D Amirkhan coping strategies. Psychological and pedagogical diagnostics

The technique was developed by D. Amirkhan and is intended to diagnose the dominant coping strategies of an individual. Adapted for conducting research in Russian by N.A. Sirota (1994) and V.M. Yaltonsky (1995).

J. Amirkhan based factor analysis developed the “Coping Strategies Indicator” for various coping responses to stress. He identified 3 groups of coping strategies: problem solving, seeking social support and avoidance (Amirkhan J., 1990).

“Indicator of coping strategies” can be considered one of the most successful research tools basic strategies human behavior. The idea of ​​this questionnaire is that all behavioral strategies that a person develops during his life can be divided into three large groups:

Problem resolution strategy is an active behavioral strategy in which a person tries to use all available resources personal resources For search possible ways effective problem resolution.

Strategy for seeking social support is an active behavioral strategy in which a person, in order to effectively resolve a problem, seeks help and support from his environment: family, friends, significant others.

Avoidance strategy is a behavioral strategy in which a person tries to avoid contact with the reality around him and avoid solving problems.

A person can use passive methods of avoidance, for example, going into illness or using alcohol or drugs, or he can completely “avoid solving problems” by using an active method of avoidance - suicide.

The avoidance strategy is one of the leading behavioral strategies in the formation of maladaptive, pseudo-coping behavior. It aims to overcome or reduce distress by a person who is at a lower level of development. The use of this strategy is due to the lack of development of personal-environmental coping resources and active problem-solving skills. However, it can be adequate or inadequate depending on the specific stressful situation, age and state of the individual’s resource system.

The most effective is to use all three behavioral strategies, depending on the situation. In some cases, a person can cope with the difficulties that arise on his own, in others he needs the support of others, in others he can simply avoid a collision with problematic situation, having thought in advance about its negative consequences.

Procedure

Instructions: there are several questions on the form possible ways overcoming problems and troubles. After reading the statements, you will be able to determine which of the proposed options you usually use.

Try to remember one of the serious problems, which you encountered in Last year and which made you quite worried. Describe this problem in a few words.

Now, as you read the statements below, choose one of the three most appropriate answers for each statement.

I completely agree.

Agree.

I don't agree.

2. I try to do everything so that I can the best way solve the problem of.

3. I search for everyone possible solutions before doing anything.

4. I try to distract myself from the problem.

5. I accept someone's sympathy and understanding.

6. I do everything possible to prevent others from seeing that I am doing poorly.

7. I discuss the situation with people because discussion makes me feel better.

8. I set a number of goals for myself that will allow me to gradually cope with the situation.

9. I weigh my choices very carefully.

10. I dream and fantasize about better times.

11. I'm trying different ways solve the problem until I find the most suitable one.

12. I confide my fears to a relative or friend.

13. I spend more time than usual alone.

14. I tell people about the situation, because only discussing it helps me come to a resolution.

15. I think about what needs to be done to improve the situation.

16. I focus entirely on solving the problem.

17. I’m thinking about a plan of action.

18. I watch TV longer than usual.

19. I go to someone (a friend or a specialist) to help me feel better.

20. I persevere and fight for what I need in this situation.

21. I avoid communicating with people.

22. I switch to hobbies or play sports to avoid the problem.

23. I go to a friend so that he can help me better understand the problem.

24. I go to a friend for advice on how to fix the situation.

25. I accept sympathy and mutual understanding from friends who have the same problem.

26. I sleep more than usual.

27. I fantasize that everything could have been different.

28. I imagine myself as a hero of books or movies.

29. I'm trying to solve a problem.

30. I want people to leave me alone.

31. I accept help from a friend or relative.

32. I seek reassurance from those who know me better.

33. I try to plan my actions carefully rather than act impulsively.

Processing and interpretation of test results

“Problem resolution” scale – answers “Yes” to points: 2, 3, 8, 9, 11, 15, 16, 17, 20, 29, 30.

Scale “seeking social support” – answers “Yes” to points: 1, 5, 7, 12, 14, 19, 23, 24, 25, 31, 32.

“Problem avoidance” scale – answers “Yes” to points: 4, 6, 10, 13, 18, 21, 22, 26, 27, 28, 30.

Points are awarded according to the following scheme:

The answer “Completely agree” is worth 3 points.

The answer “Agree” is worth 2 points.

The answer “Disagree” is worth 1 point.

The subject's answers are compared with the key. To obtain an overall score for a given strategy, the sum of the scores for all 11 items related to that strategy is calculated. The minimum score for each scale is 11 points, the maximum is 33 points.

Standards for assessing test results:

Anastasi A. Psychological testing\ Per. from English In 2 books. \Ed. K. M. Gurevich, V. M. Lubovsky - M.: Pedagogy, 1982.

Bleikher V. M., Burlachuk L. F. Psychological diagnostics intelligence and personality - Kyiv: Vishcha School, 1978. - 142 p.

Burlachuk L. F. Psychological methods personality research - Kyiv: Knowledge, 1982 - 17 p.

Gaida V.K., Zakharov V.P. Psychological testing - Leningrad: Leningrad Publishing House. Univ., 1982 – 101 p.

