Test questionnaire by A. Zverkov and E.V. Eidman “Study of volitional self-regulation. Modern problems of science and education Interpretation of the results obtained

When needed: allows you to assess how the person being assessed feels about the events taking place in his life, whether he considers them controllable or thinks that he has no control over them.

Questionnaire for studying the level of subjective control (USC)

Instructions: You are presented with 44 statements that describe the different ways a person interprets the most common social situations. Read each statement carefully, rate the extent to which you agree or disagree, and indicate answer form the number corresponding to your choice:

3 - completely agree
+2 - I agree
+1 - more likely to agree than to disagree
–1 - rather disagree than agree
–2 - I don’t agree
–3 - completely disagree

Try to use the full range of estimates.

Answer form
_______________________________________________
Full Name

№ p/p	Statement	Grade
№ p/p	Statement
	Career advancement depends more on a successful combination of circumstances than on personal abilities and efforts
	Most divorces occur because people did not want to adapt to each other.
	Illness is a matter of chance; If you are destined to get sick, then nothing can be done
	People end up lonely because they themselves do not show interest and friendliness towards others
	Making my dreams come true often depends on luck.
	It is futile to make efforts to win the sympathy of other people
	External circumstances, parents and well-being influence family happiness no less than the relationship between spouses
	I often feel like I have little influence over what happens to me
	As a rule, management is more effective when it fully controls the actions of subordinates, rather than relying on their independence
	My grades at school depended more on random circumstances (for example, on the mood of the teacher) than on my own efforts
	When I make plans, I generally believe that I can implement them
	What many people think is luck or luck is actually the result of long, focused effort.
	I think that a healthy lifestyle can help your health more than doctors and medications
	If people are not suitable for each other, then no matter how hard they try, they still will not be able to establish family life.
	The good that I do is usually appreciated by others
	Children grow up the way their parents raise them
	I think that chance or fate don't play a role important role in my life
	I try not to plan too far ahead because a lot depends on how the circumstances turn out
	My grades in school depended most on my effort and level of preparedness
	In family conflicts, I often feel guilty for myself rather than for the other party.
	People's lives depend on circumstances
	I prefer leadership where you can decide for yourself what to do and how to do it
	I think that my lifestyle is in no way the cause of my illnesses
	As a rule, it is an unfortunate combination of circumstances that prevents people from achieving success in their business
	In the end, the people who work in it are responsible for the poor management of an organization.
	I often feel that I can’t change anything in my family relationships.
	If I really want, I can win over anyone
	The younger generation is influenced by so many different circumstances that the efforts of parents to raise them are often useless
	What happens to me is the work of my hands
	It can be difficult to understand why leaders act this way and not otherwise.
	A person who has not been able to succeed in his or her job most likely did not try hard enough.
	Most often I can get what I want from my family members
	The troubles and failures that happened in my life were often the fault of other people than myself.
	A child can always be protected from a cold if you look after him and dress him correctly
	In difficult circumstances, I prefer to wait until the problems resolve themselves
	Success is the result of hard work and depends little on chance or luck
	I feel that the happiness of my family depends on me more than on anyone else.
	I've always had a hard time understanding why some people like me and others don't.
	I always prefer to make a decision and act independently, and not rely on the help of other people or fate
	Unfortunately, a person’s merits often remain unrecognized, despite all his efforts
	IN family life there are situations that cannot be resolved even with the strongest desire
	Capable people those who failed to realize their potential have only themselves to blame
	Many of my successes were only possible thanks to the help of other people.
	Most of the failures in my life were due to ignorance or laziness and had little to do with luck or bad luck.

Processing the results

Processing of testing results is carried out in several stages. The number corresponding to the choice determines the number of points received for each answer. First, with the help of keys, points are calculated on each scale (by simple summation). In this case, points for answers to questions with a “+” sign are summed up with their sign, and for questions with a “–” sign - with the opposite sign.

Keys to scales

1. Scale of general internality (Io)

2. Scale of internality in the field of achievements (ID)

3. Scale of internality in the field of failures (In)

5. Scale of internality in the field of industrial relations (IP)

7. Internality scale in relation to health and illness (From)

As a result of calculating points for each of the scales, so-called “raw” points are obtained, which must be converted into standard scores (walls). To do this, use a special table.

Table for converting raw scores into standard scores

Click image for a larger view

The received assessments within the walls are entered into the table:

Final table of results

The results expressed in walls are compared with the norm (5.5 walls). An indicator above 5.5 points indicates an internal type of control in this area, below 5.5 - about an external one.

The results can also be presented as a graph or as a profile.

Example of USC chart

USK profile example

Interpretation of the results obtained

Psychologically, a person with high level of subjective control has emotional stability, perseverance, determination, sociability, high self-control and restraint. Man with low subjective control emotionally unstable, prone to informal behavior, uncommunicative, poor self-control and high tension.

General internality scale (Io). High rate on this scale corresponds to a high level of subjective control over any significant situations. Such people believe that the majority important events in their lives - the result of their own actions, that they can control them. They feel their own responsibility for these events and for how their lives turn out in general. Subjects with low level Subjective control people do not see the connection between their actions and life events that are significant to them. They do not consider themselves capable of controlling their development and believe that most events are the result of chance or the actions of other people.

