It is interesting to analyze the concepts of personality orientation—concepts that are similar in content but belong to different psychological schools. For example, V.N. Myasishchev, on the basis of the concept of relations, identifies four personal types of correlation of biologically and socially valuable and inferior aspects of the personality as a selective principle. “Let’s imagine a square sheet: the upper half of it is socially positive, the lower half is socially negative, the right half is biologically positive, the left half is biologically negative. With infinite diversity, which is all the greater, the greater the number of human properties mapped, an integral assessment is possible … In our scheme, four main types can be distinguished in four quadrants:
- socially and biologically complete;
- socially complete with biological inferiority;
- biologically complete with social inferiority;
- socially and biologically inferior.
The O’K Corral diagram (E. Bern, F. Ernst) can be considered similar to the presented model, which distinguishes four attitudes towards oneself and other people (J. Stewart, V. Joyce. Modern transactional analysis. SPb., 1996. pp. 126-130):
1) I am OK; You are OK;
2) I am not OK; You are OK;
3) I am OK; You are not OK;
4) I am not OK; You are not OK. (Fig. 3)
These four views on life are called life positions. Some authors call them basic positions Or simply positions. They represent the basic qualities (values) that a person values in himself and in others, which means more than just some opinion about his behavior and the behavior of other people (…) Every adult has his own script based on one of four life positions. However, we are not in a chosen position all the time, but every minute of our life we can change life positions (…) Although we use the positions of all quadrants of the Corral diagram, each of us has one quadrant in which we spend most of the time when playing our script. This quadrant will be the main position that we adopted in childhood. In this version of the personality model, the quadrant corresponding to the full perception of the Self and the Other (I am OK with myself and You are OK with me) is defined as a healthy position based on the action of cooperation. It is opposed by the defensive and offensive paranoid attitude (“I am OK with myself, and You are not OK with me”) based on the action of deliverance. There are two more attitudes associated with a defective perception of «I»: barren (I am not OK with myself; You are not OK with me), based on the action of waiting, and depressive position (I am not OK with yourself, You are OK with me), based on the action of leaving. In our opinion, the task of a psychologist who owns the methodology of transactional analysis is to transfer a patient who is in any of the three inferior positions to the only “healthy” one (I am OK with myself; You are OK with me).
A similar model of personality was laid down on the basis of the behavioral theory of attachment by psychologists J. Bowlby and M. Ainsworth, and later developed by a number of other researchers (L.A. Kirkpatrick, K.E. Davis, K. Barthelomew, L.K. Horowitz, D Griffin, etc.). According to the behavioral attachment system concept, the developing child goes through a series of phases in the development of an attachment and in using that attachment as a «safety base» for exploratory activity and autonomization. In the course of development, an internal program is realized, part of our evolutionary heritage, which has an adaptive meaning. According to this program, the child develops an internal operational model, including psychological images of himself and his caregivers, based on emotional perception and creating a basis for developing expectations about future relationships with people — internal operational models of himself and others. In the early 90s, psychologists developed a system of these models associated with attachment styles. According to Bowlby, “patterns of attachment can be defined by two axes characterizing the internal model of the “I” and the internal model of the “Other”.
Each axis has its positive and negative poles. An example of the positive pole of the Self-Axis is the feeling of self-worth and the expectation of a positive reaction to oneself from Others. The positive pole of the axis that characterizes Others can be the expectation that other people will be available and ready to help and support, allowing you to get close to yourself. (…) This pattern leads to a fourth style of attachment, namely rejecting intimacy. Individuals with such a pattern of attachment feel uncomfortable when establishing close relationships and prefer not to depend on Others, but still retain a positive image of the “I” (Pervin L., John O. Personality Psychology. Theory and Research. M., 2000 P. 185. Ibid. P. 186). According to the proposed model, in addition to the rejecting pattern described above, one can single out a variant of confident attachment, when a person feels comfortable both in close relationships with others and alone with himself; a pattern of fear of attachment, which is characterized by fear of rapprochement, avoidance of communication; over-attachment pattern, with relationship absorption. Subsequent studies showed that attachment patterns in adults were associated with the choice of a partner and the stability of love relationships, with the development of depressive states and difficulties in interpersonal relationships, with the problem of overcoming personal crises. The same studies allow us to assert that the confinement of a person to a single pattern is not absolute, that in different situations, in relation to different social objects, different patterns of attachment can take place (First L., John O. Psychology of Personality. Theory and Research. S. 186). Thus, the concept of J. Bowlby-K. Barthelomew and their followers reveals a significant similarity with the concept of E. Berne-F. Ernst).
