Size: px

Start showing from the page:

Transcript

1 Test to identify psychological compatibility (based on the Raymond KATTELL test) Raymond CATTELL's multifactor personality questionnaire is universal, practical, and provides multifaceted information about personality. The questions in it reflect ordinary life situations. The questionnaire diagnoses personality traits (factors). It is used in all situations where it is necessary to know the individual psychological characteristics of a person. Therefore, in our case, this test is an indispensable assistant in the formation of a “mentor young specialist” pair (at the same time, we suggest not limiting ourselves only to this method of psychodiagnostics; this test is just an example of this type of activity). The shortened version of the questionnaire contains 105 questions. The answers are recorded on a special questionnaire and then calculated using a key. A match with the answer key “a” and “c” is assessed with two points, a match with answers “c” with one point. The sum of points for each selected group of questions results in the value of the factor. The exception is factor B, where any match between the answer and the key gives 1 point. Thus, the maximum score for each factor is 12 points, for factor B 8 points, and the minimum score is 0 points. The following blocks of factors are identified: intellectual characteristics: factors B, M, Q1; emotional-volitional characteristics: factors C, G, I, O, Q3, Q4; communicative properties and features of interpersonal interaction: factors A, H, F, E, N, L, Q2. Instructions. When answering each question, you must choose one of three proposed answers. To do this, put a cross in the corresponding box on the answer form (the left box corresponds to the answer “a”, the middle one corresponds to the answer “c”, the cell on the right corresponds to the answer “c”).

2 Text of the questionnaire 1. I think my memory is better now than it was before 2. I could easily live alone, away from people 3. If I said that the sky is below and that it is hot in winter, I would have to name the culprit A) a bandit B) a saint C) a cloud 4. When I go to bed, I A) fall asleep quickly B) something in between C) have difficulty falling asleep 5. If I were driving a car on a road where there are many other cars, I would prefer A) let most of the cars pass ahead C) overtake all the cars in front 6. In company, I give others the opportunity to joke and tell all sorts of stories 7. It is important for me that there is no disorder in everything that surrounds me 8. Most of the people with whom I am in companies are undoubtedly happy to see me C) no 9. I would rather do A) fencing and dancing C) wrestling and basketball 10. It amuses me that what people do is not at all similar to what they then talk about it 11. When reading about an incident, I am interested in all the details A) always C) rarely 12. When friends make fun of me, I usually laugh along with everyone and am not offended at all

3 13. If someone is rude to me, I can quickly forget about it 14. I like to come up with new ways of doing some work rather than stick to tried and tested techniques 15. When I plan something, I prefer to do it myself, without someone's help 16. I think that I am less sensitive and easily excitable than most people 17. I am irritated by people who cannot make decisions quickly 18. Sometimes, although briefly, I have had a feeling of irritation towards my parents 19. I would rather reveal my innermost thoughts to A) my good friends C) in my diary 20. I think the opposite of “imprecise” is A) careless B) thorough C) approximate 21. I always have enough energy when I need it 22. I am more irritated by people who A) make people blush with their rude jokes C) create inconvenience by being late for an arranged meeting 23. I really like inviting guests and entertaining them 24. I think that A) not everything should be done equally carefully B) it’s difficult to say C) any the work should be done carefully if you undertake it

4 25. I always have to overcome embarrassment B) perhaps 26. My friends more often A) consult with me B) do both equally C) give me advice 27. If a friend deceives me in small things, I would rather pretend that he is not noticed this rather than expose him 28. I prefer A) friends whose interests are business and practical in nature C) friends who have deeply thought-out views on life 29. I cannot calmly listen to other people expressing ideas contrary to those in which I firmly believe 30. I care about my past actions and mistakes 31. If I were equally good at both, I would prefer A) play chess C) play gorodki 32. I like sociable, sociable people 33. I am so I am careful and practical that fewer unpleasant surprises happen to me than to other people 34. I can forget about my worries and responsibilities when I need to 35. It can be difficult for me to admit that I am wrong 36. I would be more interested in an enterprise A ) work with machines and mechanisms and participate in basic production C) talk with people while doing social work

5 37. Which word is not connected with the other two? A) cat B) close C) sun 38. Something that distracts my attention to some extent A) annoys me B) something in between C) doesn’t bother me at all 39. If I had a lot of money, I A) would take care , so as not to arouse envy C) would live without embarrassment 40. The worst punishment for me is A) hard work C) being locked up alone 41. People should demand compliance with the laws more than they do now morals 42. I was told that as a child I was A) calm and liked to be left alone C) alive and active 43. I would enjoy practical day-to-day work with various installations and machines 44. I think that most witnesses tell the truth, even if it is not easy for them 45. Sometimes I hesitate to put my ideas into practice because they seem impossible to me 46. I try to laugh at jokes not as loudly as most people do 47. I am never so unhappy that I want to cry 48. In music I enjoy A) marches performed by military bands C) violin solos

6 49. I would rather spend two summer months A) in the village with one or two friends C) leading a group in a tourist camp 50. The effort spent on making plans A) is never superfluous C) is not worth it 51. Rash actions and the statements of my friends about me do not offend or upset me 52. When I succeed, I find these things easy A) always C) rarely 53. I would rather work A) in an institution where I would have to manage people and that’s it time to be among them C) an architect who is developing his project in a quiet room 54. A house is to a room as a tree is A) to a forest B) to a plant C) to a leaf 55. What I do, I can’t do A ) rarely C) often 56. In most things I A) prefer to take risks C) prefer to act for sure 57. Some people probably think that I talk too much A) rather, it is so C) I think not 58. I like it better a person A) of great knowledge and erudition, even if he is unreliable and fickle C) with average abilities, but able to resist all sorts of temptations 59. I make decisions A) faster than many people C) slower than most people 60. I have a lot of pressure impression is made by A) skill and grace C) strength and power

7 61. I believe that I am a cooperative person B) something in between 62. I prefer to talk with refined, sophisticated people than with frank and straightforward ones 63. I prefer A) to resolve issues that concern me personally C) consult with my friends 64. If a person does not answer immediately after I told him something, then I feel that I said something stupid 65. During my school years, I gained the most knowledge A) in lessons C) by reading books 66. I I avoid social work and related responsibilities 67. When the issue that needs to be solved is very difficult and requires a lot of effort from me, I try to A) take up another issue C) try again to solve this issue 68. I have strong emotions: anxiety , anger, fits of laughter, etc., seemingly for no specific reason. 69. Sometimes I think worse than usual 70. I am pleased to do a person a favor by agreeing to make an appointment with him at a time convenient for him, even if it is a little inconvenient for me 71. I think the correct number to continue the series is 1 , 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, will be A) 10 B) 5 C) Sometimes I have short-term attacks of nausea and dizziness for no specific reason C) no

8 73. I prefer to refuse my order rather than cause unnecessary trouble to the waiter 74. I live for today more than other people 75. At a party I like to A) take part in an interesting conversation C) watch people relax and relax myself 76. I express my opinion regardless of how many people can hear it A) yes B) sometimes C) no 77. If I could travel back in time, I would most like to meet A) Columbus C) Pushkin 78 I have to restrain myself from settling other people's affairs 79. Working in a store, I would prefer A) to decorate windows C) to be a cashier 80. If people think badly of me, I do not try to convince them and continue to act as I think necessary 81. If I see that my old friend is cold towards me and avoids me, I usually A) immediately think: “He is in a bad mood” C) worry that I have done the wrong thing 82. All misfortunes occur because for people A) who try to make changes in everything, although there are ways to solve these issues C) who reject new, promising proposals 83. I get great pleasure from reporting local news 84. Neat, demanding people do not get along with me

9 85. It seems to me that I am less irritable than most people 86. I can ignore other people more easily than they can ignore me 87. There are times when I don’t want to talk to anyone all morning A) often C) never 88 If the hands of a clock meet exactly every 65 minutes measured by an accurate clock, then that clock is A) behind B) running correctly C) in a hurry 89. I get bored A) often C) rarely 90. People say that I like to do everything in my own original way 91. I believe that unnecessary worries should be avoided because they are tiring 92. At home in my free time I A) chat and relax C) do things that interest me 93. I am timid and cautious about making friends with new people 94. I believe that what people say in poetry can be just as accurately expressed in prose 95. I suspect that the people with whom I am friends may not be friends behind my back, in most cases, rarely 96. I think that even the most dramatic events in a year will no longer leave any traces in my soul C) no

10 97. I think it would be more interesting to be A) a naturalist and work with plants C) an insurance agent 98. I am subject to unreasonable fear and disgust towards certain things, such as certain animals, places, etc. 99. I I like to think about how the world could be improved 100. I prefer games A) where you have to play in a team or have a partner C) where everyone plays for themselves 101. At night I have fantastic or ridiculous dreams 102. If I am alone in the house , then after a while I feel anxiety and fear 103. I can mislead people with my friendly attitude, although in fact I don’t like them 104. Which word does not apply to the other two? A) think B) see C) hear 105. If Mary’s mother is the sister of Alexander’s father, then who is Alexander in relation to Mary’s father? A) cousin B) nephew C) uncle

11 Key to the questionnaire of R. B. Cattell Factor Numbers of questions, types of answers, points MD 1. B B B B B B-1 A 2. B B B B B-1 B 3. B C B C A S A В-1 С 4. В В В В В В-1 E 5. В В В В В В-1 F 6. В В В В В В-1 G 7. В В В В В В-1 Н 8. V V V V V V V V V V V-1 L 10. V-1 M 11. V-1 N 12. V-1 O 13. V-1 Q1 14. V-1 Q2 15. V-1 Q3 16. Q-1 Q4 17. B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B -1 Interpretation of factors Factor A. Closedness and sociability. With low scores, a person is characterized by unsociability, isolation, indifference, and excessive severity in assessing people. He is skeptical, cold towards others, likes to be alone, and does not have close friends with whom he can be frank. With high scores, a person is open and kind-hearted, sociable and good-natured. He is characterized by naturalness and ease in behavior, attentiveness, kindness, and kindness in relationships. He willingly works with people, is active in eliminating conflicts, is trusting, is not afraid of criticism, experiences vivid emotions, and responds vividly to events. Factor B. Intelligence. With low scores, a person is characterized by concreteness, rigidity and some disorganization of thinking. With high grades, abstract thinking, quick wits, and quick learning are observed. Factor C. Emotional instability; emotional stability. With low scores, low tolerance, susceptibility to feelings, changeable interests, a tendency to mood lability, irritability, fatigue, neurotic symptoms, and hypochondria are expressed. With high grades, a person is self-possessed, efficient, emotionally mature, and realistically minded. He easily manages to follow the requirements of the team, he is characterized by constancy of interests. He is not prone to nervous fatigue.