Achievement Internality Scale (Id). High rate on this scale corresponds to a high level of subjective control over emotionally positive events and situations. Such people believe that they themselves have achieved everything that was and is in their lives, and that they are able to successfully achieve their goals in the future. Low rate on the scale indicates that a person attributes his successes and achievements to circumstances - luck, good fortune or the help of other people.

Internality scale in the field of failures (In). High rate on this scale reflects a developed sense of subjective control in relation to negative events and situations, which is manifested in the tendency to blame oneself for a variety of troubles and suffering. Low rate indicates that the subject is inclined to attribute responsibility for such events to other people or consider them the result of bad luck.

Internality scale in the field of family relations (Is). High rate Is means that a person considers himself responsible for the events occurring in his family life. Low rate Is indicates that the subject considers his partners responsible for situations that arise in his family.

Internality scale in the field of industrial relations (Ip). High rate on this scale indicates that a person relies mainly on himself in organizing his production activities. He believes that he can influence his relationships with colleagues, manage them and be responsible for them; thinks it's him professional career, career advancement depend more on himself than on other people or external forces. Low rate indicates that a person has a tendency not to take responsibility for his professional successes and failures. Such a person believes that it is not he himself, but someone else - his superiors, colleagues, luck, etc. - who determine everything that happens to him in this area.

Internality scale in the field of interpersonal relations (Im). High rate It indicates that a person considers himself able to control his formal and informal relationships with other people, to evoke respect and sympathy. Low rate , on the contrary, indicates that a person cannot actively form his social circle and is inclined to consider his interpersonal relationships the result of the activity of his partners.

Scale of internality in relation to health and illness (Iz). High rate indicate that the subject considers himself responsible for his health: if he is sick, he blames himself for it and believes that recovery largely depends on his actions. Man with low rate on this scale, he considers the disease to be the result of chance and hopes that recovery will come as a result of the actions of others, primarily doctors.

For professional diagnostics, the most informative are the results on the scale of internality in industrial relations (IP). Results on other scales make it possible to construct a multidimensional profile. Since most people are characterized by more or less wide variability in behavior depending on specific social situations, the characteristics of subjective control can also change in a person depending on whether the situation seems complex or simple, pleasant or unpleasant, etc.

The level of subjective control increases as a result of psychological correction. It should be remembered that internals prefer non-directive methods of psychological correction; and externals, as individuals with increased anxiety and prone to depression, are subjectively more satisfied with behavioral methods.

Psychology: personality and business

Keywords:

1 -1

The professional system produces a depersonalizing effect on the individual. The subjective response to the depersonalizing influence of the environment is coping-personalization, or a person’s ability to engage in coping-personal behavior - the conscious use of adaptive coping strategies to cope with the depersonalizing influence of the environment. A person must personalize himself in the environment, present himself in the professional field, present himself as a person and as a professional. The article presents the author's questionnaire of depersonalization by the professional system (DPS) with a description and explanation of the questions that make up its scale, the results of standardization and testing, interpretation and recommendations for use. The level of coping personality according to the DPS questionnaire has a strong correlation with the level of personal self-government. In order to develop personal coping behavior, it is necessary to develop the ability of personal self-government.

DPS questionnaire (depersonalization by the professional system)

coping-personal behavior

coping personalization

depersonalization

1. Acmeology: textbook / under general. ed. A.A. Derkach. – M.: Publishing house RAGS, 2002. – 650 p.

2. Fundamentals of psychology: workshop / ed.-comp. L.D. Stolyarenko. – Ed. 2nd, add. and processing – Rostov n/d: Phoenix, 2001. – pp. 217–218.

3. Peysakhov N.M., Shevtsov M.N. Practical psychology. – Kazan: KSU Publishing House, 1991. – 123 p.

4. Petrovsky V.A. Arthur Vladimirovich Petrovsky: scientific developments and discoveries recent years. [Electronic resource]. – URL: http://www.bimbad.ru/biblioteka/article_full.php?aid=267&binn_rubrik_pl_articles=173 (access date: 10/18/2011).

