Personal organization of thinking: research results (O.I. Motkov)

Problem. L.S. wrote about the need for a holistic consideration of thinking processes in their relationship with personal characteristics. Vygotsky: “He who has torn thinking from the very beginning from affect, has forever closed his way to explaining the causes of thinking itself, because the deterministic analysis of thinking necessarily involves the discovery of the driving motives of thought, needs and interests, motives and tendencies that direct the movement of thought into that or another side» (Vygotsky L.S., 1956 — p. 54).

What levels of personality and how are involved in the processes of thinking? What components of personality are primarily responsible for finding optimal solutions in difficult mental situations? To what extent do personal characteristics of a person ensure the success of solving subjectively easy and difficult mental tasks in comparison with the value of the characteristics of operational thinking (biological, high-speed intelligence according to G. Eysenck)? How do the levels of personality identified theoretically and experimentally interact with each other in the course of implementing the difficult intellectual goal set by the subject?

Before describing the experiments that shed light on these questions, we will give working definitions of the main concepts used in the article.

Working definitions

Personality is the control center psyche, which organizes and regulates behavior to meet the actual needs of the body (Motkov O.I., 2007, 2014). Its control functions include: motivation, initiation of the body to a certain activity; determination of the general and situational direction of application of this activity — the general goal (motive) and the situational goals and subgoals specifying it; organization, programming of behavior — the creation of a strategic (for a long period of time) or operational plan of action, taking into account the found trial benchmarks and their capabilities; regulation of behavior — maintaining the process of its implementation in the chosen direction (controlling the preservation of goal-oriented behavior, one’s state), analysis and assessment of approaching the final desired result — the degree of situational effectiveness of the behavior being performed, introducing corrective control actions if necessary (restoring situational goal-setting, introducing new guidelines instead old ones or in addition to them, building new schemes of actions and methods of action, making a decision to add a new portion of effort and time to continue the behavior), cessation of behavior.

Based on modern data of psychogenetics, we can conclude that the Personality has a biocultural nature, it is born and becomes (Bouchard T.E. et al., 1991; Plomin R., 1994; Loehlin JC, Gough HC, 1990; Lytton H. , 1980). Personality also has a dual essence — many of its aspirations have the opposite pole (Eysenck G.; Pervin L., John O., 2001; Kjell L., Ziegler D., 2000; Jung K. et al.). The evolutionary psychology of personality shows that animals also have personality (Buss AN, 1988; Buss DM, 1991; Kenrick DTet al, 1990; Buss AN, 1988; Buss DM, 1991; Kenrick DTet al, 1990).

Behavior — a system of external (motor) and internal (mental, etc.) integral activity of animals and humans, directed by an actual need and designed to satisfy this need. It occurs in all cases when the work of only homeostatic mechanisms of self-regulation of the body’s states does not lead to the satisfaction of actual needs. Any behavior is based on a rigid hereditary metaorganization:

The central organizer and regulator of behavior are personal, motivational-emotional and operational formations.

Thinking — the cognitive process of searching and finding a new complex of relations for the subject between the phenomena of the surrounding and inner world, new images and ideas, an unknown scheme of actions in an uncertain, problematic situation for him, which is directed by problematic actual motivation and serves to implement its requirements. Our goals and motives become problematic when the landmarks and methods of action known from past experience, when included in the behavior process, do not lead to a successful result. Together with motivation, emotions, cognitive and psychomotor components, thinking forms a holistic mental behavior of a living being. Thinking can be conditionally considered, for the purposes of its scientific study, as a purely cognitive, cognitive process, and then it is an executive mechanism that obeys the needs of the individual (Spiridonov F.V., 2006), or as a holistic intellectual behavior that includes personal, cognitive and motor components (Vasiliev I.A. et al., 1980; Psychology of thinking. Khrest., 1982; Pushkin V.N., Shavyrina G.V., 1972). In reality, thought processes are always included in behavior. They are universal and work for any motivation that has become problematic. A person with problematic actual motivation after a series of unsuccessful attempts to resolve the problem no longer refers to past experience, but includes mechanisms for a new orientation in situations and devices for comparing, analyzing and generalizing the revealed relationships and their correlation with the cognitive scheme of the goal, the desired result. It also searches for additional internal energy and other resources for the successful implementation of the task set for itself.

The processes of thinking underlie the processes of scientific creativity, invention (Psychology of thinking, 1965; Psychology of thinking. Khrest., 1981, 1982; Luk A.N., 1976; Pushkin V.N., 1970; Spiridonov F.V., 2006; Getzels JW, Jackson PW, 1962). However, in creativity, personality traits sometimes acquire a leading role. Animals also have thinking, which indicates the hereditary predetermination of its main mechanisms (Zorina Z.A., Poletaeva I.I., 2003; Köhler V., 1930).

The series of experiments I conducted and a thorough analysis of their results made it possible to obtain initial answers to most of the questions posed here. Thinking in this context is considered as a cognitive process organized by personal motivational-emotional formations and a block of operational personality.

