Магистерская диссертация

Our survey is dedicated to the study of how people overcome difficult life situations (DLC).
TJS is a situation that is regarded by the person in it as hindering the achievement of goals, but amenable to his influence, and to overcome which, according to his assessment, it is necessary to apply efforts that exceed the daily, habitual level.
Please note that we do not classify traumatic, extreme, emergency situations, as well as other situations, the appearance, duration and nature of the influence of which do not actually depend on a person, as part of the category of TJS we are studying.

1. 
   Recall 3 already completed difficult life situations in which you found yourself during the last year.
   
2. 
   Write down these situations and put down for each point according to their difficulty, where 0 is absolutely not difficult and 10 is extremely difficult. Below is an example.
   

Example:
1. Quarrel with a friend
2. Moving to another city
3. Passing a difficult exam
Your difficult life situations:
one.
2.
3.

3. 
   Choose the situation that was the most difficult for you. Try to imagine as vividly as possible the circumstances and events that took place, remember how you coped with the situation.
   
4. 
   Below are statements that describe the possible behavior of a person in a difficult life situation. Please read these options and rate how closely they describe how you behaved in the situation selected above, using the rating scale:
   

0 - not at all about me;
1 - a little about me;
2 - partially about me;
3 - exactly about me.
In order to test the hypothesis that each of the statements made up belongs to one or another category of ways to respond in difficult life situations, we conducted a survey of experts. Students and teachers of the master's program “Counseling Psychology. Personology” of the Research University “Higher School of Economics”, as well as a certified transactional analyst. The total number of experts was 17 people, including 2 teachers, 14 undergraduates and 1 transactional analyst. Each of the experts received the following instruction:
“ You are offered a series of statements that reflect the behavior of a person in difficult life situations. You need to rate each statement on a scale from 0 to 10 on the degree to which each of the ways in which you deal with difficult life situations is consistent, where 0 is "not at all appropriate" and 10 is "absolutely appropriate." Also, please rate the clarity and completeness of the instructions for this questionnaire from 1 to 10.
Example:

Statement		Coping	Protection	Mastery	self-destruction
one	I try to find the good in what happened	7	0	ten	0

Descriptions of each of the ways to handle TJS are given below.

Below in the instructions, brief descriptions and examples of all four ways of responding to the TLS were given, as well as a column for assessing the understandability of the instructions for the respondent and for free comments from experts. The full version of the questionnaire for the expert is presented in Appendix 3.
Based on the expert ratings, average ratings were calculated for the statements for each of the four ways to resolve TJS. To check the reliability of the obtained estimates, we used the correlation method, which is used for classical psychometric testing of the reliability of test scales. If there is a positive correlation between the expert's answers and the total score of all experts, this indicates the consistency of the assessments. A low or negative value of the correlation coefficient will indicate that such an expert either misinterpreted the instructions, or his understanding of the problem is significantly different from other experts and, possibly, contains significant individual characteristics, which gives us reason to exclude such estimates from the calculation. Thus, the present study did not take into account the assessments of three experts for whom the correlation coefficient of their individual assessments with the total scores turned out to be either negative or less than 0.3.
Thus, the number of statements describing self-destructive strategies also became 10. The final version of the questionnaire at this stage, including instructions, statements, supposed keys, and the procedure for calculating results, is presented in Appendix 5.