5. Lazarus R.S., Folkman S. Stress, appraisal, and coping. – New York: Springer, 1984.

6. Seligman M.E.P. Helplessnes: On depression, development, and death. – San Francisco: Freeman, 1975.

A person, in the process of his work activity, is objectively in certain conditions in which this activity is carried out. Possibilities, personal characteristics human beings are manifested within professional system. Depending on a person’s perception of a given situation, these frameworks can be felt as “rigid”, limiting, or as supporting, strengthening. In any case, the subject of activity must find the relationship between external and internal determinations, necessity and freedom, regulation, normativity, standardization and individualization. Any professional system, and especially with an authoritarian management style, with a subject-object approach to interaction along the vertical “superior-subordinate”, produces a depersonalizing effect on the individual. Personalization by A.V. Petrovsky is “the ability of an individual to determine changes in significant aspects of the individuality of other people, to be the subject of transformation of the behavior and consciousness of others through his reflection (“personalization”) in them.” Accordingly, depersonalization is the reverse process of transforming a person from a subject into an object, which does not have any influence on the situation and people, and, accordingly, is not reflected in any way in others and therefore is not perceived by oneself, alienated from oneself. Alienation from oneself in a professional environment shows, in our opinion, that a person is maladapted, perhaps in a depressed state, and feels out of place. Perhaps the reason lies in the lack of skills of self-presentation, self-presentation, self-affirmation. Or maybe, indeed, the surrounding professional environment puts excessive pressure on the individual. In any case, a person must find the strength to either change the situation (for example, leave a job that is unfavorable for his personality), or change his attitude towards the situation, learn to cope with the depersonalizing impact of the system, personalize himself in the environment, imagine himself in the professional sphere, present as a person and as a professional.

The first step to such self-change, we believe, should be awareness of the problem. A person must clearly see and realize what his sense of self is like in a professional environment, in a team of employees. It is for this purpose that the Depersonalization Questionnaire was created by the professional system (DPS). In this article, we present the questionnaire itself with a description and explanation of the questions that make up its scale, with the results of standardization and testing.

The questionnaire consists of ten pairs of statements with opposite meanings, between which there are scales from “0” to “10” (Table 1). The instructions ask respondents to evaluate their usual state and sense of self at the workplace, in an official environment, by circling the corresponding point on the scale. The method of work can be either individual or group.

Table 1 - Questionnaire of depersonalization by the professional system (DPS)

Little depends on my decisions		A lot depends on my decisions
I feel insignificant	0..1..2..3..4..5..6..7..8..9..10	I feel important
I don’t get involved in solving official problems, usually “the boss knows best”	0..1..2..3..4..5..6..7..8..9..10	They cannot solve work problems without my participation.
I still can't influence the situation	0..1..2..3..4..5..6..7..8..9..10	I can greatly influence the situation
I prefer to keep my opinions to myself	0..1..2..3..4..5..6..7..8..9..10	I try to make my opinion heard
I feel like a cog in a big machine	0..1..2..3..4..5..6..7..8..9..10	I feel like a well-oiled machine
Nobody asks my opinion	0..1..2..3..4..5..6..7..8..9..10	The bosses listen to my opinion
My personal boundaries are violated all the time, I feel addicted	0..1..2..3..4..5..6..7..8..9..10	I feel autonomous and independent
My goals are different from the organization's goals	0..1..2..3..4..5..6..7..8..9..10	My goals and the goals of the organization coincide
The professional system oppresses me	0..1..2..3..4..5..6..7..8..9..10	The professional system is a resource for me

As a result of standardizing the questionnaire on a sample of 300 police officers and researchers aged 23-47 years, the following norms were identified: 0-29 - very high DPS value; 30-49 - high DPS value; 50-70 - average DPS value; 71-90 - low DPS value; 91-100 is a very low DPS value.

The lower the scores, that is, the more the circled values are deviated to the left, the stronger the depersonalizing influence of the professional system on the individual, the less the person’s ability to resist this influence. The higher the scores, that is, the more the circled values are deviated to the right, the less the person experiences the depersonalizing influence of the professional system, the greater the person’s ability to resist this influence. For greater clarity, respondents are asked to connect the circled numbers with a line, thus obtaining a graph - a “curve” of depersonalization.

We tested and standardized the methodology. At the first stage, the conceptual content was clarified, statements that were items of the questionnaire were formulated, and the apparent validity and degree of understanding of the resulting text were assessed.

Comparisons within samples of indicators of different gender and age groups carried out at the second stage of the study did not reveal significant differences. Contrary to our expectations, there were also no significant differences between the results of two professional groups - employees of internal affairs bodies and employees research Institute. The distribution of answers did not differ significantly from normal. The internal consistency of the questions in the DPS questionnaire, calculated on this sample, is quite high (Cronbach's α 0.7), which suggests that they all measure the same object - depersonalization by the professional system.

Let's discuss each issue.

Low scores on items 1 - “little depends on my decisions - a lot depends on my decisions” (average value 5.9) and 4 - “I still can’t influence the situation - I can greatly influence the situation” (average value 5.8) talk about “learned helplessness”. This is a condition that occurs in a situation where it seems that external events do not depend on us, and we cannot do anything to prevent or modify them. The person feels helpless before the influence on him external environment. He is sure that he is unable to influence circumstances, cannot control his life. There is a refusal to attempt to solve problems that can be solved on the basis of internal resources.

A low score on item 2 - “I feel my insignificance - I feel my importance” (average value 6.5) may indicate a depressive state, loss of life meaning. Feeling like a “cog” in a large mechanism (item 6, average value 5.6) is not always bad; sometimes it means well-coordinated teamwork if the scores on all other items of the questionnaire are high. If low scores predominate, such a response also indicates depersonalization. It is preferable for an individual to feel like a “whole, well-oiled machine”; this reflects a person’s psychological health, professional adaptation, and personalization.