Analysis of the content and effectiveness of situational goals in the process of solving mental problems

At the first stage, a stressful technique was created on the basis of tasks unfamiliar to the subjects of the spatial-combinatorial game «5» (a simplified game of «1978»), which allows objectifying and exploring situational intellectual intentions (situational goals), their relationship with success in solving easy and difficult problems. tasks and with the level of development of the subject’s operational thinking (Motkov O.M., 1971; Nersesyan L.S. et al., 1965; Pushkin V.N., 1972; Pushkin V.N., G.V. Shavyrina, XNUMX; and etc.). The objective complexity of the tasks was determined by the degree of destructuring of their «conditions» relative to the «goal». At a high level of significance, it corresponds to the subjective difficulty of the solution.

Two six-cell two-row grids are drawn in front of the subject on a special sheet, each of which consists of two rows of square fields, three fields in each row (2 x 3). The left lattice is the initial «condition» of the task, the right one is the final «goal». In the “condition”, chips with numbers “1”, “2”, “3”, “4” and “5” are placed in a certain sequence. In the initial situation, the lower left corner field is always empty without a token. In the «target» grid, another target sequence of five tokens with the same numbers is placed, with an empty lower left corner field. Here is an example of the easiest training problem of the game «5»:

The basic rule of the game “5” requires that the sequence of “condition” tokens be reduced to the form of a sequence of “goal” tokens, moving for this purpose the “condition” tokens only vertically and horizontally (by the move of the rook) through the empty field that is vacated each time after each move.

The experimental series consisted of two training and four main tasks of varying objective complexity (in conventional units — 1:1:1:1:3:4). An unexpected sharp drop in complexity created the prerequisites for the emergence of states of mental stress. The objectification of the situational goals of the subject was carried out with the help of an instruction that required before each attempt to decide what he intended to do, what he wanted to achieve in the first place. It was allowed to freely manipulate the chips and to lose every trial that came to mind on the problem field. The complexity of the solution was increased by the requirement to find the optimal, shortest way to move the “condition” chips and show the solution. In the example above, the optimal four-way solution that the respondent must report is as follows: 4 shift down, 1 left, 2 up, and 4 right to her place in the «goal».

Sample: 21 adults with higher and incomplete higher education. 10 indicators were recorded for each solution attempt, including indicators of the content of intentions and their effectiveness, the dynamics and results of searches, comments during the trial and after it, the time and number of attempts. Individual conduct. When processing the data at all stages, the Spearman rank correlation method and Student’s t-test for the significance of differences were used.

RESULTS. The cognitive, informational basis of situational goals is the relationship of mismatch and similarity between the structure of the “condition” elements and the structure of the “goal” chips, the characteristics of the solution path. The essence of the general intention is determined by the subject’s desire to eliminate all situations of disagreement identified during the preliminary analysis, while private intention is determined by the desire to eliminate only a part of them in order to simplify the task and then eliminate the remaining differences. 79,6% of intentions are based on the relationship of the most striking differences and similarities. It turned out that the way of moving chips in 81% of cases corresponds to the content of intentions, which proves their controlling, organizing and regulating function. It follows from these facts that there is a special block in the personality structure — the Operational Personality, in which, with the help of the mechanisms of the Operational Self, the general and particular trial situational goals of the thought process are generated here and now in an indefinite problem situation, and there is a change in private goals (Motkov O.I. ., 2007, 2008).

The conclusion about the existence of a special operational level in the personality structure contradicts the well-established notions that the personality consists only of stable long-term formations. However, if we turn to the functions that perform situational goals, we will see that these are full-fledged motivational formations with all the functions inherent in motivation (and, consequently, personality): they induce, direct, organize here and now and regulate behavior. Those. situational intentions carry out the same actions as any other stable personal characteristic: a need, a trait of character and temperament, a psychological value or attitude. Therefore, it can be firmly asserted that in addition to stable levels, in the personality structure there really is a special block of the Operational Personality, our internal dispatcher, our operational subject, which carries the operational «point of I» (the projection of our integral I, which unites our actual needs, current mental states, etc.), constantly associated with it, the general goal of finding a solution to the problem and more specific, generated in the same block, situational goals with specific guidelines and schemes of actions in a given situation. The same block, when solving an unfamiliar series of tasks, uses automatically working processes of analysis and statistical generalization of the effort and time spent on solving, develops generalized self-esteem and level of claims in relation to this class of tasks that are often unconscious to the subject, which then, apparently, are moved to the block of relatively stable personality formations. It is important to note that all levels of personality are always simultaneously involved in the organization and regulation of any behavior.

Correlation calculations showed that success in solving easy tasks is not significantly related to success in difficult tasks. I.e, there is no connection between the level of operational thinking of the subjects, determined by success in solving relatively easy tasks, and their ability to solve unexpectedly difficult tasks. The question arises, what determines the success of solving difficult problems in the first place? The answer to this question was obtained in the following series of our studies.

