I took this class based on the reviews BUT be WARNED the professor has changed! He's commented on how people posted reviews on his class being easy and some other reviews that obviously bothered him such as that he looks like a serial killer or speaks too much of his wife, so that is the only reason I can fathom why he'd change his exams to being unbelievably ambiguous and lacking the time to complete them in it's entirety. Apparently, now he does not want to give the illusion that he's an easy professor. He gives 39 questions in 45 minutes (class is 50 min but TA takes 5min to distribute exams)...all of which are free recall with short essay answers for most, but his wording on the tests is probably the worse and why you end up spending so much time rereading his questions and racking your brain even when you've studied sufficiently and gone to office hours for clarification. After the midterm, students gathered in clusters outside of the room to compare and see if they also did not get to finish the exam and how "weird" his wording was on most questions. I hate having to state this part but it may be useful in you understanding what type of student I am so you consider whether to dismiss this review or not. I'm a psych major, transfer student, senior year, with a 3.7 gpa (4.0 at previous school), and I've taken challenging classes at UCLA such as 115 Behavioral Neuroscience, 118 Comp PsychoBio, and Anatomy...received an A in all of these classes. I also tend to like a lot of styles of teaching, accept teachers for their quirks and take a lot of handwritten notes for deeper understanding. So it SHOOK my world when I got an F on the midterm. I couldn't explain it. It felt surreal. I've never received anything below an 80 on a test and that was on an anatomy test that most students thought was savage. Professor McAuliffe lures you in believing he's an easy professor with his outrageous physical humor (eg. waving hands in air, yelling out of nowhere, and funny faces...) and his slides are terrible. But what makes his lectures difficult to follow even though you're enjoying the comedy routine before your eyes is that you don't know when one theory/effect ends and the other begins so it's all a blur since his slides do not delineate or clearly itemize them as he's doing his spiel. And his 2 hours of extra credit add up to just 1 point of your grade in case you think it'll help (it's not 1=1 like other professors give). My recommendation if you do not want to frustrate yourself and actually enjoy the topic (this is to general and broad to initiate any interest) is take one of the specific labs like social, neuroscience, developmental, etc... There may be a paper due at the end, but at least there you get what you put in and it's actually interesting and something new though even in that scenario I feel I would've done better...as opposed to hearing about bits and pieces of things you already know by the time you take 101 with a professor that has something to prove to all previous reviewers even if it's at the expense of your experience and grade.

This class wasn't bad, the professor tries to make lectures interesting (he's a funny outgoing guy). All of the material was pretty basic, stuff you've probably already learned in previous psych classes. Some exams questions could be tricky so you definitely need to study and take lots of notes in lecture/lab. He provides pretty good midterm/final study prep questions. There is extra credit for SONA. Grade consists of weekly quizzes on an article u had to read (in a course reader which is super cheap like $10 i think) and its not bad at all, midterm and final (if u study hard and make sure u pay attention to things he says in lecture/lab you should do okay), and a final presentation that u do with a partner on an article/study of your choice (easy tbh). If you want to get your psych lab out of the way without writing a 20pg paper (like most labs) i think this lab was relatively easy, not boring, and definitely doable to get an A or B if you put in work to study for the exams

The class structure is laid back, we met twice per week (1 lecture, 1 lab). 2 exams, 5 quizzes, and a presentation on a topic of your choice. No research paper required. This is the type of class one should take if they are a senior with senioritis and doesn't want to pursue grad school in psych. However, the exam grading is trash. He gives out study guides for the free response exams with the exact same questions on the exam. Hypothetically, one should get a perfect score if copied verbatim, but the professor changes one word from the sentence in the answer key so you won't get full credit for such an easy question. He is very stubborn about this and won't be willing to give your credit even if you bring up a valid argument. Labs are a waste of time and we were kept the entire lab period (NOT necessary at all for the amount of content). This class should only be taken if you need to fulfill the lab requirement to graduate.
The professor is a cool guy, but it feels like he doesn't take his job seriously anymore. I rate this as my least worthwhile class at UCLA.