For item 3 - “I don’t get involved in solving official problems, usually “the boss knows best” - they can’t do without my participation in solving official problems”), the lowest average value of all points was obtained (4.9), since in an authoritarian system of subordination There are principles of subordination and division of powers. But still, this item also agrees with all the others, so it was left in the questionnaire. In addition, a person in any case should strive to solve work problems on his own.

Items 5 - “I prefer to keep my opinion to myself - I try to have my opinion heard” (average value 6.7) and 7 “nobody asks for my opinion - management listens to my opinion” (average value 5.7) reflect readiness a person to express his point of view, position himself. If such readiness is absent or low, then this indicates the predominance of a person’s motivation to avoid failures (which has been confirmed experimentally).

A low score on item 8 - “my personal boundaries are violated all the time, I feel dependent - I feel autonomous and independent” (average value 5.8) indicates a person’s discomfort in the workplace, in his professional position. This can be due to both external reasons (authoritarian-manipulative leadership style, personal characteristics of colleagues) and internal ones - a person’s inability to build personal boundaries and overcome the depersonalizing influence of the environment.

Achieving a positive result in an activity is closely related to the joint purposeful activity of a team: unit, department, group, etc., which requires from a person, on the one hand, initiative and activity, on the other hand, conscious self-restraint of personal initiative and activity in the name of achieving common goals. goals. Moreover, personal and social (professional) goals must be coordinated. Point 9 of our questionnaire is aimed at determining the presence of this agreement - “my goals differ from the goals of the organization - my goals and the goals of the organization coincide” (average value 6.3).

Item 10 of the questionnaire - “the professional system oppresses me - the professional system is a resource for me” (average value 6.5) clarifies a person’s attitude towards the professional system. Does he perceive the system as a resource from which it is possible to draw energy to overcome life and professional difficulties, which provides support, or the system is an anti-resource for him, having a depersonalizing influence that deprives a person of subjectivity.

The problem posed by the professional system of depersonalization, like any other, requires resolution. The counterbalance to depersonalization by the professional system, from our point of view, is coping personalization as overcoming depersonalization, a subjective response to the depersonalizing influence of the environment. That is, a person’s inability to resist depersonalization by a professional system has the opposite pole - this is a person’s ability to engage in personal coping behavior - the conscious use of adaptive coping strategies to cope with the depersonalizing influence of the environment.

In general, “coping behavior” is overcoming behavior, co-controlling behavior. Behavioral efforts that are aimed at overcoming the leveling influence of the system, building personal boundaries of the “I,” and reaching a conscious level of self-regulation and self-government, we called coping personification.

Let us give an interpretation of the intervals of values of the DPS questionnaire (depersonalization by the professional system) obtained as a result of standardization, taking into account the newly introduced concept:

0-29 - very low coping persona, very high DPS value.

People with such results are most likely depressed, lack self-confidence, and do not even try to overcome the pressure of the environment (which they perceive as aggressive towards themselves). Employees with such indicators need special attention from a psychologist.

30-49 - low coping persona, high DPS value.

Shown overall result In these intervals, people are cautious, they prefer to “keep their heads down,” and it is easier for them to convince themselves that nothing depends on them than to make attempts to change the situation. If possible, they avoid responsibility, although they can be good performers. Despite the emotional discomfort of being in their workplace, in a professional environment, they are in no hurry to change anything; they lack determination.

50-70 - average coping persona, average DPS value.

Such people prefer to adhere to the “golden mean” in everything. They are careful in their statements, but if necessary they can express their opinions. They recognize the influence of the environment, but do not experience much discomfort from it. They prefer compromise in relationships. They don’t see the need to “go to trouble” to prove their point of view.

71-90 - high coping persona, low DPS value.

High scores indicate self-confidence, a person’s adaptability in the workplace, a sense of importance, a desire to actively participate in solving work-related issues, and responsibility. Such people strive to express their opinions, influence the situation, and position themselves as active figures.

91-100 - very high coping persona, very low DPS value

People with very high scores deny the depersonalizing influence of the professional system and position themselves as an independent person who has a great influence on the situation. This is a psychologically favorable position, unless it is defensive in nature. In this case, a person may try to aggressively impose his opinion on others, and behave regardless of the requirements of the situation.

As conclusions, we will determine the possibilities of using the DPS questionnaire to work with employees and teams.

Due to its compactness (the time to fill it out is 2-3 minutes) and clarity (especially if you connect the circled numbers with a graph), the questionnaire can be used in group work as an independent study or as an addition to other tests.

If the research is conducted anonymously, the data can give the psychologist and managers an idea of the psychological self-perception of employees. We use the traffic police questionnaire in educational process on subjects of a psychological and pedagogical orientation, together with other tests (T. Ehlers’ motivational questionnaires; questionnaires identifying coping strategies, etc.) in order to increase the students’ self-awareness, their understanding of the strategies and reasons for their own behavior.

If the survey is not conducted anonymously, then, together with other methods, the traffic police questionnaire can be used to identify employees who are in depressed, psychologically unfavorable states.

When a psychologist works individually with employees, asking them to fill out this questionnaire before consulting, you can pay special attention to items with low scores (0-3), talk with the employee about his feelings and opinions on these items.