Ivanov N. Ya. Population norms for indicators of character accentuation in adolescents determined using the PDO \\ Psychological diagnostics for neuropsychiatric and psychosomatic diseases - L.: Research Institute of Psychoneurology, 1985.

Ilyin E.P. Motivation and motives. - St. Petersburg: Peter, 2002 - P. 373-375.

Kline P. Reference Guide to Test Design - Kyiv: 1994 - 284 p.

Kulagin B.V. Fundamentals of professional psychodiagnostics - L.: Medicine, 1984 - 216 p.

Kulikov L.V. Psychological research. Guidelines for implementation - St. Petersburg: Nauka, 1994.

Workshop on psychodiagnostics. Differential psychometrics \ Ed. V.V. Stolina, A.G. Shmeleva - M.: Moscow Publishing House. Unota, 1984 – 151 p.

Workshop on psychodiagnostics: Psychodiagnostic materials \ Ed. A. A. Bodaleva and others - M.: Moscow Publishing House. Univ., 1988. – 141 p.

Workshop on experimental and applied psychology\ Ed. A. A. Krylova, L., 1990.

Rusalov V. M. New option adaptations of the EPI personality test \\ Psychol. Journal – 1987 – 8, No. 1 – p. 113 – 126.

Sobchik L.N. Methods of mental psychodiagnostics – Vol. 1 Standardized multifactorial method for personality research.

Khanin Yu. L. Standardized algorithm for adapting foreign questionnaires \\ Psychological problems pre-competitive preparation of athletes for important competitions \ Ed. Yu. Ya. Kiseleva - L.: 1997.

Almanac psychological tests. M., 1995, pp. 112-116.

Correction test (Bourdon test) / Almanac of psychological tests. M., 1995, pp. 107-111.

Almanac of psychological tests, M. Publishing house "KSP", 1996.

Sazonov V.F., Ladokhina I.Yu., Muravyova M.S. Practical correctional and developmental work with schoolchildren: Methodological recommendations / RGPU; Department of Anatomy, Physiology and Valeology. Ryazan, 2000. 36 p.

Karelin A. Great encyclopedia psychological tests. - M.: Eksmo, 2007. - 416 p.

Klimov E.A. Psychology professional self-determination. – Rostov n/d.: Publishing house “Phoenix”, 1996. – 512 p.

Ilyin E.P. Motivation and motives. – St. Petersburg: Peter, 2008. – 512 p.: ill. – (Series “Masters of Psychology”). – pp. 264-270.

Dubovitskaya T.D. Diagnostics of the level of professional orientation of students. // Psychological Science and education. – M., 2004. - No. 2. - P. 82-86.

Starovoytenko E.B. Modern psychology. Forms of intellectual life. - M.: Academic project, 2001. - 544 p.

Dodonov B.I. Emotions as value. - M., Politizdat, 1978. 272 ​​p.

Leontyev D. A. Value concepts in individual and group consciousness: types, determinants and changes over time // Psychological Review, No. 1 - 1998.

Karpov A.V. Reflexivity as a mental property and methods of its diagnosis / Anatoly Viktorovich Karpov // Psychological Journal. - 2003. - T. 24. - No. 5. - P. 45-57.

Regush L. A. Problems of mental development and their prevention (from birth to old age). - St. Petersburg: Rech, 2006. - 320 p.

Moreno Ya.L. Sociometry. Experimental method and social science. Translation from English by A. Bokovikov and others. M. “Academic Project”, 2001.

Games People Play. Psychology of human relationships. / Per. from English A. A. Gruzberg; terminological correction by V. Danchenko. - K.: PSYLIB, 2004. (Translation of the book “Games People Play”).

The technique is intended for diagnosing the dominant coping strategies of an individual, developed on the basis of factor analysis. The test consists of 33 questions corresponding to three scales. The theoretical basis of the methodology is the idea that people’s behavior in a situation psychological stress can be described in three groups:

A problem-solving strategy is the ability to use all personal resources in a stressful situation.

Social support seeking strategy is the ability active search social support in a stressful situation.

Avoidance strategy is a person’s ability to avoid solving impending problems by avoiding a problematic situation. The author of the technique identified a passive and active way of avoiding a problematic situation. The strategy of avoidant behavior, according to the author of the methodology, is characteristic of the behavior of a maladjusted individual at a lower level of development.

Methodology “Determination of the psychological characteristics of temperament” (B.N. Smirnov). The questionnaire consists of 48 questions and allows you to diagnose the following polar properties of temperament: extraversion - introversion, rigidity - plasticity, emotional excitability - emotional balance, rate of reactions (fast - slow), activity (high - low). Each temperament trait is assessed using a questionnaire code. The methodology has standard indicators for each scale (Table 2.1.)

Table 2.1

Norms for the expression of temperament properties according to questionnaire scales.

