Over the last few decades, interest in neuroscience has continued to increase globally. As of 2022, the global neuroscience market was valued at over $600 billion, with a projected increase to over $700 billion by 2026 [1]. Growing interest in neuroscience is also evident in research publication trends, with a consistent rise in the volume of published studies each year [2,3]. While the vast majority of neuroscience research continues to be published by researchers in Western countries including the United States, Germany, and the United Kingdom, output from China has grown significantly since the late 1990s, accounting for over 10 % of all research globally in the late 2010s [2]. This increase in research output is most clearly seen through international collaborations, where nearly 40 % of studies published from 1999–2008 included at least one author from a Chinese university [4]. The rapid expansion of neuroscience research capacity in China is also reflected in the establishment of state-of-the-art research centers including the International Data Group/McGovern Institute for Brain Research in Beijing, the Center for Excellence in Brain Science and Intelligence Technology in Shanghai, and the Shenzhen Institute of Neuroscience. Together, these trends highlight China's growing influence in global neuroscience research and its commitment to advancing both scientific understanding and technological innovation.

China, like other countries around the world, has realized the utility of neuroscience research in addressing some of society’s biggest challenges. For example, increased prevalence rates for neurodegenerative disorders such as Alzheimer’s disease have the potential to negatively impact on Chinese citizens’ quality of life, costing the country hundreds of billions of dollars in medical care and lost productivity [5]. Focusing efforts of neuroscience research on the identification of early neuromarkers for this and other neurological disorders has the potential to significantly reduce their negative impact, a key goal of the China Brain Project [6]. On the other end of the spectrum, the China Brain Project also aims to develop intelligent technologies that approximate human cognitive processes, an advancement that can contribute to maximizing the potential of the Chinese populous. As the demand for breakthroughs in both clinical and technological advancements grows, universities and research centers in China will face increasing pressure to equip the next generation of researchers with the skills and expertise needed to meet these ambitious goals.

To sustain momentum as a rising contributor in the field of neuroscience, Chinese institutions must prioritize the publication of novel, high-impact research. At the same time, there is a critical need to build future domestic research capacity by training young investigators who will serve as the next generation of neuroscientists. The national prioritization of brain science, exemplified by initiatives like the China Brain Project, reflects the government’s commitment to advance neuroscience both in basic research and applied domains. However, undergraduate education has not yet caught up with this momentum. The lack of undergraduate neuroscience programs in China [7] positions psychology programs as the most likely entry point for students who may form the next generation of neuroscience researchers, given the two disciplines’ overlapping focus on the brain. Accordingly, examining the developmental outcomes of undergraduate psychology programs offers valuable insight into the knowledge base of a student population integral to advancing neuroscience research capacity in China.

What discipline-specific competencies does an undergraduate program in psychology develop in a student? This question has motivated a small but growing number of studies on the topic of psychological literacy [8], the ability to critically analyze psychological phenomena, investigate real-world psychological issues using scientific methodology, and communicate psychological knowledge and understanding [9]. Historically, this work has focused exclusively on samples recruited in Western countries [e.g., 10,11], but attention is shifting toward a more global focus, with one recent study focusing specifically on psychological literacy in China [12]. Findings from these studies provide insight into the outcomes associated with studying psychology, with implications for curriculum design, assessment, and future employment. Whether an undergraduate program in psychology develops neuroliteracy — an understanding about the brain and its functions [13] — that may be crucial for success when pursuing postgraduate training in neuroscience is an open and unexplored question.

To date, few studies have systematically investigated levels of general neuroliteracy within any population. In one such study, Herculano-Houzel [14] administered a neuroliteracy survey to over 2000 members of the general public in Rio de Janeiro to assess knowledge about the mind–brain relationship, perception, learning, and memory. Statements on the survey were validated by a sample of senior neuroscientists, who evaluated whether each item was factually correct or incorrect. Overall results indicated a positive correlation between neuroliteracy and both educational attainment and engagement with popular science media. However, widespread misconceptions persisted, including beliefs that learning does not alter neural connections and that humans use only 10 % of their brains. The latter reflects a pervasive neuromyth—defined as “misconception[s] generated by a misunderstanding, a misreading, or a misquoting of facts scientifically established (by brain research) to make a case for use of brain research in education and other contexts” [15]. The study also highlighted a prevalent dualistic view among the public, with many attributing mental functions to both the brain and an immaterial soul, contrasting with the materialistic perspective held by neuroscientists. Further analysis by educational level and academic major revealed that students currently studying psychology exhibited significantly higher neuroliteracy than their peers in other disciplines, achieving levels of accuracy comparable to those of participants with graduate-level education. As one of the few empirical investigations into general neuroliteracy, Herculano-Houzel’s study suggests that participation in an undergraduate psychology program may positively influence neuroliteracy, highlighting the need for further research not only to characterize how neuroscience knowledge is distributed across broader populations, but also to better understand neuroliteracy within psychology majors themselves.

In contrast to studies on general neuroliteracy, a considerable body of research has examined the specific prevalence of neuromyths with the majority of studies conducted in samples of educators from different countries, including China [16]. Importantly, neuromyths only represent one aspect of neuroliteracy, reflecting incorrect or outdated beliefs as opposed to a broader understanding of neuroscience knowledge. Although misconceptions about brain research are pervasive among educators, including the belief that humans only utilize 10 % of their brain [reviewed in 17], belief in neuromyths has not been shown to negatively impact teaching quality [13]. While potentially irrelevant for those working as teachers, accurate understanding about the brain and its function is likely crucial for psychology majors, especially those aiming to pursue further education and careers in the field neuroscience. Considering that this population may account for a significant portion of the pool from which future Chinese neuroscientists will be recruited, it is a worthwhile endeavor to investigate the neuroliteracy of undergraduate psychology majors in China. Assessing neuroliteracy may be especially crucial during the earlier stages of an undergraduate psychology program to inform the design of more advanced courses given the significance of prior knowledge on achievement in higher education [18].

The present study aims to address the existing gap in our understanding of neuroliteracy by conducting a descriptive investigation of the neuroliteracy levels of undergraduate psychology majors in China. Using an abbreviated form of the validated neuroliteracy survey from the study by Herculano-Houzel [14], we investigated the following research questions: 1) What is the overall level of neuroliteracy in undergraduate psychology majors in China? 2) What are the most and least accurately identified neuroscience concepts? 3) Is neuroliteracy modulated by year of study, gender, or reading habits? 4) What subjective beliefs are held about neuroscience? To the best of our knowledge, this is the first investigation conducted in a student sample in China, providing novel insight into the neuroliteracy of its potential future neuroscientists. Given the novelty of the present study, we make no a priori predictions regarding overall levels of neuroliteracy in this population. However, based on findings from previous studies, we expect that levels of neuroliteracy may be modulated by participants’ year of study, sex at birth, and reading status. Specifically, we predict higher rates of neuroliteracy in more advanced students as well as males based on findings reported in a similar investigation of psychological literacy in China [12]. We also predict higher levels of neuroliteracy in students who read newspapers [14], but potentially lower levels in students reading popular science media based on a previously-reported negative association [19].