12 Factor E. Subordination - dominance. With low grades, a person is shy and tends to give way to others. He often turns out to be dependent, takes the blame upon himself, and worries about his possible mistakes. He is characterized by tact, resignation, deference, humility, even complete passivity. With high scores, a person is powerful, independent, self-confident, stubborn to the point of aggressiveness. He is independent in judgment and behavior, and tends to consider his way of thinking as a law for himself and those around him. Blames others in conflicts, does not recognize power and pressure from outside, prefers an authoritarian leadership style, but fights for a higher status; conflictual, capricious. Factor F. Restraint and expressiveness. With low scores, a person is characterized by prudence, caution, prudence, and silence. He is characterized by a tendency to complicate everything, some concern and pessimism in the perception of reality. Worries about the future, expects failures. To those around him, he seems boring, lethargic and overly prim. With high scores, a person is cheerful, impulsive, careless, cheerful, talkative, and active. Energetic, social contacts are emotionally significant for him. He is sincere in interpersonal relationships, often becomes a leader and enthusiast of group activities, and believes in luck. Factor G. Susceptibility to feelings, high normative behavior. With low scores, a person is fickle, subject to the influence of chance and circumstances, and does not make efforts to fulfill group requirements and norms. It is characterized by unprincipledness, disorganization, irresponsibility, and flexible attitudes towards social norms, which can lead to antisocial behavior. With high scores, conscious compliance with norms and rules of behavior, persistence in achieving goals, accuracy, responsibility, and business orientation are observed. Factor N. Timidity, courage. With low grades, a person is shy, unsure of his plans, reserved, timid, and prefers to be in the shadows. He prefers the company of one or two friends to large society. Differs in increased sensitivity to threat. With high scores, a person is characterized by social courage, activity, and a willingness to deal with unfamiliar circumstances and people. He is prone to risk, behaves freely, disinhibited. Factor I. Stiffness sensitivity. With low scores, a person is characterized by masculinity, self-confidence, rationality, realistic judgment, practicality, some rigidity, severity, and callousness towards others. With high scores, one observes softness, stability, dependence, the desire to gain patronage, a penchant for romanticism, artistic nature, femininity, and an artistic perception of the world. Factor L. Trustworthiness and suspicion. With low scores, a person is characterized by frankness, trustfulness, goodwill towards other people, tolerance, and agreeableness. A person is free from envy, gets along well with people and works well in a team. With high grades, a person is jealous, envious, characterized by suspicion, and is characterized by great conceit. His interests are directed towards himself, he is usually careful in his actions, self-centered. Factor M. Practicality and developed imagination. With low grades, the person is practical and conscientious. He focuses on external reality and follows generally accepted norms; he is characterized by some limitations and excessive attention to detail. With a high rating, we can talk about a developed imagination, orientation towards one’s inner world, and a person’s high creative potential. Factor N. Directness, diplomacy. With low scores, a person is characterized by straightforwardness, naivety, naturalness, and spontaneity of behavior. With high scores, a person is characterized by prudence, insight, a reasonable and unsentimental approach to events and people around him. Factor O. Self-confidence and anxiety. With low scores, a person is serene, cool-headed, calm, and self-confident. With high scores, a person is characterized by anxiety, depression, vulnerability, and impressionability. Factor Q1. Conservatism is radicalism. With low scores, a person is characterized by conservatism and resistance to traditional difficulties. He knows what he should believe in, and, despite the failure of some principles, he does not look for new ones. He is dubious of new ideas, prone to moralizing and preaching, resistant to change, and uninterested in analytical intellectual considerations. With high scores, a person is critical, characterized by the presence of intellectual interests, analytical thinking, and strives to receive information about everything in full. He is more inclined to experiment, calmly accepts new unsettled views and changes, does not trust authorities, and does not take anything for granted. Factor Q2. Conformism nonconformism. With low scores, a person is dependent on the group, follows public opinion, prefers to work and make decisions together with other people, and is focused on social approval. At the same time, he often lacks the initiative to make decisions.

13 With a high assessment, a person prefers his own decisions, is independent, follows the path he has chosen, makes his own decisions and acts on his own. Having his own opinion, he does not seek to impose it on others. He does not need the approval and support of other people. Factor Q3. Low self-control high self-control. With low grades, indiscipline and internal conflict in self-image are observed. The person is not concerned about fulfilling social requirements. With high grades, developed self-control and accuracy in fulfilling social requirements. A person follows his self-image, has good control over his emotions and behavior, and brings every task to the end. He is characterized by purposefulness and integrated personality. Factor Q4. Relaxation tension. With low scores, a person is characterized by relaxation, lethargy, calmness, low motivation, laziness, excessive satisfaction and equanimity. A high score indicates tension, agitation, excitement and anxiety. Factor MD. Adequacy of self-esteem. The higher the score for this factor, the more a person tends to overestimate his capabilities and overestimate himself.

Tsialno-pedagogical activities with various categories of children and adolescents, etc. According to the goals and objectives of this discipline, the main teaching methods are: problem-based learning (partial search

Determining the level of motivation for affiliation (A. Mehrabian) Theoretical foundations Description of the method A. Mehrabian’s method is intended for diagnosing two generalized stable personal motives included

Scale for assessing the level of reactive and personal anxiety Author Ch.D. Spielberger (adapted by Yu.L. Khanin) Measuring anxiety as a personality property is especially important, as this property largely determines

Last name First name Patronymic results SPFI (screening of current personnel) Full name test taker: Category, position: purchasing department manager Date of testing: Duration of work in the company: Age: Professional

Psychological tests for hiring Ilya Melnikov 2 3 Business school in 30 minutes Psychological tests for hiring 4 For most vacant positions in economics and management, tests

Questionnaire “Psychological portrait of a parent” (G.V. Rezapkina) Scales: priority values, psycho-emotional state, self-esteem, parenting style, level of subjective control Purpose of the test: methodology

Features of the implementation of the principle of natural conformity I. F. Ptitsyn FEATURES OF IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PRINCIPLE OF CONFORMITY Work presented by the Department of Methods of Teaching Foreign Languages ​​Yakut State

SELECTION OF LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT CAREER DEVELOPMENT RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CAREER MANAGEMENT Report for: Jane Doe Login: HB290686 Date: March 07, 2013 2 0 0 9 H O G A N A S S E

Diagnosis of personal anxiety The method form contains instructions and a task, which allows it to be carried out collectively. The methodology includes situations of three types: 1. Situations related to school,

METHODOLOGY FOR MEASURING TAYLOR'S ANXIETY LEVEL. ADAPTATION BY T. A. NEMCHINOV. The questionnaire consists of 50 statements. For ease of use, each statement is offered to the subject on a separate card.

“PEDAGOGICAL-PSYCHOLOGICAL AND MEDICAL-BIOLOGICAL PROBLEMS OF PHYSICAL EDUCATION AND SPORTS” Electronic journal of the Kama State Institute of Physical Culture Reg. El FS77-27659 dated March 26, 2007

Quiz Questionnaire Are you capable of being a leader? Instructions: You are offered 50 statements to which you must answer Yes or No. There is no average value for the answers. Don't think too long about it.

SELECTION OF LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT CAREER DEVELOPMENT RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CAREER MANAGEMENT Report for: Jane Doe Login: HB290686 Date: August 02, 2012 2 0 0 9 H O G A N A S S

T.V. Artamonova (Volgograd) COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF PERSONALITY SPHERE MANIFESTATIONS IN GENDER DIFFERENTIATED ATHLETES AND NON-ATHLETES Sports activities are considered from the position of the activity approach

Appendix 3.6. Methodology “Orientation of the individual in communication” Author: S. L. Bratchenko. Instructions: “The following are options for behavior in various communication situations. You are asked to choose for each

1 Instructions: You are offered a number of statements with which you can agree, disagree, or partially agree. You must choose one of the three proposed answer options that reflects your

SPIELBERGER-KHANIN REACTIVE AND PERSONAL ANXIETY SCALE Introductory remarks. Measuring anxiety as a personality property is especially important, since this property largely determines the subject’s behavior.

ATTITUDE TOWARDS CHILDREN (PARENTAL ATTITUDE TEST) Parental attitude is understood as a system of various feelings and actions of adults towards children. From a psychological point of view, parental

SCALE FOR ASSESSMENT OF THE LEVEL OF REACTIVE AND PERSONAL ANXIETY (Ch. D. Spielberg, Yu. L. Khanin) 1 This test is a reliable and informative way of self-assessment of the level of anxiety at the moment (reactive

School Class Student's test book Last name First name Gender Date of birth 2010 TEST 1. “Ladder” Instructions: There are 40 “ladders” in this test. Next to each ladder there are qualities on the left side that

Methods of primary diagnostics and identification of children at risk (M.I. Rozhkov, M.A. Kovalchuk) This material contains primary diagnostic methods for determining the characteristics of personality development,

EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE EQ EMOTIONAL MANAGEMENT Report for: ID HC625814 Date October 14, 2014 2014 Hogan Assessment Systems Inc. INTRODUCTION By emotional intelligence we mean a person’s ability to

Determination of personality orientation (B. Bass) To determine personal orientation, an orientation questionnaire is currently used, first published by B. Bass in 1967. The questionnaire consists

EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE EQ EMOTIONAL MANAGEMENT Report to: John Doe ID UH555438 Date October 20, 2014 2014 Hogan Assessment Systems Inc. INTRODUCTION By emotional intelligence we mean the ability

Conclusion on passing professional orientation testing Passing date: March 31, 2018 Form of passing: correspondence Family Psychological Center PEREMENA General data Name Ivanov Ivan

PSYCHODYAGNOSTIC METHODS IN PREVENTIVE WORK This material contains primary diagnostic methods for determining the characteristics of personality development, identifying risk factors and for using

Scale for assessing the need for achievement Achievement motivation, desire to improve results, dissatisfaction with what has been achieved, persistence in achieving one’s goals, desire to achieve one’s own goal

PEDAGOGICAL PSYCHOLOGY UDC 159.923.2 057.87:97.015.3 A. G. Maklakov, S. V. Myshkina Psychological characteristics of students of various nationalities as subjects of educational activity in pedagogical

MINI-MULT QUESTIONNAIRE The Mini-Mult questionnaire is an abbreviated version of the MMPI, contains 7 questions, scales, of which are evaluative. The first rating scales measure the sincerity of the subject, the degree of reliability

TEMPERAMENT TEST V.M. RUSALOVA The technique is used to diagnose the subject-activity and communicative aspects of temperament and allows you to quantitatively assess its properties: energy, plasticity,

COOPERATION OF DOCTOR, CHILD AND PARENTS TO INCREASE THE EFFECTIVENESS OF TREATMENT Ekaterina Vladimirovna Svistunova psychologist, psychotherapist Member of the Board of the Association of Child Psychologists and Psychiatrists Excess

Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation Nizhny Novgorod State Technical University named after. R.E. Alekseeva Department of Industrial Safety, Ecology and Chemistry Personality research using 16 -

Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation Federal State Budgetary Educational Institution higher education"Saratov National Research State University

G. EYSENK'S EPI TEST QUESTIONNAIRE ADAPTED BY A. G. SHMELEV 1 Contents of statements Yes No 1. Do you often experience a craving for new experiences in order to be distracted, to experience a strong sensation? 2. How often do you

Determining a manager's management style using self-assessment Sources Determining a manager's management style using self-assessment / Fetiskin N.P., Kozlov V.V., Manuylov G.M. Socio-psychological

1 Description of the test “16-factor Cattell Questionnaire (Form A)” Introduction The Cattell Questionnaire is one of the most common questionnaire methods for assessing individual psychological characteristics of a person

F. Zimbardo Time Perspective Inventory (ZTPI) Instructions. Please read all the proposed questionnaire items and answer the question as honestly as possible: “To what extent is this typical or in relation to

Eysenck Personality Inventory (EPI) Key Answers that match the key are scored 1 point. Extraversion - introversion: “yes” (+): 1, 3, 8, 10, 13, 17, 22, 25, 27, 39, 44, 46, 49, 53, 56; “no” (-): 5, 15,

Borisenko Alexander Mikhailovich LineStaff Competency report INFORMATION ABOUT TESTING DATE OF TESTING 06/02/2017 11:01:24 DURATION OF TESTING 00:13:13 INFORMATION ABOUT RESPONDENT DATE OF BIRTH

Report on the assessment of competencies using the “Hidden Assessment TM” method of an applicant for the position of head of a company Moscow 10.20.2008 Description of competencies Competency Description of competencies 1. Mental

Methodology of A. Assinger “Diagnostics of a tendency to aggressive behavior” Instructions You are presented with a number of situations. Emphasize the option for resolving them that is most typical for you. Questionnaire text

Test-questionnaire of parental attitude A.Ya.Varga, V.V.Stolin. ORO methodology. The Parental Attitude Questionnaire (PRA), authors A.Ya. Varga, V.V. Stolin, is a technique for diagnosing parental

SELF-ASSESSMENT OF MANAGEMENT STYLE BY A MANAGER PURPOSE: The specificity of this technique is that it allows one to determine leadership styles not through an expert method, but through self-assessment. Second

KOS TEST QUESTIONNAIRE - 1 Research procedure The study of communicative and organizational inclinations using the KOS test questionnaire can be carried out with one subject or with a group. The subjects are given

DIAGNOSTICS OF ACHIEVEMENT MOTIVATION (A. MEHRABIAN) PURPOSE OF THE METHOD: Achievement motivation, according to G. Murray, is expressed in the need to overcome obstacles and achieve high performance in work,

Parental Attitude Questionnaire (A.Ya. Varga, V.V. Stolin) The Parental Attitude Questionnaire (PRO) is a psychodiagnostic tool aimed at identifying parental attitudes

Childhood Depression Questionnaire Developed by Maria Kovacs (1992) and adapted by employees of the Laboratory of Clinical Psychology and Psychiatry of the Research Institute of Psychology, it allows you to determine quantitative indicators

Questionnaire for assessing the neuropsychic stability of a teacher. The technique was developed at LVMA named after. CM. Kirov and is intended for the initial identification of persons with signs of neuropsychic instability. She

Should you always obey your parents? YES, BECAUSE OH ADULTS.. Yes, but Adults deserve the respect of children? Are all adults worthy of respect? Does obedience always convey respect? Is it possible to manifest