Alright, so this professor made a point to make the class easy and it pretty much was I had no complaints besides the fact that the dude tries really hard to be funny when he isn't. He's also pretty rude as well but does so in a covert way which he hides with his "humor". Anyways so I cruised through the class. material, and homework and managed to get 3 (highest score) on almost all my weekly quizzes and did good on the presentation but for some reason I got a C as my final grade much to my amazement. First of all I did all of the readings, went to every single lecture, and studied the study guide (which literally has 90% of the questions that are on the tests). But some how I got a C on both tests which is weird since I answered the questions verbatim and even added more detail to each answer sooo? I don't know how he graded my test but since he puts in minimal effort and had the TA basically do his job for him I wouldn't be surprised if he half ass graded my test.

I'm honestly stunned the reviews about this class on here aren't better. McAuliffe is one of the best all-around professors at UCLA. He makes a ton of jokes in lecture and is a funny dude. His tests are completely easy if you do the reviews that are online, because he takes literally like 80% of the questions from there. You have a quiz every week on an outside research paper, but they're not hard and he drops your lowest one. Lastly, you have a presentation at the end of the quarter, but you don't even have to write a paper and you can do the presentation on literally whatever you want.

If you're looking to fill your lab requirement for psych and aren't crazy interested in any of the more specific ones (i.e. social psych lab, clinical lab, developmental lab, etc.) this is an awesome alternative that is super straightforward if you put a little effort in.

First, I would like to mention that the whole reason why I am writing this is because some of the reviews on here (if not most) are not a representative sample. And if you took psych 101 with Professor McAuliffe you would know why. So I made it a point (since I really didn't plan on it) to do this class and you (potential enrollees) justice by giving you, both, objective and subjective views. Do with them as you may.

PROS

1. Lectures are organized with slides (available a head of time)
2. Online study guide helps A LOT with exam (I wish all classes had that)
3. Quizzes are not so hard and he drops lowest grade
4. NO RESEARCH PAPER!! (That was a big one for me)
5. No text book (only course reader cost $10 - you could also just look up articles instead of buying it)
6. Offers extra credit (up to 1% increase)
7. One lab is completely devoted to presentation help
8. Exams not cumulative
9. Available to answer questions both in class and office hours
10. Tries to keep students engaged in lectures (does demonstration of material)

CONS

1. Exam & quizzes are short answers (doesn't believe in multiple choice)
2. Missing lecture could mean missing on important information not on slides
3. Quizzes are on the first 10 min. Of class - don't be late
4. Can be picky about wordings for a few questions - pay attention in class
5. Talks a bit fast, can be hard on note taking sometimes (I recorded a couple of lectures

Factual information

2 exams (33% each)
5 quizzes (12% drops lowest grade)
1 presentation (20% + 2% presentation attendance)
Roughly every lecture/lab a different area in psychology is discussed

My own personal opinion (as you can see some may not agree)

I really enjoyed this class! I thought lectures were super interesting. He discussed a little bit of everything, but it also felt like he picked subjects that are interesting and cool to know about. Don't get me wrong, I am not saying it's an easy A because it's not, but getting an A is doable if you put in the effort (I have a newborn at home that sucks out all my time and I still managed an A with putting a little effort). You just need to want to. Plus, I think he really does care and tries to give all resources possible to help student get good grades (which, unfortunately, I cannot say about all professors ) so utilize his office hours! It seems to me like he is passionate about his job which may be perceived by others as arrogance. But even if that were true, WHO CARES? Focus on things that matter.

Lastly I would like to comment back on some unfair claims:

* "McAuliffe is absolutely awful. His tests are dumb -- he literally copies questions off his study guide, and the rest of the questions are on obscure details that have no relevance to the overall meaning of the topic."

