econ!! It’s incredibly useful and it’s important to at least know the basics. Also, high school economics classes have little to no math involved. It’s all about theory and explanation. You won’t do any problem sets or anything like that.</p>
<p>For me I would say Econ because I want to major in it, but for you since you are a science person, I suggest Psychology because it seems to relate more to chemistry than Economics does. My opinion.
However, its totally up to you, which one do you find more interesting?</p>
<p>
No. Using this “definition” (except I haven’t given a definition, and the only applicable definition for quantitative is “relating to quantities”), Equilibrium Growth Theory may not be as quantitative as Human Neuroscience. Which I think is generally true, as [high-level] psych courses seem to be typical high-level science lab courses (idk really I’m not that familiar with the psych major), while [high-level] economics courses are usually a mixture of theory (in words, and in algebraic and modeling/analysis math) and policy/real life applications.</p>
<p>Anyway, the psych major would certainly fit into his plans as a Chemistry major more. Somewhat similar skill set.</p>
<p>Quantities = numbers. What’s more quantitative, mathematics or psychology? Disciplines draw their quantitative aspects from mathematics, not from science. To say a discipline is more quantitative because it’s more scientific utilizes a definition of quantitative reasoning that I have never seen before.</p>
<p>I’m taking Econ now
No math at all. Except for like adding up things in excel spreadsheets</p>
<p>Economics at the intro level (hell, at any level below grad) is grossly watered down. But it does involve more math than intro psychology.</p>
<p>The question is not which of mathematics and psychology is more quantitative, but which of economics and psychology is more quantitative.</p>
<p>But while you bring this up – yes, I think a course that strongly utilizes the scientific method would, in general, inherently be more quantitative than a course that doesn’t*.</p>
<p>*Not to say that economics doesn’t use a scientific method. It does, and econometrics courses that teach empirical analysis are extremely necessary to the economic researcher. Even experimental economics is being taught at some undergraduate departments. Still, I think you can definitely say that psychology uses the scientific method far more often than economics does (which is basically what I said in my first post)</p>
<p>And I’m saying that’s inherently misleading, because if we use your definition, psychology is more quantitative than mathematics, because mathematics is by definition not science. Either the quantitative nature of subject is drawn from the mathematics involved, or it’s not. If it’s the former, economics is more quantitative than psychology, because my point is that economics uses way more math than psychology, and thus being more quantitative. It it’s the latter, then mathematics is not quantitative. </p>
<p>It won’t be preposterous of me to declare that there’s no popular usage of “quantitative” that’s not associated with mathematics. It’s one thing to say psychology is more scientific, it’s quite another to claim it’s more quantitative.</p>