ABOUT SOME ASPECTS OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PROJECT “ASSESSMENT BY BEHAVIOR” Kremneva T.B., Director of the MKU NMC of Penza STEPS FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PROJECT 1. Diagnostics 2. Development of models for assessing the relationship between the team and

TEMPERAMENT OF PRESCHOOL CHILDREN The concept of temperament Temperament (lat. temperamentum proportionality, proper ratio of parts), mental characteristics that explain the way a person acts in that

RESEARCH OF PSYCHOLOGICAL FEATURES AND CREATIVITY OF STUDENTS Nasyrova T.Sh., Nasyrova O.Sh. St. Petersburg State University of Industrial Technologies and Design, St. Petersburg

Task 1. Instructions: Below are a number of statements that relate to different aspects of your life. Each of them may be more or less relevant to you. Rate how often you have recently

When you're sad Bradley's Diary Trevor Grieve MOSCOW 2006 Introduction Everyone has bad days. It seems a little strange that for many of us tears are evidence sincere feelings. But

Fears in children: from newborns to teenagers. How to overcome them? Children's fears are normal. They are surmountable, and with the help of parents, the child will cope with them faster and “outgrow” fears. Important,

WAYS OF RESOLVING CONFLICTS IN THE FAMILY Gusarova Galina Petrovna Irkutsk State Linguistic University Russia, Irkutsk Family is the closest people who are always there and always ready

ALLEN CARR HOW TO BECOME A HAPPY NON-SMOKER Inspiration for every day Moscow 2008 PREFACE Most smokers are convinced that it is very difficult to get rid of nicotine addiction. It takes a huge

Тecm “Your Child's Temperament” Carefully observe your child, and then answer the questions of this test. Be honest, don't try to sugarcoat your son or daughter's behavior. Answer like this

Version Emotional Intelligence Head of ABCD 12-6-2013 INTRODUCTION The report on Emotional Intelligence examines the emotional intelligence of a person, i.e. ability to feel, understand and effectively

METHOD OF DIAGNOSTICS OF SOCIO-PSYCHOLOGICAL ATTITUDES OF PERSONALITY IN THE MOTIVATIONAL-NEED SPHERE OF O.F.POTEMKINA Purpose of the test. Identification of the degree of expression of socio-psychological attitudes.

Fear Exam Anxiety Excitement Test Stress Two types of stress should be distinguished: 1- short-term, activating the internal reserves of the body, forcing you to move towards new achievements, study

Family Relationship Analysis (FAA) Dear parent! The questionnaire we offer you contains statements about raising children. Statements are numbered. The same numbers are in the “Answer Form”. Read

Compatibility is one of the most complex phenomena of socio-psychological science in general and family psychology in particular. Compatibility is manifested in the interaction and communication of spouses.

The purpose of the experimental part of our work is to study the characteristics of psychological compatibility in married couples.

The research hypothesis is the assumption that the psychological compatibility of spouses influences marital satisfaction: compatible combinations of personality orientation, interpersonal relationships increase marital satisfaction.

To achieve this goal and test the hypothesis put forward, the following tasks were identified in the experimental study:

1. Determine the compatibility of spouses and the consistency of role expectations and aspirations in marriage.

2. To study the marital satisfaction of men and women in married couples.

3. Identify various combinations of temperament types and their correlation with marital satisfaction.

4. Identify general patterns of compatibility in married couples, role expectations, marital satisfaction and temperament.

Object of study: married couples aged 20 to 32 years.

Subject of research: psychological compatibility in married couples.

A total of 50 married couples aged 20 to 32 years took part in the study. Study participants had been married for no more than 5 years. 38 couples are in a registered marriage, 12 couples live together in an unregistered marriage. For all study participants this marriage is the first. 36 couples have one child, 6 couples have two children, 8 couples have no children.

At the first stage of the study, empirical data was collected. The psychodiagnostic study was carried out on an individual basis, and the following research methods were used:

1. To study the compatibility of spouses, the W. Schutz Interpersonal Relations Questionnaire was used.

2. For express diagnostics of the degree of satisfaction - dissatisfaction with the marriage, as well as the degree of agreement - mismatch of satisfaction among spouses, the method of V.V. was used. Stolina, T.L. Romanova, G.P. Butenko.

3. To study the consistency of family values ​​and role settings in a married couple, the method “Determination of the consistency of family values ​​and role settings in a married couple” by A.N. was used. Volkova.

4. To study the characteristics of interpersonal interaction between spouses, the test “Self-assessment of constructive interaction in marital relationships” was used.

5. To determine the type of temperament, in order to diagnose the psychophysiological compatibility of spouses, the method of determining the type of temperament by G. Eysenck was used.

Questionnaire of Interpersonal Relations by W. Schutz (Appendix A).

The W. Schutz questionnaire allows you to obtain data on the social-need (interpersonal) compatibility of spouses in the form of total compatibility indices. It is assumed that the three types of needs (inclusion, control, affect) that the questionnaire scales measure are essentially social (to be involved in and maintain relationships; to control the behavior of others and make decisions; to create close relationships), because determine the behavior of an individual specifically in situations of interpersonal interaction and communication.

The questionnaire is aimed at diagnosing various aspects of interpersonal relationships. An individual's behavior is assessed in three areas of interpersonal needs: inclusion (I), control (C), and affect (A). Each domain is divided into expressed (e) and required (w) behavior.

The questionnaire contains 6 scales, 54 tasks (9 points per scale).

Questionnaire scales:

1e - pronounced behavior in the area of ​​inclusion (the desire to attract attention, interest in oneself, to be involved in relationships, to enter various social groups, to be among people).

Iw - required behavior in the field of inclusion (the desire for others to be interested in the individual, to invite the individual to take part in their activities and to strive to communicate with him).

Se - pronounced behavior in the field of control (the desire to control and influence others, to take leadership into one’s own hands, to determine what will be done and how).

Cw - required control behavior (the desire for others to control the individual, influence him and tell him what and how to do).

Ae - pronounced behavior in the area of ​​affect (the desire to be in close, intimate relationships with others, to show friendly, warm feelings towards them).

Aw is the required behavior in the area of ​​affect (the desire for others to be closer to the individual).

Further, when analyzing the data, attention is paid to the ratio, a combination of points on the main scales, which allows you to calculate the index of the volume of interactions (e + w) and the index of inconsistency of interpersonal behavior (e - w) within and between individual areas of interpersonal needs. The data obtained also make it possible to determine the coefficient of mutual compatibility in the Dyad. It is calculated as follows; if we denote the expressed achievement of individual A in a particular area by the symbol e1, and of individual B by the symbol e2, and the required behavior of these individuals is w1 and w2, respectively, then the compatibility coefficient has the form K = [e1 - w2] + [e2 - w1] .

The nature of marital relations largely depends on the degree of consistency between the family values ​​of the husband and wife and role ideas about who and to what extent is responsible for the implementation of functions in a certain family sphere. The adequacy of the role behavior of spouses depends on the compliance of role expectations (the attitude of the husband and wife to the active fulfillment of family responsibilities by the partner) with the role aspirations of the spouses (the personal readiness of each partner to fulfill family roles).

Marriage Satisfaction Questionnaire (V.V. Stolin, T.L. Romanova, G.P. Butenko) (Appendix B).

Marital satisfaction was measured using the method of V.V. Stolin, which has a high correlation with other methods for marital satisfaction and high reliability of the results.

When developing the questionnaire, the authors proceeded from the thesis that the main factor holding marital unions together is emotional ties - love, emotional attachment. In accordance with this, it can be assumed that subjective satisfaction - dissatisfaction with marriage by its nature is more likely a generalized emotion, a generalized experience, rather than a consequence of a rational assessment of the success of a marriage according to certain parameters.

Initial data:

Marital satisfaction test scores for husband and wife;

Total coefficients of interpersonal compatibility of spouses;

Score indicators of the consistency of family values ​​and roles in various areas of family life.

Methodology “Determining the consistency of family values ​​and role settings in a married couple” by A. N. Volkova (Abbreviated name - ROP) (Appendix B).

This technique, developed by A. N. Volkova, is part of a comprehensive program of practical work with a married couple.

The ROP technique allows you to determine:

1. Spouses’ ideas about the importance of sexual relations in family life, the personal community of husband and wife, parental responsibilities, professional interests of each spouse, household services, moral and emotional support, and the external attractiveness of partners. These indicators, reflecting the main functions of the family, constitute a scale of family values.

2. Spouses’ ideas about the desired distribution of roles between husband and wife in the implementation of family functions, united by a scale of role expectations and aspirations.

Despite the fact that this technique is used more often in consulting work, and in scientific research much less frequently, nevertheless, with its help it is possible to determine the consistency of family values ​​and role attitudes in a married couple separately for men and women, and based on the average results, make specific conclusions.

Test “Self-assessment of constructive interaction in marital relationships” (Appendix D).

The technique is a blank test - a questionnaire containing a description of 15 situations of marital interaction that are of a conflict nature.

As an answer, respondents (subjects) are offered a scale of possible reactions to a certain situation, which includes 5 possible options. The left pole of the scale is the greatest expression of agreement, a consonant, neutral attitude, an expression of disagreement and, finally, the right pole is an active expression of disagreement.

Personality questionnaire of G. Eysenck (Appendix E).

We considered it necessary to include in our study a test to determine the type of temperament as a tool for diagnosing psychophysiological compatibility. This technique is intended to determine the degree of extroversion and introversion, as well as neuroticism and emotional stability; it also has a lie scale to increase validity: if the subject receives a high score on the lie scale, he takes the test again. However, all these components of temperament are interpreted in more detail during individual or family counseling; in mass research, the specifics are somewhat different, and to analyze the results, general characteristics of the type of temperament are more needed.

When statistically processing the results obtained, the Spearman rank correlation coefficient was used

The Spearman rank correlation method allows you to determine the closeness (strength) and direction of the correlation between two characteristics or two profiles (hierarchies) of characteristics.

Calculation of the Spearman rank correlation coefficient consists of the following steps:

1. Ranking of features in ascending order.

2. Determination of the difference in ranks of each pair of compared values, d=dx-dy.

3. Square the difference di and find the total sum, ?d2.

4. Calculation of the rank correlation coefficient using the formula:

where d 2 - squared differences between ranks; N is the number of features involved in the ranking.

When using the rank correlation coefficient, the closeness of the connection between characteristics is conditionally assessed, considering coefficient values ​​equal to 0.3 or less as indicators of weak connection; values ​​more than 0.4, but less than 0.7 are indicators of moderate closeness of connection, and values ​​of 0.7 or more are indicators of high closeness of connection. The level of significance is determined using a special table.

Thus, in the study we used five different methods to identify various aspects of family relationships necessary to confirm or refute the thesis of the hypothesis.

