Self-Organization of Personal Positioning Systems in the Space of Co-Existence | South-Russian Journal of Social Sciences
Self-Organization of Personal Positioning Systems in the Space of Co-Existence
Vol. 23 (2022) No. 1, Psychology of Personality
Vol. 23 (2022) No. 1
Psychology of Personality

Self-Organization of Personal Positioning Systems in the Space of Co-Existence

Ryabikina S.N.
International Innovation University
ORCID ID 0000-0003-4627-2733
Ryabikina Z.I.
Kuban State University
ORCID ID 0000-0001-7396-0115
PDF (Russian)
https://doi.org/10.31429/26190567-23-1-133-145
https://doi.org/10.31429/26190567-23-1-133-145

How to Cite Array

Ryabikina S.N., Ryabikina Z.I. (2022) Self-Organization of Personal Positioning Systems in the Space of Co-Existence. South-Russian Journal of Social Sciences, 23 (1), pp. 133-145. DOI: 10.31429/26190567-23-1-133-145 (In Russian)
Submission Date 2022-02-11
Accepted Date 2022-03-15
Published Date 2022-07-30

Copyright (c) 2022 Светлана Николаевна Петросьян, Зинаида Ивановна Рябикина

Creative Commons License

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

Abstract

Developing the ideas set forth by M. Buber, B. D. Parygin, Z. I. Ryabikina, respectively, and establishing the research methodology on the principles of synergy, we worked out a subject-­dynamic approach to studying personality which emphasizes the role of personal positioning systems in the processes of subjectivity development. These ontogenetically determined systems emerge occur within the space of co-existence, and are simultaneously the process and the result of the human-­world interaction. Self-organization of personal advances in the direction of four vectors: Infantile, Aggressive, Sabotaging, Powerful. As the given systems predetermine the typical character and orientation of a subject’s activity, we offered to qualify them as types of subjective activity. The research became possible due to the development of “The Dispositional Model of the Structure of Subjective Activity” and “The Personal Profile of Subjective Activity” inventory method created on the basis of the above-­mentioned Model. This inventory method tests the profile of subjective activity system as an individual systemic formation. Factorization of these techniques makes it possible to identify allowed to reveal sets of personal orientations as cross-­cutting organizing principles, or types. The system of positioning immature types of agentive activity (Infantile, Aggressive, Sabotaging) prevents genuine self-actualization. The system of positioning of the Powerful Mighty subjective activity establishes the formation organization of such system as one that is aimed at the self-realization and self-actualization of the subject.

Keywords

co-existence, personal positioning, type of subjective activity, dynamic system, self-organization