Extraversion - Introversion	Rigidity - Plasticity	Emotional excitability - balance	Rate of reactions	Activity
22 > very high	16 > very high	18 > very high	20 > very high	24 > very high
17-21 high	12-15 high	14-17 high	14-19 tall	21-23 high
16-12 average	11-7 average	13-8 average	9-13 average	14-20 average
7-11 high	3-6 high	4-7 high	5-8 slow	9-13 low
0-6 very high	0-2 very high	0-3 very high	0-4 very slow	0-8 very low

Students of the State Educational Institution of Higher Professional Education of the LPR of Lugansk took part in our study national university named after Taras Shevchenko. The sample consisted of 54 respondents aged from 18 to 29 years.

Results of the study.

Based on the results of diagnostics of mechanisms psychological protection(R. Plutchik, adapted by L. I. Wasserman, O. F. Eryshev, E. B. Klubova, etc.) we received the following data (Fig. 2.1).

Rice. 2.1. Distribution of average values ​​of psychological defense mechanisms for the entire sample.

From Figure 2.1. It follows that the respondents in our sample are characterized by the predominance of such a psychological defense mechanism as regression (41.8), in second place is denial (41.1), in third place is overcompensation (39.3), in fourth place is substitution (38. 1), on the fifth - rationalization (34.9), on the sixth - projection (33.0), on the seventh - repression (31.7), on the eighth - compensation (30.6).

The average values ​​of indicators of defense mechanisms for the sample as a whole indicate a tendency towards uniform use of all psychological defense mechanisms.

For a more detailed study of defense mechanisms, we assigned ranks to the respondents’ indicators in ascending order from the dominant defense mechanism (rank 1) to the little used one and obtained a hierarchical structure of defenses for each subject. Based on this ranking, we were able to calculate the frequency of use of each protection mechanism in the sample in percentage terms.

Having analyzed the data on psychological defense mechanisms among respondents in our sample, we found that only 13% of respondents equally often use two or more mechanisms, which suggests an increase in the effectiveness of psychological defenses.

Among respondents with dominance of one psychological defense mechanism, the frequency of use indicators have the following distribution.

In first place in terms of frequency of occurrence in our sample were (in % ratio):

Replacement – ​​27.7%;

Regression – 25.5%;

Overcompensation – 14.9%;

Denial – 10.6%;

Projection – 8.5%;

Compensation – 6.4%;

Rationalization – 6.4%;

Displacement – ​​0.0%.

Substitution is a defense against a disturbing or even unbearable situation by transferring a reaction from an “inaccessible” object to another “accessible” object, or by replacing an unacceptable action with an acceptable one. Due to this transfer, the tension created by the unsatisfied need is discharged. This defense mechanism is associated with response redirection. When the desired path of response to satisfy a certain need is closed, then something associated with the fulfillment of this desire seeks another way out. Substitution provides an opportunity to deal with anger that cannot be expressed directly and with impunity. It has two different shapes: object replacement and need replacement. In the first case, tension is relieved by transferring aggression from a stronger or more significant object (which is the source of anger) to a weaker and more accessible object or to oneself.

In second place in terms of frequency of occurrence in our sample were (in % ratio):

Denial – 29.8%;

Displacement – ​​19.1%;

Regression – 17.0%;

Rationalization – 17.0%;

Projection – 14.9%;

Substitution – 8.5%;

Overcompensation – 8.5%;

Compensation – 8.5%.

Denial is a psychological defense mechanism through which a person either denies some frustrating, anxiety-inducing circumstances, or denies some internal impulse or aspect of himself. As a rule, the action of this mechanism is manifested in the denial of those aspects of external reality that, although obvious to others, are nevertheless not accepted or recognized by the person himself. In other words, information that is disturbing and could lead to conflict is not perceived. This refers to a conflict that arises when motives are manifested that contradict the basic attitudes of an individual or information that threatens his self-preservation, self-respect, or social prestige.

How the process of outward directed “denial” leads to the fact that social environment unwanted, internal unacceptable traits, properties or negative feelings to the subject of experience. “Denial” as a mechanism of psychological defense is realized in conflicts of any kind and is characterized by an outwardly distinct distortion of the perception of reality.

In third place in terms of frequency of occurrence in our sample were (in % ratio):

Regression – 25.5%;

Denial – 17.0%;

Replacement – ​​14.9%;

Overcompensation – 14.9%;

Compensation – 14.9%;

Displacement – ​​12.8%;

Projection – 10.6%;

Rationalization – 6.4%.

During regression, there is a return to earlier, infantile personal reactions, manifested in the demonstration of helplessness, dependence, and childish behavior in order to reduce anxiety and avoid the demands of reality. With this form of defensive reaction, the person exposed to frustrating factors replaces the decision with a subjectively more complex tasks to relatively simpler and more accessible ones in current situations. The use of simpler and more familiar behavioral stereotypes significantly impoverishes the overall (potentially possible) arsenal of dominance conflict situations. This mechanism also includes the “realization in action” defense mentioned in the literature, in which unconscious desires or conflicts are directly expressed in actions that prevent their awareness. Impulsivity and weakness of emotional-volitional control, characteristic of psychopathic individuals, are determined by the actualization of this particular defense mechanism against the general background of changes in the motivational-need sphere towards their greater simplicity and accessibility.

Thus, the majority of respondents most often use defense mechanisms associated with the distortion or transformation of the content of thoughts and received traumatic information.

