Writing argumentative syntheses based on multiple sources implies integrating ideas from diferent, often conlicting, positions. This can promote more constructive learning, especially when students undertake the task together with their peers. However, despite the importance of this activity in the university context, students generally lack the competency required. Thus, the primary objective of this research is to analyse the impact of a speciic intervention programme (CPG + EICS) that combines help designed to foment collaboration with help aimed at improving the writing of argumentative syntheses, improving the quality of the university students' work, whether undertaken individually or collaboratively. For this we designed an experimental study with one hundred and sixty participating psychology students, distributed randomly into four diferent intervention programmes. We then compared and contrasted the impact of the already mentioned irst programme (CPG + EICS) with that of the three others in which we progressively reduced the help provided (explicit instruction with video modelling, a guide and collaborative practice). We evaluated the quality of the syntheses by examining the number of arguments and their degree of integration within the students' texts. The results demonstrate that, to achieve the appropriate competency level, the intervention should include explicit instruction with video modelling. When this instruction combines help aimed at improving the elaboration of argumentative syntheses with help designed to foment collaboration, students integrate a higher level of contradictory information. However, to identify a high level of arguments, explicit instruction focused solely on helping students write argumentative syntheses turns out to be as efective as help directed at collaboration. In addition, after the intervention encouraging collaborative work, students successfully transfer the skills developed to their own individual writing tasks.

You will be contacted as soon as possible.

Emotional intelligence (EI) is related to better performance in sports. To measure this construct, many tools have been developed and validated in the sports context. However, these tools are based on an individual’s ability to manage their own emotions, but do not consider the emotions of the rest of the team (teammates, coaches, etc.). In this regard, the Workgroup Emotional Intelligence Profile short version (WEIP-S) is a self-reported measure designed to measure the EI of individuals who are part of a team. The aim of this study was to validate the WEIP-S structure to measure EI in the sports context, and to analyze the psychometric properties of this tool in the sample in terms of validity and reliability. A cross-sectional study was conducted among 273 athletes to examine the reliability, factor structure, and evidence of validity (convergent, discriminant, nomological, and concurrent) of the WEIP-S. Confirmatory factor analysis showed that the original four-factor structure is the most appropriate for the sports context. Composite reliability was adequate for all factors except management of one’s own emotions, which also showed poor convergent validity. Evidence of convergent, discriminant, and nomological validity are discussed. This study represents an advance in the use of specific scales to measure EI in the sports context.

The outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic and the resulting restrictions designed to slow the spread of infection greatly disrupted people’s lives. The present study aimed to investigate the impact of lockdown on the psychology, training, and sleep habits of a cohort of basketball players. An online survey involving 169 professional and amateur athletes was conducted using four validated psychological questionnaires (WLEIS-S, POMS, BRS, SMS-II) and a Likert scale to measure the rating of perceived exertion (RPE) and training variables. Gender differences in fatigue (p = 0.022); friendships (p = 0.017); others’ emotional appraisal (p < 0.001); and resilience (p = 0.031) were apparent, with higher values for women in all categories bar resilience. Comparisons before and during the lockdown revealed that all participants reduced their RPE (p < 0.001); training days (p = 0.004); and training hours (p < 0.001), and experienced a decline in the quality of sleep (p < 0.001). Sleep hours (p < 0.001) increased during lockdown. The professionals and females maintained their training days (p > 0.05), while the non-professionals and males did not. Psychological states during lockdown were a predictor of the differences in training and recovery variables. In situations where training and competition are limited, it is important to develop plans to maintain physical activity, good quality sleep, and promote greater emotional management and understanding to control negative moods.