We have located links that may give you full text access.
Emotional Regulation Mechanisms of University Students in Group Work Situations.
UNLABELLED: Universities are active agents of social change through knowledge, providing citizens with the necessary abilities to face professional challenges. This work aims to evaluate and analyse the adaptation of emotional regulation in learning situations of group work in virtual and hybrid (virtual and presential) environments, of a group of students of Physical Activity and Sport Sciences belonging to a Chilean university and a Spanish university.
METHOD: A total of 107 students from a Chilean university and a Spanish university, all of them enrolled in the degree in Physical Activity and Sport Sciences, participated in the study. The instrument used was the Adaptative Instrument for Regulation of Emotions questionnaire.
RESULTS: The analysis of the data shows that there are some significant differences ( p ≤ 0.05), between the groups of students who worked virtually and those who worked in hybrid situations, in the aspects related to personal motivations (learn from my classmates, not to disappoint my working group, and enjoying the experience of working in a group). The students who worked online resolved conflicts mainly through individual regulation mechanisms with significant differences in relation to the students who worked in hybrid mode. No significant differences were found in the socioemotional challenges or in the balance of the metacognitive experience.
CONCLUSION: The group that worked in hybrid learning valued group purposes over personal purposes and used the social regulation mechanism over individual regulation in conflict resolution. On the other hand, the group that worked virtually valued group and personal purposes equally and used the mechanism of individual regulation and social regulation to solve difficulties. Differences between students who worked in virtual and hybrid environments may be due to greater social interaction and group dynamics in hybrid environments, as well as differences in culture and access to resources and technology.
METHOD: A total of 107 students from a Chilean university and a Spanish university, all of them enrolled in the degree in Physical Activity and Sport Sciences, participated in the study. The instrument used was the Adaptative Instrument for Regulation of Emotions questionnaire.
RESULTS: The analysis of the data shows that there are some significant differences ( p ≤ 0.05), between the groups of students who worked virtually and those who worked in hybrid situations, in the aspects related to personal motivations (learn from my classmates, not to disappoint my working group, and enjoying the experience of working in a group). The students who worked online resolved conflicts mainly through individual regulation mechanisms with significant differences in relation to the students who worked in hybrid mode. No significant differences were found in the socioemotional challenges or in the balance of the metacognitive experience.
CONCLUSION: The group that worked in hybrid learning valued group purposes over personal purposes and used the social regulation mechanism over individual regulation in conflict resolution. On the other hand, the group that worked virtually valued group and personal purposes equally and used the mechanism of individual regulation and social regulation to solve difficulties. Differences between students who worked in virtual and hybrid environments may be due to greater social interaction and group dynamics in hybrid environments, as well as differences in culture and access to resources and technology.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Executive Summary: State-of-the-Art Review: Unintended Consequences: Risk of Opportunistic Infections Associated with Long-term Glucocorticoid Therapies in Adults.Clinical Infectious Diseases 2024 April 11
Autoimmune Hemolytic Anemias: Classifications, Pathophysiology, Diagnoses and Management.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 13
Clinical practice guidelines on the management of status epilepticus in adults: A systematic review.Epilepsia 2024 April 13
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app