UNDERSTANDING
To be productive, a work team of men and women needs to be in a productive mindset. Empathic listening training can help with this.
Time - 1.5 hours.
The place is a classroom.
Procedure. The group is divided into two subgroups (one with men, the other with women). The training participants sit in a circle. Someone sits in the center of the circle. The manager asks this person to speak on the topic “A man in a work group of men and among women” or “A woman in a work group of women and among men.” The monologue should last up to 10 minutes. Group members are required to listen with full attention, not argue, not interrupt
EACH OTHER
beat the speaker. If he speaks for less than 10 minutes, then at the end of the speech he must sit silently. After ten minutes, another participant takes a place in the center of the circle, etc.
In a mature group, the exercise is carried out in such a way that men and women take turns speaking.
The topic of the statement is very significant for every employee. Labor productivity in mixed groups depends on the business mood of men and women. This is helped by stereotypes that develop in the process of listening and speaking.
N. Rudestam. Group psychotherapy (Translated from English). M.: Progress, 1990. lt;^0^

Despite the complexity of the proposed devices and the sophistication of the techniques used on them, experimental methods are still limited in their capabilities. In addition, in practice they are often quite difficult to apply. In this regard, experimental methods for measuring and assessing compatibility remain so far only laboratory ones. In practice, semi-

Chile distribution of empirical instrumental methods. The word instrumental in this case is used in the sense of test.
First of all, this is a method for determining the value-orientation unity of a group (COE). This method determines the level of psychological development of the group, while it is postulated that the higher this level, the higher the degree of cohesion. The procedure here is extremely simple. Each group member is offered a list of personality traits that characterize him from different aspects: from the attitude to work, from the attitude to the norms of public morality, from the forms of behavior. Individuals must select from this list five traits that they consider most important for an individual in a group. If all group members choose the same qualities, then the COE acquires the maximum possible value and compatibility is then assessed as the highest. If there is a scatter in the choice of qualities, then the degree of compatibility is assessed as tending to a minimum.
Quite valuable information about the degree of compatibility is obtained using a semantic differential, which is a system of polar profiles (up to 20 lines):
Pessimist Suspicious Egoist, etc.
The procedure consists of three measurements:
a) drawing an average personality profile for each member of the work group (everyone evaluates each other);
b) drawing the average profile of the group;
c) comparison of the group profile with individual profiles and assessment of the degree of compatibility of the group. These measurements, in addition, can serve as the basis for organizing group communication training and the starting point for self-education by each member of the work group.
As indicated, interpersonal compatibility often depends on the degree to which an individual is accepted by group members. It has been empirically proven that people with high self-esteem are considered unacceptable. If this turns out to be the formal leader, then the level of compatibility of the group will be lower.
married As you can see, knowledge of people’s self-esteem provides certain information about the level of compatibility.
Questionnaires, questionnaires, and blank tests are widely used to assess the level of self-esteem. Here's one of them.
The form contains 20 different personality traits. The subject in column (No. 1) ranks these qualities (from 1 to 20) depending on how he likes them. Then, in another column (No. 2), he ranks the qualities relative to himself, that is, he determines to what extent they are inherent in him. Next, the difference (d) of each quality between columns (No. 1 and No. 2) is calculated. This difference is squared (d) and the total sum (X) is calculated. Then the correlation coefficient is calculated using the formula:
g (p2 - p)p
The closer the coefficient approaches one, the higher the self-esteem. A value of 0.7 is considered high. An individual who receives such a coefficient can be considered unacceptable. If the formal leader turns out to be such, then there may be no interpersonal compatibility in the group. Those who have very low self-esteem are also unacceptable.
Interpersonal compatibility is often determined by temperamental characteristics. Moreover, the components of temperament influence both compatibility in reactions and pace of activity (which is important for workers in assembly line sections), and compatibility in the management system. The type of temperament can be quite successfully determined using the G. Eysenck questionnaire (by the way, along with the full set of two questionnaires with 57 questions, a truncated version, including 12 questions, works quite well).
If the interpretation of the data obtained from the questionnaire for conveyor section workers, carried out on the basis of the principle of complementarity (mutual complementarity), does not cause difficulties, then such an interpretation for the management system is complicated by a great many variables. However, evaluation of the obtained data using a questionnaire based on logical

analysis makes it possible to advance in this matter. With this approach, it is possible to solve the problem of determining compatibility, for example, between the first manager and his deputies. The general scheme of 10 factors, obtained by summarizing surveys of students of the Academy of National Economy, the most favorable combinations of various qualities in the general director and chief engineer may turn out to be the same as given in the table.

General Director Sanguine Phlegmatic Choleric Authoritative, demanding tough Assumes collective decisions Prefers to make decisions individually Sociable Self-confident Stubborn Hot-tempered
Chief engineer Sanguine, choleric, phlegmatic Sanguine or choleric Sanguine or phlegmatic Prone to collective action, executive Decisiveness, activity, initiative
Thoughtful, reasonable, not prone to haste
Silent
Self-critical
Compliant
Restrained

The compatibility of a manager with his deputies, as well as with the entire workforce in general, has been shown to be largely determined by his commitment to a very specific leadership style. In this regard, when planning the selection of the first manager, it is advisable to include an assessment of the selected candidates according to their acquired style of dealing with people, decision-making, communication, and educational actions. For this purpose, you can use the methods known to us.
Questions to clarify the problem What is the essence of psychological compatibility? What types of compatibility are usually distinguished?
How should the phenomenon of compatibility be taken into account when forming working groups and management units?
How to assess the degree of compatibility of workers in work collectives and work groups?
How do known methods of measuring and assessing psychological compatibility “work”?

PRACTICUM
_ When answering, choose a, b, c, d, e, f accordingly.
Exercise #1 Answer quickly.
a ^Reality 1. You found out that your friend said something bad about you
pleasant. What will you do?
a) talk to him about it;
b) stop communicating with him. When entering a tram (bus, metro) you are roughly pushed to the side. In this case you
c) try to get ahead;
d) wait for everyone to pass;
d) protest out loud. During arguments, you notice that the interlocutor has his own point of view. You:
b) try not to encourage him to renounce his opinion;
d) trying to convince your interlocutor that you are right. You are late for meeting. All the seats are already taken, except for one in the first row. You
b) stand in the back of the room;
f) looking for another chair;
d) without hesitation, head to the front row. Don't you think you apologize too often?
food; d) no. Do you find it difficult to start a conversation with a stranger?
Yeah? Really; d) no. You did not find the product you need in the self-service store. Do you feel uncomfortable leaving empty-handed?
b) yes; a) no. At work they collect money for some occasion. You
c) immediately give the required amount; a) wait to be asked;
d) You are pleased when you are asked for such things. They require a service from you that could bring you trouble. Is it easy for you to refuse?
c) yes; b) no. You have the opportunity to talk with famous person. You />e) use familiarity; f) refuse; They forgot to include you in the promotion list, although you deserve it. You
a) demand an explanation;
d) be silent so as not to get into trouble. Your child (grandchild) unfairly received a low grade at school, you
b) do nothing;
f) meet with the teacher for an explanation. You have previously worked with this test on another occasion (see 1.3.2). Now compare the two results.

Processing the results
Count the answers marked with the appropriate letters and write them down in a column. Multiply the points by the numbers indicated and get the total. ax3 = in5 = dx4 =
6x0= rx2= exl =
Assessment (self-confidence):
38~42 points - very high (means compatibility is low);
30-37 points - high;
26-29 points - average;
25 points or less - low (also indicates insufficiently high compatibility).
On the form you see 20 personality traits. Rank these qualities in columns (No. 1) from 1 to 20 as you like them. Then rank these same qualities in the column (No. 2) on the right from 1 to 20 as they are inherent to you (in your opinion). Next, for each line, calculate the difference between No. 1 and No. 2 and enter it in column (d). After this, square this difference (d2), calculate the total sum (X) and determine the correlation coefficient using the formula:
Ed2
g “ 1 6 (p2 - p)p
Form

Grade:
The closer the correlation coefficient is to 1, the higher the individual’s self-esteem is inherent in the subject. Too high and too low self-esteem indicate a low degree of compatibility.

In front of you is an assessment sheet made in the form of a semantic differential. Follow these procedures:
a) evaluate yourself. To do this, determine your coordinates on each line of the differential by placing a point corresponding to the degree of proximity of the left or right criterion. After this, connect all the dots received and you will receive your personal profile;
b) draw the average profile of the group;
c) draw conclusions about the psychological compatibility of each group member.

When a family experiences a crisis, marital relationships, as well as relationships in other subsystems, are adversely affected by various stressors. Moreover, the crisis period in which the family as a whole is in may be superimposed by a crisis in marital relations associated with dynamic processes occurring specifically in the marital subsystem. For example, a family crisis caused by the birth of a child may coincide in time with a crisis in marital relations for 3-7 years.

A psychologist-consultant can obtain the necessary information that allows him to give a qualified assessment of the relationship between spouses not only through a specially organized conversation during the counseling process, but also with the help of standardized diagnostic procedures aimed at studying various aspects of the relationship between partners in marriage.

When diagnosing marital relationships, the following tasks can be solved:

1. Studying the characteristics of communication in a married couple: the “Communication in the Family” questionnaire (Yu. E. Aleshina, L. Ya. Gozman, E. M. Dubovskaya), etc.

2. Study of emotional relationships in a married couple:

□ Marriage Satisfaction Questionnaire (V.V. Stolin, G.P. Butenko, T.L. Romanova);

□ questionnaire “Love and Sympathy Scale” (3. Rubin, modification by L. Ya. Gozman and Yu. E. Aleshina);

□ questionnaire “Understanding, emotional attraction, authority” (PEA) (A. N. Volkova, modification by V. I. Slepkova).

3. Diagnosis of marital compatibility:

□ questionnaire “Role expectations and aspirations in marriage” (ROP) (A. N. Volkova);

□ questionnaire “Measuring attitudes in a married couple” (Yu. E. Aleshina, L. Ya. Gozman).

4. Studying the features of conflict interaction between spouses:

□ methodology “The nature of interaction between spouses in conflict situations” (Yu. E. Aleshina, L. Ya. Gozman);

O questionnaire “Spouses’ reaction to conflict” (A. S. Kocharyan, G. S. Kocharyan, A. V. Kirichuk).

5. Study of perceptual processes in a married couple: About the “My letter about my spouse” technique (S. A. Belorusov);

□ technique “Diagnostics of interpersonal relationships” (T. Leary, adapted by L. N. Sobchik).

Within the framework of this publication, we present methods designed to diagnose emotional relationships between partners in marriage, marital compatibility (in particular, socio-psychological compatibility), as well as perceptual processes in a married couple.

4.3.1. Marital Satisfaction Questionnaire

The purpose of the technique is to expressly diagnose the degree of satisfaction or dissatisfaction with the marriage of each spouse, as well as the coincidence or discrepancy of the obtained assessments. The authors of this technique are V.V. Stolin, T.L. Romanova and G.P. Butenko (1984).

The questionnaire is based on the idea of ​​marital satisfaction as a fairly stable emotional phenomenon, which includes, first of all, a feeling, a generalized emotion, a generalized experience, rather than a rational assessment of the success of a marriage according to certain parameters, which can manifest itself directly in the emotions that arise in various situations, and in various opinions, assessments, comparisons.

The proposed questionnaire can be used wherever express diagnostics of marital satisfaction is needed: when conducting scientific research in the field of family psychology, during psychoprophylactic examinations, when working with divorcees in registry offices and courts, as well as in the field of family counseling and psychotherapy. The Marriage Satisfaction Questionnaire can be successfully used to diagnose the crisis state of the marital subsystem at any stage life cycle families.

Description of the technique

The text of the methodology consists of 24 statements (the original version contained 29 statements), which can be reduced to the following six types:

1. Comparing your marriage with other marriages.

2. Assumption about assessing your own marriage from the outside.

3. Statement of certain feelings towards the spouse in the present or past.

4. The spouse’s own assessment of a number of parameters.

5. Setting to change the character of the spouse.

6. Opinion, positive or negative, regarding marriage in general.

Each statement has three possible answers: “true”, “hard to say”, “false” (or their semantic analogues). The statements contain both positive and negative characteristics of marriage and are worded in both positive and negative terms.

Completing the questionnaire takes no more than 10 minutes. The questions do not concern overly intimate facts and details.

Instructions:“Read each statement carefully and choose one of the three answer options provided. Try to avoid intermediate answers like “hard to say,” “difficult to answer,” etc. Do the work as quickly as possible.”

Questionnaire text

1. When people live as close as they do in family life, they inevitably lose mutual understanding and acuity of perception of the other person:

b) not sure;

c) incorrect.

2. Your marital relationship brings you:

a) rather anxiety and suffering;

b) find it difficult to answer;

c) rather joy and satisfaction.

3. Relatives and friends evaluate your marriage:

a) as a success;

b) something in between;

c) as a failure.

4. If you could, then:

a) You would change a lot in the character of your spouse;

b) difficult to say;

c) You wouldn't change anything.

5. One of the problems of modern marriage is that everything becomes boring, including sexual relations:

b) difficult to say;

c) incorrect.

6. When you compare your family life with the family life of your friends and acquaintances, it seems to you:

a) that you are more unhappy than others;

b) difficult to say;

c) You are happier than others.

7. Life without a family, without a loved one is too high a price for complete independence:

b) difficult to say;

c) incorrect.

8. You believe that without you the life of your spouse would be incomplete:

a) yes, I think;

b) difficult to say;

c) no, I don’t think so.

9. Most people are to some extent deceived in their expectations about marriage:

b) difficult to say;

c) incorrect.

10. Only many different circumstances prevent you from thinking about divorce:

b) difficult to say;

c) incorrect.

11. If the time went back to when you got married, then your husband (wife) could be:

a) anyone, but not the current spouse;

b) difficult to say;

c) it is possible that it is the current spouse.

12. You are proud that a person like your spouse is next to you:

b) difficult to say;

c) incorrect.

13. Unfortunately, your spouse's shortcomings often outweigh his advantages:

b) difficult to say;

c) incorrect.

14. The main obstacles to a happy married life lie:

a) rather in the character of your spouse;

b) difficult to say;

c) rather in yourself.

