Una investigación sobre la calidad del desayuno en una población de futuros maestros.

Introducción: Indagar sobre el desayuno que realizan colectivos como jóvenes universitarios, que en un futuro pueden ser Maestros, puede ser de interés por doble motivo como propiciar posibles mejoras de su dieta y potenciar modelos de hábitos saludables. Objetivo: Conocer la composición y calidad de los tipos de desayunos (incluyendo la llamada toma de media mañana) que llevan a cabo futuros Maestros tanto desde el punto de vista cualitativo como cuantitativo. Métodos: El estudio se realizó en 88 alumnos universitarios (futuros Maestros) con una media de edad de 21,4± 0,8 años. Previo consentimiento y entrenamiento, durante siete días consecutivos realizaron un registro de sus desayunos y tomas de media mañana. La calidad de las ingestas se ha evaluado en un primer lugar empleando una adaptación de los criterios del estudio enKid (según la distribución de consumo de lácteos, cereales y frutas) estableciendo una puntuación de 21 a 0 puntos y unos rangos de calidad en: Buena, Mejorable, Insuficiente o Mala (Tabla 1). Además, se ha analizado la incidencia del cambio de alimentos a lo largo de las tomas matinales (variabilidad) sobre los rangos anteriores. Asimismo se ha evaluado el aporte energético (kilocalorías) y de macronutrientes (carbohidratos, lípidos y proteínas) de los alimentos ingeridos utilizando tablas actuales de composición de alimentos. El análisis estadístico de los datos recogidos para el presente estudio se ha realizado mediante el programa SPSS 15.0. Resultados: De todos los posibles primeros desayunos computados (n=616), no se efectúan un 4,38% ni un 60,5% de las medias mañanas. La puntuación general media de la calidad tipo enKid (no considerando la bollería industrial) para el primer desayuno estudiado sería de 9,86±3,59 (Insuficiente) e incrementaría (p<0,05) a un valor medio de 11,50± 3,85 (Mejorable) si se computan a la vez desayunos y medias mañanas. Asimismo cuantos más días se cambia de tipo de alimentos consumidos (aspecto que hemos denominado variabilidad) más aumenta la puntuación media de la calidad tipo enKid e igualmente al aumentar la energía aportada por los alimentos en las tomas matinales y acercarse al óptimo (≥ 25% de las kilocalorías diarias). No obstante, valorando las tomas matinales a la vez y considerando si son equilibradas respecto a las recomendaciones de la energía y respecto a la distribución de macro-nutrientes que aportan a la dieta diaria sólo un 20,45% de los alumnos tendrían un desayuno considerado saludable. Discusión: Hay coincidencia con otros estudios en cuanto a ingestas de los primeros desayunos (que no se realizan en torno al 5%) pero los datos obtenidos para las tomas de media mañana suele ser más bajos en nuestro caso (faltan en torno al 60%); no obstante, los estudios específicos de segundos desayunos suelen ser escasos y referidos a adolescentes. Por otra parte, en línea con otros autores, de nuevo al valorar la calidad deseable de los desayunos, un porcentaje escaso de alumnos consumirían desayunos con calidad global aceptable, y de nuevo nuestros datos suelen quedar en el rango bajo (sólo en torno al 20% de los alumnos realizaría tomas matinales saludables). Esto, al igual que indican otros trabajos previos, vuelve a poner de manifiesto de nuevo la necesidad de actuar en procesos de mejora de los desayunos para conseguir una dieta diaria saludable en colectivos como jóvenes universitarios. Sin embargo, los datos que hemos relacionado con la importancia de las tomas de media mañana no los podemos comparar al no haber encontrado estudios similares en universitarios españoles.post-print188 K

Marco activo de recursos de innovación docente: Madrid

Una guía de espacios e instituciones para actividades educativas complementarias en enseñanza secundaria y Formación Profesional

