Prospects of Studying the Meaning-Making Avoidance Coping
https://doi.org/10.23947/2658-7165-2023-6-4-81-88
Abstract
Introduction. The importance of studying meaning-making avoidance coping classified as maladaptive is emphasized. Avoidance coping makes it impossible for one to behave adequately in the communication situation.
Purpose. In this article, we will methodologically justify the structure of the original questionnaire for avoidance coping in the form of a partial semantic differential and a set of personal trait scales included in it.
Theoretical Justification. We described the foundations and specifics of the expression of meaning-making avoidance coping. This strategy consists of shifting away from the problem, idleness, carelessness, and immaturity of the personality, the will to stay in the comfort zone, procrastination, escapism, hedonism, as well as diving into virtual space. We presented our method for studying avoidance coping specifics in the form of a partial semantic differential of personal traits. When designing it, we proceed from the phenomenon of meaning consonance and dissonance as a match and mismatch. The original method consists of nine bipolar semantic scales of personality traits as special indicator marks of meaning. The validation will be conducted on the sample of 300 respondents. We will also use certified methods from related psychodiagnostic spheres: “Life-Purpose Orientations” (LPO) by D. A. Leontiev, Amirkhan’s Coping Strategy Indicator (CSI) adapted by V. N. Yaltonsky and N. A. Sirot, the Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument (TKI) adapted by N. V. Grishina, the Melbourne Decision Making Questionnaire adapted by T. V. Kornilova, and the New Uncertainty Tolerance Questionnaire (NTQ) by T. V. Kornilova.
Discussion. We are certain that this particular approach will form a battery of tests appropriate for study on avoidance coping aspects. It is possible to empirically reveal multi-type portraits related to the value-meaning sphere of subjects who show the avoidance coping strategy, if the ensemble mechanisms of personal trait structure are taken as a basis. Those multi-type models of current meaning states not only are effective in a person’s behaviour prediction, but they also imply cost-friendly test technologies.
About the Authors
M. V. Godunov
Don State Technical University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Godunov Mikhail V., - Dr. Sci. (Psychology), Professor of the “General and Consulting Psychology” Department
1, Gagarin Sq., Rostov-on-Don, 344003
E. A. Portnov
Stavropol Branch of Krasnodar University of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Portnov Evgeny A. - teacher
43, Kulakov Av., Stavropol, 355035
References
1. Amirkhan, J. H. (1990). A factor analytically derived measure of coping: The coping strategy indication. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59(7), 1066–1074.
2. Crumhaugh, J. S., & Maholick, L. T. (1964). An experimental study in existentialism: The psychometric approach to Frankl’s concept of noogenic neurosis. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 20(2), 200–207.
3. Dyakov, S. I. (2018). Mental self-assembly of a person as a subject of the life. Semantic principle. The Bulletin of Irkutsk State University. Series “Psychology”, 23, 15–27. (In Russ.).
4. Furnham, A. (1994). A content, correlational and factor analytic study of four tolerance of ambiguity questionnaires. Personality and Individual Differences, 16(3), 403–410.
5. Gardner, H. (2011). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. Basic Books.
6. Godunov, M. V. (2016). Personality traits ensemble: Interpretation and diagnosis of bipolar semantic scales. Book 1. KREDO. (In Russ.).
7. Godunov, M. V. (2019). Personality traits ensemble: Trialectical development of preadaptive capabilities. Book 2. KREDO. (In Russ.).
8. Godunov, M. V., Elagina, M. J., & Belova, E. V. (2017). Studying the personal profiles of the polar meaning-making strategies. Russian Psychological Journal, 14(3), 30–47. (In Russ.).
9. Grishina, N. V. (2008). Psychology of conflict. Piter. (In Russ.).
10. Kornilova, T. V. (2010). The new uncertainty tolerance — intolerance questionnaire. Psychological Journal, 1(31). 74–86. (In Russ.).
11. Kornilova, T. V. (2019). Intellectual and personal potential of an individual in the conditions of uncertainty. Nestor-History. (In Russ.).
12. Kotlyakov, V. Yu. (2013). “System of life meanings” technique. SibScript, 2(54), 148–153. (In Russ.).
13. Lazarus, R. S. (2018). Emotion and adaptation. Oxford University Press.
14. Leontiev, D. A. (1997). On the psychology of personality. Smysl. (In Russ.).
15. Leontiev, D. A. (2006). Life-purpose orientations test (LPO). Smysl. (In Russ.).
16. Leontiev, D. A. (2019). Psychology of meaning: Nature, structure and dynamics of meaning reality. Smysl. (In Russ.).
17. Mann, L., Burnett, P., Radford, M., & Ford, S. (1997). The Melbourne decision making questionnaire: An instrument of measuring patterns for coping with decisional conflict. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 10(1), 1–19.
18. Osgood, C. E. (1990). Language, meaning, and culture. Praeger.
19. Thomas, K. W., & Kilmann, R. H. (1978). Comparison of four instruments measuring conflict behavior. Psychological Reports, 42, 1139–1145.
20. Yaltonsky, V. M., & Sirota, N. A. (2008). Psychology of coping behavior: Development, accomplishments, problems, prospects. In A. L. Zhuravlev (ed.), Coping: Current State and Prospects (pp. 21–54). Institute of Psychology of the Russian Academy of Sciences. (In Russ.)
Review
For citations:
Godunov M.V., Portnov E.A. Prospects of Studying the Meaning-Making Avoidance Coping. Innovative science: psychology, pedagogy, defectology. 2023;6(4):81-88. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.23947/2658-7165-2023-6-4-81-88
Views:
238
Email this article 