Our research also showed that the level of coping personality according to the DPS questionnaire has a pronounced correlation (p = 0.01) with the level of personal self-government according to N.M.’s test. Peysakhova. This means that if a person has a high level of self-government, that is, he can analyze the situation, navigate it, predict its development, set goals, plan to achieve them, designate guidelines for his achievements, make decisions, exercise self-control and correct his actions, then he is able to cope with the depersonalizing influence of the environment. Accordingly, in order to develop personal coping behavior, it is necessary to develop the ability of personal self-government.

Reviewers:

Chernyavskaya V.S., Doctor of Pedagogical Sciences, Professor of the Department of Philosophy and Psychology, Institute of Law and Management, Vladivostok State University of Economics and Service, Vladivostok.

Kravtsova N.A., Doctor of Psychology, Associate Professor, Head. Department of Clinical Psychology, Vladivostok State Medical University, Ministry of Health and Social Development Russian Federation, Vladivostok.

Bibliographic link

Burtseva E.V. QUESTIONNAIRE FOR DEPERSONALIZATION BY THE PROFESSIONAL SYSTEM (DPS) // Contemporary issues science and education. – 2012. – No. 2.;
URL: http://science-education.ru/ru/article/view?id=5507 (access date: 02/01/2020). We bring to your attention magazines published by the publishing house "Academy of Natural Sciences"

Test questionnaire developed by E.F. Bazhin et al. based on J. Rotter’s locus of control scale

Subjective control research

Instructions to the subject. “The questionnaire offered to you contains 44 statements. Read them and answer whether you agree with this statement or not. If you agree, then in the answer form put a “+” sign in front of the corresponding number; if you disagree, put a “-” sign. Remember that there are no “bad” or “good” answers in the test. Express your opinions freely and sincerely. The answer that comes to your mind first is preferable.”

Questionnaire

1. Career advancement depends more on a successful combination of circumstances than on a person’s abilities and efforts.

2. Most divorces occur because people did not want to adapt to each other.

3. Illness is a matter of chance; if you are destined to get sick, then nothing can be done.

4. People find themselves lonely because they themselves do not show interest and friendliness towards others.

5. Making my dreams come true often depends on luck.

6. It is useless to make efforts to win the sympathy of other people.

7. External circumstances (parents, welfare) influence family happiness no less than the relationship between spouses.

8. I often feel that I have little influence on what happens to me.

9. As a rule, management turns out to be more effective when it fully controls the actions of subordinates, rather than relying on their independence.

10. My grades at school often depended on random circumstances (for example, on the mood of the teacher), and not on my own efforts.

11. When I make plans, I generally believe that I can carry them out.

12. What many people think is luck or luck is actually the result of long, focused efforts.

13. I think that a healthy lifestyle can help your health more than doctors and medications.

14. If people are not suitable for each other, then no matter how hard they try, they still will not be able to establish family life.

15. The good things I do are usually appreciated by others.

16. Children grow up the way their parents raise them.

17. I think that chance or fate do not play an important role in my life.

18. I try not to plan too far ahead, because a lot depends on how circumstances turn out.

19. My grades at school depended most on my efforts and degree of preparedness.

20. In family conflicts, I often feel more guilty than on the other side.

21. The life of most people depends on a combination of circumstances.

22. I prefer leadership in which I can independently determine what to do and how to do it.

23. I think that my lifestyle is in no way the cause of my illnesses.

24. As a rule, it is an unfortunate combination of circumstances that prevents people from achieving success in their business.

25. In the end, the people who work in it themselves are responsible for the poor management of an organization.

26. I often feel that I cannot change anything in the existing relationships in the family.

27. If I really want to, I can win over almost anyone.

28. The younger generation is influenced by so many different circumstances that the efforts of parents to raise them often turn out to be useless.

29. What happens to me is the work of my own hands.

30. It can be difficult to understand why leaders act this way and not otherwise.

31. A person who could not succeed in his work most likely did not show enough effort.

32. Most often I can get what I want from my family members.

33. The troubles and failures that happened in my life were often more to blame for other people than for me.

34. A child can always be protected from a cold if you look after him and dress him correctly.

35. In difficult circumstances, I prefer to wait until the problem resolves itself.

36. Success is the result of hard work and depends little on chance or luck.

37. I feel that the happiness of my family depends on me more than anyone else.

38. It has always been difficult for me to understand why some people like me and not others.

39. I always prefer to make a decision and act on my own, rather than rely on the help of other people or fate.

40. Unfortunately, a person’s merits often remain unrecognized, despite all his efforts.

41. In family life there are situations that cannot be resolved even with the strongest desire.

42. Capable people who failed to realize their potential have only themselves to blame.

43. Many of my successes were possible only thanks to the help of other people.

44. Most of the failures in my life resulted from inability, ignorance or laziness and depended little on luck or bad luck.

Processing the results

The purpose of processing the results is to obtain an indicator of the locus of subjective control, that is, an indicator of the general internality of “Io”. It represents the sum of matches between the test subject’s answers and the answers to the questions given in the key.