Infantile psychological defense mechanisms associated with the lack of processing of received information or manipulative reactions are used somewhat less frequently, which indicates the immaturity of the personality of the subjects.

About a quarter of all subjects periodically use the most complex and mature psychological defense mechanism associated with the processing and revaluation of information - rationalization.

Research results on method “Indicator of coping strategies” (D. Amirkhan) showed the following distribution.

The average values ​​of coping strategies for the sample as a whole are at a low level of tension, which indicates an adaptive version of coping (Fig. 2.2.)

Fig.2.2. Distribution of mean values ​​of coping strategies.

The coping strategy “problem resolution” is at a very low level in 13.0% of the sample, at a low level in 55.6% of the sample, and at an average level in 31.5% of the sample.

A problem-solving strategy is an active behavioral strategy in which a person tries to use all his available personal resources to find possible ways to effectively resolve a problem.

The coping strategy “seeking social support” is at a low level in 50.0% of the sample, and at an average level in 50.0% of the sample.

The strategy of seeking social support is an active behavioral strategy in which a person, in order to effectively resolve a problem, seeks help and support from his environment: family, friends, significant others.

The coping strategy of “avoidance” is at a very low level in 9.3% of the sample, and at a low level in 90.7% of the sample.

An avoidance strategy is a behavioral strategy in which a person tries to avoid contact with the reality around him and avoid solving problems.

A person can use passive methods of avoidance, for example, going into illness or using alcohol or drugs, or he can completely “avoid solving problems” by using an active method of avoidance - suicide.

The avoidance strategy is one of the leading behavioral strategies in the formation of maladaptive, pseudo-coping behavior. It aims to overcome or reduce distress by a person who is at a lower level of development. The use of this strategy is due to the lack of development of personal-environmental coping resources and active problem-solving skills. However, it can be adequate or inadequate depending on the specific stressful situation, age and state of the individual’s resource system.

The most effective is to use all three behavioral strategies, depending on the situation. In some cases, a person can cope with the difficulties that arise on his own, in others he needs the support of others, in others he can simply avoid facing a problematic situation by thinking in advance about its negative consequences.

Thus, the coping strategy “problem resolution” dominates in our sample - an active behavioral strategy in which a person tries to use all his available personal resources to find possible ways to effectively resolve a problem.

In second place in terms of use is the “avoidance” coping strategy, which indicates periodic avoidance of solving impending problems by avoiding the problematic situation.

The coping strategy “seeking social support” is in third place in terms of frequency of use among our respondents. This is an active behavioral strategy in which a person seeks help and support from his environment to effectively resolve a problem.

Results for method “Determination of the psychological characteristics of temperament” (B.N. Smirnov), expressed in average values, are shown in Figure 2.3.

Rice. 2.3. Average values ​​of psychological characteristics of temperament.

From Figure 2.3. it is clear that all average values ​​of psychological characteristics of temperament are at an average level of expression, which turns out to be uninformative for describing the sample.

Having grouped the individual indicators of respondents according to the level of expression of psychological characteristics of temperament in accordance with the norms of the methodology, we obtained the following distribution on scales:

“Extraversion” was found at a very high level in 14.8% of the sample, and at a high level in 14.8%.

“Introversion” was found at a very high level in 3.7% of the sample, and at a high level in 11.1%.

Ambivert characteristics were found in 55.6% of the sample.

Extroverts are individuals, due to the organization of their nervous processes requiring constant stimulation from external environment. They are characterized by initiative, impulsiveness, behavioral flexibility, sociability, and social adaptability. Introverts do not need much external stimulation. They are not sociable, withdrawn, prone to introspection [Merlin V.S. Essay on an integral study of individuality. -M.: Pedagogy, 1986. - 256 p., Merlin V.S. Features temperament // Psychology individual differences. - M., 2002. -S. 360-366., Jung K. Psychological typology// Problems of the soul of our time. - St. Petersburg: Peter, 2002. - P. 99-120]. Extroverts have low level nonspecific activation and strive to increase it by additional stimulation from the outside. This explains their behavior, characterized by establishing social contacts and changing impressions. Introverts, on the contrary, have more high level activation and strive to protect themselves from additional stimulation.

“Rigidity” was found in 16.7% of the sample at a very high level, in 24.1% - at a high level.

Rigidity refers to the inability to adjust the program of activities in accordance with the requirements of the situation. WITH psychological point rigidity is seen as the inability to change ideas about environment when it actually changes, the invariability of the emotional significance of objects, the impossibility of changing the usual ways of satisfying

needs with changing living conditions. Plasticity, on the contrary, is characterized by flexibility and ease of adaptation to changing

living conditions.

“Plasticity” was found in 7.4% of the sample at a very high level, in 22.2% - at a high level.

29.6% of the sample had average level rigidity-plasticity

“Emotional excitability” was found at a very high level in 1.9% of the sample, and at a high level in 22.2%.

“Emotional balance” was found at a very high level in 13.0% of the sample, and at a high level in 25.9%.

An average level of excitability-balance was found in 37.0% of the sample.

