Магистерская диссертация

Organization of the study: stages. To test the general hypothesis of the study, as well as the proposed theoretical model, an empirical study was conducted, which was divided into two main stages, within which sub-stages were also identified.
The first stage included the development of an author's questionnaire to determine the preferred ways of responding to difficult life situations. The following sub-steps can be distinguished here:
1. Preparation of a list of statements describing each of the four forms of treatment of TFS, instructions for future respondents and questionnaires for subsequent peer review.
2. Expert evaluation of statements in order to determine the most accurately describing the selected ways of responding to the TJS for inclusion in the final version of the questionnaire. The experts were students and teachers of the master's program “Counseling Psychology. Personology” of the National Research University “Higher School of Economics”, as well as a certified transactional analyst.
3. Compilation of the final list of statements included in the questionnaire, preparation of a version for distribution among respondents.
4. Collection of empirical data (respondents' answers to two questionnaires). The sample was recruited using the "snowball" method by distributing an electronic link to the passage of questionnaires on the Internet through personal social networks, on thematic forums.
5. Analysis of the validity of the allocation of 4 ways of handling HFA based on the empirical data obtained.
At the second stage , the similarities and differences between the representatives of personal adaptations in their preferred ways of responding in a difficult life situation were revealed. The implementation included the following sub-steps:
1. Grouping subjects into groups according to their leading adaptations of survival and approval based on empirical data.
2. Identification and comparison of the structure of ways of responding in difficult life situations for representatives of six personal adaptations.
In total, the study involved 304 participants (19 experts + 285 subjects) aged 18 to 69 years. A more detailed description of the participants is given in Appendix 1.