Self-Assessment and Basic Personal Beliefs: Content of the Relationship and Peculiarities of the Research | South-Russian Journal of Social Sciences
Self-Assessment and Basic Personal Beliefs: Content of the Relationship and Peculiarities of the Research
Vol. 19 (2018) No. 3, Psychology of Personality
Vol. 19 (2018) No. 3
Psychology of Personality

Self-Assessment and Basic Personal Beliefs: Content of the Relationship and Peculiarities of the Research

Fomenko G.Yu.
Kuban State University
Frolov A.A.
Krasnodar University of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia
ORCID ID 0000-0001-7603-2621
PDF (Russian)
https://doi.org/10.31429/26190567-19-3-58-74
https://doi.org/10.31429/26190567-19-3-58-74

How to Cite Array

Fomenko G.Yu., Frolov A.A. (2018) Self-Assessment and Basic Personal Beliefs: Content of the Relationship and Peculiarities of the Research. South-Russian Journal of Social Sciences, 19 (3), pp. 58-74. DOI: 10.31429/26190567-19-3-58-74 (In Russian)
Submission Date 2018-06-30
Accepted Date 2018-08-23
Published Date 2018-09-27

Copyright (c) 2018 Галина Юрьевна Фоменко, Алексей Анатольевич Фролов

Creative Commons License

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

Abstract

Modern psychological research in the sphere of ensuring personal safety and law-and-order domain focuses on shaping standard qualities for the personnel. In this connection, it is necessary to update explorative tools, to improve forms and methods of work, and introduce new psychological mechanisms. The diagnostics and description of self-assessment and basic personal beliefs of those who work in law-enforcement agencies are of special scientific interest. The authors of the paper put forward the hypothesis about the connection of basic personal beliefs and the determining role of self-assessment. The diagnostics of self-assessment was carried out with the help of methodology worked out by S. A. Budassi. Personal beliefs were analyzed on the basis of M. Padun and A. Kotel’nikova’s methodology modified by R. Yanoff-Bul’man. The research is based on the selection provided by polling 400 employees of law-enforcement agencies representing most subdivisions of Internal Affairs Agencies, as well as cadets and attendees of Krasnodar University of IAA, both males and females (18–48 years of age), with different employment period in IAA. As a result, five groups of employees with different levels of self-assessment have been extracted. The data obtained in the course of analysis were compared with basic beliefs. Processing the data with the help of IBM® SPSS Statistics 22 has verified the authors’ hypothesis about the inner connection between self-assessment and basic personal beliefs. It has been proved that the most radical differences exist between the employees with overestimated and underestimated levels of basic personal beliefs. The first group of employees mistrusts reality and consider the surrounding world unsafe and hostile; the second group think that the world around is friendly, especially because they themselves participate in ensuring their own safety. Yet the level of friendliness depends on their perception of safety in the surrounding world. The average rate of self-assessment predetermines their goodwill towards reality and the level of their efficiency. The second group considers that reality is friendly in proportion to the decisions taken / made by the administrative elite of the society.

Keywords

self-assessment, basic beliefs, personality, justice, luck, positive worldview, goodwill of the world around, locus of (internal-external) control

