Cite this article as:
Князев Е. Б. Specifics of Integration of Characteristics of Social Cognition in Dichotomy Space «Domination–Obedience» of Students. Izvestiya of Saratov University. Philosophy. Psychology. Pedagogy, 2017, vol. 17, iss. 3, pp. 303-?. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18500/1819-7671-2017-17-3-303-307
Specifics of Integration of Characteristics of Social Cognition in Dichotomy Space «Domination–Obedience» of Students
These article present results of a survey the purpose of which was studying of specifics of characteristics integration of social knowledge of dichotomy space «domination-obedience» at students are presented in article. 125 persons who are students of the first courses Saratov State University named after N. G. Chernyshevsky have participated in the research. The author used techniques of both the Russian, and foreign authors, in particular, techniques are used: J. Duсkitt's directed to a research of social beliefs, J. Gilford's technique allowing to estimate the level of development of social intelligence, and D. V. Lyusin's technique also widely applied in Russia «EmIn» estimating the level of development of emotional intelligence. Results of the factorial analysis of social and cognitive characteristics in dichotomy space «domination-obedience» are presented in the table. Five integrative factors of social knowledge, such as «Authoritativeness», «Responsibility», «Competition», «Obedience», «Danger» are allocated and described. It is shown that designing of the world by the personality is interconnected with understanding of logic of development and sense of those social situations in which it is included as the subject of interpersonal interaction. It is also shown that the problem of obedience should be studied within psychology of social cognition, taking into account its indicators such as emotional and social intelligence. The conducted research allows to draw a conclusion: if a person expects that control over him and the situation, can be carried out by other people, while he is not able to take control of himself, he has a desire to obey other people.
1. Andreeva G. M. Psikhologiya sotsialnogo poznaniya [Psychology of social cognition]. Moscow, 2000. 288 p. (in Russian).
2. Rubinshtein S. L. Bytie i soznanie [Being and mind]. St. Petersburg, 2012. 288 p. (in Russian).
3. Zimbardo Ph. The Lucifer effect. Understanding how good people turn evil. New York, 2007. 576 p. (Russ. ed.: Zimbardo F. Effekt Lyutsifera. Pochemu khorochie lyudi prevrashchayutsya v zlodeev. Moscow, 2014. 740 p.).
4. Schutz W. FIRO: A three-dimensional theory of interpersonal behavior. New York, 1958. 267 p.
5. Goleman D. Emotional intelligence: why it can matter more than IQ. London, 1996. 368 p. (Russ. ed.: Goulman D. Emotsionalnyy intellect. Moscow, 2008. 480 p.).
6. Liusin D. V. Oprosnik na emotsionalnyy intellekt EmIn: novye psikhometricheskie dannye [Questionnaire on emotional intelligence EmIn: new psychometric data]. In: Sotsialnyy i emotsionalnyy intellekt: ot modeley k izmereniyam. Eds. D. V. Lyusin, D. V. Ushakov. Moscow, 2009, pp. 264–278 (in Russian).
7. Altemeyer B. The authoritarian specter. Cambridge, 1996. 374 p.
8. Duckitt J., Wagner C., du Plessis I., Birum I. The psychological bases of ideology and prejudice: testing a dual process model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2002, vol. 83, iss. 1, pp. 75–93.
9. Mikhailova (Aleshina) E. S. Test Gilforda diagnostika sotsialnogo intellekta: metodicheskoe rukovodstvo [Gilforod’s test diagnostics of social intelligence: methodical guide]. St. Petersburg, 2006. 56 p. (in Russian).
Generator XML for DOAJ
Не определено в Выпуске поле Опубликована онлайн:publicationDate