Analysis of results

Locus of control is a characteristic of a person’s volitional sphere, which reflects his tendency to attribute responsibility for the results of his activities to external forces or his own abilities and efforts. Attributing responsibility for the results of one’s activities to external forces is called external, or external, locus of control, and attributing responsibility to one’s own abilities and efforts is called internal, or internal, locus of control.

Thus, two polar types of personalities are possible depending on the localization of control: external and internal. Every person has a certain position on a continuum that extends from the external to the internal type.

0 _______________¦______________ 44

external internal

The locus of control indicator (Io) obtained in the process of processing the results is deciphered as follows:

In general, the greater the value of internality, the less externality.

The locus of control characteristic of a person is universal in relation to any type of events and situations that he has to face. The same type of control manifests itself in cases of failure and in cases of achievement, and this is observed in different spheres of the subject’s life.

To determine the level of locus of control, the following boundaries of the internality scale are used.

At low level of internality people make little connection between their actions and life events that are significant to them. They do not consider themselves able to control the development of such events and believe that most of them are the result of chance or the actions of other people. Therefore, “externals” are emotionally unstable, prone to informal communication and behavior, uncommunicative, have poor self-control and high tension.

High level of internality corresponds to a high level of subjective control over any significant situations. People with this locus of control believe that most important events in their lives were the result of their own actions, that they can control them, and feel responsible for both these events and the way their lives turn out in general. “Internals” with high rates of subjective control have emotional stability, perseverance, determination, are sociable, have good self-control and restraint.

Average level internality typical for most people. The features of their subjective control may vary somewhat depending on whether the situation seems complex or simple, pleasant or unpleasant, etc. to the person. But although their behavior is psychological feeling responsibility for it depends on specific social situations; however, it is still possible to establish the predominance of one or another type of locus of control in them.

Thus, the subjective locus of control is associated with a person’s sense of his strength, dignity, responsibility for what is happening, with self-esteem, social maturity and personal independence. Therefore, when making recommendations for self-improvement, you should consider that:

· conformal, compliant behavior is largely characteristic of people with an external locus of control; internals are less inclined to submit to the pressure (opinion, emotions, etc.) of other people;

· a person with an internal locus of control works better alone;

· internals more actively seek information and are usually more aware of the situation than externals;

· internals have a more active position in relation to their health than externals.

Research has shown that internals are more popular and occupy a favorable position in the system of interpersonal relations. They are more benevolent, more self-confident and more tolerant.

Individuals with an internal locus of control prefer non-directive methods of education and psychocorrection. And when working with externalities, it is important to take care of reducing the frequently observed anxiety and depression.

Methodology for studying personality self-esteem
Instructions: Carefully read the words characterizing individual personality qualities (character traits):

· neatness, · carelessness, · thoughtfulness, · receptivity, · pride, · rudeness, · cheerfulness, · caring, · envy, · responsiveness, · pedantry, · mobility, · suspicion, · integrity, · poetry, · contempt, · cordiality ,

· shyness, · rancor, · sincerity, · sophistication, · capriciousness, · gullibility, · slowness, · daydreaming, · suspiciousness, · vindictiveness · swagger, · rationality, · determination, · self-forgetfulness, · restraint, · compassion · bashfulness,

· persistence, · tenderness, · ease, · nervousness, · indecisiveness, · lack of restraint, · charm, · touchiness, · caution, · patience, · cowardice, · fascination, · perseverance, · compliance, · coldness, · enthusiasm.

Make two rows of words of 10-20 each.
In the first column - let's call it “My ideal” - place words that characterize your ideal.

In the second - let's call it “Anti-ideal” - words denoting traits that an ideal should not have.

From the first (“positive”) and second (“negative”) rows, select those traits that you think you possess. In this case, the choice must be made according to the “yes-no” system: whether you have this trait or not, regardless of the degree of its severity.

Processing, results and conclusions

Number positive traits that you ascribe to yourself, divide by the number of words placed in the “My ideal” column. If the result is close to one, you are most likely overestimating yourself; a result close to zero indicates underestimation and increased self-criticism; if the result is close to 0.5 - normal average self-esteem, and you perceive yourself quite critically.

In the same way, conclusions are drawn based on a comparison of the selected negative qualities with the “Antiideal” column. Here, a result close to zero indicates an overestimated self-esteem, one - underestimated, and one - 0.5 - normal.

Psychological safety: tutorial Solomin Valery Pavlovich

Methodology for determining the dominant state

Used for examining adults.

Target: determination of sentiment characteristics and some other characteristics personal level mental state using subjective assessments of the subject. The main purpose of the questionnaire is to diagnose relatively stable (dominant) conditions.

Instructions. The questionnaire contains signs that describe a person’s state, behavior, and attitude to various phenomena. Assess to what extent these signs are characteristic of you, keeping in mind not only today, but a longer period of time.

Do not try to “improve” or “worse” the answers, this will lead to unreliable results, since the technique detects distortions and insincerity in the answers. You can be sure that your answers will not be disclosed.

You must express your agreement with each judgment given in the questionnaire using a seven-point scale:

1 – completely disagree;

2 – agree to a small extent;

3 – almost half agree;

4 – half agree;

5 – more than half agree;

6 – agree almost completely;

7 – I completely agree.