The most important indicator of the content of intentions is the degree to which relations and signs of the situation are taken into account — their complexity. It is important in solving problems of any complexity. This is the most «intellectual» indicator of situational focus, reflecting the level of preliminary analysis of the problem situation. It was shown that the complexity of intentions depends, in particular, on the degree of preservation of situational purposefulness — the relative number of non-random, intentional attempts — and on the flexibility of goal setting, the number of cases of changing intention to another. The success of solving the entire series of tasks is not related to the severity of these indicators in easy situations and, on the contrary, is closely related to their severity in difficult tasks (pIndicators of goal-setting retention and flexibility are most important precisely in difficult, stressful situations of decision. The disorganization of goal-setting (the transition to a “blind” enumeration of solutions) entails a sharp decrease in the complexity of intentions and flexibility in their promotion.

I suggested that the indicator of the preservation (and restoration) of situational goal-setting in solving difficult problems reveals the impact on the cognitive process of personal factors, since achieving success in these tasks is not related to the level of operational thinking of the subjects. The significance of non-intellectual factors is also confirmed by the following fact: three people refused to find a solution in the first difficult problem, but solved the next, more difficult one. Those. the mental abilities of these people were sufficient for the solution of both tasks, but their manifestation became limited when they unexpectedly met with difficulties. The goal-setting retention indicator was later chosen as a decisive indicator of the quality of the organization of the thought process, since it is associated with success in difficult tasks and causes a change in other goal-setting indicators.

The study of the effectiveness and dynamics of the motives for participation in the experiment. Situational self-esteem and situational level of claims

In the second series, the content of the initial and final motives for the participation of the subjects in solving the tasks of «Game 5» was analyzed, a correspondence was found between these orientations and the result of the decision, between the content of those and other motives. A technique similar to that of the first series, but with significant additions, was used. Before the start of the experiments, the subjects were asked about the initial motives for performing intellectual activity, at the end of the experiment — about the motives for refusal or the motives for continuing the decision until complete success. These conscious responses about motives were considered as relatively stable orientations of the subjects. Experimental procedure: individual conduct. Sample: 40 adults with higher and incomplete higher education.

RESULTS. Four types of initial motivations for participation in experiments were found: the desire to learn something about the characteristics of one’s personality, earning money, interest in a psychological experiment, and helping the experimenter. All subjects showed polymotivation of their behavior in the experiment. The calculation showed that for each orientation there are, on average, the same number of failure cases and decision cases. Consequently, the initial motives do not determine the outcome of solving difficult problems. One of the reasons for the ineffectiveness of these orientations is their abstractness, resulting from the subjects’ ignorance of the tasks of the game «5» and the stressful nature of the experiment.

The final orientations arising in the process of solving difficult problems were divided into three main types. Type I: «I can and will decide at all costs» — for people who sought to maintain their self-esteem, faith in their ability to cope with intellectual difficulties, their «intellectual-volitional» prestige, self-esteem «. All persons in this group solved a difficult problem (group I, 15 people). Type II: “I can’t solve it” — in people with low self-confidence, fear of a new failure, a sense of the futility of further efforts, a feeling that they will not cope with the task — everyone refused to solve a difficult task (group II, 12 people .). III: “I want to solve it right away, otherwise it’s difficult and I don’t want to” — among people who strove for a quick, easy solution of problems and avoided systematic and prolonged mental efforts, everyone refused to solve a difficult problem (group III, 6 people). Persons with reorientation (7 people) were also found: they refused the first difficult task due to motivations of types II and III, and solved the next, more difficult task to the «victorious end». They demonstrate fluctuations in the choice of the final orientation and self-esteem, the desire to ultimately rehabilitate and assert themselves in their own eyes, as in the case of persons of group I.

The final personal orientations of the thinking process completely determine the result of solving difficult problems and do not correspond to the initial motives for participating in the experience of the subjects. Often their formation is preceded by a struggle of motivational tendencies in favor or against the continuation of the decision, the struggle of the individual for himself, an attempt to «rehabilitate» himself. The subjects of group I eventually increase the ceiling of the possible expenditure of effort and time for solving difficult problems, the persons of groups II and III keep it at the same level. The self-report data show a high level of frustration for most of the subjects, which arises when faced with unexpected difficulties, and that it is in a state of mental stress that the final orientations of further behavior are created. 90% of participants experienced strong negative emotions when solving a difficult task. Spanish self-report Z .: “After failure (OM — solution attempts), the thread of the general solution is completely lost, intuition no longer helps. Especially in difficult tasks. We must step by step to verify the right path. I can’t work step by step. There comes a feeling that the task is unsolvable, the time of stupid enumeration. It’s all emotional.» Spanish self-report E .: “I want the necessary order of chips to be immediately established, since then it is very difficult to rearrange … Self-esteem of one’s abilities is shaky. If it took a long time to solve the first tasks, then maybe this would not have happened … A certain attitude has already developed in the first tasks — the tasks are not difficult. I want to quickly solve this one in order to rehabilitate myself … ” But some of the subjects managed to overcome the disorganization of behavior, distract from stress and continued to search for the optimal solution, while others either underestimated their self-esteem, or devalued their activities, refused to increase their efforts and time to analyze the situation and find the optimal solution, which inevitably led to failure. from continuing the search.