References

  1. Baumeister, R. F., Tice, D. M. & Hutton, D. G. (1989). Self-Presentational Motivations and Personality Differences in Self-Esteem. Journal of Personality, 57, 547–579.
  2. Berns, R. (2003). Ya-kontseptsiya i YA-obrazy [Ya-concept and Ya-images]. In D. Ya. Raigorodskij (Ed.) Samosoznanie i zashhitnye mekhanizmy lichnosti [Consciousness and Protective Mechanisms of the Personality]. Samara: Izd dom “Bakhrakh”.
  3. Borozdina, L. V. (1999). Teoretiko-ehksperimental’noe issledovanie samootsenki [Theoretical and Experimental Study of Self-Assessment]: dis. … d-ra psikhol. nauk. Moskva.
  4. Coon, D. & Mitterer, J. O. (2010). Introduction to Psychology: Gateways to Mind and Behavior. Wadsworth Cengage Learning.
  5. Coopersmith, S. (1959). A method for determing types of self-esteem. Journal of Abnormal and Social psychology, 59 (1), 87–94.
  6. Doyle, A. C. (1894). The Memoirs of Sherlock Holmes. London: George Newnes.
  7. Federal’nyj zakon “O sotsial’nykh garantiyakh sotrudnikam organov vnutrennikh del Rossijskoj Federatsii i vnesenii izmenenij v otdel’nye zakonodatel’nye akty Rossijskoj Federatsii” ot 19.07.2011 N247-FZ [Federal Law “About Social Guarantees to Staff of Bodies of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation and Introduction of Amendments to Separate Acts of the Russian Federation” from 19.07.2011 N247-FZ].
  8. Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive–developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34 (10), 906–911.
  9. Fomenko, G. Yu. (2004). Paradoksal’nost’ kak konstituiruyushhee kachestvo professional’nogo bytiya psikhologa [Paradoxicality as the Constituting Quality of Professional Life of the Psychologist]. Chelovek. Soobshhestvo. Upravlenie [Human. Community. Management], 1, 69–84.
  10. Frolov, А. А. (2016). Issledovanie vzaimosvyazi vidov samootsenki i urovnej pravovogo samosoznaniya lichnosti sotrudnikov pravookhranitel’nykh organov [The Research of Interrelation Between Types of Self-Esteem and Levels of Legal Consciousness of Law Enforcement Officers]. Chelovek. Soobshhestvo. Upravlenie [Human. Community. Management], 17 (2), 26–40.
  11. Glover, EH. (1999). Frejd ili Yung [Freud or Jung]. SPb.: Аkademicheskij proekt.
  12. Hofstede, G., Hofstede, G. J. & Minkov, M. (2010). Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind. McGraw-Hill.
  13. Karabash, D. V. (2015). Formirovanie zhiznennykh i professional’nykh tsennostnykh orientatsij lichnosti v protsesse obucheniya v obrazovatel’noj organizatsii MVD Rossii [The Formation of Vital and Professional System of Values of a Personality in the Course of Training in an Education Organization of the Ministry of the Interior of Russia]. Vestnik Krasnodarskogo universiteta MVD Rossii [Bulletin of Krasnodar University of Russian MIA], 4 (30), 246–249.
  14. Kessel, M., Kratzer, J. & Schultz, C. (2012). Psychological safety, knowledge sharing, and creative performance in healthcare teams. Creativity and innovation management, 2 (21), 147–157.
  15. Leeuwenberg, E. & van der Helm, P. A. (2013). Structural information theory: The simplicity of visual form. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  16. Meshheryakov, B. G. & Zinchenko, V. P. (Eds.). (2009). Bol’shoj psikhologicheskij slovar’ [Big Psychological Dictionary]. Moskva: АST, Prajm-Evroznak.
  17. Mruk, C. (1999). Self-esteem: Research, theory, and practice (2nd ed.). N. Y.: Springer.
  18. Nikireev, E. M. (2007). Psikhologicheskie osobennosti napravlennosti lichnosti: Uchebnoe posobie [Psychological Features of Orientation of the Personality: Textbook]. Moskva: Moskovskij psikhologo-sotsial’nyj institut.
  19. Padun, M. А. & Kotel’nikova, А. V. (2008). Modifikatsiya metodiki issledovaniya bazisnykh ubezhdenij lichnosti R. Yanoff-Bul’man [Modification of Core Beliefs of Personality Questionnaire (R. Janoff-Bulman’s)]. Psikhologicheskij zhurnal [Psychological magazine], 29 (4), 98–106.
  20. Pavlova, S. А. (2014). Formirovanie ehmotsional’noj ustojchivosti u sotrudnikov organov vnutrennikh del [Formation of emotional stability at staff of bodies of internal affairs]. In Аkmeologiya. Spetsial’nyj vypusk po materialam IX Mezhdunarodnoj nauchnoj konferentsii “Аkmeologiya: lichnostnoe i professional’noe razvitie cheloveka” [Akmeology. Special Release on Materials IX of the International Scientific Conference “Akmeology: Personal and Professional Development of the Person”] (pp. 175–176).
  21. Putnam, R. (1995). Bowling Alone: America’s Declining Social Capital. Journal of Democracy, 6 (1), 65–78.
  22. Rogers, C., Dymond, R. (1957). Psychotherapy and Personality Change. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  23. Ryabikina, Z. I. & Fomenko, G. YU. (2010). Lichnost’ v professii: teoretiko-ehmpiricheskaya interpretatsiya v kontekste sub»ektno-bytijnogo podkhoda [The Personality in Profession: Theoretical and Empirical Interpretation in the Context of the Subjective and the Event-Driven Approaches]. In L. G. Dikaya, A. Juravlev (Eds.) Sotsial’naya psikhologiya truda teoriya i praktika [Social Labour Psychology: Theory and Practice], Moskva: Izdatel’stvo “Institut psikhologii RАN”, 1, 82–101.
  24. Stolyarenko, L. D. (2000). Osnovy psikhologii [Fundamentals of Psychology]. Izdanie 3-e, pererabotannoe i dopolnennoe. Rostov-na-Donu: Feniks.
  25. Stolyarenko, А. M. (Ed.). (2001). Prikladnaya yuridicheskaya psikhologiya [Applied Legal Psychology]. Moskva: Yuniti-Dana.
  26. Zimbardo, P. (2006). Formirovanie samootsenki [Formation of a Self-Assessment]. Samosoznanie i zashhitnye mekhanizmy lichnosti: Khrestomatiya [Consciousness and Protective Mechanisms of the Personality: Anthology]. Samara: BАKHRАKH-M.
  27. Zimbardo, Р. G. & Sword, R. (2012). Overcome PTSD with new psychology of time perspective therapy. N. Y.: Willey.
  28. Znakov, V. V. (2016). XXI vek: Izmeneniya v mire cheloveka i novyj ehtap razvitiya psikhologii sub”ekta [21st Century: Changes in the World of the Person and New Stage of Development of Psychology of the Subject]. In Lichnost’ i bytie: chelovek kak sub”ekt sotsiokul’turnoj real’nosti [Personality and Life: Person as a Subject of Sociocultural Reality] (Materials of the All-Russian Scientific and Practical Conference (September 9–10, 2016)) (pp. 5–14). Krasnodar.