15. Feelings with which you entered into marriage:

a) intensified;

b) difficult to say;

c) weakened.

16. Marriage dulls a person’s creative potential:

b) difficult to say;

c) incorrect.

17. We can say that your spouse has the following advantages that compensate for his shortcomings:

a) agree;

b) something in between;

c) no, I don’t agree.

18. Unfortunately, not everything is going well in your marriage with emotional support for each other:

b) difficult to say;

c) incorrect.

19. It seems to you that your spouse often does stupid things, speaks out of place, jokes inappropriately:

b) difficult to say;

c) incorrect.

20. Life in a family, as it seems to you, does not depend on your will: a) true;

b) difficult to say;

c) incorrect.

21. Yours family relationships did not bring into life the order and organization that you expected:

b) difficult to say;

c) incorrect.

22. Those who believe that it is in the family that a person can least count on respect are wrong:

b) difficult to say;

c) incorrect.

23. As a rule, the company of your spouse gives you pleasure:

b) difficult to say;

c) incorrect.

24. To tell the truth, there is not and never has been a single bright moment in your married life:

b) difficult to say;

c) incorrect.

Note. In the version of the questionnaire for spouses who filed for divorce, statements No. 3, 10, 12, 18, 23 are formulated in the past tense.

“Key”: 1c, 2c, For, 4c, 5c, 6c, 7a, 8a, 9c, 10c, Iv, 12a, 13c, 14c, 15a, 1bc, 17a, 18c, 19c, 20c, 21c, 22a, 23a, 24c.

If the answer option chosen by the subject (a or c) coincides with that given in the key, then 2 points are awarded; if the answer is intermediate (b) - 1 point; for an answer that does not match the “key” - 0 points. Next, the total score for all answers is calculated. The possible range of test scores is from 0 to 48 points. A high score indicates marital satisfaction.

The entire axis of total test scores is divided into 7 categories, forming the following relationship rating scale:

0-16 points - absolutely unfavorable,

17-22 points - unfavorable,

23-26 points - rather unfavorable,

27-28 points - transitional,

29-32 points - rather prosperous,

33-38 points - prosperous,

39-48 points - absolutely prosperous relationship.

4.3.2. Questionnaire “Role expectations and aspirations in marriage” (ROP)

The technique is aimed at studying spouses’ ideas about the importance of sexual relations in family life, personal community between husband and wife, parental responsibilities, professional interests of each spouse, household services, moral and emotional support, and the external attractiveness of the partner. These indicators, reflecting the main functions of the family, make up the family values ​​scale (FVS). In addition, this technique makes it possible to clarify the spouses’ ideas about the desired distribution of roles between husband and wife in the implementation of family functions, united by the scale of role expectations and aspirations (SROA). The results of this technique indicate a hierarchy of family values ​​of spouses, which makes it possible to draw a conclusion about the socio-psychological compatibility of spouses in the family.

Diagnosis of socio-psychological marital compatibility, including using the questionnaire “Role expectations and aspirations in marriage,” becomes particularly relevant during any crisis period, the content of which is the role restructuring of a married couple.

Description of the technique

The technique contains 36 statements in each version (male and female) and consists of 7 scales.

Spouses are asked to independently familiarize themselves with a set of statements corresponding to their gender and express their attitude to each statement using the following answer options: “I completely agree”, “In general this is true”, “This is not entirely true”, “This is false”.

Instructions: “You have a number of statements that relate to marriage, family, and the relationship between husband and wife. Read the statements in the text carefully and evaluate the extent to which you agree or disagree with them. You are offered 4 answer options, expressing varying degrees of agreement or disagreement with the statement, namely: “I completely agree”, “In general this is true”, “This is not entirely true”, “This is incorrect”. When choosing an answer to each of the statements, try to convey your personal opinion as accurately as possible, and not what is accepted among your relatives and friends. Register your answers on a special form.”

Questionnaire text

(Female version)

5. A husband is a friend who shares my interests, opinions, and hobbies.

6. A husband is, first of all, a friend with whom you can talk about your affairs.

8. The husband should do housework equally with his wife.

9. A husband should be able to take care of himself, and not expect his wife to take care of him.

10. The husband should take care of the children no less than the wife.

11. I would like my husband to love children.

12. I judge a man by whether he is a good or bad father to his children.

13. I like energetic, business-like men.

14. I really appreciate men who are seriously passionate about their work.

15. It is very important for me how my husband’s business and professional qualities are assessed at work.

16. A husband should be able to create a warm, trusting atmosphere in the family.

17. The main thing for me is that my husband understands me well and accepts me for who I am.

18. A husband is, first of all, a friend who is attentive and caring to my experiences, mood, and condition.

19. I like it when my husband is dressed beautifully and fashionably.

20. I like prominent, tall men.

21. A man should look so that he is pleasant to look at.

23. I always know what to buy for my family.

24. I collect useful tips for the housewife: how to cook delicious dishes, can preserve vegetables and fruits.

25. The mother always plays the main role in raising a child.

26. I am not afraid of the difficulties associated with giving birth and raising a child.

27. I love children and enjoy working with them.

35. I love beautiful clothes, wear jewelry, and use cosmetics.

36. I attach great importance to my appearance.

Questionnaire text

(Male version)

1. A person’s mood and well-being depends on the satisfaction of his sexual needs.

2. Happiness in marriage depends on the sexual harmony of the spouses.

3. Sexual relations are the main thing in the relationship between husband and wife.

4. The main thing in marriage is that the husband and wife have many common interests.

5. A wife is a friend who shares my interests, opinions, and hobbies.

6. A wife is, first of all, a friend with whom you can talk about your affairs.

8. A woman loses a lot in my eyes if she is a bad housewife.

9. A woman can be proud of herself if she is a good mistress of her home.

10. I would like my wife to love children and be a good mother to them.

11. A woman who is burdened by motherhood is an inferior woman.

12. For me, the main thing in a woman is that she be a good mother to my children.

13. I like businesslike and energetic women.

14. I really appreciate women who are seriously passionate about their work.

15. It is very important to me how my wife’s business and professional qualities are assessed at work.

16. A wife must, first of all, create and maintain a warm, trusting atmosphere.

17. The main thing for me is that my wife understands me well and accepts me for who I am.

18. A wife is, first of all, a friend who is attentive and caring to my experiences, mood, and condition.

19. I like it when my wife is dressed beautifully and fashionably.

20. I really appreciate women who know how to dress beautifully.

21. A woman should look so that people pay attention to her.

22. I always know what to buy for our home.

23. I like to do household chores.

24. I can renovate and decorate the apartment, fix household appliances.

25. Children love to play with me, willingly communicate, and go into my arms.

26. I love children very much and know how to work with them.

27. I would take an active part in raising my child, even if my wife and I decided to separate.

28. I strive to achieve my place in life.

29. I want to become a good specialist in my field.

30. I am proud when I am entrusted with difficult and responsible work.

31. Relatives and friends often turn to me for advice, help and support.

32. People around me often trust me with their troubles.

33. I always sincerely and with a feeling of compassion console and care for people in need.

34. My mood largely depends on how I look.

35. I try to wear clothes that suit me.

36. I am picky about the cut of my suit, the style of my shirt, and the color of my tie.

Form for registering answers

Date of_________

FULL NAME. _________Floor_________

Age________

Education___________

Length of married life_________

Number and age of children_______________

Processing and interpretation of results

After the spouses complete the task, the husband’s and wife’s answers are entered into the “Consultation Study of Family Values” table (see Table 7).

Table 7

Consultative study of family values

The answers to the proposed statements indicate that the spouses have seven basic family values. Accordingly, scores for each family values ​​scale are summed up separately. For the first two scales, these results are final and are transferred to the last column of the table. The final scores of the remaining five scales are calculated as half the sum of the scores on the subscales “role expectations” (the husband and wife’s attitude towards their partner actively fulfilling family responsibilities) and “role aspirations” (the personal readiness of each partner to fulfill family roles). Answers are scored as follows:

□ answer “Completely agree” - 3 points;

□ answer “In general this is true” - 2 points; O answer “That’s not entirely true” - 1 point; Answer “This is false” - 0 points.

Thus, the minimum total score on the scale is 0 points, the maximum total score on the scale is 9 points. The relationship rating scale is presented in three categories:

low scores on the scale - 0-3 points;

average ratings on the scale - 4-6 points;

high scores on the scale - 7-9 points.

Characteristics of family values ​​scales

1. Intimate-sexual scale(statements No. 1-3) - scale of the importance of sexual relations in marriage. High scores on the scale mean that the spouse considers sexual harmony an important condition for marital happiness; the attitude towards the spouse significantly depends on the assessment of her (him) as a sexual partner. Low scores on the scale are interpreted as an underestimation of sexual relations in marriage.

2. Personal Identification with Spouse Scale(statements No. 4-6) - a scale reflecting the husband’s (wife’s) attitude towards personal identification with the marriage partner: the expectation of common interests, needs, value orientations, ways of spending time. Low scores on the scale suggest a focus on personal autonomy.

3. Household scale measures the attitude of spouses towards the implementation of the economic and household functions of the family. This scale, like all subsequent ones, has two subscales: “role expectations” and “role aspirations.” Subscale “role expectations” (statements No. 7-9) - assessments are considered as the degree of expectation from a partner to actively resolve everyday issues. The higher the ratings on the scale of role expectations, the more demands the husband (wife) places on the spouse’s participation in organizing everyday life, the more important the partner’s household skills are. The “role aspirations” subscale (statements No. 22-24) reflects attitudes toward one’s own active participation in housekeeping. The overall rating on the scale is considered as the husband’s (wife’s) assessment of the importance of the family’s everyday organization.

4. Parent-parent scale allows us to judge the attitude of spouses to their parental responsibilities. The role expectations subscale (statements No. 10-12) shows the severity of the spouse’s attitude towards an active parental position of the marital partner. The role aspirations subscale (statements No. 25-27) indicates the husband's (wife's) orientation toward his own responsibilities in raising children. The overall scale score is considered as an indicator of the importance of parental functions for the spouse. The higher the scale score, the more importance the husband (wife) attaches to the role of the father (mother), the more he (she) considers parenthood to be the main value that centers the life of the family around itself.

5. Social Activity Scale reflects an attitude towards the importance of external social activity (professional, social) for the stability of marriage and family relations. The “role expectations” subscale (statements No. 13-15) measures the degree of orientation of the husband (wife) to the fact that the marriage partner should have serious professional interests and play an active social role. The “role aspirations” subscale (statements No. 28-30) illustrates the severity of the spouse’s own professional needs. The overall rating of the scale shows the importance of extra-family interests for the husband (wife), which are the main values ​​in the process of interpersonal interaction between spouses.

6. Emotional-psychotherapeutic scale expresses an attitude towards the importance of the emotional and psychotherapeutic function of marriage. The “role expectations” subscale (statements No. 16-17) measures the degree of orientation of the husband (wife) to the fact that the marriage partner will take on the role of an emotional leader in the family in matters of correcting the psychological climate in the family, providing moral and emotional support, creating a “psychotherapeutic atmosphere." The “role aspirations” subscale (statements No. 31-33) reflects the desire of the husband (wife) to be a family “psychotherapist”. The overall rating of the scale is considered as an indicator of the importance for the spouse of mutual moral and emotional support of family members, orientation towards marriage as an environment conducive to psychological relaxation and stabilization.

7. Attractiveness scale assesses the degree of importance of appearance for a husband (wife), its compliance with modern fashion standards. The “role expectations” subscale (statements No. 19-21) indicates the severity of the spouse’s desire to have an outwardly attractive partner. The “role aspirations” subscale (statements No. 34-36) illustrates the focus on one’s own attractiveness, the desire to dress fashionably and beautifully. The overall assessment is an indicator of the spouse’s orientation towards modern examples of external appearance.

Analysis of the results involves three stages:

1. Analysis of individual indicators on the scale of family values, role expectations and aspirations of the husband (wife). It is carried out on the basis of scoring in the “Consulting Study of Family Values” table. The data obtained as a result of the calculation characterizes:

□ the husband’s (wife’s) idea of ​​the hierarchy of family values: the higher the score on the family values ​​scale, the more significant this family environment is for the spouse;

□ orientation of the wife (husband) towards the active role behavior of the marriage partner (role expectations) and towards her own active role in the family in the implementation of family functions (role aspirations).

2. Comparative analysis of ideas about family values and role attitudes of husband and wife. The degree of consistency between spouses’ family values ​​is assessed based on the data presented in Table 8.