Thus, we can conclude that The work of the operational personality in creating situational goals and regulating their implementation is supported or turned off by the overlying personality block — A relatively stable level of generalized motives (initial and final orientations of participation in the experiment and solving problems) and formations of the I-personality (ideas about oneself, self-esteem, expectations and claims (Motkov O.I., 2008; 2014, ch. 1.2)). It sets the general attitude to the solution of these problems, determines the approximate amount of energy costs and mental effort to find a solution. Formations of this level, as we have seen, are also dynamic to a certain extent and undergo changes in the process of finding solutions to difficult problems.

The functioning of these two levels of personality, in turn, is determined, according to my hypothesis, by the factors of its more fundamental Basic level. They, as was revealed in further series of experiments, when solving unexpectedly difficult problems, begin to play the first violin in the orchestra of factors that determine the achievement of the optimal search result.

Initial orientations in the course of intellectual behavior go through a series of changes. In the course of automatic unconscious generalization of the viutri-procedural efforts and time spent on solving light, unfamiliar tasks of the «game 5» (about 1-5 attempts and 1-4 minutes to solve one problem), the subjects form an unconscious high self-esteem of their abilities to solve them and the corresponding the level of claims to quickly and easily achieve success in these tasks. It is as if the energy charge of the original orientations is transferred to these unconscious claims. Thus, in In the operational personality block, in addition to situational goals, new generalized formations unconsciously arise — situational self-esteem and the level of claims. They, due to their generalization (their attitude to the peculiarities of achieving success in the entire array of this type of intellectual tasks), and greater stability than situational goals, apparently move into a block of relatively stable personality formations. High, situationally arising, self-esteem is pleasant for the subjects, it reinforces their sometimes unstable and low idea of ​​their abilities. The unconscious transfer of high situational claims to the solution of a difficult task leads to a collision of high situational self-esteem with low current self-assessments of the success of solving a difficult task (“bad …”, “this is no good …”). The test subject has been solving a difficult problem for 10 minutes, and the optimal solution is not yet visible. «Self-esteem is shattered …».

Shaped in easy tasks the unconscious situational level of claims is thus the internal cause of mental stress when solving a difficult task. It can also be stated that many important processes of intellectual behavior proceed at an unconscious level.

The study of the comparative role of the level of operational thinking and characterological personality traits in determining the success of solving difficult problems of the «Game 5»

Hypothesis: personality traits and mental states, pronounced needs for self-affirmation and cognition determine in a stressful situation the choice of one or another final orientation and emotional reactions in the experiment. Features of indecision, vulnerability to stress, prolonged subneurotic states of emotional discomfort, weakly expressed needs for self-affirmation and cognition can lead not only to disorganization of behavior, but also to the choice of final orientations to refuse to continue searching for a solution and to long-term reactions of emotional stress. On the contrary, the presence of developed emotional-volitional traits, a pronounced motivation for self-assertion in one’s own eyes and the need to learn something new will lead to the creation of a victorious final orientation, the restoration of the situational purposefulness of mental behavior and the attenuation of emotional stress reactions. The third series of experiments was devoted to testing this hypothesis.

In the third series of experiments, before starting to solve problems, the characteristics of the character and mental states of the subjects were determined. Sample: 20 randomly selected adults with higher and incomplete higher education. A standardized method for studying the personality of SMIL L.N. was used. Sobchik, which is a modification of the MMPI personality questionnaire re-standardized on a group of healthy population of the USSR (Sobchik L.N., 1998). The rises on the main scales of SMIL form a personality profile, the syndromic interpretation of which makes it possible to reveal the structure of personality traits and states. It is possible to quantitatively measure the degree of approach of a person’s current mental states to neurotic states (according to the (“anxiety triad”), “severity of the condition”, the severity of signs of emotional stress (factor A), the severity of personality traits of strength.

A day later, the same subjects were presented with the stress-producing technique of «game 5». In it, after the same easy tasks, the most difficult task was immediately presented (the complexity of the tasks was expressed in the proportion — 1 : 1 : 1 : 1 : 4), which provokes more severe stress and excludes the formation of reorientation in a difficult task. The following were recorded: the content of the final orientations, the indicator of maintaining situational goal-setting, the success of solving easy and difficult tasks.