Emotionality by modern ideas– this is one of the two most important (along with activity) properties of temperament. It is characterized by the speed and depth of a person’s emotional reactions [Eysenck G.Yu. Personality structure. Per. from English – St. Petersburg: Yuventa. M.: KSP+, 1999. - 464 p., Groysman.A.L. Medical psychology. - M.: Master, 1998. -360 p., Mendelevich V.D. Clinical and medical psychology. Practical guide. -M.: Medpress, 1999.- 589 p.]

A very fast pace of reactions was found in 5.6% of the sample, a fast pace - in 31.5% of respondents, an average pace was found in 31.5%, a slow pace of reactions was found in 15.2% of the sample, and in 1.9% very slow pace of reactions.

This indicator reflects individual tempo and rhythm mental processes, and also includes a motor component of temperament. The latter characterizes the speed, expressiveness and energy of movements, writing speed and speech motor skills. Speed ​​characteristics of reactions

and movements lie in a wide range: from a sharp and rapid increase to a slow pace and decay [Batarshev A.V. Psychology of individual differences: from temperament to character and personality typology. - M.: Vlados, 2000. - 256 pp.]

A very high level of activity was found in 1.9% of the sample, a high level of activity was found in 37.0% of respondents, a medium level of activity was found in 44.4%, a low level of activity was found in 13.0% of the sample, and 3.7% - very low level of activity detected.

The general activity of an individual occupies a central place in the characteristics of temperament. Activity is reflected in the degree of energy with which a person achieves his goals, overcomes various obstacles, and how persistent he is. There is activity in the personality's tendency to self-expression, effective mastery and transformation of external reality. The range of activity is distributed from lethargy, inertia, passive contemplation at one pole to violent manifestations of energy, swiftness of action at the other.

Having summarized the diagnostic indicators of psychological characteristics of temperament for the sample as a whole, we grouped the respondents’ data according to the conditional criterion of temperament type.

Sanguine people were determined by the characteristics of extraversion, balance, fairly pronounced activity and reactivity, fast pace reactions and plasticity.

Cholerics were determined by the characteristics of extraversion, high reactivity and activity (reactivity exceeds activity), and reduced plasticity compared to sanguine people.

Phlegmatic people were identified by characteristics high activity, significantly prevailing over low reactivity, emotional stability, rigidity, slow pace of reactions, introversion.

Melancholic people were defined by the characteristics of introversion, low activity, reactivity, slow pace of reactions, and emotional instability.

Having formed four groups of respondents, we obtained the following distribution of average values ​​on the scales of psychological defense mechanisms.

The results obtained indicate that for the choleric type of temperament, the following hierarchy of frequency of use of MPZ is more typical: Regression (45.0), Rationalization (39.5), Overcompensation (39.2), Substitution (39.0), Denial (38.8 ), Repression (31.7), Projection (30.0), Compensation (27.5).

For the sanguine type of temperament, the following hierarchy of frequency of use of MPZ is more typical: Regression (42.1), Hypercompensation (39.9), Projection (38.7), Denial (38.5), Rationalization (38.2), Substitution (37 ,9), Compensation (36.7), Displacement (33.9).

For the phlegmatic type of temperament, the following hierarchy of frequency of use of MPZ is more typical: Denial (44.3), Substitution (42.1), Overcompensation (39.8), Regression (37.6), Repression (39.7), Projection (28 ,1), Rationalization (21.9), Compensation (19.2).

For the melancholic type of temperament, the following hierarchy of frequency of use of MPZ is more typical: Compensation (47.0), Regression (45.5) and Rationalization (45.5), Denial (37.5), Hypercompensation (30.0), Repression (15 ,0), Substitution (10,0) and Projection (10,0).

Thus, respondents of sanguine and choleric temperament have a more or less uniform tension (use) of all psychological defense mechanisms, which may indicate their flexibility and effectiveness.

The least flexibility in the use of MPZ is observed among respondents with a melancholic type of temperament.

Next, based on the data from the grouped samples, we conducted comparative analysis results on the methodology for identifying mechanisms of psychological defense of the individual. The calculated results of average values ​​received the following distribution (Fig. 2.4.).

Rice. 2.4. Comparison of average values ​​of psychological defense mechanisms in groups with different types temperament.

According to Figure 2.4. it is clear that the psychological defense mechanism “Denial” is most pronounced in the group of phlegmatic people (44.3), least pronounced in melancholic people (37.5).

The tendency toward denial is likely explained by differences in sensitivity to both external and internal stimuli. A phlegmatic person has little sensitivity and emotionality, it is difficult to make him laugh or sadden; when people laugh loudly around him, he can remain calm; When faced with big troubles, he remains calm. Melancholic is a person with high sensitivity and low reactivity. Increased sensitivity with great inertia, it leads to the fact that an insignificant reason can cause him to cry, he is overly touchy, painfully sensitive.

That is, in order to deny some frustrating, anxiety-inducing circumstances, it is necessary to be sensitive to them (isolate them from incoming information, identify them, and only then react with denial).

