It is a great course, but there should be more in depth material within each topic, more examples to really get a sense. Several of the bias are really easy to confuse. And when the questions are open for interpretation or it seems like the could be several right answers, it constitutes a higher failiure rate.

The weeks aren't evenly divided with reading and video materials. One week will have a lot of information with little time to read and watch the videos and then the test is usually on 1/4 of what you just read. While other weeks have little reading and videos. However, it had a lot of information.

The topic is extremely intersting, and the course is completely free, if you don't need the certificate. In the course you have a lot of reading to do and the videos are not always on point. If you read Daniel Kahnemann's Thinking fast and slow, you will get more out of this particular subject.

The course content need to be improved, the presentation are very plain, we have to read much outside to complete the tests. The subject matter is very interesting, little more elaborate course content would have made reading little more interesting. The professors are very good. Thank you.

The videos are very good but the written component is a bit lazy. It's filled with mistakes, typos, missing data. There's also no explanation after the quizzes for you to understand which one is correct and why. That said the information is interesting and relatively easy to follow.

Needs more reading/resources. Most of the test questions were conceptual (a good thing), but I did not find that the material adequately prepared me to answer them. Either I missed where the material was located (possible), or it is lacking. The info that was presented was well done.

The Course material is really good, but the examples could have been more diverse and the videos could have been targeted at topics beyond the PDF material. The questions were tricky and a little unexpected. One could have built a little line of thought before entering the questions.

Video Lectures covered partial course content. PDFs provided also left out some details which formed a pat of Week 3 Quiz. Could have been made much more interactive and interesting by including real world interviews and the design of course content could also be made moe engaging.

My only complaint is that there is too little actual videos while the quizzes required us to study A LOT beyond the videos. Videos could have been much more comprehensive with more examples. That being said, I have never found a course so relevant and challenging.

Introduces interesting concepts however quiz was often unreflective of the content being taught. Enrol in the course to have a brief understanding of how our we act against ourselves in the financial markets but do not expect much learning outcomes from the quiz.

The questions in the assignment were tricky along with the fact that some questions were asked even before the material for the same was taught.

a good course in terms of topics but could have been a little bit more comprehensive and not just focus on biases.

Some concepts were not explained clearly and some of the untold or unstressed concepts were asked at the quizes. All quizes were aiming the memorization capability instead of understanding the subject. However, I really enjoyed the lectures of Prof. Rasiel.

Videos had almost nothing to add. Gaps in theory and terminology. Some terms appeared in the tests for the first time. Bibliography and additional material for further understanding should be added. Very interesting topic. Course should me more extensive.

A very well designed course. I need time and patience to understand the practical applications of all the concepts being taught. I love the examples that have been explored in the course. Hoping for more core finance related examples in the future.

The course is great, content is very good and the tests are challenging, I wish the videos were more in depth and explained the math better. The discussion forums were good but not very active. I wish you could get answers from the professors.

Interesting course, nevertheless, many concepts find very useful definition, only as the replies to the quizz.

Same thing for the last quizz which explains the different biases during "bubbles", but do not give advices on how to bypass them

Course content is quite interesting and easy to apply to day-to-day life but I feel the content is not taught in a logical order. Th videos available for this course could be increased to cater to more of the content shared in the slides.

Very interesting topic and content, but it's mostly reading the PDFs, and the quizzes do not correlate well the with course. The four phases of a bubble was a large part of quiz 3 but was hardly discusses in the course.

I would have liked this course to be longer, so that the information could have been spread out among more lectures, rather than so much information condensed into one week. It made the exams a little confusing.

The course offered by Duke University is good. Very generic terms and lessons. Would have liked it more if they would've made a video on the bubble crash lessons and not attach a link for the learners to read.

The subject is interesting. However, a few explanations can be improved/added. 2 of the 3 quizzes don't have explanations, and sometimes in the material questions are left unattended or answered vaguely.

Very interesting course, but I think that it should have explanations in all quizzes as it has in the first one. Altough, there were some terms and bias that weren´t explained in the lectures or videos

The material is good, although it's hard to tell just how much of the biases you learn. The examples and quizzes are challenging, sometimes it's really hard to understand the logic behind the answer.

I expected more engagement and exposure to Nudge theory and other key theories of behavioural economics from this course. Overall, it's a nice course but lacks continuity and is abruptly ended.

Thank you for the course!

Lots of good things, though I would have preferred a deeper dive into the biases, the root causes, manifestations and generally a little bit more detailed perspective.