Table 8

Note. ShSTsm and ShSTszh are indicators on the scales of family values ​​of the husband and wife, respectively, STS is the consistency of the family values ​​of the spouses.

The consistency of family values ​​is characterized by the difference in the scores of the husband’s family values ​​scale and the wife’s family values ​​scale. The smaller the difference, the greater the consistency of the spouses’ ideas about the most significant areas of family life. A difference of up to 3 points suggests that the spouses do not have problematic relationships, while a discrepancy of more than 3 points indicates a fairly high degree of conflict in the relationship in the couple.

3. Determining the degree of role adequacy of a married couple in five areas of interpersonal interaction in the family (3-7 SSC). When analyzing the specifics of a couple’s ideas about the importance of family values, it is necessary to proceed from the fact that the husband and wife’s attitudes regarding the most important areas of family life may be ideal, but not correspond to the actual role behavior of the spouses. The adequacy of the role behavior of a husband and wife depends on the compliance of role expectations with the role aspirations of the spouses. The husband's role adequacy is assessed based on calculating the difference in scores between the wife's role aspirations and the husband's role expectations; accordingly, the wife’s role adequacy will be equal to the difference in scores characterizing the husband’s role aspirations and the wife’s role expectations (see Table 9). The smaller the difference, the greater the role adequacy of the spouse, and, therefore, the orientation of the wife (husband) to perform a certain function corresponds to the husband’s (wife’s) orientation towards the active role of a marital partner in the family.

When analyzing the degree of agreement between the family values ​​of the husband and wife, it is necessary to focus on those family values ​​that are characterized by the least agreement, since their mismatch is one of the reasons for role inconsistency in a married couple and, therefore, a conflict-generating factor that destabilizes interpersonal relationships in the family.

Table 9

Note. RAM - role adequacy of the husband, RAj - role adequacy of the wife. PM and PJ - assessments of the role aspirations of the husband and wife, respectively; Om and Ozh - assessments of the role expectations of husband and wife.

Young spouses who sought psychological help filled out the questionnaire “Role Expectations and Aspirations in Marriage.” The resulting data is presented in two tables.

Consistency of family values ​​between spouses

Individual indicators of the family values ​​scale of husband and wife allow us to draw the following conclusions.

This married couple is characterized by a certain consistency in ideas about family values. The existing differences in the attitudes of spouses on the most important areas of family life do not exceed the acceptable norm. Young spouses mutually consider the commonality of interests, needs, ideas, and life goals of husband and wife to be the most significant in family life. It can be assumed that newlyweds are guided by the so-called “matrimonial” type of family organization, which is based on the value-orientation unity of marriage partners.

According to the young spouses, parental responsibilities are also important in family life; attentive, caring and warm relationships; attractive and fashionable appearance (your own and your marriage partner); the desire to realize professional interests (which is more pronounced in young women); willingness to solve family problems.

From the point of view of newlyweds, the sphere of intimate sexual relationships is less significant in family life. This is quite typical for young spouses, since the spouses’ understanding of the value of intimate relationships, as a rule, is formed in the process life together as the husband and wife achieve psychosexual compatibility.

Role adequacy of a married couple

The degree of role adequacy of the husband in various spheres of family life is not the same. The correspondence between the husband's role expectations and the wife's role aspirations is observed in the professional and parental spheres, and in the idea of ​​the importance of external attractiveness. Thus, the willingness of the wife (Pzh) to perform maternal duties, run the household, and take care of her appearance is consistent with the husband’s (Om) attitude to have an attractive, fashionably dressed wife who performs the duties of a mother and housewife. The husband's least role adequacy is observed in attitudes towards professional interests and the creation of a “psychotherapeutic” atmosphere in the family. The young woman strives to be a specialist in her field. However, the husband believes that his wife’s professional employment is only possible to a small extent. The wife does not want to take on the functions of a “psychological dispatcher” in the family, which does not correspond to the role expectations of her husband. Indicators of the wife's role adequacy demonstrate the correspondence of the wife's expectations and the husband's claims in the area of ​​his professional interests, in orientation towards compliance with the requirements of modern fashion. At the same time, the wife's expectations of her husband actively solving household issues, fulfilling parental responsibilities, and providing the wife with moral and emotional support are not consistent with the husband's role aspirations. Conclusion

1. Young spouses are characterized by a certain consistency of ideas about the most important family values.

2. The husband and wife demonstrate a discrepancy between aspirations and expectations typical of young spouses: the wife is focused on realizing her own professional interests, expecting her husband to actively perform “female” functions in the family, while the husband retains traditional ideas about the role of women in family interactions.

3. This married couple is characterized by a discrepancy between the spouses’ ideal ideas about family values ​​and the husband and wife’s role guidelines for their implementation. Thus, newlyweds, emphasizing the importance of common interests, needs, views and ideas (personal identification) for their life together, focus on the individual style of interpersonal interaction in the family, which is a serious conflict-generating factor.

4.3.3- PEA Questionnaire (understanding, emotional attraction, authority)

The questionnaire is designed to assess the degree of understanding, emotional attraction and respect of partners in marriage.

Description of the technique

The questionnaire consists of 45 statements that relate to the relationship between partners in marriage. The text of the questionnaire contains three scales, reflected in the name of the methodology: understanding, emotional attraction and authority (respect). Each scale includes 15 statement questions.

Spouses are asked to independently review a set of statements and express their agreement or disagreement with each of them.

Instructions: “Here are statements about your understanding of your spouse. You can answer these questions: “Yes” (I agree, this is true), “No” (I disagree, this is not true) or select the answer “I don’t know” (I find it difficult to say). Having chosen the answer, put a “tick” in the appropriate box of the form "

Questionnaire text

1. I I easily read her (his) thoughts.

2. I have difficulty guessing her (his) mood.

3. I understand her (him) without words.

4. It is difficult for me to predict how she (he) will behave in a given situation.

5. I know her (his) tastes and habits well.

6. It is difficult for me to predict her (his) opinion on this or that issue.

7. I know what she (he) wants, what she strives for.

8. It seems to me that I understand her (him) poorly.

9. She (he) often surprises me with actions that I did not expect from her (him).

10. I know her (his) advantages and disadvantages well.

11. Her (his) inner experiences remain a mystery to me.

12. I know what she (he) is capable of and what she is not.

13. I know what is important for her (him) in life.

14. It often turns out that I misunderstood her (him).

15. It’s hard for me to say what can make her (him) sad or happy!

16. Simply her (his) presence has a beneficial effect on me.

18. Her (his) manners irritate me.

19. She (he) has an unpleasant face.

20. I like to watch how she (he) walks, works, sits.

21. Her (his) kisses, touches, affection are unpleasant to me.

22. I like her (his) laughter, smile.

23. I have a hard time being separated from her (him).

24. I clearly don’t like something about her (his) appearance.

25. I often criticize her (his) actions and statements.

26. She (he) often expresses sensible and intelligent thoughts.

27. Her (his) views on many things are unacceptable to me.

28. I value her (his) opinion about me.

29. I am proud that she (he) is my friend.

30. I rarely agree with her (his) opinions and assessments.

31. Next to her (him) I feel light and relaxed.

32. Her (his) presence lifts my spirits.

33. Next to her (him), I get tired easily, get irritated, and lose my temper.

34. I am ready to put aside important things just to be with her (him).

35. I often have a desire to take a break from her (him).

36. I feel better when she (he) is away.

37. I find in her (him) many personal advantages, for which I respect her (him) as a person.

38. Among my friends and relatives, she (he) is the most authoritative person for me.

39. When it’s difficult for me to decide something, I most often consult with her (him).

40. She (he) can easily convince me.

41. I think that her (his) head works well.

42. I am interested in those books and films that made an impression on her (him).

43. She (he) is an interesting person, I don’t get bored with her (him).

44. Sometimes it seems to me that she (he) is a narrow-minded person.

45. She (he) has qualities that I would like to see in myself.

PEA questionnaire form

Processing and interpretation of results

Scoring is done separately for each scale in accordance with the key:

2 points are assigned:

□ for the answer “Yes” (“+”) in questions: 1, 3, 5, 7, 10, 12, 13, 16, 17, 20, 22, 23, 25, 26, 28, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37,39, 41, 42, 45;

□ for the answer “No” (“-”) in questions: 2, 4, 6, 8, 9, 11, 14, 15, 18, 19, 21, 24, 27, 29, 30, 38, 40, 43, 44.

1 point is assigned for the answer “I don’t know” (hard to say); About points - for an answer that does not match With key.

The sum of points within one scale is a numerical measure of the parameter being measured. Thus, the technique allows you to measure the degree of understanding, emotional appeal and respect. The maximum value for each of these scales is 30 points.

1. Understanding(1-15 statements): the assessment of the given scale indicates that the subject has a picture of the partner’s personality, a subjective feeling of knowledge of his individual characteristics. A subject who notes a high understanding of his spouse does not find it difficult to interpret his behavior, thoughts, feelings and intentions and can easily take them into account when communicating with him. Low scores on this scale reflect a lack of understanding - the lack of a clear picture of the partner’s personality, difficulties in interpreting, explaining his thoughts, feelings, and actions.

2. Emotional Attraction(16-30 statements) - the attractiveness of the partner, the desire to communicate, to deal with him, the therapeutic effect of contact on the subject are assessed. Low scores characterize difficulties in communication between partners and a feeling of tiredness from each other.

3. Authority (respect)(31-45 statements) - an indicator of how much the partner is accepted as a person, how much the subject shares his worldview, interests, opinions and accepts them as a standard. Disrespect is contempt for a partner as an individual.

4.3.4. Questionnaire “Love and sympathy scale”

The purpose of the technique is to find out what prevails in relationships: love or sympathy.

Initially, 3. Rubin’s scales of love and sympathy consisted of 2 sets of statements, each of which included 13 points, then, as work on the creation of the methodology, the number of statements was reduced to 9. When compiling the scales of the questionnaire 3. Rubin proceeded from certain theoretical ideas about internal structure of measured phenomena. In particular, three components of love seemed important to measure: affection, care And degree of intimacy of the relationship.

The sympathy scale records: degree of respect, degree of admiration And the degree of perceived similarity between the target and the respondent.

Description of the technique

The final version of the methodology, adapted by L. Ya. Gozman and Yu. E. Aleshina, included 14 points. The procedure takes 5-7 minutes.

Instructions: “Please note the following statements that apply to you and your spouse. For each statement, you must select the answer option that, in your opinion, most corresponds to the existing relationship with him (her). The answer options are as follows: “Yes, that’s true”; "That's probably true"; “This is unlikely to be the case”; "It's not like that at all". Try to answer as frankly as possible. Don't linger long over any statement. And remember: there are no right or wrong answers.”

Text techniques

1. I feel that I can trust him (her) with absolutely everything.

2. When we are together, we always have a similar mood.

3. I can say that he (she) belongs only to me.

4. He (she) is a very smart person.

5. For her (him) I am ready to do absolutely anything.

6. In most cases, people like him (she) almost immediately after meeting him.

8. I think that he (she) and I are internally similar to each other.

9. I feel responsible for making him (she) feel good.

10. I would like to be like him (her).

11. I am pleased to feel that he (she) trusts me more than others.

12. He (she) is one of the most charming men (women) I know.

13. It would be very difficult for me if I had to live without him (her).

14. I am sure that he (she) treats me well.

Processing the results

The love scale includes the following statements: 1,3,5,7,9, 11, 13. The sympathy scale is represented by statements with even numbers 2, 4, 6,8,10,12,14.

Answers are scored as follows: O answer “Yes” - 4 points;

□ answer “Probably so” - 3 points;

□ answer “It’s unlikely that this is so” - 2 points;

□ answer “That’s not true at all” - 1 point.

The points assigned to the answers to each of the statements are summed up separately on the love scale and on the sympathy scale. Final scores can vary from 7 to 28 points. It is possible to calculate the total score on both scales, characterizing the general level of emotional relationships in the dyad (from 14 to 56 points).

4.3.5. Method for diagnosing interpersonal relationships

The method of diagnosing interpersonal relationships (DMR) is a modified version of T. Leary’s interpersonal diagnostics (modified and adapted by L. N. Sobchik).

The purpose of the technique is to study the subject’s ideas about himself and his ideal “I”, ideas about family members. The use of the DME technique in the analysis of family crises allows us to draw a conclusion about the aspirations of the subject in the family sphere; identify areas of probable conflicts; study the psychological compatibility of spouses and interpersonal relationships in the family (identification of the predominant type of relationships in the family). Correlating each spouse's ideas about themselves makes it possible to identify distortions in perception and problems associated with similarities/differences in the manifestation of styles of interpersonal relationships.

