On Nov 26, 2007, at 2:02 PM, Shearon, Tim wrote:
Marc- I think there are a number of variables to whether you'll like
Julien or not (witness other posts here). I don't totally agree
that it
is poorly written but it does have a particular style to it. I find
students generally like it though. It is more conversational.
Also, it limits the agonist/antagonist spectrum and does not
present or
explain the concept of inverse agonism (well, it didn't when I stopped
using it at about edition 3- so maybe it does now?). That is an
important concept to the way I teach it. Julien is also written for
practitioners who do not have a background in bio/pharm so it is
probably a good choice for psychology majors. (If I'm being unclear, I
think it is a very good book- it just doesn't fit with my course).
My sense with the Julien book is that it was more poorly written with
succeeding editions, since more and more material was crammed into
it, but not fully explained. The author would often use "direct
quotations" from research papers without fully explaining what was
being said.
Bruce Hetzler
---