Before the start of the experiment, during and after it, galvanic skin reactions (GSR) according to Tarkhanov were recorded on a 4EEG-1 encephalograph (Motkov O.I., 1978). Waves of the GSR testify to the severity of the emotional reactions of the subjects. The average level of GSR usually corresponds to the maximum quality of work (Aminov N.A., 1975). GSR reveals a hyper- or hypo-reaction to an intellectual load, characteristic of a person, depending on the individual type of autonomic response (Akinshchikova G.I., 1969). Emotionally depressive V.N. Myasishchev discovered the asthenic type of the GSR curve. The exit from the subdepressive state leads to the normalization of GSR — pronounced spontaneous GSR and normal reactions are observed under the action of orienting stimuli. Anxious people register high spontaneous GSR and strong reactions to stimuli and a possible threat (Suvorov N.F. et al., 1977).

RESULTS. Those who solved the difficult problem chose the final orientation of the first «victorious» type (40%), those who refused — II and III of the «defeatist» types of orientations (40% and 20%). Differences between groups in the success of solving easy tasks are not significant. Success in easy tasks in the entire group of subjects is not significantly related to success in solving a difficult task, which indicates the insignificant importance of the level of operational thinking in determining the solution of a difficult task. Those who solved the difficult problem were about as good at the easy problems as those who refused. Females more often chose type II orientation (50%), males — type I (50%). Among both those and others there are individuals who form motives of types II and III, which makes it possible to search for the determinants of thinking that are common to both sexes.

The group of those who decided I significantly differs from the other groups in a higher degree of retention of situational goal-setting in a difficult task in terms of the number of intentional attempts to solve. They show a higher purposefulness, organization of thinking processes. According to self-reports, they have a pronounced desire to prove to themselves their high intellectual capabilities, to confirm the strength of their personality, or, in some cases, a cognitive desire to better understand the patterns of the «Game 5». At the same time, it turned out that the higher the retention of situational purposefulness, the higher the success of its solution (p

The degree of severity in the subjects of subneurotic states — anxiety, depression, etc. — was determined by emotional stress factors A, the severity of the condition and the scales of the neurotic triad SMIL, and elevations of all profile scales. The severity of neurotic states is closely positively associated with failure in solving a difficult task (p In group I, those who solved a difficult task, the severity of neurotic states was significantly lower than in the groups who refused (p — code for leading peaks 9 (64 T), 4 (62). They are strive for self-affirmation by achieving real success. Such a personality profile is often found in athletes and pilots (Gissen L.D., Sobchik L.N., 1976). Those who refused group II are characterized by the predominance of doubts, uncertainty, avoidance of failures, a large number of fears, states of active anxiety — code 8 (75), 9 (70), 7 (65). Those who refused group III are dominated by subdepressive states, reactions of leaving situations that require the adoption of important decisions and the application of systematic, long-term volitional and intellectual efforts — code 8 (78), 2 (71), 7 (68). The females of the group of those who have decided reveal traits of masculinity in their character, the men who have refused reveal traits of femininity, which contributes to the strengthening of the latter’s neurotic reactions in stressful situations.

When solving a difficult task, the subjects significantly differ in the number of cases of high-amplitude GSR, apathy of the GSR curve (p In group I individuals, after a surge, average emotional reactions are restored, in groups II and III, stress reactions intensify: in group II — high, active GSR, and in group III — on the contrary, asthenic. The character traits of the first group of those who decide allow them to overcome the state of stress at the final stage of the decision. GSR activity in the middle of attempts shows the calm or stressful nature of emotional reactions. Women are more likely to demonstrate active GSR, while men are moderate and apathetic.

Thus, our hypothesis about the leading role of character traits and long-term mental states in determining the success of solving an unexpectedly difficult task was confirmed. In a state of mental stress, a predominantly hereditarily determined basic level of personality, represented, among other things, by stable character traits, needs for self-affirmation and cognition, as well as dominant emotional states, play a major role in determining the success of thinking processes, emotional characteristics, and in choosing one or another final orientation. , in maintaining situational goal-setting — in comparison with the value of the level of operational thinking and the initial motives of the subject. Note that emotional subneurotic states are more amenable to correction and self-regulation than character traits.

This conclusion about the leading role of emotional and volitional character traits was confirmed in the fourth comparative study of the importance of emotional and volitional character traits and features of operational thinking in ensuring the effectiveness of the professional activities of air traffic controllers at the Main Command Control Center of the Vnukovo airport. The air traffic controller, under the conditions of moral and legal responsibility for flight safety, makes about 5 decisions and performs up to 23 work actions per minute, which is several times higher than the indicators of railway section and construction department dispatchers. This nature of the work puts forward strict requirements for the system of its mental regulation, especially when difficult situations arise.

Sample: 12 air traffic controllers and 24 seniors. Methods: Scale for assessing the business qualities of an air traffic controller (the method of independent judges, an external assessment of character traits was also determined here), Questionnaire for self-assessment of emotional and volitional regulation, Stressogenic technique «game 5» — task complexity 1 : 1 : 1 : 1 : 3. Level of operational thinking was also determined using open and closed versions of “Game 5” with sets of relatively easy tasks, etc. (V.P. Pushkin, 1971; L.S. Nersesyan et al., 1971; O.I. Motkov, 1978). Individual conduct.