Description of the technique

Based on the fact that personality is manifested in behavior actualized in the process of interaction with others, the American psychologist T. Leary systematized empirical observations in the form of 8 general or 16 more detailed (not justified in practice) options for interpersonal interaction. Respectively different types interpersonal behavior, a questionnaire was developed, which is a set of 128 fairly simple characteristics-epithets (Sobchik L.N., 2003).

Each type includes 16 judgments. The methodology is structured in such a way that judgments aimed at identifying any type of relationship are not arranged in a row, but in a special way: they are grouped by 4 and repeated through an equal number of definitions. Thus, the first type of relationship includes judgments numbered: 1-4, 33-36, 65-68, 97-100.

Each subject, when filling out the questionnaire, notes the presence of certain qualities in himself (if necessary, his spouse, his father, his mother or another family member), and also notes what qualities he himself would like to have and what he would like to see in his husband (your wife or other family member).

Instructions: “In front of you is a questionnaire containing various characteristics. You should read each one carefully and think about whether it matches your idea of ​​yourself. If “yes”, then in a special form intended for registering your answers, cross out the figure corresponding to the serial number of the characteristic in the grid of the registration form. If “no”, then do not make any notes on the registration form. Try to be as careful and frank as possible to avoid repeated examinations.

So, you must answer the question: “What kind of person are you?” (the subject completes the task).

Now, using the same characteristics, try to evaluate your ideal idea of ​​yourself, that is, answer the question: “What would I like to be?”

Then, in a similar way, it is asked to evaluate the husband (wife) and his (her) ideal, from the point of view of the respondent.

Questionnaire text

1. Knows how to please.

2. Makes an impression on others.

3. Knows how to manage and give orders.

4. Knows how to insist on his own.

5. Has a sense of dignity.

6. Independent.

7. Able to take care of himself.

8. May show indifference.

9. Capable of being harsh.

10. Strict but fair.

11. Can be sincere.

12. Critical of others.

13. Likes to cry.

14. Often sad.

15. Able to show distrust.

16. Is often disappointed.

17. Capable of being critical of oneself.

18. Able to admit when he is wrong.

19. Willingly obeys.

20. Flexible.

21. Grateful.

22. Admiring and imitative.

23. Respectful.

24. Approval seeker.

25. Capable of cooperation and mutual assistance.

26. Seeks to make friends with others.

27. Benevolent, friendly.

28. Attentive and affectionate.

29. Delicate.

30. Encouraging.

31. Responsive to calls for help.

32. Selfless.

33. Capable of causing admiration.

34. Enjoys respect from others.

35. Has leadership talent.

36. Likes responsibility.

37. Confident.

38. Self-confident and assertive.

39. Businesslike, practical.

40. Competitive.

41. Steadfast and cool where necessary.

42. Relentless, but impartial.

43. Irritable.

44. Open and straightforward.

45. Does not tolerate being commanded.

46. ​​Skeptical.

47. It is difficult to impress him.

48. Touchy, scrupulous.

49. Easily embarrassed.

50. Unsure of yourself.

51. Compliant.

52. Modest.

53. Often resorts to the help of others.

55. Willingly accepts advice.

56. Trusting, strives to please others.

57. Always kind in his dealings.

58. Values ​​the opinions of others.

59. Sociable and easy-going.

60. Kind-hearted.

61. Kind, inspiring confidence.

62. Gentle and kind-hearted.

63. Likes to take care of others.

64. Generous.

65. Likes to give advice.

66. Gives the impression of importance.

67. Commanding and commanding.

68. Bossy.

69. Boastful.

70. Arrogant, self-righteous.

71. Thinks only about himself.

72. Sly.

73. Intolerant of the mistakes of others.

74. Calculating.

75. Frank.

76. Often unfriendly.

77. Embittered.

78. Complainant.

79. Jealous.

80. Remembers insults for a long time.

81. Prone to self-flagellation.

82. Shy.

83. Lack of initiative.

84. Meek.

85. Dependent, dependent.

86. Likes to obey.

87. Lets others make decisions.

88. Gets into trouble easily.

89. Easily influenced by friends.

90. Ready to trust anyone.

91. Kind to everyone indiscriminately.

92. Likes everyone.

93. Forgives everything.

94. Filled with excessive sympathy.

95. Generous and tolerant of shortcomings.

96. Strives to help everyone.

97. Striving for success.

98. Expects admiration from everyone.

99. Gives orders to others.

100. Despotic.

101. Treats others with a sense of superiority.

102. Vain.

103. Selfish.

104. Cold, callous.

105. Sargent, mocking.

106. Angry, cruel.

107. Often angry.

108. Insensitive, indifferent.

109. Grudge-bearer.

BY. Imbued with a spirit of contradiction.

111. Stubborn.

112. Distrustful, suspicious.

113. Timid.

114. Shy.

115. Helpful.

116. Soft-bodied.

117. Almost doesn’t object to anyone.

118. Obsessive.

119. Loves to be looked after.

120. Overly trusting.

121. Strives to gain the favor of everyone.

122. Agrees with everyone.

123. Always friendly with everyone.

124. Loves everyone.

125. Too lenient towards others.

126. Tries to console everyone.

127. Takes care of others to the detriment of himself.

128. Spoils people with excessive kindness.

DMO form

(Depending on the goals and objectives, the required number of tables is added to the form and it is indicated which ideas are being identified: about the real self, the ideal self, about the spouse, etc.)

Processing and interpretation of results

After the subject evaluates himself, his ideal image, husband (wife) and his (her) ideal and fills out the registration form, points are calculated for eight options of interpersonal interaction. To do this, a key is used, with which blocks of 16 numbers each are allocated, forming each of the 8 octants:

I octant: characteristics 1-4, 33-36, 65-68, 97-100;

II octant: characteristics 5-8, 37-40, 69-72, 101-104;

III octant: characteristics 9-12, 41-44, 73-76, 105-108;

IV octant: characteristics 13-16, 45-48, 77-80, 109-112;

V octant: characteristics 17-20, 49-52, 81-84, 113-116;

VI octant: characteristics 21-24, 53-56, 85-88, 117-120;

VII octant: characteristics 25-28, 57-60, 89-92, 121-124;

VIII octant: characteristics 29-32, 61-64, 93-96, 125-128.

Each crossed out number corresponds to one point. The number of points is calculated for each octant. The maximum octant score is 16 points, but it is divided into 4 degrees of relationship severity:

The obtained data (scores) are transferred to the discogram (Fig. 5).

Discogram is a conventional diagram developed by T. Leary to present the results of the technique, having the form of a circle divided into sectors (8 sectors, where each sector corresponds to a certain type of relationship), on the axes of which are indicated: friendliness-hostility (aggression) horizontally, dominance - vertical subordination.

Quantitative indicators for each of the octants - from 0 to 16 - are plotted on the coordinate corresponding to the octant number, each of which is marked with arcs, the distance between them is a multiple of four: 0,4,8,12,16. An arc is drawn at the level corresponding to the points obtained for each octant. The inner part of the octant defined by the arc is shaded. After all the results obtained during the examination are noted and the inner, central part of the discogram circle is shaded to the level outlined by the arcs, a kind of “fan” is obtained. The most shaded octants (that is, those for which the scores were high) correspond to the prevailing style of behavior of a given individual in interpersonal relationships.

Characteristics that do not go beyond 8 points are characteristic of harmonious individuals. Indicators exceeding 8 points indicate an accentuation of the properties revealed by this octant. Scores reaching the level of 14-16 indicate difficulties in social adaptation.

Low scores for all octants (0-3 points) may be the result of the subject’s secrecy and lack of frankness. Accordingly, the data obtained should be considered questionable in terms of their reliability (Sobchik L. N., 2003).

Characteristics of types of attitude towards others

13-16 - dictatorial, domineering, despotic character, a type of strong personality who leads in all types of group activities, instructs, teaches everyone, always strives to rely on his own opinion, does not know how to accept the advice of others. Those around them notice this authority, but acknowledge it.

9-12 - dominant, energetic, competent, authoritative leader, successful in business, loves to give advice, demands respect.

0-8 - a self-confident person, but not necessarily a leader, stubborn and persistent.

2. Egoistic (independent-dominant).

13-16 - strives to be above everyone, but at the same time aloof from everyone, narcissistic, calculating, independent, selfish. He shifts difficulties onto those around him, but he himself treats them somewhat aloofly.

0-12 - egoistic traits, self-orientation, tendency to compete.

9-12 - self-confidence.

0-8 - self-confidence.

3. Aggressive type (straightforward-aggressive).

13-16 - tough, hostile towards others, harsh; aggressiveness can reach the point of antisocial behavior.

9-12 - demanding, straightforward, frank, strict and harsh in assessing others, irreconcilable, inclined to blame others for everything, mocking, ironic.

0-8 - stubborn, tenacious, persistent, energetic.

4. Suspicious (distrustful-skeptical).

13-16 - alienated in relation to a hostile world, suspicious, touchy, inclined to doubt everything, vindictive, constantly complaining about everyone (schizoid character type).

9-12 - critical, experiences difficulties in interpersonal contacts due to suspicion and fear of a bad attitude, closed, skeptical, disappointed in people, secretive, shows his negativism in verbal aggression.

0-8 - critical of all social phenomena and surrounding people.

5. Submissive type (submissive-shy).

13-16 - submissive, prone to self-destruction, weak-willed, inferior to everyone and in everything, always puts himself in last place, condemning himself; ascribes guilt to himself, is passive, seeks to find support in someone stronger.

9-12 - shy, meek, easily embarrassed, inclined to obey a stronger person without taking into account the situation.

0-8 - modest, timid, compliant, emotionally restrained, able to obey, does not have his own opinion, obediently and honestly fulfills his duties.

6. Dependent (dependent-obedient).

With moderate indicators - the need for help and trust from others, for their recognition. At high rates - overconformity, complete dependence on the opinions of others.

7. Friendly (cooperative-conventional).

Reveals the style of interpersonal relationships characteristic of individuals striving for close cooperation with a reference group and friendly relations with others. The excessive degree of expression of this style is manifested by compromising behavior, lack of restraint in outpouring one’s friendliness towards others, and the desire to emphasize one’s involvement in the interests of the majority.

8. Altruistic (responsible-generous).

This type of interpersonal behavior is manifested by an expressed willingness to help others and a developed sense of responsibility (up to 8 points). High scores indicate soft-heartedness, overcommitment, hypersocial attitudes, and emphasized altruism. The extreme form is characterized by hyper-responsibility, the desire to sacrifice oneself and one’s interests, and obsession with one’s help.

The first four types of interpersonal relationships - 1, 2, 3 and 4 - are characterized by the predominance of non-conforming tendencies, of which 3.4 reflect a tendency towards disjunctive (conflict) manifestations, and 1 and 2 - the desire for independence of opinion, persistence in defending one’s own point of view, tendency towards leadership and dominance. The other four octants - 5, 6, 7 and 8 - give the opposite picture: subordination, self-doubt and conformity (5 and 6), a tendency to compromise, congruence and responsibility in contacts with others (7 and 8).

The interpretation of DML data should mainly be guided not by the predominance of some indicators over others, and to a lesser extent - not by absolute values.

Formula for calculating the dominance index (vector V):

V = 1-5+0.7[(2-8)-(6+4)]

Formula for calculating the goodwill index (vector G):

G = 7-3+0.7[(8+7)-(4+3)]

A result that deviates from 1.0, either positively or negatively, reveals the prevailing trends.

Based on the results of this technique, you can get a visual representation of conflict zones and build therapeutic hypotheses about the causes of difficulties in a couple, correlating the spouses’ ideas about themselves and their partner; about the real and ideal partner, presenting them in one table.

Table 10

Consistency of interpersonal relationship styles between spouses

The use of the DME method in the field of family counseling is quite effective: in addition to identifying interpersonal conflict, the method allows a deeper understanding of the causes psychological incompatibility, which can be hidden both in the different characters and behavioral patterns of family members, and in the presence of intrapersonal incongruence (internal conflict) in one of them. In addition, unrealistic ideas about the ideal of a husband, wife, children or parents can play a detrimental role in such situations (Sobchik L.N., 2003).