M.Sh. Magomed-Eminov. He writes: «The orientation of the personality secession characterize:
1) centering on the «I», which, unlike the Other, is considered as a special distinctive value, while the ability to decenter from one’s «I» and take into account the positions of the Other deteriorates;
2) a system of requirements goes from the person to the Other;
3) there is a focus on one’s own inner experiences;
4) own interests are the main ones, and the interests of the Other are denied, or recognized insofar as they contribute to the achievement of one’s own interests, or they are not taken into account at all;
5) The Other is considered as a depersonalized category: it is impersonal, a limited set of qualities is attributed to it; 6) a certain limited repertoire of behavioral, emotional manifestations, etc. is expected from the Other;
7) if expectations are not confirmed, then certain measures are taken against the Other (persuasion, persuasion, punishment, etc.) or contact with him is broken.
Personal Orientation compound characterize:
1) centering on the Other, which, unlike one’s own «I», is regarded as a higher value; there is an inability to decenter from the Other and take into account one’s own positions;
2) the interests of the Other are put in the first place, and one’s own interests are either not taken into account or are generally denied;
3) a person is aimed at controlling his behavior, his emotions and carefully monitors whether they coincide with the expectations of others;
4) the internal experiences of others, their opinions and assessments are of great value;
5) a person expects certain demands, influences, claims from others;
6) if his behavior and emotions do not meet the expectations of others, then he is afraid that he will be rejected, punished, etc.;
7) although a person is directed to close contact, the psychological distance is great; he limits his personality, perceiving himself as a faceless being.
Personal Orientation separation through connection characterize:
1) equality of positions;
2) value attitude both to oneself and to the Other;
3) interest in both one’s own and others’ inner experiences, which are coordinated into a single holistic process;
4) neither own nor other people’s interests are absolutized;
5) focus not on attributing, but on understanding the point of view of the Other;
6) the ability to decenter both from the “I” to the Other, and from the Other to the “I”;
7) the point of view that the Other is the same as the «I», and that the «I» is the same as the Other. A person with this orientation is characterized by the acceptance of a humanistic norm of relationships, the recognition of a person as an unconditional and supreme value.
It is obvious that the list of characteristic signs of personality orientation is not exhaustively complete. In addition, personality orientations have a complex internal structure and include a variety of motivational factors. The ratio between the directions considered above can be such that one of the extremes will steadily dominate in relations, and the influence of the other will be minimal.
Depending on which orientation of the personality prevails, two motivational accentuations can be distinguished: social phobia and sociophilia. Sociophilia manifests itself in the complete dissolution of the «I» in society, in the fear of being alone with oneself, in the loss of individuality. (…) Social phobia is expressed in the desire for loneliness, for isolation; other people either frighten or irritate or don’t care about them; the minimum required contacts are maintained. There are different gradations of it, ranging from alienation due to the frustration of basic basic needs and ending with the desire for neurotic isolation (…) Motivational-personal continuum: social phobia, separation, separation-affiliation, affiliation, sociophilia. Each of these orientations is understood as an interpersonal personality variable.
