Ego-Identity and Value Orientation of Men And Women in Unregistered Relationships and Who Are Married | South-Russian Journal of Social Sciences
Ego-Identity and Value Orientation of Men And Women in Unregistered Relationships and Who Are Married
Vol. 21 (2020) No. 3, Psychology of Personality
Vol. 21 (2020) No. 3
Psychology of Personality

Ego-Identity and Value Orientation of Men And Women in Unregistered Relationships and Who Are Married

Ryabikina Z.I.
Kuban State University
ORCID ID 0000-0001-7396-0115
Khozyainova T.K.
Kuban State University
ORCID ID 0000-0002-7895-8214
Bosenko M.V.
Kuban State University
ORCID ID 0000-0003-3943-751X
Averina E.N.
Kuban State University
ORCID ID 0000-0003-1056-8989
PDF (Russian)
https://doi.org/10.31429/26190567-21-3-78-96
https://doi.org/10.31429/26190567-21-3-78-96

How to Cite Array

Ryabikina Z.I., Khozyainova T.K., Bosenko M.V., Averina E.N. (2020) Ego-Identity and Value Orientation of Men And Women in Unregistered Relationships and Who Are Married. South-Russian Journal of Social Sciences, 21 (3), pp. 78-96. DOI: 10.31429/26190567-21-3-78-96 (In Russian)
Submission Date 2020-08-19
Accepted Date 2020-09-12
Published Date 2021-03-31

Copyright (c) 2020 Зинаида Ивановна Рябикина, Татьяна Константиновна Хозяинова, Марина Вилоровна Босенко, Елена Николаевна Аверина

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Abstract

Unmarried marital relations between men and women are becoming increasingly common in modern society, which explains the attention of researchers in the field of family problems to this topic. The article examines the personality of men and women in unregistered relationships and in marriage. The study showed a connection between the decision to establish a family and the choice of the status of the relationship (formalized in the civil registry or unregistered relationship) with the status of the ego-identity of the man and the woman and their value orientation. To diagnose the structure of ego-identity, the E.L.Soldatova’s “Status Test and Ego-­Identity Structure (SEI-Test) methodology was applied”; to study the value system, S.Schwarz’s questionnaire was used. Sixty-four persons participated in the study: 16 couples in unregistered relationships and 16 married couples. The age of the respondents was 25–35 years. The study showed that in the situation of unregistered relationships, both men and women have a reduced level of personal certainty. At the same time, marriage matures a man more than it does a woman. This is reflected in men’s higher autonomous status and, the lower diffuse status index significantly different from that of women. Value comparisons showed that men (regardless of the status in their relationships with a woman) share a relatively high value for personal success, as well as the desire to maintain autonomy and control over the situation in relationships. The difference between men was only in their assessment of hedonism. Men in unregistered relationships value the desire to enjoy life. And it’s more likely to be the regulator of their behavior. A comparison of the values of women showed that for married women, the well-being of the family and people close to them is a priority value.

Keywords

ego-identity status, value orientation, personal maturity, registered marriage, unregistered relationship(s)