By choosing one of the scale points: 1,2, 3, 4, 5, 6 or 7, you will express the degree of your agreement with this judgment. Write down the selected point on the answer sheet next to the serial number of this item, indicating at the top of the sheet your last name (or nickname), date and time you started work.

Do not skip a single item on the questionnaire. We ask you not to write or underline anything in the text of the questionnaire. Please do not transfer one number to another in the same place. To correct, cross out the unnecessary number and write a new one on the right.

Questionnaire

1. My body reacts strongly to weather changes or climate changes.

2. Very often I am in a mood when I am easily distracted from the task, become absent-minded and dreamy.

3. I worry very often.

4. I often have trouble falling asleep.

5. A lot of small troubles drive me crazy.

6. My thoughts constantly return to possible failures, and it is difficult for me to direct them in a different direction.

7. I often praise people I know very little.

8. I feel vague anxiety, fear, I don’t know why.

9. If everything is against me, I don’t lose heart at all.

10. I wake up in the morning unrested and tired.

11. I often feel useless.

12. I am unable to control my frustration or anger.

13. Difficult tasks lift my spirits.

14. I often have a headache.

15. It often happens that I gossip with someone.

16. I often have a premonition that some kind of punishment awaits me.

17. I am easily offended by words.

18. I am full of energy.

19. There is a conflict between my plans and reality.

20. In situations of prolonged neuropsychic stress, I show endurance.

21. My table manners at home are usually not as good as when visiting.

22. Very often some trifle takes over my thoughts and bothers me for several days.

23. Very often I feel tired and lethargic.

24. I miss an opportunity because I don’t make a decision quickly enough.

25. There are a lot of things that easily irritate me.

26. I often feel tense and anxious when thinking about what happened during the day.

27. When I don't feel well, I'm irritable.

28. Very often I have the blues (sad mood).

29. In the morning, after waking up, I still feel tired and exhausted for a long time.

30. I like to constantly overcome new difficulties.

31. I have a desire to change a lot in my lifestyle, but I don’t have the strength.

32. In most cases, I easily overcome disappointment.

33. Satisfying some of my needs and desires makes it impossible to satisfy others.

34. Often an indecent or even obscene joke makes me laugh.

35. I look into the future with complete confidence.

36. I lose patience very often.

37. People disappoint me.

38. Bad thoughts often come to my mind, which are better not to talk about.

39. I get bored of everything quickly.

40. I feel like I'm close to a nervous breakdown.

41. I often experience general weakness.

42. People often tell me that I am short-tempered.

Interpretation of results. In this technique, when interpreting the obtained numerical values, the conversion of raw scores into standard, T-scores is used. Standard T-score scales are constructed as follows: average values are equal to 50 T-scores; 10 T-scores are equal to one sigma (sigma is the standard deviation.)

Increased scores on one scale or another are scores in 55 and more T-scores. This deviation from the average is more than half a sigma.

Decreased grades are grades of 45 T-scores or less. This is a downward deviation from the average of more than half a sigma.

High scores are scores of 60 or more T-scores.

Low scores are scores of 40 T-scores or less.

Scales

“Ak” scale: “active – passive attitude to life situation.” This scale allows you to get an idea of the characteristics of the state, which in most cases is more dependent on the corresponding personality trait - activity - than on other factors. It should be taken into account that activity is only relatively stable, since the predisposition to an active or passive attitude and response depends on many current circumstances, the social environment, as well as events preceding the life period of the individual. To diagnose states and moods, it is especially important to take into account the strength of faith in achieving your goals, to identify an active or passive position in relation to the current life situation. This parameter is especially important when diagnosing stress conditions.

High scores - more than 60 T-points. An active, optimistic attitude towards the life situation is expressed, there is a readiness to overcome obstacles, and faith in one’s capabilities. Feeling empowered to overcome obstacles and achieve your goals. Cheerfulness is higher than most people.

Low scores - less than 40 T-scores. A passive attitude towards life situations; in assessing many life situations, a pessimistic position and disbelief in the possibility of successfully overcoming obstacles predominate.

“To” scale: “tone: high – low.” In a situation of acute stress, a person more often experiences a feeling of increased strength, but the opposite picture is often observed - a feeling of weakness. A similar picture can be observed during prolonged stress. Energy characteristics for any mental state are the most important dimension. They are especially necessary for predicting the developed state of an individual. In the diagnosis of stressful conditions, they provide valuable data on the depth of stress.

High marks. Characterized by high activity, sthenic reaction to emerging difficulties. Subjective feelings of internal composure, reserve of strength, energy. Willingness to work, including long-term work.

Low ratings. Characterized by fatigue, lack of composure, lethargy, inertia, and low performance. There are fewer opportunities to be active, to expend energy, the resource of strength is reduced, and fatigue is increased. Tendency to exhibit asthenic reactions to emerging difficulties.

