POSITIONS OF NON-VIOLENCE AND NON-INTERFERENCE IN STUDENTS: COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS

Introduction. The ability to non-violent interaction acts as the most important indicator of professional competency of specialists of “person to person” type occupations: teachers, psychologists, physicians, social workers, etc. Such ability has to be formed at the stage of higher education institution. To build the conditions for development and consolidation in students of the position of non-violence and to neutralise propensity to coercion and manipulation, it is necessary to provide regular monitoring on the identification of prevalent psychological attitudes in students: coercion, manipulation, non-violence, non-interference, including the analysis of their structure and content. However, correctional work with students can become complicated by their internal resistance to the need to change personally, overcoming the developed stereotypes and attitudes, as well as by ambiguity of potential deformations of positions similar to non-violence, but not similar to its positions.
The aim of the present research consisted in comparative characteristic of positions of non-violence and non-interference in students of psycho-pedagogical and medical specialties.
Methodology and research methods. The methodological framework of the research was based on the provisions of modern philosophy, pedagogics and psychology about non-violence as a universal human value. As a diagnostic tool, the authors designed the questionnaires to identify the types of students’ interaction with people and the positions held by students. The tests of “Motivation to Success” and “Motivation of Failure Avoidance” by T. Ehlers, the test-questionnaire “Readiness for risk” by G. Schubert, “Method for Studying Trust to Own Self” by N. B. Astanina were employed. The total sample involved 362 students of the Moscow University for the Humanities, Cherepovets State University and Ivanovo State Medical Academy. To conduct the comparative analysis, the groups of students with the expressed non-violence position – 81 persons (22.38% of the total sample) and students with the expressed non-interference position – 34 persons (9.39% of the total sample) were allocated. The statistical significance of distinctions was calculated using of the Fisher’s angular transformation. 

Results and scientific novelty. As a result, it was established that a low level of irritability to people, high sensitivity to people, moderate expressiveness of motivation of success achievement and readiness to take the reasonable risk are common to students with prevalence of the position of non-violence. The respondents of this group demonstrated the dominant need for safety, which is expressed in high sensitivity to threats and choice of adequate ways of reaction in life-threatening situations with the average level of own credibility. The higher potential of irritability, low sensitivity to other people, tendency to failures avoiding and desire not to risk prevail among the students with the expressed position of non-interference. The need for experience of feeling safety, low sensitivity to threats, the aspiration to exaggerate value of dangers and low level of own credibility characterise the students of the group described above. The authors concluded that sensitivity to another person and own credibility act as the key factors, which cause the acceptance by students of the positions of non-violence or non-interference.
Practical significance. The received results can be used in the course of formation of students’ ability to non-violent interaction as the most important professional competency of future specialists of “person to person” type occupations. 

1. Zhuravleva E. A. A nonviolence principle in a collaboration of teachers with a child: capabilities and limitations of training. Izvestiya instituta pedagogiki i psihologii obrazovaniya = News of Institute of Pedagogics and Psychology of Education [Internet]. 2017 [cited 2018 Nov 26]; 1: 74–82. Available from: https://elibrary.ru/item.asp? id=29894382 (In Russ.)

2. Maralov V. G., Sitarov V. A. Characteristic of positions of interaction as forms of expression of values of coercion or non-violence. Znanie. Ponimanie. Umenie = Knowledge. Understanding. Ability. 2017; 1: 131–146. DOI: 10.17805/zpu.2017.1.9 (In Russ.)

3. Maralov V. G., Romanyuk L. V. Influence of sensitivity to the person on acceptance of positions of interaction by students. Znanie. Ponimanie. Umenie = Knowledge. Understanding. Ability. 2018; 3: 180–195. DOI: 10.17805/zpu.2018.3.17 (In Russ)

4. Maralov V. G., Fortunatov A. A., SHonin M. Yu. Positions of interaction of students in the context of problems of ensuring psychological safety of the personality. Znanie. Ponimanie. Umenie = Knowledge. Understanding. Ability. 2018; 3: 196–209. DOI: 10.17805/zpu.2018.3.18 (In Russ.)

5. Maralov V. G., Sitarov V. A. Person-oriented irritability, social and educational stereotypes as factor of adopting controlling or non-aggressive position by students. International Journal of Pharmaceutical Research and Allied Sciences. 2018; Vol. 7. 2: 74–85.

6. Kupriyanchuk E. V. The phenomenon of “aggressiveness – sacrifice” in the socio-cultural context. Mir nauki. Sociologiya, filologiya, kul'turologiya = The World of Science. Sociology, Philology, Cultural Science [Internet]. 2018 [cited 2018 Nov 26]; 2: 3–6. Available from: https://sfk-mn.ru/PDF/03KLSK218.pdf (In Russ.)