“Repression” is more pronounced in sanguine people (33.9) and least pronounced in melancholic people (15.0). The obtained results received statistically reliable confirmation of the difference in indicators using the Student's t-test method: t em =2.995 > t tab =2.779(p≤0.01); df=26. This may be due to a combination of such temperamental characteristics as plasticity-rigidity and extraversion-introversion. A sanguine person, having high plasticity, which manifests itself in the variability of feelings, moods, interests and aspirations, easily displaces impulses that are unacceptable to the individual, responding more to external stimuli. Melancholic, immersed in inner world and endowed with a tendency towards rigidity, it turns out to be forced to introspection and comprehension of desires, thoughts, feelings that cause anxiety.

“Regression” is most pronounced in melancholic people (45.5) and choleric people (45.0), and least pronounced in phlegmatic people (37.6). Perhaps this type of protection by which the individual in his behavioral reactions seeks to avoid anxiety by switching to more early stages development of libido is associated with increased emotional instability, which combines choleric and melancholic temperaments and is not very characteristic of the phlegmatic type of temperament.

“Compensation” is most pronounced among melancholic people (47.0), and least among phlegmatic people (19.2).

Compensation, as a psychological defense mechanism, is often combined with identification. It manifests itself in attempts to find a suitable replacement for a real or imaginary shortcoming, a defect of an intolerable feeling with another quality, most often through fantasizing or appropriating the properties, advantages, values, and behavioral characteristics of another person. A number of authors reasonably believe that “compensation” can be considered as one of the forms of protection against an inferiority complex. Peculiarities of melancholic temperament (timidity, self-doubt, vulnerability, high sensitivity etc.) contribute to the search for objects, qualities, incentives, ways that allow the individual to preserve positive attitude to yourself and maintain your integrity. A phlegmatic person, in turn, is less inclined to respond to external ideals and demands with self-abasement, reducing his virtues.

“Projection” is most pronounced in sanguine people (38.7), and least pronounced in melancholic people (10.0). The results obtained received statistically reliable confirmation of the difference in indicators using the Student t-test method: t em =5.782 > t tab =3.707(p≤0.001), df=26.

At the heart of “projection” is the process by which unconscious and unacceptable feelings and thoughts for the individual are localized externally, attributed to other people, and thus, as a fact of consciousness, become secondary. Probably, the main characteristic of this MPD in relation to types of temperament can be considered extroversion-introversion, which distinguishes sanguine people from melancholic people.

“Replacement” is most pronounced in phlegmatic people (42.1), and least pronounced in melancholic people (10.0). The results obtained received statistically reliable confirmation of the difference in indicators using the Student t-test method: t em =4.353 > t tab =4.221 (p≤0.001), df=13.

A common form of psychological defense, which in the literature is often referred to as “displacement.” The effect of this defense mechanism manifests itself in a discharge of suppressed emotions (usually hostility, anger), which are directed towards objects that pose less danger or are more accessible than those that caused negative emotions and feelings. For example, an open manifestation of hatred towards a person, which can cause an unwanted conflict with him, is transferred to another, more accessible and not “dangerous”. In most cases, substitution allows emotional stress, which arose under the influence of a frustrating situation, but does not lead to relief or achievement of the goal. In this situation, the subject can perform unexpected, sometimes meaningless actions that resolve internal tension.

A number of researchers interpret the meaning of this protective mechanism much more broadly, including in it not only the replacement of the object of the action, but also its source, and the action itself, meaning by this various options replacement activities.

Perhaps the difference in the frequency of use of this mechanism is explained by the characteristic “emotional excitability - emotional balance,” which distinguishes the reaction of a phlegmatic person from a melancholic person. Probably, due to their emotional excitability, melancholic people are more impulsive and spontaneous in their emotional reactions and thus less prone to displacement.

“Rationalization” is most pronounced among melancholic people (45.5), and least pronounced among phlegmatic people (21.9).

When rationalizing, a person creates logical (pseudo-reasonable) but plausible justifications for his or someone else’s behavior, actions or experiences caused by reasons that he (the person) cannot recognize due to the threat of loss of self-esteem. With this method of defense, there are often obvious attempts to reduce the value of experience that is inaccessible to the individual. Thus, finding oneself in a situation of conflict, a person protects himself from its negative effects by reducing the importance for himself and other reasons that caused this conflict or traumatic situation. Also included in the intellectualization-rationalization scale was sublimation as a psychological defense mechanism, in which repressed desires and feelings are exaggeratedly compensated by others professed by the individual.

Probably, the difference in the frequency of use of this mechanism in melancholic and phlegmatic people can be explained by the peculiarities of the combination of such characteristics as activity and emotional balance-emotional excitability. Being emotionally excitable and low in activity, a melancholic person is forced to react to the consequences of a conflict or traumatic situation, while a phlegmatic person, being highly active and emotionally balanced, has the resources to work with the causes of such situations.

“Hypercompensation” is most pronounced in sanguine people (39.9) and phlegmatic people (39.8), and least in melancholic people (30.0).

With such MPD, a person prevents the expression of unpleasant or unacceptable thoughts, feelings or actions through the exaggerated development of opposing aspirations. In other words, there is a transformation of internal impulses into their subjectively understood opposite. For example, pity or caring may be seen as reactive formations in relation to unconscious callousness, cruelty or emotional indifference. The differences between sanguine people, phlegmatic people and melancholic people can be built on the basis of the strength, balance of the former and the weakness and imbalance of the latter.