References

  1. Adushkina, K. V. (2009). Sovremennaya zhenshchina kak sub"ekt semeynykh otnosheniy [A Modern Woman as a Subject of Family Relations]. In Aktual'nye problemy psikhologii lichnosti: sb. nauchnykh trudov (pp. 5–9) [Topical Problems of Personality Psychology: Collection of scientific works]. Ekaterinburg: UrGPU.
  2. Akimenko, N. K, Baginskaya, S. V. (2014). Izuchenie tsennostey sem'i i osoznanie semeynykh roley sovremennoy molodezh' [Study of Values of The Family and Realization of Family Roles by Modern Youth]. Lichnost', sem'ya i obshchestvo: voprosy pedagogiki i psikhologii [Personality, Family and Society: Questions of Pedagogy and Psychology], 38, 211–217.
  3. Alekseyeva, L. S. (2005). Nepolnaya sem'ya: sostoyaniye i tendentsii razviti [Single-Parent Family: State and Development Trends]. Otechestvennyy zhurnal sotsial'noy raboty [National Journal of Social Work], 2, 49–50.
  4. Almo, H. S. (1978). Without Benefit of Clergy: Cohabitation as a Noninstitutionalized Marriage Role. In K. Knalf, H. Grace (Eds) Families across the life cycle: Studies from nursing. Boston.
  5. Andreeva, T. V. (2009). Sotsial'no-psikhologicheskie problemy stabil'nosti i uspeshnosti brachno-semeynykh otnosheniy [Socio-Psychological Problems of Stability and Success of Marriage and Family Relations]. Vestnik SPbGU [Vestnik of St. Petersburg State University], 12(1), 129–140.
  6. Bagdanova, L. P., Shchukina, A. S. (2003). Grazhdanskiy brak v sovremennoy demograficheskoy situatsii [Civil Marriage in Current Demographic Situation]. Sotsial'nye issledovaniya [Sociological Studies], 7(231), 100–105.
  7. Blumstein P., Schwartz, P. (1983). American Couples. New York: Morrow.
  8. Borisenkov V. P., Gukalenko, O. V. (2014). Institut sem'i i semeynaya politika v sovremennoy Rossii: problemy, tendentsii i perspektivy [The Institution of The Family and Family Policy in Modern Russia: Problems, Trends and Prospects]. Internet-zhurnal “Naukovedenie” [Internet Magazine “Science Studies”], 5(24). Retrieved from https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/institut-semi-i-semeynaya-politika-v-sovremennoy-rossii-problemy-tendentsii-i-perspektivy/viewer
  9. Bronfenbrenner, Ur. (1982). The Changing Family in a Changing World America First? Paris: UNESCO.
  10. Demaris, A., Leslie, G. (1984). Cohabitation with a Future Spouse: Its Influence Upon Marital Satisfaction and Communication. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 46, 77–84.
  11. Dementiy, L. I. (2003). Otvetstvennost' kak resurs lichnosti v semeynykh otnosheniyakh [The Civil Marriage as Destructor of Family Institute]. Vestnik OmGU [Herald of Omsk University], 2, 81–84.
  12. Erikson, E. (1996). Identichnost': yunost' i krizis [Identity: Youth and Crisis]. Moscow: Progress.
  13. Eydemiller, E. G., Yustitskis V. V. (2001). Psikhologiya i psikhoterapiya sem'i [Psychology and Psychotherapy of the Family]. SPb: Piter.
  14. Galkina, E. P., Kadnichanskaya, M. I. (2015). Transformatsiya instituta sem'i v usloviyakh sovremennykh modernizatsionnykh protsessov [Transformation of The Institution of Family in Today's Modernization Process]. Vestnik OmGU [Herald of Omsk University. Series: Economics], 3, 193–200.
  15. Gurko, T. A. (2003). Roditel'stvo: sotsiologicheskie aspekty [Parenthood: Sociological Aspects]. Moscow: Institut sotsiologii RAN.
  16. Kotova, I. B., Groza, I. V. (2012). Empiricheskoe izuchenie vozmozhnostey razvitiya lichnosti v kontekste supruzheskogo vzaimodeystviya [The Empirical Study of The Possibilities of Personal Development in The Context of Marital Interaction]. Gumanizatsiya obrazovaniya [Humanization of Education], 2, 53–59.
  17. Kovaleva, A. V. (2009). Grazhdanskiy brak kak destabilizator instituta sem'i. Vlast' i upravleniye na Vostoke Rossii [Civil marriage as a destabilizer of the institution of the family]. Vlast' i upravlenie na Vostoke Rossii [Power and Administration in the East of Russia], 1(46), 142–148.
  18. Craig, G. (2002). Psikhologiya razvitiya [Development Psychology]. SPb: Piter.
  19. Kuchmaeva, O. V., Kuchmaev, M. G., Petryakova, O. L. (2009). Transformatsiya instituta sem'i i semeynye tsennosti [Transformation of Institution of Family and Family Values]. Vestnik slavyanskikh kul'tur [Bulletin of Slavic Cultures], 3, 20–29.
  20. Kurdek, L., Schmitt, J. (1986). Early Development of Relationship Quality in Heterosexual Married, Heterosexual Cohabiting, Gay, and Lesbian Couples. Developmental Psychology, 48, 305–309.
  21. Mal'kova I. N. (2015). Semeynaya istoriya kak faktor formirovaniya materinskogo otnosheniya [Family History as a Factor of Shaping Motherhood] (Abstract of Candidate Dissertation). Yaroslavl'.
  22. Marcia, J. E. (1966). Development and Validation of Ego Identity Status. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 3, 551–558.
  23. Pakhomova, E. I. (2008). Braki i razvody: chto izmenilos' v predstavleniyakh rossiyan [Marriages and Divorces: What Has Changed in the Perceptions of Russians]. Monitoring [Monitoring], 1(85), 128–135.
