Магистерская диссертация

Conclusions on the first stage of the study
Correlation of the obtained empirical data and theoretical ideas about the ways of responding in difficult life situations (with the help of expert assessment, exploratory and factor analysis) allows us to preliminarily confirm the hypothesis about the possibility of distinguishing four types of behavior in DLS based on the results of the created questionnaire - mastering, protective, coping and self-destructive . These differences find empirical justification, however, the theoretical model needs to be refined and further re-validation of the refined model to confirm the possibility of extending the results to other groups of the general population (external validity).
2.3 Identification of the style of dealing with a difficult life situation among representatives of various personal adaptations
At the second stage of the study, we were faced with the goal of finding out whether there are differences in the preferred response strategies in difficult life situations among representatives of various personal adaptations and how these differences manifest themselves. In other words, firstly, the general hypothesis was tested, according to which personal adaptations according to P. Ware and V. Joins are interconnected with the ways of dealing with TJS, and secondly, the empirical research hypotheses that correlate personal adaptations and possible preferences for specific strategies.
To determine the degree of severity of certain strategies in DLS, this study proposes to use the average values of the scales of mastering, defensive, coping and self-destructive behavior, obtained from the results of the questionnaire we developed. Through the application of various non-parametric criteria, we can compare the preferences for using certain strategies both between groups (personal adaptations) and within groups (between representatives of the same adaptation). This will make it possible to compile a description of the structure of the ways of responding to difficult life situations of respondents with various personal adaptations. As a result, we expect to approach the answer to the question: do representatives of different personal adaptations really behave differently in difficult life situations?
We will obtain some of the data necessary for analysis based on the results of the questionnaire we developed, and to assign the respondent to one or another personal adaptation, we turned to the Vann Joins method translated by D. Kasyanov [Joins, Stuart, 2019], described below.
The Joines Personality Adjustment Inventory (Version 3) consists of 72 items - 12 items for each of the six personality adjustments, each corresponding to one of the scales on the questionnaire.
For any of the statements, the respondent can choose the answer "True" (1 point) or "False" (0 points). Further, the number of points is summed up for each of the selected scales (presented in Appendix 6) and, based on the final points, one of the survival adaptations and one approval adaptation is allocated. This takes into account the observations made by the author of the technique in the process of its approbation (with the participation of 1500 subjects). First, almost every respondent receives points on all scales. This suggests that all people have an idea of the behavior characteristic of each adaptation, and to some extent identify with them. Secondly, any of the adaptations will act as preferred and more significant in everyday life, both at the level of survival and at the level of approval. Thirdly, as the analysis shows, respondents who are more outward-oriented (extroverts) will more often choose the answer “true”, which can be seen from the higher scores on each of the scales. Introverted respondents, on the contrary, are less inclined to choose statements, which is manifested by low final scores. The fourth observation suggests that if the respondent wants to hide his preferences, the total scores on the scales are almost the same.
In view of the foregoing, we interpreted the data obtained for each of the 143 respondents and either singled out one adaptation of survival and approval, or singled out adaptation at one of the levels (survival or approval), or did not single out any adaptation (which can be understood as the desire of the respondent hide your identity). The results obtained, as well as their further analysis, will be presented below.
Conclusion
This work is devoted to the study of the correlation of personal adaptations according to P. Ware and V. Joines and ways of dealing with difficult life situations as resources available to a person in resolving difficult life situations. This topic is important for several reasons. Firstly, the development and complication of modern society leads to the fact that an increasing number of situations can be subjectively assessed as complex or difficult. Secondly, people often seek psychological support precisely in connection with the need to resolve a current or expected difficult life situation. Knowledge of the relationship between personal characteristics and preferred ways of dealing with difficult life situations can contribute to more effective and directed work to expand the repertoire of actions available and mastered by a person to resolve difficult life situations.
In the course of this study, we have analyzed and summarized the existing theoretical ideas about resolving difficult life situations. As a result, in our study, we relied on the model of V.A. Petrovsky and I.M. Shmelev, which distinguishes four ways of resolving difficult life situations according to the criteria of "activity/passivity" and "adaptability/non-adaptation": protection, coping, mastery, maladjustment (self-destruction).
Next, we studied the theoretical and practical ideas about the concept of personal adaptations by P. Ware and V. Joines. All six adaptations—the Brilliant Skeptic, the Creative Dreamer, the Charming Manipulator, the Responsible Workaholic, the Over-Responsive Enthusiast, and the Playful Rebel—can be characterized in the categories of task-solving activity/passivity and social involvement/avoidance.
Further comparison and analysis of the described models made it possible to put forward assumptions about the correlation of personal adaptations according to P. Ware and V. Joins with methods for resolving difficult life situations. As a result of the study, a theoretical model was formulated that describes the following relationships between six personal adaptations according to P. Ware and V. Joins and four ways to resolve difficult life situations:
1. Owners of personal adaptation Charming Manipulator more often choose mastery and disadaptation as ways to resolve a difficult life situation.
2. Owners of personal adaptation Brilliant Skeptic more often use defenses and coping in difficult life situations.
3. Representatives of the adaptations Creative Dreamer and Playful Rebel more often resort to strategies of maladaptation and protection in a difficult life situation.
4. Representatives of personal adaptations Overreacting Enthusiast and Responsible Workaholic more often prefer coping and mastery as ways of responding to a difficult life situation.
To test the theoretical assumptions, an empirical study was carried out, the program of which included the development of a "Questionnaire of ways to deal with difficult life situations", the allocation of four methods on its basis and their correlation with personal adaptations inherent in the personality.
The development of the questionnaire was carried out using such methods as peer review and factor analysis - exploratory and confirmatory. To identify the leading personal adaptations , the technique "Joins Personal Adaptation Questionnaire (third version)" was used (translated by D. Kasyanov).
Based on the processing of the empirical data of the "Questionnaire for dealing with difficult life situations", all four forms of dealing with DFS were identified, which confirmed the theoretical concepts. Also, as a result, the average values of the severity of the use of the selected response strategies in DLS for each respondent were obtained.
Further, as a result of an intergroup comparison using the nonparametric Mann-Whitney test, differences were found in the severity of the ways of dealing with TJS in representatives of various personal adaptations. This suggests that representatives of different adaptations use available strategies to varying degrees.