Who do teenagers consider heroes of their time?

The study “Identification models of adolescents and youth: “heroes of our time” was conducted among teenagers aged 16-18 in two stages: in 2000-2001 and 2014-2015. It was attended by 512 boys and girls (in equal shares) from families with different socio-economic status in Moscow, Yekaterinburg, Krasnoyarsk and the Moscow region. The results were published at the end of last year. Why are we talking about them now?

Participants in the first study have evolved from teenagers to adults with formed opinions and political views. These people today make up a large percentage of the socially active population. What ideals and values ​​were instilled in them in childhood and adolescence? And how does this relate to their attitude to life today? How far apart are the two generations and what are the similarities? We tried to find answers to these questions.

Psychologies: What are the characters in your research? Who are they?

Elena Belinskaya: These are some ideal images that teenagers are looking for. Heroes can be people real or fictional, whose worldview or views are close, who causes respect and a desire to imitate in a teenager. Mayakovsky in the poem “Good!” there are lines about a young man who decides “to make life with someone.” This need to identify with someone or something is a classic feature of age. In early youth, we are looking for people who help us in the formation of an individual worldview, personal values, self-concept. And so it was interesting for us, social psychologists, to see “with whom the young people make their lives.”

In Soviet times, high school students, as a rule, found idols among the heroes of books. What books and what characters attract today’s teenagers?

Yes, it was literature that set the image of the heroic and supplied these models for schoolchildren 30-40 years ago. As for the youth of the new age – and this is the most striking, even shocking result of the study – they did not mention the characters of fiction or cinema at all!

Who were the teenagers?

Their responses in 2000 and 2015 differed markedly. Almost a third of the participants in the first phase of the study refused to name their hero at all. It was either a conscious refusal, active resistance (“I don’t know anyone similar”, “I can’t single out anyone”), or an unconscious refusal and some confusion (“I don’t understand who to write about”). But the most interesting thing is that of those who refused, more than 40% of the participants argued that such a figure should not exist.

What does this mean?

On the one hand, about the lack of unity in the public consciousness of that era regarding the value system. After all, the ideal hero is some quintessence of the value principle. This is a sample. If at the age of 16-17 I reasonably say that there are no samples for me, this means that at the moment I do not have a structured value range that I am ready to focus on.

Remember the turn of the century: then, indeed, there was a period of “confusion and vacillation.” The old values ​​did not work, and the new ones did not take shape. And teenagers, having absorbed this mood of society, by the age of 17 took a position of denial: “I am my own ideal and hero. And there shouldn’t be any heroes at all.” For them, the presence of a figure of a hero, an ideal, an object to follow was synonymous with uniformity of opinions and infringement of their own freedom, a sign of authoritarianism, from which they fled like fire.

Who were the others named?

Others, approximately 30% of the respondents, chose some specific people from their inner circle as a model. That is, not abstract characters, not public figures, not show business stars. Their ideal is a person from the sphere of direct communication. He’s a little older and he’s great. The guy who served in Chechnya. A businessman, a friend of his parents, who raises his own small business and provides for his family. Or the coach who leads the section, captivates the guys with sports.

That is, the one who sets the pattern of behavior in everyday life.

Yes. And this same person is primarily professionally successful. But he is not a careerist, he does not hold a post. He earns, but money for him is not a means of enrichment, he invests it primarily in business. He loves his homeland, he is sure that Russia has a future, he does not export capital abroad. He takes a patriotic and civil position.

The remaining teenagers (just over 10%) chose real political figures. Most often called “winning leaders” – Yeltsin, Chubais, Luzhkov and Putin. From foreign – George W. Bush and Princess Diana. But in any case, this “hero” does not demonstrate outstanding heroic deeds – he does not perform feats. Perhaps this is a consequence of the general discrediting of the very idea of ​​the “heroic”, which is characteristic of our respondents.

15 years later …

How has the idea of ​​a hero changed among teenagers 15 years later?

This time, no one refused to talk about ideals. But the number of heroes “among us” has halved. Adolescents (about 30% of respondents) see role models not in concrete acquaintances, but in some abstract images. In which, by the way, there is nothing heroic: “this is an ordinary person”, “the same as everyone else”, “he does not stand out in anything, he has the courage to just live”, “he lives here and now”. This collectible hero has no professional qualities, with one exception: he makes a career.

Moreover, a very interesting transformation of civic position and feelings of patriotism took place. If the teenagers of 2000 emphasized that their ideal person believes in the future of the country, works for its good, then here the civic position is different: the hero continues to love Russia, but he also obeys the laws. He is very law abiding.

This abstract “simple person” is opposed by answers that appeal to specific characters, among whom one dominates – the current president of our country. Moreover, Putin is endowed with absolute power. The leading statement (more than 40% of answers): “everything, our whole life depends on it now.”

Athletes, Paralympic athletes, actors, musicians, show business stars appear in the list of other role models (a little less than 20% in total). Moreover, the study participants combine seemingly poorly compatible names – for example, Nikita Mikhalkov and Khabensky, Pugacheva and Leps (it’s hard for me to imagine that teenagers really listen to them).

Increasingly, historical figures are mentioned: more than 20% of the answers mention Peter the Great (he was also named in the first survey), Stalin, Zhukov and Gagarin. They also mentioned Jesus Christ. At the same time, the motivation for such a choice is interesting – as a rule, strength acts as the leading quality of these heroes: “willpower”, “strength to withstand difficulties” and – somewhat paradoxically – “the desire to protect everyone”. In total, almost 30% of respondents adhere to this position.

How do you see this generation – judging by the answers?

It can be stated that over the past fifteen years, the generation of 17-18-year-olds has become more inclined to the uniformity of positions and to the “creation of idols” (rather formal). In this turmoil of names and definitions, there is no figure of action, no figure oriented more toward achievement, toward a concrete deed. Perhaps this is due to the fact that the uncertainty of the personal future increases quite a lot and the personal time perspective narrows.

The task of this generation is to adapt to today, and without a reserve for tomorrow. Which is very close to the values ​​of conservatism and traditionalism. It seems that they are already tired of life in advance. They have not yet managed to do anything, but they have already managed to understand the entire potential tragedy of passionaries in Russia and have denied themselves action. Moreover, this passivity is accompanied by an internal breakdown. Because they continue to value strength, courage, will.

Today they are just over 20, and, judging by recent events, they are becoming more and more politically active: they are increasingly taking to the streets and feeling free there.

Maybe we, the researchers, “caught” them too early, and political activity is their later choice. Maybe they started to grow up later. After all, they grew up in the very calm 2000s and only now are they facing real difficulties. To what extent are they ready to resist them and build their position? For now, this question remains open.

Can parents somehow participate in the search for identification models? How can you help your kids navigate?

Do not be afraid to show your child your assessment of really acting people. Do not hide your respect, admiration. Pay the attention of your 5-10-15-year-old child to other people’s actions, actions: “I admire this person. How could he achieve, manage, be like that … How does Masha (my friend) endure it (some difficulties)! What a fine fellow she is, that she decided to take this courageous step! It seems to me that we rarely show our children our positive attitude. Although we certainly have such acquaintances before our eyes. In a situation of value discord, and sometimes even a value vacuum, these real figures must be tangible. If we, adults, admire someone in particular, then there is less room for fragmented, random selection.