The psychological science accelerator’s COVID-19 rapid-response dataset

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Psychological Science Accelerator coordinated three large-scale psychological studies to examine the effects of loss-gain framing, cognitive reappraisals, and autonomy framing manipulations on behavioral intentions and affective measures. The data collected (April to October 2020) included specific measures for each experimental study, a general questionnaire examining health prevention behaviors and COVID-19 experience, geographical and cultural context characterization, and demographic information for each participant. Each participant started the study with the same general questions and then was randomized to complete either one longer experiment or two shorter experiments. Data were provided by 73,223 participants with varying completion rates. Participants completed the survey from 111 geopolitical regions in 44 unique languages/dialects. The anonymized dataset described here is provided in both raw and processed formats to facilitate re-use and further analyses. The dataset offers secondary analytic opportunities to explore coping, framing, and self-determination across a diverse, global sample obtained at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, which can be merged with other time-sampled or geographic data

A global experiment on motivating social distancing during the COVID-19 pandemic

Finding communication strategies that effectively motivate social distancing continues to be a global public health priority during the COVID-19 pandemic. This cross-country, preregistered experiment (n = 25,718 from 89 countries) tested hypotheses concerning generalizable positive and negative outcomes of social distancing messages that promoted personal agency and reflective choices (i.e., an autonomy-supportive message) or were restrictive and shaming (i.e., a controlling message) compared with no message at all. Results partially supported experimental hypotheses in that the controlling message increased controlled motivation (a poorly internalized form of motivation relying on shame, guilt, and fear of social consequences) relative to no message. On the other hand, the autonomy-supportive message lowered feelings of defiance compared with the controlling message, but the controlling message did not differ from receiving no message at all. Unexpectedly, messages did not influence autonomous motivation (a highly internalized form of motivation relying on one’s core values) or behavioral intentions. Results supported hypothesized associations between people’s existing autonomous and controlled motivations and self-reported behavioral intentions to engage in social distancing. Controlled motivation was associated with more defiance and less long-term behavioral intention to engage in social distancing, whereas autonomous motivation was associated with less defiance and more short- and long-term intentions to social distance. Overall, this work highlights the potential harm of using shaming and pressuring language in public health communication, with implications for the current and future global health challenges

The Psychological Science Accelerator’s COVID-19 rapid-response dataset

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Psychological Science Accelerator coordinated three large-scale psychological studies to examine the effects of loss-gain framing, cognitive reappraisals, and autonomy framing manipulations on behavioral intentions and affective measures. The data collected (April to October 2020) included specific measures for each experimental study, a general questionnaire examining health prevention behaviors and COVID-19 experience, geographical and cultural context characterization, and demographic information for each participant. Each participant started the study with the same general questions and then was randomized to complete either one longer experiment or two shorter experiments. Data were provided by 73,223 participants with varying completion rates. Participants completed the survey from 111 geopolitical regions in 44 unique languages/dialects. The anonymized dataset described here is provided in both raw and processed formats to facilitate re-use and further analyses. The dataset offers secondary analytic opportunities to explore coping, framing, and self-determination across a diverse, global sample obtained at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, which can be merged with other time-sampled or geographic data

The Psychological Science Accelerator’s COVID-19 rapid-response dataset

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Psychological Science Accelerator coordinated three large-scale psychological studies to examine the effects of loss-gain framing, cognitive reappraisals, and autonomy framing manipulations on behavioral intentions and affective measures. The data collected (April to October 2020) included specific measures for each experimental study, a general questionnaire examining health prevention behaviors and COVID-19 experience, geographical and cultural context characterization, and demographic information for each participant. Each participant started the study with the same general questions and then was randomized to complete either one longer experiment or two shorter experiments. Data were provided by 73,223 participants with varying completion rates. Participants completed the survey from 111 geopolitical regions in 44 unique languages/dialects. The anonymized dataset described here is provided in both raw and processed formats to facilitate re-use and further analyses. The dataset offers secondary analytic opportunities to explore coping, framing, and self-determination across a diverse, global sample obtained at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, which can be merged with other time-sampled or geographic data

