Social intelligence is a construct that not only appeals to laymen as a relevant individual difference but also has shown promising practical applications. Nevertheless, the use of social intelligence in research and applied settings has been limited by definitional problems, difficulties in empirically differentiating social intelligence from related constructs, and the complexity of most existing measures of social intelligence. The goal of the present research was to address some of these obstacles by designing a multi-faceted social intelligence measure that is short and easy to administer. Three studies were conducted to develop and validate the Tromsø Social Intelligence Scale (TSIS). Study 1 examined professional psychologists' interpretations of social intelligence to derive a consensually agreed-upon definition of the construct. In Study 2, a large pool of social intelligence items were tested, and a 3-factor, 21-item scale was identified. In Study 3, the stability of this measure was confirmed.

No abstract

Some, but not all, beliefs about knowledge and learning offer insight into students' reported use of learning strategies relevant for reading course literature.

Procrastination is common among students, with prevalence estimates double or even triple those of the working population. This inflated prevalence indicates that the academic environment may appear as "procrastination friendly" to students. In the present paper, we identify social, cultural, organizational, and contextual factors that may foster or facilitate procrastination (such as large degree of freedom in the study situation, long deadlines, and temptations and distractions), document their research basis, and provide recommendations for changes in these factors to reduce and prevent procrastination. We argue that increased attention to such procrastination-friendly factors in academic environments is important and that relatively minor measures to reduce their detrimental effects may have substantial benefits for students, institutions, and society.

In what ways do native language (NL) speakers and foreign language (FL) learners differ in understanding the same messages delivered with or without gestures? To answer this question, seventh‐ and eighth‐grade NL and FL learners of English in the United States and Norway were shown a video of a speaker describing, in English, a cartoon image that the viewers could not see. For half the viewers, the speaker's gestures were visible; for the others they were not. Participants drew a picture of each description, which was later coded for recall of explicit information, comprehension of logically implied information, and distortions. Overall, NL listeners produced the most accurate drawings; the presence of gestures did not appreciably facilitate NL comprehension. In contrast, the availability of gestures had a measurable effect on FL listener performance: It enabled them to produce drawings within native‐like range. However, lack of gestures negatively impacted FL listener comprehension and recall. Regardless of condition, distortions in FL responses were significantly more frequent than in NL responses. All participants reported valuing visual cues in communication, yet their understanding of their value for their actual drawing performance was inconsistent, suggesting a difference between visual cue preference and visual cue dependence.