This makes no sense to me! He literally gives his students the to key to succeeding in his class. That makes him AWSOME in my book! And, if you call class material obscure details, then yeah, sure...

* "seriously mcauliffe's condescending attitude and overall lack of self-control makes it unbearable"

What are you talking about??? I have no idea what you even mean. It just sounds like you are mad you have to show up for class...tough luck, this is a university...are you aware of that?

* "On the last day of lecture, he brought his guitar and sang to the class. Is this really the way that professors at one of the top universities in the country should be teaching? "

He didn't do this in my quarter and I'm kind disappointed. I hope it wasn't because of all your mean and unfair comments. I heard that was a learning tool he used to help students remember class material. This is outside of the box thinking. It means he took time to come up with a song for this class to help his students do better on his exams. How is that a bad thing???

My Tip: When you read reviews try to weed out all the angry sounding comments (people can be unjustly mean) or even general positive comments that don't tell you much except that that person liked the class. Look for concrete information. And, most importantly try not to be biased in your own reviews.

It looks like there are a lot of bad reviews out here. I took his Psych 101 course in the summer, which seemed not as hard as these reviews made me expect it to be. We didn't have a textbook, which is always a plus. The class consisted of two midterms (40% each) and 1 group presentation (20%). The midterms weren't too bad, no questions or ideas that he didn't go over in class. It is very manageable, the only part that was sometimes hard was the 4 hour lab, but he gave us a break and candy sometimes. He is very helpful in his office hours, so I encourage you to visit him. Overall, probably much better than any other Pysch lab out there.

CAUTION: People say to take Psych 101 because it's "easy" but McAuliffe's class was a joke. The title is General Psychology Laboratory. But you learn nothing about research methods, lab skills, or anything. It's basically whatever McAuliffe feels like teaching. One week we took turns flipping pennies in the lab as part of an "experiment". Another week he thought it necessary to make us look at optical illusions. The material is so DISJOINTED from week to week, you're learning NOTHING. Then, McAuliffe expects you to memorize random phobias, facts about optical illusions, and whatever he mentions BRIEFLY in class...but in MINUTE detail on the exams. I'm always down for an easy class, but this class was so downright painful to stay in, sometimes I had to just leave. If you want to take Psych 101, take it with another professor. Either that, or just take another lab...even if it's more "work", at least you won't feel like stabbing yourself in class.

Take this lab. As long as you stay on top of your reading, you'll be good to go. The weekly quizzes aren't all too hard. Big plus for me is the NO PAPER fact about the class.

This class is a waste of time. If you have taken your cores for the psychology major, this class will not teach you anything new. This class is supposed to be a lab. However, there is absolutely no lab experience.
The professor is not of the greatest quality. He really should not be teaching. During lab, he would assign us with group work that we would have to present in 45 minutes to the class. Then, he would leave during the 45 minutes. I guess it's smart of him...he gets paid to teach and then heads back to his office to relax. "Lab" is 4 hours long. However, he managed to let us out about 30 minutes late on the last day of lab. Time management anyone?
I learned nothing about lab/research procedures in psychology. Instead the professor, teaches about things like visual illusions (useless if you already took psych 120a) or abnormal psychology (useless if you already took psych 127), etc. The material taught is not relevant for those students who want to go to grad school and learn about research.
Apparently, the professor dreamt of being a comedian or a singer and it didn't work out. In class, he spends most of his time cracking jokes. On the last day of lecture, he brought his guitar and sang to the class. Is this really the way that professors at one of the top universities in the country should be teaching? This is really disappointing considering how much we pay for our courses! He knows he is not the best professors, so he showers the class with candy on evaluation day. Lectures are extremely boring because all the material is not new. His exams are short answer. They are easy for the most part. But, he asks really specific questions. In conclusion, this class is not helpful if you are looking to learn. It is best to sign up for another lab. Best of luck.