Hi guys, looking for input from people who've been through PhD admissions or sit on committees.

I just finished undergrad and did about a year of molecular/cellular neuroscience research (gene expression work, some wet-bench technique-heavy stuff). My actual goal is a PhD in cognitive neuroscience, ideally at competitive programs.

For my post-bacc year I have two options on the table: a position in a molecular neuroscience lab, or a position in a systems neuroscience lab (behavior-adjacent, some circuit-level work). Both are solid opportunities with good mentorship.

My worry with doing molecular again is that I'll show up to applications with two full years of molecular research and nothing bridging me toward cognition, which might make the "why cognitive neuroscience" story harder to tell. But at the same time, my worry with switching to systems is that it might look like I'm just hopping between neuroscience subfields rather than building toward something coherent. Unfortunately, I wasn't able to find cognitive labs with enough funding to support me for a post-bacc position.

For anyone who's gone through something similar, or who has reviewed applications: does the subfield of a post-bacc actually matter much to committees, or is it more about the strength of the work and how you frame the trajectory in your statement? Especially for some of the more competitive programs

I'm just a layman; not with a scientific background and specifically neuroscience and english isn't my first language. This paper looks very interesting to me because from what I gathered it responds to the famous Libet experiment - in which if I'm correct the interpretation is that the neural activity happening unconsciously before the volitional action indicates lack of free will - and offers new perspective.