A global experiment on motivating social distancing during the COVID-19 pandemic

Finding communication strategies that effectively motivate social distancing continues to be a global public health priority during the COVID-19 pandemic. This cross-country, preregistered experiment (n = 25,718 from 89 countries) tested hypotheses concerning generalizable positive and negative outcomes of social distancing messages that promoted personal agency and reflective choices (i.e., an autonomy-supportive message) or were restrictive and shaming (i.e. a controlling message) compared to no message at all. Results partially supported experimental hypotheses in that the controlling message increased controlled motivation (a poorly-internalized form of motivation relying on shame, guilt, and fear of social consequences) relative to no message. On the other hand, the autonomy-supportive message lowered feelings of defiance compared to the controlling message, but the controlling message did not differ from receiving no message at all. Unexpectedly, messages did not influence autonomous motivation (a highly-internalized form of motivation relying on one’s core values) or behavioral intentions. Results supported hypothesized associations between people’s existing autonomous and controlled motivations and self-reported behavioral intentions to engage in social distancing: Controlled motivation was associated with more defiance and less long-term behavioral intentions to engage in social distancing, whereas autonomous motivation was associated with less defiance and more short- and long-term intentions to social distance. Overall, this work highlights the potential harm of using shaming and pressuring language in public health communication, with implications for the current and future global health challenges

A global experiment on motivating social distancing during the COVID-19 pandemic

Significance Communicating in ways that motivate engagement in social distancing remains a critical global public health priority during the COVID-19 pandemic. This study tested motivational qualities of messages about social distancing (those that promoted choice and agency vs. those that were forceful and shaming) in 25,718 people in 89 countries. The autonomy-supportive message decreased feelings of defying social distancing recommendations relative to the controlling message, and the controlling message increased controlled motivation, a less effective form of motivation, relative to no message. Message type did not impact intentions to socially distance, but people’s existing motivations were related to intentions. Findings were generalizable across a geographically diverse sample and may inform public health communication strategies in this and future global health emergencies. Abstract Finding communication strategies that effectively motivate social distancing continues to be a global public health priority during the COVID-19 pandemic. This cross-country, preregistered experiment (n = 25,718 from 89 countries) tested hypotheses concerning generalizable positive and negative outcomes of social distancing messages that promoted personal agency and reflective choices (i.e., an autonomy-supportive message) or were restrictive and shaming (i.e., a controlling message) compared with no message at all. Results partially supported experimental hypotheses in that the controlling message increased controlled motivation (a poorly internalized form of motivation relying on shame, guilt, and fear of social consequences) relative to no message. On the other hand, the autonomy-supportive message lowered feelings of defiance compared with the controlling message, but the controlling message did not differ from receiving no message at all. Unexpectedly, messages did not influence autonomous motivation (a highly internalized form of motivation relying on one’s core values) or behavioral intentions. Results supported hypothesized associations between people’s existing autonomous and controlled motivations and self-reported behavioral intentions to engage in social distancing. Controlled motivation was associated with more defiance and less long-term behavioral intention to engage in social distancing, whereas autonomous motivation was associated with less defiance and more short- and long-term intentions to social distance. Overall, this work highlights the potential harm of using shaming and pressuring language in public health communication, with implications for the current and future global health challenges

The Psychological Science Accelerator’s COVID-19 rapid-response dataset

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Psychological Science Accelerator coordinated three large-scale psychological studies to examine the effects of loss-gain framing, cognitive reappraisals, and autonomy framing manipulations on behavioral intentions and affective measures. The data collected (April to October 2020) included specific measures for each experimental study, a general questionnaire examining health prevention behaviors and COVID-19 experience, geographical and cultural context characterization, and demographic information for each participant. Each participant started the study with the same general questions and then was randomized to complete either one longer experiment or two shorter experiments. Data were provided by 73,223 participants with varying completion rates. Participants completed the survey from 111 geopolitical regions in 44 unique languages/dialects. The anonymized dataset described here is provided in both raw and processed formats to facilitate re-use and further analyses. The dataset offers secondary analytic opportunities to explore coping, framing, and self-determination across a diverse, global sample obtained at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, which can be merged with other time-sampled or geographic data