RESULTS. The air traffic control efficiency indicator ATC turned out to be closely related to external assessment and self-assessment of emotional and volitional character traits (p basic character traits are the main factor in the effectiveness of the professional activity of an air traffic controller in comparison with the value of the level of his operational thinking, his ingenuity. The characteristics of situational goal-setting for solving a difficult problem can serve not only as indicators of the development of emotional and volitional traits of air traffic controllers, but also as indicators of their professional effectiveness.

It was also found that the percentage of failures among controllers (33%) is even higher than in the normal group (24%). At the same time, it was found that the success of solving easy tasks of all variants of the game «5» among air traffic controllers was significantly higher than in the usual group (p

Basic self-affirmation motivation as a factor in increasing mental activity in solving problems

The need for self-assertion R. Cattell considered one of the basic, hereditarily fixed motivations (Pervin L., John O., 2001, p. 277). In a pair experiment, its influence on the success of solving problems of «Game 5» of varying complexity was studied. It was expressed in two forms: as a general personal desire to increase self-confidence, the strength of one’s Self in one’s own eyes, and as a local desire to establish oneself in the eyes of a friend who has a higher rating in a couple.

Sample: 20 high school students and students making up 10 pairs of friends: 14 people. male and 6 female. Methods: Sociometry (determining the place in a pair with a friend); Questioning about the motives for participation in the experiments; SMIL; “Goal-setting” methodology based on 15 tasks of the combinatorial “game 5” of five levels of complexity from very easy to very difficult, with a free choice of a task with a known difficulty in turn by each of the friends and communication of the result of the choice and solution to a friend (for each, 7 selections of tasks); A survey about the influence of a partner on the choice of a task.

RESULTS. 71% of persons with a relatively lower sociometric rating in a couple chose and successfully solved problems of greater complexity than their high-status friends. A higher self-affirmation motivation in one’s own eyes and in the eyes of a friend provided low-status individuals with more pronounced mental activity and better results than those of a friend. That., in a situation of a possible increase in self-confidence, self-assessment of one’s mental abilities and self-assessment by a friend, the basic desire for self-assertion is an effective factor in investing great intellectual effort and achieving greater success in solving mental problems. In male couples, this phenomenon is found in 100% of cases. In women, an increased tendency to intellectual self-affirmation and to harmonize their rating in a pair with a girlfriend is less pronounced. Perhaps they attach less importance to their success in intellectual pursuits than men.

The study of the correlation between the level of operational thinking and the severity of personality harmony

The harmony of the personality of the GL is determined by the degree of optimality of the manifestation of most of its main parameters: the needs and values ​​that guide and induce behavior, the processes of functioning and development, the results of self-organization of behavior. With a high severity of HL, a person has developed both needs and values ​​of deficiency, as well as existential, spiritual ones, he has created predominantly positive relationships with people, with nature and with himself. The behavior is dominated by a sense of proportion and internal balance, interestingness and diversity of life (harmonious lifestyle). Characterized by adequate positive self-esteem and developed subjectivity, predominantly positive emotional tone, friendliness and responsiveness towards others. There are also hereditary prerequisites for greater or lesser harmony of personality: it is directly related to certain properties of temperament and character. With a high GL, an individual may also have individual, not optimally expressed, personality characteristics and their proportions. However, the volume of those in a generally harmonious personality is significantly less than the volume of optimally manifested personal parameters.

In a study conducted under my supervision by M.A. Rudentsova, the relationship between the characteristics of operational thinking (speed, biological intelligence — Eysenck G., 1995) and personality harmony was studied in 20 Moscow humanities students of 2-3 courses (10 men and 10 women). Methods: 4 subjectively easy, unfamiliar tasks of the spatial-combinatorial «game 5» with optimal solutions in 4-8 moves (the instruction contained a request to quickly find the optimal, shortest solutions to each problem in the mind and then show the found path); the author’s questionnaire «Personal biography» with the scale «Harmony of personality» (12 points), etc. (Rudentsova M.A., 2004). Individual conduct.

RESULTS. A shorter time for solving spatially combinatorial problems corresponds to a higher GL (p developed operational thinking helps to quickly find the right solutions to relatively simple, uncomplicated mental tasks, helps to quickly harmonize a person’s relations with the external and his inner world, and quickly optimize his mental states. A more or less optimal organization of thinking processes in solving difficult problems can take place only in the case of a sufficiently harmonious expression of most of the Basic formations of the personality and their relationships.

