<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" version="2.0">
<channel>
<title>Artículos de revistas</title>
<link>http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12226/6</link>
<description/>
<pubDate>Fri, 25 Sep 2026 22:14:26 GMT</pubDate>
<dc:date>2026-09-25T22:14:26Z</dc:date>
<item>
<title>Cómputo del plazo de prescripción para declarar y exigir responsabilidad subsidiaria en caso de concurso</title>
<link>http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12226/3596</link>
<description>Cómputo del plazo de prescripción para declarar y exigir responsabilidad subsidiaria en caso de concurso
Puebla Agramunt, Nuria
En estas líneas encontrará el lector un comentario a la sentencia de la Sección Segunda de la Sala de lo contencioso-administrativo del Tribunal Supremo, de fecha 30 de abril de 2026, ponente la Excma. Sra. D.ª Esperanza Córdoba Castroverde, que da respuesta al recurso de casación 122/2024. La cuestión de interés casacional que se dilucida es la correcta determinación del dies a quo del cómputo del plazo de prescripción en un caso de responsabilidad tributaria subsidiaria en el que, varios años antes de la declaración de fallido del deudor principal, la Agencia Estatal de la Administración Tributaria (AEAT) ya conocía, o podía conocer, la insolvencia total de éste, pues se trataba de una sociedad que había entrado en concurso y el administrador concursal había presentado al juzgado de lo mercantil el preceptivo informe (con traslado a las partes y por tanto a la AEAT) sobre el déficit patrimonial de la mercantil.
</description>
<pubDate>Wed, 01 Jul 2026 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12226/3596</guid>
<dc:date>2026-07-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
</item>
<item>
<title>Antes de declarar al responsable subsidiario, busca al solidario. Análisis de la STS de 5 de noviembre de 2025, rec. núm. 5704/2023</title>
<link>http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12226/3595</link>
<description>Antes de declarar al responsable subsidiario, busca al solidario. Análisis de la STS de 5 de noviembre de 2025, rec. núm. 5704/2023
Puebla Agramunt, Nuria
Esta sentencia de la Sección Segunda de la Sala de lo Contencioso-Administrativo del Tribunal Supremo, de la que es ponente la Excma. Sra. D.ª María Dolores Rivera Frade, y que fue dictada el 5 de noviembre de 2025, en respuesta al recurso de casación 5704/2023, parte del cambio de paradigma que supuso la sentencia de 20 de mayo de 2025, en la manera de entender el reparto de la carga tributaria cuando la Administración trata de justificar la declaración de responsabilidad subsidiaria del artículo 43.1 a) de la LGT. Y garantizando la interdicción de la responsabilidad objetiva del administrador legal, exige a la Administración tributaria, antes de iniciar un expediente de responsabilidad subsidiaria, una actividad encaminada a comprobar la realidad de indicios claros de los que se pueda desprender la existencia de un responsable solidario
</description>
<pubDate>Mon, 01 Dec 2025 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12226/3595</guid>
<dc:date>2025-12-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
</item>
<item>
<title>The Role of Emotion Regulation in Trauma Processing During Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR) Therapy</title>
<link>http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12226/3592</link>
<description>The Role of Emotion Regulation in Trauma Processing During Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR) Therapy
Gómez-Salas, Francisco J.; Ramallo-Machín, Alejandra; Burgos-Julián, Francisco; Santed-Germán, M. A.; González-Vázquez, Ana Isabel
Abstract&#13;
Background/Objectives: Emotion regulation may be relevant to trauma processing dur-&#13;
ing Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR) therapy, but associations&#13;
between specific regulatory processes and distinct processing patterns remain unclear. This&#13;
study examined these associations and cross-sectional indirect associations with symptom&#13;
severity. Methods: This multicenter cross-sectional study included 116 patients receiving&#13;
EMDR therapy between 2023 and 2025. Patients completed measures of emotion regula-&#13;
tion, emotional processing, rumination, alexithymia, childhood trauma, and psychological&#13;
symptom severity; therapists completed the Processing Difficulties Scale (PDS). Analy-&#13;
ses included Pearson correlations with Benjamini–Hochberg false discovery rate correc-&#13;
tion, multivariable linear regression, and bootstrap cross-sectional indirect-effect analyses.&#13;
Results: Overall emotion regulation difficulties were not significantly associated with any&#13;
PDS dimension, whereas specific processes showed distinct bivariate associations. In multi-&#13;
variable linear regression models, lower emotional awareness was independently associated&#13;
with greater Lack of Generalization and/or Absence of Changes (β=−0.215, p = 0.028), hy-&#13;
pothetical thinking with greater Poor Emotional Processing (β= 0.235, p = 0.011), and more&#13;
EMDR processing sessions with greater Loss of Dual Attention (β= 0.264, p = 0.005). Mod-&#13;
els explained 5.5–18.4% of the variance. Lower emotional awareness showed a significant&#13;
cross-sectional indirect association with symptom severity through Lack of Generalization&#13;
and/or Absence of Changes. Conclusions: Specific emotional-cognitive processes were dif-&#13;
ferentially associated with trauma-processing patterns during EMDR. The cross-sectional&#13;
design and modest explanatory capacity of the models preclude causal or temporal inter-&#13;
pretations. Prospective studies are needed to assess the predictive and clinical utility of&#13;
the PDS.
</description>
<pubDate>Sun, 20 Sep 2026 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12226/3592</guid>
<dc:date>2026-09-20T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
</item>
<item>
<title>A systemic theory of scientific discovery: a conceptual review of field maturation and independent convergence</title>
<link>http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12226/3590</link>
<description>A systemic theory of scientific discovery: a conceptual review of field maturation and independent convergence
Díaz Palencia, José Luis
This article develops a systemic theory of scientific discovery as a conceptual framework. Its central hypothesis is that a scientific idea is not explained by an isolated mind alone and is more likely to emerge when a field has reached a level of conceptual, technical, empirical, social, and institutional readiness. Such readiness is hypothesised to make some ideas thinkable, expressible, and stable. The article uses a conceptual narrative review, because the aim is to build and justify a theoretical construct. The argument is organised around two main ideas. The first is field maturation. A field becomes mature when problems, methods, tools, data, and communities form a structure that allows a new idea to be stated. The second is independent convergence. Different researchers, or different groups, may reach close results at a similar time because they work inside a shared system of problems and resources. The article relates these ideas to classic work on multiple discovery and to recent work in the meta-science of science, research teams, disruption, knowledge recombination, and conceptual review methods. The proposed framework examines emergence, convergence, stabilisation, and diffusion of scientific ideas as effects of a system of knowledge. The article ends with analytical propositions, scope conditions, candidate operationalisations, and research lines for future empirical testing.
</description>
<pubDate>Fri, 18 Sep 2026 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12226/3590</guid>
<dc:date>2026-09-18T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>