Consequently, the data obtained from the primary statistical processing show the existence of a relationship between the psychological defense mechanisms used and individual psychological characteristics temperament: extraversion-introversion, plasticity-rigidity, emotional excitability-emotional stability, activity-passivity.

Next, we conducted a comparative analysis of data using the methodology for identifying coping strategies in groups of four temperaments. The calculated results of average values ​​received the following distribution (Table 2.2.).

INDICATOR OF COPING STRATEGIES (D.AMIRKHAN)

Scales: problem solving, seeking social support, coping, problem avoidance

PURPOSE OF THE TEST

The technique is intended to diagnose the dominant coping strategies of an individual. Adapted at the Psychoneurological Research Institute named after. V.M. Bekhtereva.

Description of the technique

The technique was developed by D. Amirkhan and is intended to diagnose the dominant coping strategies of an individual. Adapted for conducting research in Russian by N.A. Sirota (1994) and V.M. Yaltonsky (1995).

Theoretical basis

J. Amirkhan, based on factor analysis of various coping responses to stress, developed the “Coping Strategies Indicator”. He identified 3 groups of coping strategies: problem solving, seeking social support and avoidance (Amirkhan J., 1990).

The “Coping Strategies Indicator” can be considered one of the most successful tools for studying basic human behavior strategies. The idea of ​​this questionnaire is that all behavioral strategies that a person develops during his life can be divided into three large groups:

1. Problem resolution strategy is an active behavioral strategy in which a person tries to use all his available personal resources to find possible ways to effectively resolve a problem.

2. Strategy for seeking social support is an active behavioral strategy in which a person, in order to effectively resolve a problem, seeks help and support from his environment: family, friends, significant others.

3. Avoidance strategy is a behavioral strategy in which a person tries to avoid contact with the reality around him and avoid solving problems.

A person can use passive methods of avoidance, for example, going into illness or using alcohol or drugs, or he can completely “avoid solving problems” by using an active method of avoidance - suicide.

The avoidance strategy is one of the leading behavioral strategies in the formation of maladaptive, pseudo-coping behavior. It aims to overcome or reduce distress by a person who is at a lower level of development. The use of this strategy is due to the lack of development of personal-environmental coping resources and active problem-solving skills. However, it can be adequate or inadequate depending on the specific stressful situation, age and state of the individual’s resource system.

The most effective is to use all three behavioral strategies, depending on the situation. In some cases, a person can cope with the difficulties that arise on his own, in others he needs the support of others, in others he can simply avoid facing a problematic situation by thinking in advance about its negative consequences.

Test instructions

The question form presents several possible ways to overcome problems and troubles. After reading the statements, you will be able to determine which of the proposed options you usually use.

Try to think of one of the serious problems that you faced over the past year that made you quite worried. Describe this problem in a few words.

Now, as you read the statements below, choose one of the three most appropriate answers for each statement.

· I completely agree.

· Agree.

· I do not agree.

TEST

2. I try to do everything so that I can solve the problem in the best possible way.

3. I search for all possible solutions before doing anything.

4. I try to distract myself from the problem.

5. I accept someone's sympathy and understanding.

6. I do everything possible to prevent others from seeing that I am doing poorly.

7. I discuss the situation with people because discussion makes me feel better.

8. I set a number of goals for myself that will allow me to gradually cope with the situation.

9. I weigh my choices very carefully.

10. I dream and fantasize about better times.

11. I try different ways to solve the problem until I find the most suitable one.

12. I confide my fears to a relative or friend.

13. I spend more time than usual alone.

14. I tell people about the situation, because only discussing it helps me come to a resolution.

15. I think about what needs to be done to improve the situation.

16. I focus entirely on solving the problem.

17. I’m thinking about a plan of action.

18. I watch TV longer than usual.

19. I go to someone (a friend or a specialist) to help me feel better.

20. I persevere and fight for what I need in this situation.

21. I avoid communicating with people.

22. I switch to hobbies or play sports to avoid the problem.

23. I go to a friend so that he can help me better understand the problem.

24. I go to a friend for advice on how to fix the situation.

25. I accept sympathy and mutual understanding from friends who have the same problem.

26. I sleep more than usual.

27. I fantasize that everything could have been different.

28. I imagine myself as a hero of books or movies.

29. I'm trying to solve a problem.

30. I want people to leave me alone.

31. I accept help from a friend or relative.

32. I seek reassurance from those who know me better.

33. I try to plan my actions carefully rather than act impulsively.

PROCESSING AND INTERPRETING TEST RESULTS

· Scale " problem solving" - answers " Yes» by points: 2, 3, 8, 9, 11, 15, 16, 17, 20, 29, 30.

· Scale " seeking social support" - answers " Yes» by points: 1, 5, 7, 12, 14, 19, 23, 24, 25, 31, 32.

· Scale " avoiding problems" - answers " Yes» by points: 4, 6, 10, 13, 18, 21, 22, 26, 27, 28, 30.

Points are awarded according to the following scheme:

· The answer “Completely agree” is worth 3 points.

