Магистерская диссертация

Statistical processing of the received data was carried out using standard software packages such as Microsoft Excel for Mac (version 16.36), IBM SPSS Statistics ( Subscription ) and Amos module ( SEM ) for IBM SPSS . For the analysis of empirical data, methods of mathematical statistics were used (nonparametric criteria for comparing averages: the Kruskal-Wallace H test, the Mann-Whitney test; exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis).
2.2 Identification of ways to deal with difficult life situations
Research program
The purpose of the first stage of the empirical study was to substantiate the hypothesis that there are four different ways of responding to difficult life situations: mastery, protection, maladaptation (self-destruction), coping.
To test this hypothesis, we needed to find procedures that would allow us to identify the designated strategies. And if coping and defense have been in the field of view of researchers for more than half a century, then mastery and self-destruction as phenomenologically different from the previous two ways of dealing with a difficult life situation were singled out not so long ago.
In the work of I.M. Shmelev [Shmelev, 2017], which for the first time considered all four identified strategies in their relationship, empirically tested and confirmed the existence of three ways to resolve difficult life situations: mastery, protection, coping. At the same time, the data obtained from the results of filling in by the subjects of already existing methods that test coping strategies, namely the “ WCQ Coping Test (Questionnaire on Coping Methods)” by R. Lazarus and S. Folkman (adapted by a team of researchers led by L.I. Wasserman , SPbPNI named after V. M. Bekhterev) and “Methodology for determining individual coping strategies” by E. Haim [Shmelev, 2017, p. 105].
Further analysis of scientific works also showed that currently existing methods successfully test coping, protective strategies, but cannot be directly applied to this study - they do not distinguish the two remaining methods. Based on these data, it was decided that it was necessary to develop an author's questionnaire, which would allow us to identify all four described methods. The work was carried out jointly with S.D. Timokhina (master student of the program "Counseling Psychology. Personology" NRU HSE) according to the following procedure for developing a questionnaire :
1. Compilation of a list of statements that would describe the highlighted ways of responding to TLS at the behavioral level in real life. At this step, we partly relied on traditional methods for studying coping behavior - “Questionnaire for Coping Methods” by E.V. Bityutskaya [Bityutskaya, 2015], which is a Russian-language adaptation of the previously mentioned Coping Methods Questionnaire ( WCQ ) by S. Folkman and R. Lazarus, as well as the COPE questionnaire by Ch. Carver, adapted by E.I. Rasskazova, T.O. Gordeeva and E.N. Osin [Rasskazova et al., 2013]. In addition, some of the proposed formulations were the author's and reflect our vision of the issues under study.
2. Drawing up instructions for the created questionnaire.
3. Categorization and ranking of the proposed statements by the method of expert assessments (assignment by experts of a particular statement to a particular group of strategies, as well as identification of statements that received the highest marks from experts as corresponding to a certain category). The experts also assessed the clarity and consistency of the instructions for the questionnaire.
4. Compilation of the final version of the questionnaire, which included 10 statements for each selected way of responding to a difficult life situation - a total of 40 statements mixed randomly.
5. Collection of respondents' answers.
6. Analysis of the obtained data, statistical verification of the reliability and structure of the questionnaire.
The result of the work done was the author's "Questionnaire of ways to deal with difficult life situations" (co-authored with SD Timokhina).
Development of the questionnaire
When compiling options for statements, we relied on theoretical ideas about various ways of responding, already existing questionnaires of coping behavior, our own experience and ideas, and also sought advice from the creators of the theoretical model of ways to respond in difficult life situations - V.A. Petrovsky and I.M. Shmelev. As a result, a list of 73 statements was obtained, of which, according to the authors, 18 statements described coping strategies, 24 - mastery, 17 - defense and 14 - self-destructive methods. The statements made and their intended category are presented in Annex 2.
It was also necessary to draw up instructions for respondents, taking into account the following features:
1. It is necessary to give a definition of a difficult life situation in terms that are understandable to the respondent without special knowledge in psychology.
2. It is important to indicate those types of situations that are not considered within the framework of this questionnaire (for example, extreme situations, disasters).
3. The respondent should be oriented towards considering a situation that has already been resolved, since it is possible to evaluate the effectiveness and result of some strategies for dealing with DFA only after the situation is over (for example, in situations of gaining new meanings or mastering completely new forms of behavior for oneself).
4. At the same time, it is important to immerse the respondent in the experience of this difficult situation, given the studies that show significant differences in people's assessment of their actions in the case of describing the actual DVT and a retrospective assessment of the same situation [Bityutskaya, 2015, p. 20-21] .
5. It is necessary to use concise wording that would be understandable to a respondent with an average level of education (the questionnaire is aimed at people from 18 years old), write clear descriptions of the required actions in order to minimize the possibility of double interpretations and save more cognitive resources of the respondent for the survey itself.
Taking into account the above points, the following instruction was drawn up for the respondents:
“ Dear respondent!