  24. Papa, O. M. (2012). Sozhitel'stvo kak al'ternativa braku [Cohabitainos as Alternative to Marriage]. Sovremennye issledovaniya sotsial'nykh problem (elektronnyy nauchnyy zhurnal) [Russian Journal of Education and Psychology], 2(10), 20.
  25. Pyankova, L. A. (2015). Retrospektivnyy analiz problemy materinstva kak usloviya psikhologo-pedagogicheskoy i sotsial'noy podderzhki detstva [Retrospective Analysis of The Problems of Motherhood as Conditions of Psycho-Pedagogical and Social Support of Childhood]. Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo pedagogicheskogo universiteta [Tomsk State Pedagogical University Bulletin], 6(159), 43–49.
  26. Rean, A. A. (2017). Sem'ya v strukture tsennostey molodezhi [A Family in The Structure of Values of Young People]. Rossiyskiy psikhologicheskiy zhurnal [Russian Psychological Journal], 14(1), 62–76.
  27. Rean, A. A., Andreeva T. V. (2009). Psikhologicheskie problemy grazhdanskogo braka [Psychological Problems of "Common-Law Marriage"]. Vestnik Baltiyskogo federal'nogo universiteta im. I. Kanta. Seriya: Filologiya, pedagogika, psikhologiya [Vestnik IKBFU. Philology, Pedagogy, and Psychology], 5, 36–44
  28. Ryabikina, Z. I., Khozyainova, P. M. (2018). Otsutstvie muzhchiny v sem'e kak oslozhnennaya zhiznennaya situatsiya, obuslovlivayushchaya maskulinizatsiyu zhenshchiny [Absence of a Man in the Family as a Complicated Life Situation Leading to Masculization of a Woman]. In Lichnost' v trudnykh zhiznennykh situatsiyakh: resursy i preodolenie: materialy Mezhdunarodnoy nauchno-prakticheskoy konferentsii (pp. 93–96) [The Individual in Difficult Life Situations: Resources and oveyrcoming: Proceedings of the International Scientific and Practical Conference]. Omsk: Izdatel'stvo Omskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta.
  29. Ryabikina, Z. I., Tivodar, A. R. (2011). Lichnostnaya identichnost' v supruzheskikh otnosheniyakh [Personal Identity in Matrimonial Relations]. Chelovek. Soobshchestvo. Upravlenie [Human. Community. Management]. 4, 4–12.
  30. Shkurko, T. A. (2019). Prediktory i korrelyaty emotsional'nogo otnosheniya k svoemu vneshnemu obliku i vneshnemu obliku partnera u suprugov, sostoyashchikh v zaregistrirovannom i nezaregistrirovannom brake [Predictors and Correlates of The Emotional Attitude to One’s Own Appearance and to the Appearance of One’s Partner in Registered and Unregistered Marriages]. Yuzhno-rossiyskiy zhurnal sotsial'nykh nauk [South-Russian Journal of Social Sciences], 3, 167–186.
  31. Schneider L. B. (2003). Osnovy semeynoy psikhologii [Fundamentals of Famikly Psychology]. Moscow Voronezh: Modek.
  32. Schneider L. B. (2002). Psikhologicheskoye konsul'tirovaniye [Psychological Counseling]. Moscow: Izhitsa.
  33. Soldatova, E. L. (2007). Normativnye krizisy razvitiya lichnosti vzroslogo cheloveka [Normative Crises of Adult Development] (Abstract of Doctoral Dissertation). Ekaterinburg.
  34. Tarasova, E. O. (2015). Problemy razvoda v sovremennoy sem'e [The Problems of Divorce in Modern Family]. Vlast' [Vlast’], 23(1), 141–145.
  35. Tarasova, E. V. (2015). Spetsifika supruzheskikh otnosheniy v ofitsial'nykh i grazhdanskikh brakakh [The Specificity of The Marital Relationship in Official and Civil Marriages]. MGUU. Vestnik universiteta [Vestnik Universiteta], 3, 295–297.
  36. Tikhomandritskaya, O. A., Dubovskaya, E. M. (1999). Osobennosti sotsial'no-psikhologicheskogo izucheniya tsennostey kak elementov kognitivnoy i potrebnostno-motivatsionnoy sfery [Features of the Socio-Psychological Study of Values as Elements of the Cognitive and Need-Motivational Spheres]. Mir psikhologii [Mir psikhologii], 3, 80–90.
  37. Tronina L. N. (2010). Etiko-psikhologicheskiye problemy sovremennogo materinstva [Ethical and Psychological Problems of Modern Motherhood] (Candidate Dissertation). Tula.
  38. Tverdostup, K. G. (2014). Sistema tsennostey suprugov kak faktor udovletvorennosti brakom [The Value System of Spouses as a Factor in Marriage Satisfaction]. Nauka i sovremennost' [Science and Modernity], 33, 116–121.
  39. Volkova, A. N., Yakushenko, E. G. (2009). Odinokoe materinstvo: psikhologicheskiy portret problem [Single Maternity: Psychological Analyze of The Problem]. Vestnik LGU im. A. S. Pushkina, seriya Psikhologiya [Pushkin Leningrad State University Journal], 1, 123–136.
  40. Zhuravlev, A. L., Soina, I. A. (2012) Rol' tsennostnykh orientatsiy lichnosti v formirovanii ee sotsial'no-psikhologicheskogo prostranstva [The Role of Person’s Value Orientations in The Formation of Its Social and Psychological Space]. Znanie. Ponimanie. Umenie [Knowledge. Understanding. Skill], 4, 218–226.
  41. Zhuravlev, A. L., Yurkevich, A. V. (Eds). (2009). Makropsikhologiya sovremennogo rossiyskogo obshchestva [Macropsychology of Modern Russian Society]. Moscow: Izdatel'stvo “Institut psikhologii RAN”.