This circumstance allows us to connect the orientation of the personality with the phenomenon of position, more precisely, with its two varieties — the personal position and the social position of the individual. (…) So, in a personal position, we distinguish: isolation, I-centering, I-other — integration, other-centering, merging; social position includes, from our point of view, five types: alienation, narcissism, selfishness, humanism, altruism, conformism.
YES. Leontiev, speaking sharply about the desire for a typology of personality, attributing to it “the typology of schoolchildren according to the “orientation” of their personality that prevailed in pedagogical and psychological-pedagogical literature, especially in the 60-70s, but still exists in some places to this day” , clearly dissociates its «type or path of personality development» from the mentioned typology (Leontiev DA. Essay on the psychology of personality. M., 1993).
Here he considers it appropriate to single out autonomous, symbiotic, impulsive and conformal types, behind which, according to their content, “life positions” or “attachment patterns” already familiar to us, or finally the types of personality orientation identified by I.D. Egorycheva: humanistic, egocentric, negativistic and sociocentric (Egorycheva ID. Personal orientation of a teenager and the method of its diagnosis // World of Psychology. 1999. No. 1. P. 264-277).
The remark of D.A. Leontiev, which completely coincides with our understanding of the types of these life positions: “An autonomous path or type of development is the only path leading to the achievement of personal maturity and a full-fledged human existence. The remaining three of the four described types, models or paths of personality development lead to a dead end. (…) Having embarked on one of these paths (and its choice is largely determined by the characteristics of parental relations in adolescence and earlier), we find ourselves on a conveyor that leads us through life along this path. You can leave it only at the cost of great internal efforts. In particular, the main task of any serious psychotherapy, whatever methods it uses, is to direct a person along an autonomous path of development. If this task is solved, he will no longer need psychotherapy” (Leontiev D.A. Ibid., p. 30). (Similar to the task of a psychologist in the concept of E. Bern — F. Ernst).
The concept of I.D. Egorycheva allows us to consider the orientation of the personality as a causal relationship of dominant relationships — dominant social attitudes — the dominant sense-forming motives of the leading activity — its personal meaning — the life position of the individual — personal values. This whole causal chain is manifested in two positions: in relation to the individual to himself and in his relation to others (society), with all the consequences arising from these relations. Such an understanding of the foundations of personality typology brings the described concept closer to the concepts of E. Bern — F. Ernst, J. Bowlby — C. Barthelomew, the approach of V.N. Myasishchev, the concepts of personality orientation M.Sh. Magomed-Eminova and the type or way of personality development D.A. Leontiev. It does not contradict from the point of view of recognition of the hierarchical scheme of dispositional regulation of the social behavior of the individual and the concept of V.A. Yadov. In general, the approach of I.D. Egorycheva can be called a socio-psychological model of personality. I.D. Egorycheva identified 4 main types of personal orientation and 8 subtypes-accentuations (Fig. 5). The combinations I+, I-, O+, O- (where O is Society, Others) turned out to be associated with the manifestation of a certain type of personal orientation.
I +, O + — humanistic orientation of the personality. With this orientation, the individual does not seek autonomy, recognizing the right of everyone to free self-determination, both individually and within the group. The main value for a person with such an orientation is personality.
I, He, She are a concrete person and a concrete society, consisting of concrete «I», and not of abstract «Others». In this type, subtypes or accentuations are distinguished: with a predominantly positive attitude towards oneself — an individualistic accentuation of a humanistic orientation and with a predominantly positive attitude towards others — altruistic accentuation.
I +, O — egocentric orientation of the personality. With this orientation, the personality is in the center of attention itself, all its activity is focused on itself, its own interests, problems; the individual strives for recognition by society of his special value. The main value for a person with such an orientation is himself, his thoughts, his judgments, his interests, his activities, the results of his work. A person with this type of orientation is very demanding in assessing the other, accepting him as a whole as much as he is similar to himself, as far as he agrees with his opinion, shares his likes and dislikes. In this type of orientation, two accentuations are distinguished: with a predominantly positive attitude towards oneself, with a negative, in general, attitude towards society — an individualistic accentuation of an egocentric orientation; and with a predominantly negative attitude towards society, with, in general, a positive attitude of the individual towards himself — egoistic accentuation. The basis of the characteristics of the first subtype is the lesser rigidity and intolerance of the individual in relation to society. The second subtype is characterized by complete self-centering.
