People are not divorced by one trait alone, but some patterns show again and again. Couples tend hold together when both partners are emotionally stable, k their promises, calm down after arguments, and look for each other. A person who has learnt to talk things through, own to mistakes, and make up after conflict is more lik to build a lasting marriage. contrast, marriage often breaks down when one or both partners keep blow up, put the other person down, shut down during problems, or acting impulse.
High anx y, jealousy, reliability, and harsh criticism can wear a relationship out time. In long-term studies, emotionally unstable and lsive people were more like to split up, le responsible, kind, and cooperative people usually got better with their partners. Still, no trait decides everything: people can grow emotionally, work on themselves, and turn a troubled marriage .
Total Questions: 0
Incorrect Answers: 0
Stress Management Workshop
Developed by the student psychologists of the University of Twente
Are you tired of feeling overwhelmed by everything on your to-do list? Does pressure from study, social life, work, sports, and other responsibilities affect your daily routine?
This workshop explains why a completely stress-free life is unrealistic and shows how pressure can sometimes be useful. More importantly, it gives students practical tools for making stress easier to manage.
The session requires active participation. Participants should be ready to continue practising the techniques after the workshop, since learning to cope with pressure is an ongoing process.
Duration:
2.5 hours
Dates:
15 December 2025, 09:30–12:00
or
18 December 2025, 13:30–16:00
Cost:
UT bachelor’s and master’s students: €10 non-refundable administration fee, paid at registration
Participants:
Maximum 15 people
Location:
To be announced
Registration:
Currently closed
Course alert: Registration is not available now. Students can subscribe to receive an email when new dates or free places are offered.
11. What is the main purpose of this announcement?
12. What is true about joining the workshop?
13. What should interested students do now?
Total Questions: 0
Incorrect Answers: 0
Read these texts
Student Feedback #1
Posted 2 days after the workshop
I signed up because my schedule had started to resemble a circus act with too many plates spinning at once. I wasn't expecting any miracle cure, and thankfully none was promised. What I did get was a more realistic way of looking at pressure.
The presenters didn't try to sell a one-size-fits-all solution. Instead, they gave us several techniques and encouraged us to take them for a test drive. Not every suggestion struck gold for me, but a couple of them have already earned a permanent place in my routine.
I also appreciated that the workshop didn't sugar-coat the issue. The message was essentially that stress is part of life, but it doesn't have to sit in the driver's seat. The session felt more like being handed a compass than being shown a shortcut.
Would I recommend it? If you're hoping someone will wave a magic wand, probably not. If you're willing to roll up your sleeves and put the ideas into practice, it may be worth your while.
Student Feedback #2
Posted 1 week after the workshop
I enrolled after hearing positive comments from friends. To be fair, the facilitators clearly knew their subject and the session was well organised. However, I left feeling that the workshop promised a map but delivered a sketch.
Some of the strategies sounded sensible on paper, yet many were ideas I had come across before. A few participants seemed to have light-bulb moments, but for me the session mostly preached to the choir.
Another challenge was the format. We were encouraged to participate actively, which some people may enjoy, but I would have preferred more concrete examples and less discussion. By the end, I felt I had been given ingredients without quite enough instructions.
That said, I wouldn't call the workshop a waste of time. Students who are completely new to the topic may find it useful. It simply didn't move the needle very much for me.
14. What is Student #1's overall opinion of the workshop?
15. What does Student #1 mean by saying that stress "doesn't have to sit in the driver's seat"?
16. What is Student #2's main criticism of the workshop?
17. Which statement would both students most likely agree with?
18. What can be inferred about Student #2?
Total Questions: 0
Incorrect Answers: 0
4. Read the text
Start reading and taking down detail!
Read the text noting down a) Author's Purpose and how they prove their point(s). The logic and author's points are expressed in link phrases at the beginning, in the middle and at the end of each paragraph. In the exam, the text will be shorter, with 5 questions on it. In the exam you will not see all the questions at once!
Reading Passage
The Marshmallow Test Reconsidered
Paragraph 1
For decades, the marshmallow test held an almost mythical place in popular psychology. In the experiment, a young child was offered one treat immediately or 2 treats later, provided they could wait. The scene seemed to present a simple test of character: some children resisted temptation, while others ate the marshmallow at once. From this, a much larger conclusion was often drawn: children who could delay gratification were more likely to succeed later in life.
Paragraph 2
Yet this interpretation is now considered too simplistic. A short laboratory task cannot easily reveal a child’s entire personality or predict their adult future. More recent research suggests that the test measures not only self-control, but also how children interpret the situation. If the adult’s promise seems reliable, waiting may appear reasonable. If the child has experienced broken promises or unstable routines, taking the available reward immediately may be a sensible response to uncertainty rather than a failure of discipline.
Paragraph 3
This becomes clearer when the reliability of the adult is changed. When children first see that an adult keeps promises, they tend to wait longer. When the adult proves unreliable, they are more likely to eat the treat quickly. In this sense, the test captures an interaction between self-regulation and trust, not a pure measure of willpower.
Paragraph 4
Social background also matters. Children from secure and predictable environments may find it easier to believe that patience will be rewarded. Children familiar with scarcity or inconsistency may see immediate reward as the safer choice. When later studies accounted for family background and early cognitive differences, the connection between waiting time and later achievement became much weaker.
Paragraph 5
This does not mean that self-control is unimportant. The ability to postpone immediate pleasure can help students, workers, and adults in relationships. However, self-control develops within an environment. Stable routines, trustworthy adults, and meaningful incentives may encourage patience more effectively than moral lectures about willpower.
Paragraph 6
The broader lesson is that psychological experiments should not be turned into slogans. The marshmallow test may show how a child behaves under specific conditions, but it should not divide children into future winners and losers. A child who eats the marshmallow quickly is not doomed, and a child who waits is not guaranteed success. Human development is shaped by repeated interactions between personal abilities and the environments that support or weaken them.
Questions
16. What is the main purpose of the passage? [Question Type: Main Idea]
The passage argues that the famous experiment has often been interpreted too narrowly and should be understood in relation to trust, background, and environment.
17. According to paragraph 2, why might some children take the immediate reward? [Question Type: Detail]
The passage discusses trust, social background, stable routines, and early cognitive differences. It does not discuss children’s preference for different foods.
19. In the paragraph below, there is a missing sentence. Where would the sentence best fit? [Question Type: Sentence Insertion]
In other words, patience may depend partly on whether the situation itself feels trustworthy.
This becomes clearer when the reliability of the adult is changed. (A) When children first see that an adult keeps promises, they tend to wait longer. (B) When the adult proves unreliable, they are more likely to eat the treat quickly. (C) In this sense, the test captures an interaction between self-regulation and trust, not a pure measure of willpower. (D)
The final paragraph states that a child’s future should not be reduced to one experiment; development results from both personal abilities and supportive or unsupportive surroundings.