Learn Hardcore Spanish (Latin America): La encuesta también mostró que muchos se sienten inseguros, pero eso no debería quitarles la confianza. - The survey also showed that many feel insecure, but that shouldn’t take away their confidence.

Even though there’s no “logical” reason it’s feminine, you just memorize encuesta as a feminine word and always use feminine articles and adjectives with it.

Why is it mostró and not ha mostrado or mostraba?

Mostró is the third person singular of mostrar in the simple past (preterite). It’s used for a completed action in the past, seen as a single event:

La encuesta mostró... = The survey showed...

Alternatives and their nuance:

ha mostrado (present perfect): more like “has shown”, often used for recent or still-relevant actions. In Latin America, the simple past mostró often covers this meaning.
mostraba (imperfect): “was showing / used to show”, focusing on an ongoing, repeated, or background action in the past.

In a news-like or report-like sentence that states a result, mostró is the most natural option in Latin American Spanish.

Why do we need que after mostró?

Que introduces a subordinate clause that functions as the direct object of mostró:

La encuesta mostró qué cosa? → que muchos se sienten inseguros

So the structure is:

mostrar que + [full clause]
- La encuesta mostró que muchos se sienten inseguros...
  = The survey showed that many feel insecure...

In Spanish, verbs like decir, pensar, saber, mostrar, demostrar, revelar, etc. frequently take que to introduce “that-clauses.”

What does muchos refer to here, and why isn’t there a noun after it?

Muchos here means “many people” and the noun is simply omitted because it’s clear from context.

Spanish often does this:

Muchos llegaron tarde. = Many (people) arrived late.
Pocos entendieron. = Few (people) understood.

We could make it explicit:

muchas personas / muchas personas encuestadas
But it’s not necessary; muchos alone is natural and common.

Grammatically, muchos here is a pronoun (not just an adjective).

Why is it se sienten inseguros and not están inseguros?

Both are possible, but they’re not identical in nuance:

sentirse
- adjective = “to feel” + adjective
- Se sienten inseguros. = They feel insecure.
  This emphasizes their internal, subjective feeling.
estar
- adjective = “to be” + adjective (state or condition)
- Están inseguros. = They are insecure (right now / in this situation).

In this sentence, we’re talking about how respondents feel about something (their confidence), so se sienten inseguros is a very natural choice.

Why is it inseguros and not inseguro or inseguras?

The adjective inseguros must agree in number and gender with muchos:

muchos → masculine plural
So the adjective also must be masculine plural → inseguros.

Patterns:

muchos estudiantes inseguros (masc. plural)
muchas estudiantes inseguras (fem. plural)
mucho público inseguro (masc. sing.; público is masculine)

If the group is mixed or gender-unknown, Spanish normally defaults to masculine plural → muchos / inseguros.

Why is it pero and not sino?

Pero introduces a contrast between two ideas without negating the first one:

Se sienten inseguros, pero eso no debería quitarles la confianza.
= They feel insecure, but that should not take away their confidence.

Sino is used after a negation, to mean “but rather / but instead”, correcting something:

No se sienten seguros, sino inseguros.
= They don’t feel safe, but rather insecure.

There is no negation before pero in the original sentence, so sino would be incorrect there.

Why is it eso and not esto or ello?

Eso refers to something previously mentioned, at a medium distance (conceptually):

Here, eso = the fact that many feel insecure.

Common demonstratives (neutral forms):

esto = this (thing/idea just mentioned or about to be mentioned; close)
eso = that (thing/idea previously mentioned; a bit “farther”)
aquello = that (more distant, often more abstract or distant in time)

You could use esto if you were pointing to something you’re about to mention:

Esto no debería quitarles la confianza: que muchos se sienten inseguros.
(This shouldn’t take away their confidence: that many feel insecure.)

But in the given sentence, we already mentioned the idea, so eso is the natural choice. Ello is very formal/literary in Latin America and not typical in everyday speech.

What exactly does no debería quitarles la confianza mean, grammatically?

Structure:

no = not
debería = should / ought to
quitarles = take away from them
- quitar = to take away, remove
- les = from them (indirect object pronoun)
la confianza = (the) confidence

So literally:

Eso no debería quitarles la confianza.
= That should not take away their confidence.

It’s deber in the conditional (debería) expressing advice, expectation, or moral judgment; not a strict obligation.

Why is it debería and not debe?

debe = “must / has to / should” (stronger, more obligatory)
debería = “should / ought to” (softer, more hypothetical or ideal)

Using debería makes the statement sound more like:

“Ideally, that shouldn’t take away their confidence”
rather than
“That must not take away their confidence” (which sounds like an order or rule).

In survey/report language, debería is more in line with recommendation or opinion about what ought to be the case.

Why is it quitarles and not quitar la confianza de ellos?

Spanish prefers indirect object pronouns instead of long de + pronoun phrases when the meaning is “take something from someone”:

quitar algo a alguien → to take something from someone
Eso no debería quitarles la confianza.
= That should not take their confidence away from them.

So:

les = a ellos / a ellas / a ustedes
quitarles la confianza = take away their confidence.

You can say quitar la confianza de ellos, but it sounds unnatural here and is not the usual structure with quitar + indirect object.

Why is it la confianza and not su confianza?

In Spanish, when it’s clear whose thing it is (from context or pronouns), a simple definite article (la, el, los, las) often replaces possessive adjectives like su:

Eso no debería quitarles la confianza.
Literally: “That shouldn’t take from-them the confidence.”
Natural English: “That shouldn’t take away their confidence.”

Spanish frequently uses el/la/los/las instead of mi/tu/su, especially when an indirect object (like les) already marks possession:

Le lavé las manos. = I washed his/her hands.
Nos cortaron el agua. = They cut off our water.

You could say su confianza, but la confianza is more idiomatic here.

Can the word order change, like eso no les debería quitar la confianza?

Yes, this is also correct:

Eso no debería quitarles la confianza.
Eso no les debería quitar la confianza.

Both sound natural in Latin American Spanish.

Rules/notes:

With one verb: pronoun usually goes before the conjugated verb:
- Les quitaron la confianza.
With verb + infinitive/gerund, pronoun can go:
- before the conjugated verb: no les debería quitar
- or attached to the infinitive: no debería quitarles

So you can say:

Eso no les debería quitar la confianza.
Eso no debería quitarles la confianza.

The emphasis doesn’t significantly change here; it’s mostly stylistic.