Identification of Predictors of a Meaningful Avoidance Strategy

Introduction. In this section the authors present the relevance of the study of the semantic avoidance strategy which is maladaptive when coping with crisis and uncertain situations. We consider the assumption of the presence of predictors of a sense-forming avoidance strategy as a hypothesis that has significant correlations with the scales of the questionnaire for the study of avoidance.

Objective. Presentation of the results of empirical identification of predictors of a meaningful avoidance strategy.

Materials and methods. The author’s verbal questionnaire is presented and applied to study the avoidance strategy. It consists of 9 semantic scales of personality traits to study the specifics of avoidance. To identify its predictors, the battery of tests includes proven methods from the related fields of semantic regulation: the test of life orientations (D. A. Leontiev), the “New Questionnaire of tolerance-tolerance to uncertainty” (T. V. Kornilova).

Results. The indicators for verifying the normality of the distribution of empirical indicators are presented as well as data from the correlation analysis of the battery of tests in the sample n = 282. Empirically established values of the Shapiro-Wilk coefficient have values higher than the required level of statistical significance ,05 for indicators of all scales of this battery of tests. Correlation analysis has established that there are three indicators of the scales of the tested tests, which have values of statistically significant empirical Pearson correlation coefficients with the scales of the author’s questionnaire.

Discussion. Empirically calculated values of the Shapiro-Wilk criterion with respect was based on the satisfaction to a specified level of statistical significance ,05 it was found that all the studied indicators have a normal distribution character. This confirms the representative nature of the sample. According to the results of the correlation analysis conducted at the significance level ,05, the scales “process” and “locus of control – I” of the test “Life orientations” (D. A. Leontiev) were adopted as the main predictors of avoidance, and the scale “tolerance to uncertainty” according to the “New questionnaire of tolerance to uncertainty” was used as an auxiliary predictor (T. V. Kornilova). The stated hypothesis has been confirmed. Limitations of the study – testing did not affect respondents under the age of 18, as well as over the age of 47, and was conducted only for the types of profession “human – human” and “human – sign”. It is possible to conduct low-cost testing and build multifactorial personal avoidance profiles with the help of the identified predictors.

1. Baumeister, R., Bratslavsky, E., Muraven, M., & Tice, D. (1998). Ego depletion: Is the active self a limited resource? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(5), 1252–1265.

2. Bazarov, T. Yu., Bityutskaya, E. V. (2019). Features of the perception of life events by people with different preferred styles of responding to changes. Questions of Psychology, 3. 94–106.

3. 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.

4. Dyakov, S. I. (2018). Mental self-organization of a person as a subject of life. The semantic principle. Proceedings of Irkutsk State University. Psychology series, 23, 15–27.

5. Frydenberg, E., & Lewis, R. (2000). Teaching Coping to adolescents: when and to whom? American Educational Research Journal, 37(3). 727–745.

6. Furnham, A. (1994). A content, correlational and factor analytic study of four tolerance of ambiguity questionnaires. Personality and Individual Differences, 16(3). 403–410.

7. Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences. Basic Books.

8. Godunov, M. V. (2016). The ensemble of personality traits: interpretation and diagnosis of bipolar semantic scales. Book 1. CREDO.

9. Heritov, A. D. (2012). Mathematical methods of psychological research. Data analysis and interpretation: study guide. Speech.

10. Kornilova, T. V. (2010). A new questionnaire of tolerance - tolerance to uncertainty. Psychological Journal, 31(1), 74–86.

11. Kotlyakov, V. Yu. (2013). The "System of life meanings" methodology. Vestnik Kemerovskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Seriia: Gumanitarnye i obshchestvennye nauki, 2(54), 148–153.

12. Leontiev, D. A. (2000). The test of life orientations (TLO). Meaning.

13. Leontiev, D. A. (2019). Psychology of meaning: the nature, structure and dynamics of semantic reality. Meaning.

14. Nartova-Bochaver, S. K. (2005). The psychological space of personality: A monograph. Prometheus.

15. Petrovsky, V. A. (2009). Seven spaces of personality existence: formal models of well-being. The world of psychology, 1(57), 25–43.

16. Pidgeon, N., Hood, C., Jones, D., & Turner, B. (1992). A Risk perception. In Risk: Analysis, Perceprion and Management. London (P. 89–134). The royal Society.

17. Sidorenko, E. V. (2003). Methods of mathematical processing in psychology. Speech.

18. Slovic, P., & Weber, E. (2002). Perception of Risk Posed by Extreme Events. In Applegate, Gabba, Laitos, and Sachs (eds.) Regulation of Toxic Substances and Hazardous Waste (2nd edition) (P. 1–21) Foundation Press.