Scale "Sp": "calmness - anxiety." In the mental state, the experience of anxiety is of decisive importance for a number of other phenomena. It is anxiety that enhances the sound of emotiogenic stimuli of varying strength, including minor ones, increasing the intensity of negative emotions, exacerbating them Negative influence on consciousness, behavior and activity. The scale is designed to measure the level of generalized anxiety. In the literature, it is also designated by the terms “free-floating”, “unmotivated”, etc. Among the types of anxiety, this type of people is most characterized by long-term, long-lasting emotional experiences.

High marks. Greater confidence in your abilities and capabilities than most people.

Low ratings. There is a tendency to experience anxiety in a wide range of life situations, to see a threat to prestige and well-being, regardless of how real the reasons are. Anticipation of events with an unfavorable outcome, anticipation of a future threat (punishment, loss of respect or self-esteem) without a clear awareness of its sources.

“Us” scale: “stability – instability of emotional tone.”

High marks. An even, positive emotional tone and a calm flow of emotional processes predominate. High emotional stability; in a state of emotional arousal, the adequacy and effectiveness of mental self-regulation, behavior and activity is maintained. Very low scores can be interpreted as emotional rigidity.

Low ratings. Emotional stability is reduced, emotional arousal easily occurs, mood is changeable, irritability is increased, and a negative emotional tone predominates.

“Ud” scale: “satisfaction – dissatisfaction with life in general (its course, the process of self-realization).” Difficulties in the process of self-realization lead to experiences of extensive emotional discomfort. This characteristic has special diagnostic significance in individual advisory and psychocorrectional work. Experiences of the fullness of life are one of the main pillars of a person’s psychological stability. Feelings of emptiness are a risk factor for neurotic and depressive disorders, and alcohol addiction. The judgments included in this scale relate to the internal aspects of experiences, to the feeling of satisfaction with one’s life. Since the criteria for successful self-realization are subjective, a subjective assessment of the success of self-realization is most important for the diagnostician. Full self-realization of a person is not only the development of any special abilities, but also the development of his potential as a strong and integral human being, free from crippling internal compulsions.

High marks. Satisfaction with life in general, its course, self-realization, the way life goes. A person feels the ability to take responsibility and the opportunity to make his own choices, in which the voice of his own “I” is heard. The subject feels ready to overcome difficulties in realizing his abilities (if his higher needs are activated). Quite a high assessment of personal success.

Low ratings. Dissatisfaction with life in general, its course, the process of self-realization and how the main life events are currently unfolding. Low assessment of personal success. Currently, a person has not fully found himself, has not revealed himself, has not felt reliable internal supports in himself, and does not feel the ability to demand truthful answers from himself. Often characterized by withdrawal into doubt, which allows you to evade the need to do life choice, listening first of all to yourself, taking responsibility for what happens to you.

“Po” scale: “positive – negative self-image.” This scale is auxiliary; it allows you to determine the criticality of self-assessment (low or high), the adequacy of self-assessment. On a scale of b points. The criticality of self-esteem is closely related to the individual’s acceptance of himself. The more positive the self-image, the less a person sees flaws in himself. Self-acceptance has a significant impact on mood - the more complete the acceptance of oneself and the more positive feelings towards oneself emotionally, the higher the mood. Indicators on the “Po” scale have a significant positive correlation with indicators on the main scales. Positive self-acceptance improves mental state, and vice versa - a more favorable state encourages one to see one’s shortcomings as insignificant and allows one to evaluate one’s behavior as closer to normative.

Very high scores indicate an underdeveloped understanding of oneself. A score of more than 65 points suggests low criticality in self-assessment, insufficient adequacy of self-assessment, and insincerity. Other reasons may be: a negative attitude towards the examination, the influence of the subject’s strong interest in the “positive, good” results of the examination.

Scores of 60–64 points mean reduced criticality in self-assessment and insufficient adequacy of self-assessment. If high scores are obtained on the “Us”, “Sp” or “Ud” scales - more than 60, then most likely the data as a whole is not reliable enough.

Indicators in the range of 40–59 characterize the degree to which an individual accepts himself. The higher the standard score, the lower the criticality of self-assessment and the greater the acceptance of oneself with all one’s shortcomings.

With scores of less than 50 points, there is reason to speak of sufficient sincerity in the answers, an expressed desire for adequacy in assessing one’s psychological characteristics and your condition, about criticality in self-assessment.

Low scores - less than 40 points - indicate not only high criticism in assessing oneself and a great desire to be sincere, but also a negative attitude towards oneself.

Key

Ak: 9, 13, 18, 20, 30, 32, 35.

That: 1, 4, 10, 14, 23, 29, 41.

Sp: 3, 6, 8, 16, 22, 26.

Us: 5, 12, 25, 36, 39, 40, 42.

Oud: 2, 11, 17, 19, 24, 28, 31, 33, 37.

By: 7, 15, 21, 27, 34, 38.

TABLE OF CONVERSION OF RAW POINTS TO T-POINTS (for women)

Table continuation

TABLE OF CONVERSION OF RAW POINTS TO T-POINTS (for men)

Table continuation

This text is an introductory fragment. author Solomin Valery Pavlovich

Methodology for determining short-term memory. It is used to examine people of any age. Purpose: determining the volume of short-term visual memory. Description. Subjects must remember and then reproduce the maximum number of numbers from