I-, O+ — the sociocentric orientation of the personality is distinguished primarily by the fact that the personality does not accept itself. A person does not believe in his own strength, does not believe that he will independently succeed in what he would like to achieve. At the same time, he is sure that others will achieve what they want with ease, at least much easier than he does. In this type of orientation, two accentuations are distinguished: with a predominantly positive attitude towards society, with a generally negative attitude towards oneself — conformist accentuation; and with a predominantly negative attitude towards oneself, with a generally positive attitude of the individual towards society — a self-deprecating accentuation of a sociocentric orientation.
I-, O — the negative orientation of the personality. Man does not accept himself or others; he experiences his failure as an extremely uncomfortable internal state. In this type of orientation, two accentuations are distinguished: with a predominantly negative attitude towards society, with a negative attitude towards oneself — misanthropic accentuation; and with a predominantly negative attitude towards oneself, with a less negative attitude towards society, a self-deprecating accentuation of a negative orientation (Egorycheva I.D. The personality orientation of a teenager and the method of its diagnosis // World of Psychology. 1999. No. 1. P. 264-277).
“Relationships, understood as a system of temporary connections of a person as a person — a subject with all reality or its individual aspects,” writes, referring to V.N. Myasishcheva, G.M. Andreev, — explain just the direction of the future behavior of the individual. (…) The scope of personality actions based on relationships is practically unlimited ”(Andreeva G.M. Social psychology. M., 1998. P. 289-290).
Research conducted under our supervision by graduates of the Moscow Psychological and Social Institute (MPSI): M.Yu. Nikolaeva, L.A. Yarovoy, E.A. Kotelnikova, V.N. Moskalets, E.G. Gusakova, O.A. Gurina, V.K. Kiseleva, O.B. Polevtsova, N.V. Zhuchkova, M.A. Vagina, V.N. Deryabina, O.Yu. Siplatova, S.V. Zonova, Ya.E. Kolomeets, I.V. Motova, E.V. Pochinskaya and I.A. Strashnenko, made it possible to find out that a person with a humanistic orientation, with the most healthy life position (according to F. Ernst), a pattern of confident attachment (according to K. Barthelomew), is able to separate through cooperation (according to M.Sh. Magomed-Eminov), being on an autonomous path of development (according to D.A. Leontiev), biologically and socially complete (according to V.N. Myasishchev) (Fig. 6) is characterized by a relatively stable system of relations, which is dominated by a sense of self-worth and the expectation of a positive assessment from «others «.
Others in this system are evaluated as people worthy of acceptance and respect for who they are, even if they do not share the interests of the subject and hold different views and beliefs. With this approach, the struggle of opinions and opposition to the enemy is not ruled out, there is only contempt for a dissident. B.S. In this case, Bratus speaks of “the activity of bestowal,” when “pro-social aspirations, by their very nature, switch activity to the processes of bestowing oneself, transforming the world for the benefit of others. The world and people become not means, but ends. It is clear from this that activity of this kind is an undoubted sign of personal health. (.37 Bratus B.S. Personality anomalies. M., 37. P. 1988).
Further, this author points to the “semantic force field” that arises around each personality, and that the personalities of this type of development, leading to familiarization with the generic essence of a person, create a “powerful force field of beneficial influence on other people, beneficial “contributions” and elevating semantic transformations”38. (38 Bratus B.S. Personality anomalies. M., 1988. P. 131).