4.3.6. Methodology “My letter about my spouse”

This technique allows spouses who seek psychological help to systematize mutual claims, grievances, and assessments of each other. As a result, in the author’s opinion, it is advisable to use it in the first stages of counseling. The structured information contained in the methodology can also be valuable for the consultant, providing an opportunity to assess the situation and draw a conclusion about the problem of the couple who applied. So, for example, the coincidence or similar meaning of the first proposed definition of “the most... person for me” allows us to hope for a good and, possibly, quick result of the consultation. On the contrary, completely different definitions from the first line can indicate the causes of frustration as a result of mismatched expectations.

One of the tasks when working with the “My Letter about My Spouse” technique may be to identify the spouses’ ideas about each other, about their marriage, as well as about the main difficulties and problems of the marriage. By reading the form and filling it out, the spouse will be able to better understand, imagine and, possibly, change his attitude towards his partner, whose “Letter” he is reading.

When compiling the text of the methodology, the author was guided by the achievements of “narrative theory”, according to which the life of both an individual and a family can be presented in the form of a told story, to which universal principles of interpretation (exegesis) will be applied. If, at the time of contacting a specialist, this story can be interpreted as the culmination of a tragedy or drama, then the consultant's goal will be to help its participants retell it for themselves in a different narrative key.

Description of the technique

Two spouses who come to the family consultation are asked to silently fill out identical pre-prepared forms with the missing words. Their task is to fill in the missing words. On average, filling time is about half an hour. After this, the spouses exchange “Letters” and read them.

The “Letter” begins with updating ideas about the period preceding marriage. Memories allow you to have a positive outlook on further discussions of marital relationships. The technique restores in memory the first impression of the future spouse, which, most likely, was positive, and also leads to the need to think about the system of personal values ​​and expectations during this period. In the future, the attitude towards various aspects of marriage becomes clearer: goals, time spent together, attitude towards relatives, etc. One way or another, the person filling out the standard form has to constantly return to his own perception of what is happening, to the degree of realization of his expectations, to responsibility for his personal choice.

The last block of the methodology is devoted to assessing the current state of family life and possible options for the development of events. The key word here is “exit”. It emphasizes that the family is experiencing a crisis and at the same time has the resources to overcome it. Responsibility in this situation is shared by both spouses who agreed to write “Letters”. Their ideas about how to resolve the current situation may be similar or, conversely, very different. The task of the psychologist is to help assess the feasibility of the proposed solutions and support the spouses in finding the most adequate way out of the current situation.

The technique can be used in family counseling and therapy. There have been no special studies aimed at validating it and comparing it with existing methods of family diagnostics and family counseling (Belorusov S. A., 1998).

Form “My letter about my spouse”

What can I tell you about the most ................................... person for me, my marriage partner . When we met, the decisive thing for me was.................................... ........................... and for this person - ................... ......................................... Subsequently it turned out that.. ............................

If you joke, then of the animals, he (she) resembles........................ because the main thing in him (her) ..... ................................................, A in me, in my opinion - .................

Our parents................................................ ...............................................

Entering into this marriage, most of all I wanted us to.........

For this I......................................................... ........................................................ .....

I think my marriage partner wanted.................................... ..........

My expectations................................................ ......................... Our marriage as a whole.............. ........................................................ ...................................................

Sometimes we................................................ ..................................... Then I........... ...............

Jealousy towards a partner in marriage I.................................................... ......

We understand each other............ than before. Of course, we have changed, I can say about myself that.................................... ........................................................ ...., and the person next to me.................................... ...................................

Sometimes I think that if things had turned out differently, it would have been just...................... ....By agreeing to write this letter, I can admit, at least within myself, that I have problems. Start with myself: first, I.................................... ........................................., secondly, I have ................................................................................................................................ thirdly, to me -................................... ..........There are things that I perceive as negative qualities in my family partner. For example, I absolutely can’t stand it when.................................... ..........

However, I can put up with the fact that.................................... .............

If I were in his (her) place, I would never...................................... ....................

Of the positive traits of my partner, the three most important for me are:..........

Work for my partner is................................................... but to myself I can say that my goal is....................................... ........................................................

For entertainment, I prefer......................................................... .............and here is my partner.................................. ........................................................ ............

If at the time of the wedding my partner’s rating in my eyes was 10 points, then recently it was.....points. Our difficulties are most associated with................................... ..sphere. The reason for this is that the person with whom my life turned out to be connected could be................................. ........................................................ ................... Our views on family life are practically............................. ........................................................ .............

When we are together, we rarely................................... ......................

Friends and relatives are a source for us....................................

It remains to add that in relation to children......................

It seems to me that the best solution would be

With love................Date of:..................200.... years

After both spouses finish their letters, a period of reflection follows, searching for a new form of behavior. The most correct psychotherapeutic practice in this case would be to maintain such a “creative pause,” with the exception of situations when the spouses do not have questions aimed at clarifying certain nuances of what the other partner wrote.

If spouses do not have enough space when filling out a letter form and they write between the lines, diligently commenting on their position, this often indicates interest and deep reflective involvement. At the same time, some of the “Letters” spaces proposed for filling sometimes remain empty, which gives reason to assume the presence of problem areas in one area or another. In this case, it is recommended to discuss relevant topics.

Introduction

2. APPROACHES TO STUDYING THE PROBLEM OF MARITAL COMPATIBILITY

3.2 Diagnosis of socio-psychological compatibility of spouses

3.2.1 Questionnaire “Role expectations and aspirations in marriage” (ROP)

3.2.2 Questionnaire “Measuring attitudes in a married couple”

CONCLUSION

Literature

APPLICATIONS

Introduction

Marriage and family are among such phenomena, interest in which has always been stable and widespread. For society, the question of knowledge of these social institutions and the ability to manage their development is of paramount importance because the reproduction of the population, the creation and transmission of spiritual values ​​largely depend on their condition.

Many psychologists believe that marital compatibility is the most important condition for the stability and well-being of a married couple. Compatibility is partly defined by its researchers through satisfaction: “If for harmony, sympathy is a secondary element in assessing interaction, then for compatibility, sympathy (as satisfaction with the relationship) is the main element.”

“Compatibility can be described mainly by two characteristics included in the affective component of interaction: indicators of subjective satisfaction with the partner ( psychological sign) and indicators of the emotional and energetic costs of the individual, the participant in communication (physiological sign). At the same time, the emotional background of the relationship is accompanied by some, perhaps the maximum, emotional and energy costs of the communicating partners.” In conditions of informal relationships (intimate-emotional), the optimal interaction will be one that is characterized by maximum satisfaction of partners with the relationship, duration of communication, and frequency of contacts.

1. STUDYING ASPECTS OF MARITAL COMPATIBILITY

A. N. Obozova identified four aspects of marital compatibility, the need to separate which, in her opinion, is justified by the difference in their inherent criteria, patterns and manifestations:

Spiritual compatibility - characterizes the consistency of the goal-setting components of the partners' behavior: attitudes, value orientations, needs, interests, views, assessments, opinions, etc. (the main pattern of spiritual compatibility is the similarity, similarity of the spiritual ways of the spouses);

Personal compatibility - characterizes the correspondence of the structural and dynamic characteristics of partners: properties of temperament, character, emotional-volitional sphere: one of the criteria for personal compatibility is a conflict-free distribution of interpersonal roles. The main pattern of this aspect of spouse compatibility is the complementarity of the structural characteristics of the partners;

Family and household compatibility - functional characteristics of marriage partners: consistency of ideas about the functions of the family and the corresponding way of life, consistency of role expectations and aspirations in the implementation of these functions. The criterion is the effectiveness of raising children;

Physiological compatibility.

Signs of physical, including sexual, compatibility are the harmony of caresses between a man and a woman, physical contact, and satisfaction from intimacy.”

This understanding of marital compatibility is close to the concept of marital satisfaction. Indeed, in this case, compatibility is interpreted as the consistency of attitudes, the similarity of the spiritual ways of the spouses, the conformity of character, the consistency of ideas about the functions of the family - that is, in principle, all this can be designated as ideas about family life, and the implementation of these ideas in marriage determines the assessment spouses of their own marriage, their satisfaction with family relationships.

2. APPROACHES TO STUDYING THE PROBLEM OF MARITAL COMPATIBILITY

Based on the aspects of marital compatibility identified by A. N. Obozova, all studies on this problem can be divided into three groups:

1. Structural approach focused on the study of personal compatibility - the relationship between various static characteristics of spouses: characterological, intellectual, motivational, etc. In this case, the compatibility of spouses is expressed in the ability to form a harmonious couple: a structure that has signs of integrity, balance, completeness. The basis for such studies was R. Winch’s hypothesis about the so-called complementarity, according to which the needs of partners, members of a small group (in this case, such a group is the family), should complement each other in the quality of their personal properties.

2. Functional approach based on the representation of the individual through his roles and functions in the group. In relation to marriage, the functional approach is expressed in the study of the relationship between the psychological family roles of spouses and their ideas about the family. Compatibility in this case acts as agreement, similarity of ideas, expectations of spouses about family life, consistency of roles in a married couple.

Proponents of the functional approach believe that if family members understand their roles differently and present each other with inconsistent expectations and requirements rejected by the partner, the family is obviously incompatible and conflict-ridden.

Interesting work in this vein was carried out by T. A. Gurko. She found that in cases where women are satisfied with their husband’s participation in household chores, they are more often satisfied with the marriage (50%, dissatisfied - 19%). On the contrary, dissatisfaction with the spouse’s attitude towards household affairs clearly correlates with dissatisfaction with family life (12% and 58%, respectively). According to the nature of the distribution of responsibilities, all families are divided into 3 groups: with significant, moderate and weak participation of the husband in housework. It was found that the number of women dissatisfied with marriage increases significantly when moving from the first to the second and third groups of families, while the number of satisfied women, on the contrary, decreases.

Interestingly, the level of marital satisfaction among men changes in the same direction, although not as significantly. Apparently, if a husband withdraws from housework, the wife constantly expresses dissatisfaction about this.

3. And finally third approach to study compatibility - adaptive- focuses on the study of weak, problematic aspects of marital relationships that cause conflicts, disagreements, and misunderstandings. This approach is, on the one hand, common to the two above, and at the same time a special direction. Its task is to search for reserves for adaptation of spouses to each other through harmonization of the marital union. This approach is most fully implemented in practical work to provide psychological assistance family, in particular family consultation.

So, the concept of marital compatibility is one way or another defined through the concepts of marital satisfaction and stability, while many researchers understand marital compatibility as something static. However, we must not forget that each family is unique, and there is no psychological pattern that applies to everyone without exception.

For diagnosis, I chose 3 young married couples without children, with the same age difference.

1. Skripnik Tatyana Ravilyevna (25 years old) and Gennady Petrovich (30 years old) - married for 4 years.

2. Polyukhovich Oksana Vladimirovna (26 years old) and Vladimir Evstafievich (31 years old) - married for 6 years.

3. Yakimets Tatyana Nikolaevna (24 years old) and Yuri Vladimirovich (29 years old) - married for 5 years.

3. DIAGNOSTICS OF MARITAL COMPATIBILITY

3.1 Diagnosis of psychophysiological compatibility of spouses

Research in the field of psychology of sexuality, although it has a long history, however, much remains to be done in order to help people better, to know themselves, to solve problems that cause trouble, to prevent conflict situations that are so often and so painfully experienced by both men and women. women. For this purpose, methods of psychological diagnostics in the field of psychology of sexuality are needed.

3.1.1 Methodology for assessing sexual profile

Purpose: diagnostics of sexual behavior characteristics.

Description of the methodology: it contains 14 main scales that make up the distribution of polar forms of sexual behavior, as well as individual questions relating to certain forms of sexual behavior. The technique has the advantage of being easy to process the data obtained, which is important when conducting individual consultations, especially in the form method.

Procedure for carrying out the technique: subjects are asked to answer questions by filling out the protocol form below.

Instructions: “Answer the following questions in two ways: “Yes” or “+” if your behavior corresponds to an affirmative answer to the question, and “No” or “-” if your answer is negative.”

Data processing (see Appendix 1).

Data interpretation

The results of processing the questionnaires of married couple No. 1 showed the following:

The wife is characterized by a violent manifestation of her feelings, emotional expressiveness and relaxed reactions, while the husband is characterized by calmer behavior, and emotional outbursts in behavior are less observable. The husband's characteristic feature is restraint;

When communicating with people of the opposite sex, the spouses do not have any problems; they are both confident in their sexual capabilities. This gives me the right to assume that in this regard, the spouses easily understand each other, which makes it possible for them to communicate easily and relaxedly in any society;