CONCLUSIONS

1. The results of a series of experiments allow us to assert that the process of thinking is organized and regulated by a system of three personality blocks of varying degrees of fundamentality and stability. In this hierarchical system, in addition to the stable Basic and Relatively stable blocks, there is also a separate Operational-personal level of organization of intellectual behavior (Operational personality). This is the cutting edge of the personality, its mind and subject, which performs the functions of operational, here and now, setting general and trial situational goals, their retention and change, as well as operational regulation and control of the implementation of these intellectual goals in behavior. It is shown that in most cases (81%) situational intellectual intentions really regulate the processes of constructing a solution path. The more complex and flexible such intentions are, and the higher the person’s preservation of the situational purposefulness of search processes, the higher the probability of success in solving intellectual problems. Situational intellectual personality formations are of a trial, probabilistic nature, they are only possible motivational guidelines with an indefinite significance, since the decisive individual does not know for sure whether they will lead to the success of solving the problem. The generation of such trial intentions is specific for intellectual behavior, for the processes of solving problematic mental tasks with a high uncertainty of ways, methods of solving or the image of the final result.

2. The work of the operational personality in creating situational goals and regulating their implementation is supported or turned off by the overlying block — A relatively stable level of motives (initial and final orientations) and formations of the I-personality. In unfamiliar problem situations in the process of solving a number of simple tasks in the block of the operational personality, high situational self-esteem and a situational level of claims may unconsciously arise. They, as rather generalized characteristics striving for constancy, move from the level of the Operative personality to the level of Relatively stable formations of the personality. Thus, in the Operational personality, more stable personal formations can mature, because after a series of repetitions of successful solutions in similar easy tasks, unconscious automatic internal estimates of the parameters of the efforts and time invested by a person to achieve situational goals are summed up, each time reinforced and thereby strengthened. Generalized self-assessments and corresponding claims and expectations are formed, which can become long-term personal constructs already relatively stable level of personality.

3. When faced with an unexpectedly difficult task of the same type, high self-esteem and the level of claims / expectations are an intrapersonal factor in the occurrence of mental stress, which entails the disorganization of mental behavior, the destruction of situational goal-setting and purposefulness of the processes of searching for a solution to a difficult task in most people facing such task (90%).

4. When solving difficult problems in a state of mental stress, the activation and action of the Basic level of personality, represented in this case by stable character traits and needs for self-affirmation and cognition, set to a greater extent by the genotype, plays a major role in determining the success of thinking processes, the features of the accompanying emotional response , in the choice of the final orientation of participation in solving difficult problems, in the restoration and preservation of situational goal-setting — in comparison with the features of operational thinking and the initial motives of a person. In a stressful state, the Basic level of the personality subjugates the work of other blocks of the personality: it determines the choice of the final direction at the Relatively stable level (refusal to continue the decision or, with the activation of “victorious” character traits, its search to the victorious end) and, depending on this choice, general characteristics of the operational personality. In the organization and regulation of thought processes, and more broadly — of any behavior, all three levels of personality always simultaneously participate.

5. Several types of final orientations have been identified that arise in the process of solving a difficult task: “victorious” orientation and “defeatist” orientations, leading to a refusal to continue the search for its solution. According to the MMPI test, their choice is largely determined by the character traits and mental states of the subjects. A certain contribution to this choice is also made by the activation of basic needs for self-affirmation and cognition.

6. Basic emotional and volitional character traits are also the main factor in the effectiveness of the professional activity of an air traffic controller in comparison with the importance of the degree of development of his operational thinking (biological intelligence). A purposeful long-term training of the emotional and volitional traits of candidates for the position of an air traffic controller is needed to improve air traffic control in case of sudden changes in the air situation.

7. The basic initial desire for self-assertion is an effective factor in increasing mental activity and achieving greater success in solving intellectual problems in people with a lower sociometric rating of achievements in a pair of friends. This phenomenon is especially characteristic of male friends.

8. A significant relationship was found between the indicators of operational thinking and the severity of personality harmony. Since biological intelligence, according to G. Eysenck and others, is 70% determined by the genotype, it can be argued that developed operational thinking helps to quickly find the right solutions in relatively simple, uncomplicated mental tasks, operational harmonization of human relations with the external and internal world , optimization of his mental states.