· The answer “Agree” is worth 2 points.

· The answer “Disagree” is worth 1 point.

Standards for assessing test results.

The technique was developed by D. Amirkhan and is intended to diagnose the dominant coping strategies of an individual. Adapted for research in Russian by N. A. Sirota (1994) and V. M. Yaltonsky (1995). This test was developed by specialists and has a scientific basis.

Theoretical basis:

J. Amirkhan, based on factor analysis of various coping responses to stress, developed the “Coping Strategies Indicator”. He identified 3 groups of coping strategies: problem solving, seeking social support and avoidance (Amirkhan J., 1990).

The “Coping Strategies Indicator” can be considered one of the most successful tools for studying basic human behavior strategies. The idea of ​​this questionnaire is that all behavioral strategies that a person develops during his life can be divided into three large groups:

1. Problem resolution strategy is an active behavioral strategy in which a person tries to use all his available personal resources to find possible ways to effectively resolve a problem.
2. Strategy for seeking social support is an active behavioral strategy in which a person, in order to effectively resolve a problem, seeks help and support from his environment: family, friends, significant others.
3. Avoidance strategy is a behavioral strategy in which a person tries to avoid contact with the reality around him and avoid solving problems.

A person can use passive methods of avoidance, for example, going into illness or using alcohol or drugs, or he can completely “get away from solving problems” by using an active method of avoidance - suicide.

The avoidance strategy is one of the leading behavioral strategies in the formation of maladaptive, pseudo-coping behavior. It aims to overcome or reduce distress by a person who is at a lower level of development. The use of this strategy is due to the insufficient development of personal-environmental coping resources and active problem-solving skills. However, it can be adequate or inadequate depending on the specific stressful situation, age and state of the individual’s resource system.

The most effective is the use of all three behavioral strategies identified using psychological analysis individuals, depending on the situation. In some cases, a person can cope with the difficulties that arise on his own, in others he needs the support of others, in others he can simply avoid facing a problematic situation by thinking in advance about its negative consequences.

The technique was adapted at the Psychoneurological Research Institute named after. V. M. Bekhtereva.

Instructions. We are interested in how people cope with problems, difficulties and troubles in their lives. The form presents several possible ways to overcome problems and troubles. After reading the statements, you will be able to determine which of the proposed options you usually use. All your answers will remain unknown to outsiders. Try to think of one of the serious problems that you faced over the past year that made you quite worried. Describe this problem in a few words.

Now, as you read the statements below, choose one of the three most appropriate responses for each statement.

Questionnaire text

2. I try to do everything so that I can solve the problem in the best possible way.

3. I search for all possible solutions before doing anything.

4. I try to distract myself from the problem.

5. I accept someone's sympathy and understanding.

6. I do everything possible to prevent others from seeing that I am doing poorly.

7. I discuss the situation with people because discussion makes me feel better.

8. I set a number of goals for myself that will allow me to gradually cope with the situation.

9. I weigh my choices very carefully.

10. I dream and fantasize about better times.

11. I try different ways to solve the problem until I find the most suitable one.

12. I confide my fears to a relative or friend.

13. I spend more time than usual alone.

14. I tell people about the situation, because only discussing it helps me come to a resolution.

15. I think about what needs to be done to improve the situation.

16. I focus entirely on solving the problem.

17. I’m thinking about a plan of action.

18. I watch TV longer than usual.

19. I go to someone (a friend or a specialist) to help me feel better.

20. I persevere and fight for what I need in this situation.

21. I avoid communicating with people.

22. I switch to hobbies or play sports to avoid the problem.

23. I go to a friend so that he can help me better understand the problem.

24. I go to a friend for advice on how to fix the situation.

25. I accept sympathy and mutual understanding from friends who have the same problem.

26. I sleep more than usual.

27. I fantasize that everything could have been different.

28. I imagine myself as a hero of books or movies.

29. I'm trying to solve a problem.

30. I want people to leave me alone.

31. I accept help from a friend or relative.

32. I seek reassurance from those who know me better.

33. I try to plan my actions carefully and not act impulsively.

Registration form for the “Coping Strategy Indicator” methodology

FULL NAME. date

Age Education

No.	Yes	No	No.	Yes	No	No.	Yes	No
1			12			23
2			13			24
3			14			25
4			15			26
5			16			27
6			17			28
7			18			29
8			19			30
9			20			31
10			21			32
AND			22			33

“Problem resolution” scale - answers “yes” to items 2, 3, 8, 9, 11, 15, 16, 17, 20, 29, 30.

Scale “seeking social support” - answers “yes” to items 1,5,7,12,14,19,23,24, 25, 31, 32.

“Problem avoidance” scale - answers “yes” to items 4, 6, 10, 13, 18, 21, 22, 26, 27, 28, 30.

Evaluation of results. Problem resolution: 11-16 points - very low; 17-21 points - low; 22-30 points - average; 31 and above - high. Seeking social support: below 13 points - very low; 14-18 points - low; 19-28 points - average; 29 or more points - high. Avoidance of problems: 11-15 points - very low; 16-23 points - low; 24-26 points - average; 27 or more points - high.