English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

This paper reports a study aimed at evaluating the effect of two different writing guidelines on the quality of argumentative essays of psychology students. The study consisted of a secondary analysis of a database which included the grades of 543 students (355 women) that took the undergraduate course Educational Psychology between the years 2012 and 2018. Two groups were compared: group 1, corresponding to students that took the course until 2015, and group 2, corresponding to students that did it since 2016 onwards. Analyses of covariance show statistically significant differences between the two groups. The group who used the more elaborated and explicit guideline (group 2) outperformed the one who used the less elaborated guideline. The results show that guidelines are effective tools for promoting argumentative writing in educational psychology learning.

Las pautas sí importan. Efecto del uso de pautas sobre la calidad de la escritura argumentativa en la universidad