References

  1. Allport, G. (1937). Personality: A Psychological Interpretation. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.
  2. Bandura, A. (1999). A Social Cognitive Theory of Personality. In L. Pervin & O. John (Ed.), Handbook of Personality (pp. 154–196). New York: Guilford Publications.
  3. Bourdieu, P. (1993). Sotsiologiya politiki [Sociology of Politics]. Moscow: Socio-Logos.
  4. Buber, M. (1995). Dva obraza very [Two types of faith]. Moscow: Respublika.
  5. Giordano, P. (2015). Being or Becoming: Toward an Open-System, Process-Centric Model of Personality. Integrative psychological & Behavioral Science, 49. DOI: 10.1007/s12124–015–9329-z
  6. Giordano, P. J. (2017). Individual Personality is Best Understood as Process, not Structure: A Confucian Inspired Perspective. Culture & Psychology, 23(4), 502–518.
  7. Hjelle, L., Ziegler, D. (1981). Personality Theories. Basic Assumptions, Research, and Applications. New York: McGraw-Hill
  8. Knyazeva, Ye. N., Kurdyumov, S. P. (1994). Zakony evolyutsii i samoorganizatsii slozhnykh system [Laws of Evolution and Self-Organization of Complex Systems]. Moskva: Nauka.
  9. Knyazeva, Ye. N., Kurdyumov, S. P. (2002). Osnovaniya sinergetiki: Rezhimy s obostreniyem, samoorganizatsiya, tempomiry [Foundations of Synergetics: Regimes with Aggravation, Self-Organization, and Temporal World]. Sankt-Peterburg: Aleteyya.
  10. Kuper, N., Modersitzki, N., Phan, Le Vy & Rauthmann, J. (2020). The Dynamics, Processes, Mechanisms, and Functioning of Personality: An Overview of the Field. British Journal of Psychology, 112, DOI: 10.1111/bjop.12486
  11. Milnor, J. (1985). On the Concept of Attractor. Communications in Mathematical Physics, 99, 177–195.
  12. Mironenko, I. A. (2018, February/June). Personality as a Social Process: Where Peter Giordano meets Boris Parygin. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 52(4). DOI: 10.1007/s12124-018-9417-y
  13. Mungalov, V. N. (2012). Psikhologicheskiye prostranstva cheloveka [Psychological Human Space]. Sibirskiy psikhologicheskiy zhurnal [Siberian Psychological Journal], 45, 104–111.
  14. Nowak, A., Vallacher, R. & Zochowski, M. (2005). The Emergence of Personality: Dynamic Foundations of Individual Variation. Developmental Review, 25, 351–385. DOI: 10.1016/j.dr.2005.10.004
  15. Parygin, B. D. (1999). Sotsial’naya psikhologiya. Problemy metodologii, istorii i teorii [Social Psychology. Problems of Methodology, History and Theory]. Sankt-Peterburg: IGUP.
  16. Petros’yan, S. N., Ryabikina, Z. I. (2020). Tipy sub»yektnoy aktivnosti: sub»yektno-bytiynyy podkhod [Types of Subjective Activity: the Subject-being Approach]. In Z. I. Ryabikina, V. V. Znakov (Eds) Lichnost’ i vyzovy sovremennosti: interpretatsiya problem razlichnymi nauchnymi shkolami [Personality and the Challenges of Modernity: Interpretation of Problems by Different Scientific Schools] (pp. 54–57). Maykop: Adygeyskiy gos. un-t; Krasnodar: Kubanskiy gos. un-t.
  17. Petros’yan, S. N., Ryabikina, Z. I., Gubanova, N. Yu. (2021). Strukturnaya validnost’ metodiki “Lichnostnyy profil’ sub»yektnoy aktivnosti” [Structural Validity of The Methodology «Personality’s Agency Activity (PAA) Profile”]. Gumanizatsiya obrazovaniya [Humanization of Education], 1, 41–58. DOI: 10.24411/1029-3388-2020-10148
  18. Petros’yan, S. N., Ryabikina, Z. I., Gubanova, N. Yu., Simavoryan, S. Zh. (2021). Standartizatsiya metodiki “Lichnostnyy profil’ sub’’yektnoy aktivnosti” [Standardization of the methodology “Personality’s Agentic Activity (PAA) Profile”]. Nauchnyye issledovaniya i razrabotki. Sotsial’no-gumanitarnyye issledovaniya i tekhnologii [Scientific Research and Development. Socio-Humanitarian Research and Technology], 10(3), 45–56. DOI: 10.12737/2306-1731-2021-10-3-45-56.
  19. Richardson, M. J., Dale, R., & Marsh, K. L. (2014). Complex Dynamical Systems in Social and Personality Psychology: Theory, Modeling, and Analysis. In H. T. Reis, & C. M. Judd (Eds) Handbook of Research Methods in Social and Personality Psychology (pp. 253–282). Cambridge University Press.
  20. Rubinshteyn, S. L. (2012). Chelovek i mir [Person and World]. Sankt-Peterburg: Piter.
  21. Ryabikina, Z. I. (2013). Perspektivy issledovaniy lichnosti s teoretiko-metodologicheskikh pozitsiy psikhologii sub»yekta [Prospects of Investigating a Personality from Theoretical-Methodological Position of a Subject Psychology]. Chelovek. Soobshchestvo. Upravleniye [Human. Community. Management], 3, 6–19.
  22. Sato, T., Hidaka, T., Fukuda, M. (2009). Depicting the Dynamics of Living the Life: The Trajectory Equifinality Model. In Dynamic Process Methodology in the Social and Developmental Sciences (pp.217–240). New York: Springer.
  23. Sergiyenko, Ye. A. (2013). Problema sootnosheniya ponyatiy sub»yekta i lichnosti [The Problem of Relationship Between Subject and Personality]. Psikhologicheskiy zhurnal [Psikhologicheskii Zhurnal], 34(2), 5–16.
  24. Vallacher, R. R., Read S. J., Nowak A. (2002). The Dynamical Perspective in Personality and Social Psychology. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 6, 264–263. DOI: 10.1207/S15327957PSPR0604_01
  25. Valsiner, J. & Sato, Tatsuya. (2006). Historically Structured Sampling (HSS): How Can Psychology’s Methodology Become Tuned in to the Reality of the Historical Nature of Cultural Psychology? DOI: 10.14361/9783839402344-010
  26. Valsiner, J. (2009). Integrating psychology within the Globalizing World: A Requiem to the Post-Modernist Experiment with Wissenschaft. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 43(1), 1–21.
  27. Valsiner, J. (2017). Between Self and Societies: Creating Psychology in a New Key. Tallinn: TLU Press
  28. Zhuravlev, A. L., Mironenko, I. A. (2012). Sistema nauchnykh predstavleniy B. D. Parygina v oblasti sotsial’noy psikhologii [System of B. D. Parygins Scientific Conceptions in The Sphere of Social Psychology]. Psikhologicheskiy zhurnal [Psikhologicheskii Zhurnal], 33(5), 28–38.
  29. Zhuravlev, A. L., Mironenko, I. A. (2016). Vklad Borisa Dmitrievicha Parygina v razvitie otechestvennoy sotsial’noy psikhologii [Contribution of B. D. Parygin to The Development of Russian Social Psychology]. Sotsial’naya i ekonomicheskaya psikhologiya [Social and Economic Psychology], 1(3), 4–23.
  30. Znakov, V. V. (2019). Dinamicheskii podkhod k issledovaniiu lichnosti i protsessual’nyi analiz v psikhologii sub»ekta [Dynamic Approach to The Research of The Personality and The Procedural Analysis in Psychology of The Subject]. Psikhologicheskiy zhurnal [Psikhologicheskii Zhurnal], 40(5), 27–34. DOI: 10.31857/S020595920006073-6
  31. Znakov, V. V., Riabikina, Z. I. (2017). Psikhologiya chelovecheskogo bytiia [Psychology of Human Existence]. Moscow: Smysl.