REFERENCES

1. AYSENK G.Yu. Intellect: a new look / Psych. magazine, No. 1, 1995
2. Akinshchikova G.I. The study of vegetative shifts under the influence of a stressful situation / Sat. «The study of personality in the clinic and in extreme conditions.» Ld, 1969.
3. Aminov N.A. Mental states caused by monotonous work, and properties of the nervous system. Cand. diss. M., 1975.
4. BUSHARD T.E. et al. (BOUCHARD TE et al) Sources of Psychological Differences: Minnesota Study of Separated Twins / Abstract. J. 95. Psychology. 1991, no. 10, p. 2.
5. VASILYEV IA, POPLUZHNY VL, TIKHOMIROV OK Emotions and thinking. M., 1980
6. L.S. VYGOTSKY Fav. psychol. research. M., 1956.
7. GISSEN L.D., SOBCHIK L.N. The standardized method of personality research (SMIL) and the experience of its application for the purpose of individualization of sports training. Moscow: VNIIFK, 1976.
8. Zorina Z.A., Poletaeva I.I. Zoopsychology. Elementary thinking of animals. M.: Aspect Press, 2003 — 320 p.
9. Köhler V. A study of the intelligence of anthropoid apes. M.: Komakademiya, 1930
10. LUK A.N. Thinking and creativity. M.: Politizdat, 1976 — 144 p.
11. Motkov O.I. The ratio of personal and cognitive components of intellectual activity under conditions of mental stress. Candidate’s abstract. diss. 19.00.01 — General psychology. M., 1978 http://psychology.rsuh.ru/motkov.htm
12. Motkov O.I. The nature of personality: essence, structure and development. M.: Resurrection Printing House, 2007 — 248 p. (monograph) http://dlib.rsl.ru/01003181833
13. Motkov O.I. Nature and harmony of personality: From theory to research. Saarbrücken: LAP Lambert Academic Publishing, 2014 — 284 p. (monograph) http://vk.com/doc18360883_286658198?hash=5f64c62196c8a6be02&dl=7a5dd06d792a542c1e
14. Nersesyan L.S., Pushkin V.N., Fetisov V.M. On the role of the intellectual component in various types of operator activities / Sat. «New research in psychology and developmental physiology». Moscow: Pedagogy, 1971, no. 2.
15. PLOMIN R. Environment and genes. What determines behavior? / Ideal and present childhood: Sat. works of modern Western scientists / Ed. Slobodskaya E.R. Per. from English. Novosibirsk: Siberian Chronograph, 1994. S. 71-102 — Part 2. Heredity and education. (S.71-89).
16. PSYCHOLOGY OF THINKING. Sat. Per. with him. and English. Ed. A.M. Matyushkin. M.: Progress, 1965 (Dunker K., Reid D., Sekey L., Maltzman I., Hilgard E., Gilford J., Newell A. et al.).
17. PSYCHOLOGY OF THINKING. Cross. in General Psychology. Ed. Yu.B. Gippenreiter, V.V. Petukhova — M .: Ed. Moscow State University, 1981, 1982 (Arnheim R.; Vygotsky L. S., Sakharov L. S.; Galperin P. Ya.; Lindsay G., Hull K., Thompson R.; Teplov B. M.; u.e.shtein S.L.; Jung K.G. et al.)
18. PUSHKIN V.N. Operational thinking in large systems. M.-L.: Energy, 1965
19. PUSHKIN V.N. Heuristics is the science of creative thinking. M., 1970
20. Pushkin V.N., Shavyrina G.V. On the systemic nature of intelligence. / Questions of psychology, 1972, No. 5
21. PERVIN L., JOHN O. Psychology of Personality: Theory and Research. M.: Aspect Press, 2001 — 607 p.
22. RUDENTSOVA M.A. The ratio of the level of operational thinking and personality characteristics of students. Course work. Ruk-l O.I. Motkov. M.: RGGU, 2004
23. SOBCHIK L.N. Introduction to the psychology of individuality. M.: Institute of practice. Psychology, 1998 — 512 p. (SMIL test, etc.)
24. SPIRIDONOV F.V. Psychology of thinking: Solving problems and problems: Textbook. M.: Genesis, 2006. — 319 p.
25. SUVOROV NF, et al. Participation of activation structures of the brain in the organization of the emotional state of anxiety and depression / J. Human Physiology. 1977, vol. 3, no. 1
26. HJELL L., ZIEGLER D. Theories of personality. St. Petersburg: Peter, 2000 — 608 p. S. 277
27. Yung K.G. Psychological types. Previous I.D. Ermakov. M.: GIZ, 1927
28. BUSS A.H. Personality: Evolutionary heritage and human distinctiveness. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum, 1988
29. BUSS D.M. Evolutionary personality psychology/ Annual Review of Psychology, 1991, 42, p. 459-492
30. GETZELS J. W., JACKSON P. W. Creativity and intelligence. London — N. Y., 1962 — 293 p.
31. KENRICK D.T. et al. Evolution, traits, and the stages of human courtship: Qualifying the parental investment model/ Journal of Personality, 1990, 58, p. 97-116
32. LOEHLIN JC, GOUGH HC Genetic and environmental variation on the California psychol. inventory / J.Person. evaluation. 1990, no. 3-4, p. 463-468. (Genetic and environmental influences on personality traits, determined by the CPJ vector scales). /Abstract. J. 95. Psychology. 1991, No. 11 (Twin method. Internality and the ability to self-development are partly determined by heredity — by 59%, and are practically not influenced by the environment. Following the norms is largely due to the family environment).
33. LYTTON H. Parent-Child Interaction / NJ, L., 1980. (Indicator of the heritability of the quality of «operational independence», in the form of the desire to dress oneself, lace up shoes, etc. in children — 58%).