According to B.S. Bratusya, every success of upbringing, the success of psycho-correction is not just a contribution to the fate of an individual, but also a factor in the improvement of the social environment. It would be good for future parents and educators to remember this, especially in our time, which is not very conducive to optimism.
The personality type in question is characterized by the predominance of the norm in the manifestation of physical aggression, in the absence of a tendency to increased aggressiveness. Verbal aggression reveals the most significant (up to 46,1%) manifestations above the norm, as well as guilt. The index of aggression and the indicator of irritability are mostly within the normal range, with a downward trend. Among the terminal (life, basic) values stand out: independence, self-confidence, interesting work, good and faithful friends, happy family life. Among the instrumental values, the most significant are cheerfulness, self-control, education, honesty, responsibility, tolerance, and strong will.
Common features of this type of personality are an increased focus on communication, a high degree of social adaptation in the field of relationships. It is characterized by high indicators of sociability, combined with the dynamism and emotionality of communication, activity in social contacts, the ability for empathy, sympathy and understanding of other people. These qualities coexist with frankness, benevolence towards others, accommodating, self-control, purposefulness in behavior and the presence of intellectual interests. The study of the features of self-esteem of older adolescents allowed I.A. Strashnenko in 2001 to find a certain similarity in terms of self-attitude and self-acceptance of subjects with an individualistic accentuation of a humanistic orientation with subjects of a similar accentuation of an egocentric orientation. Both of them are united by similar indicators of low self-acceptance, increased closeness in communication, a noticeable discrepancy between the level of claims and the level of self-esteem, which, according to B.S. Bratusya, can hinder personal development. The above data allow us to attribute one of the personality types described by A.A. Bodalev, to an altruistic accentuation of a humanistic orientation. The researcher characterizes this type as a person who is equally good at both situational and role-playing communication — any interpersonal communication, regardless of the number of partners and the degree of their heterogeneity. The basis of this ability, according to the author, is increased empathy, the ability to notice and understand the needs and intentions of other people, anticipate their behavior and, accordingly, take into account and exercise one’s abilities, including both advantages and disadvantages. In addition, observation is inherent in this type; decentration, or the ability to put oneself in the place of another and look at what is happening and at oneself through his eyes; the ability to receive this information at a subconscious level; and finally, the ability to experience and realize the attitude towards a person as a value, i.e. the ability to manifest humanity as a deep psychological property. Due to the possession of these qualities, people of this personal type of open and friendly communication experience a feeling of psychological comfort that causes sthenic emotions (Bodalev A.A. On the giftedness of a person as a subject of communication // World of Psychology. 1998. No. 4. P. 274).
A. G. Maslow describes in sufficient detail and accurately a typical psychological portrait of the individualistic accentuation of the humanistic orientation. He identifies the following features of this personality type: the highest degree of perception of reality, the ability to accept oneself, others and the world as they are; increased spontaneity;, high ability to focus on the problem; craving for solitude, pronounced autonomy; freshness of perception and richness of emotional reactions; identification with all people, the ability to improve interpersonal relations, a tendency to democratic relations; creative abilities, the ability to enjoy the process of activity, the process of self-giving, creativity, insight (Maslow A.G. Psychology of being. Refbook., 1997. P. 59-63).
According to our assumption, the boundaries separating the variants of personal orientation into models (see Fig. 5) are rather blurred. In essence, we are talking about the gradual transition of some personality characteristics to others. In this regard, we can expect the presence on both sides of the dividing boundaries between the types of orientation and accentuations of «zones of uncertainty», which include complexes of the personality traits of the subjects that can change depending on the circumstances. For example, the dot, which in the model is I.D. Egorychev’s personal complex of individualistic accentuation of a humanistic orientation and standing in close proximity to the vertical scale I +, I — indicates that this personal complex, due to external reasons, can relatively easily turn into an individualism complex of an egocentric orientation. The farther from the intersecting axes is the point identified as a combination of qualities, personality, attributed to this position, the more stable the listed properties.