7. Batson C. D. The Altruism question: Toward a social-psychological answer. New York, London: Psychology Press; 2014. 268 p.

8. Mararica L. V., Kazanceva T. V., Pochebut L. G., Svencickij A. L. Contribution of the personality in the social capital of group: Structure of altruistic investment. Social’naya psihologiya i obshchestvo. = Social Psychology and Society. 2018; 9, 1: 43–66. DOI: 10.17759/sps.2018090104 (In Russ.)

9. Lipman N. Training for the purpose of reduction of violence and development of peacefulness. Voprosy filosofii = Philosophy Questions. 1995; 2: 110–121. (In Russ.)

10. Danesh H. B. The Education for peace integrative curriculum: Concepts, contents and efficacy. Journal of Peace Education [Internet]. 2008 [cited 2018 Nov 26]; 5. Issue 2: 157–174. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1080/17400200802264396 11. Lizgunov P. The concept of humility: history and modern interpretations. Provincial’nye nauchnye zapiski. = Provincial Scientific Notes [Internet]. 2018 [cited 2018 Nov 26]; 1 (7): 86–91. Avaliable from: https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=35089010 (In Russ.)

11. Ou A. Y., Tsui A. S., Kinicki A. J., Waldman D. A., Xiao Z. and Song, L. J. Humble chief executive officers’ connections to top management team integration and middle managers’ responses. Administrative Science Quarterly [Internet]. 2014 [cited 2018 Nov 26]; 59: 34–72. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1177/0001839213520131

12. Wright J., Nadelhoffer T., Perini T., Langville A., Echols M., Venezia K. The psychological significance of humility. The Journal of Positive Psychology. 2017; 12/1: 3–12. DOI: 10.1080/17439760.2016.1167940

13. Barrett J. Intellectual humility. The Journal of Positive Psychology. 2017; 12, 1: 1–2. DOI: 10.1080/17439760.2016.1167945

14. Tangney J. P. Humility: Theoretical perspectives, empirical findings and directions for future research. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology. 2000; 19/1: 73–74.

15. Nielsen R., Marrone J. A. Humility: Our current understanding of the construct and its role in organizations. International Journal of Management Reviews. 2018; 20: 805–824. DOI:10.1111/ijmr.12160

16. Davis D. E., Deblaere C., Hook J. N., Placeres V. Humility at work. The Wiley Blackwell Handbook of the Psychology of Positivity and Strengths-Based Approaches at Work. 2016. p. 191–209. DOI: 10.1002/9781118977620.ch12

17. Enright R. D., Maria J. D. S., Radhi A. L. The adolescent as forgiver. Journal of Adolescence. 1989; 12: 95–110. DOI: 10.1016/0140–1971(89)90092–4

18. Blyasova I. Yu., Zajceva L. Yu., Byakova N. V. Intellektual’naya passivnost’ kak faktor riska razvivayushchejsya lichnosti budushchego pedagoga = Intellectual passivity as a risk factor for developing personality of a future teacher. Razvitie vysshego professional’nogo psihologo-pedagogicheskogo obrazovaniya: tendencii i perspektivy = Development of the higher professional psychology and pedagogical education: Trends and prospects [Internet]. Yalta; 2018 [cited 2018 Nov 26]. p. 20–26. Avaliable from: https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=35354091 (In Russ.)

19. Lazarev M. A., Podvojskij V. P., Stukalova O. V. Pedagogicheskoe obespechenie preodoleniya social’noj indifferentnosti studentov gumanitarnyh vuzov: social’no-kul’turnyj podhod = Pedagogical maintenance of the liberal arts colleges students’ social indifference overcoming: Socio-cultural approach. Moscow: Publishing Houses IAE; Daugavpils: DU; 2016. 152 p. (In Russ.)

20. Laskin A. A. The passivity and inertness in the formation of activity among the youth. Vestnik Vladimirskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta im. Aleksandra Grigor’evicha i Nikolaya Grigor’evicha Stoletovyh. Seriya: Pedagogicheskie i psihologicheskie nauki = The Bulletin of the Vladimir State University. Series: Pedagogical and Psychological Sciences [Internet]. 2013 [cited 2018 Nov 26]; 13 (32): 93–100. Avaliable from: https://elibrary.ru/item.asp? id=20912805 (In Russ.)

21. Kudinov S. I., Kudinov S. S., Kudinova I. B., Mikhailova O. В. The role of persistence in students’ self-realisation. International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education. 2017; 5, 2: 19–26. DOI 10.5937/IJCRSEE1702019K

22. Muhina V., Hvostov A. Alienation from others: Alienation of lazy and indifferent. Razvitie lichnosti. = Personal Development [Internet]. 2013 [cited 2018 Nov 26]; 1: 51–73. Avaliable from: https://elibrary.ru/item.asp? id=21480450 (In Russ.)

23. Maralov V. G., Sitarov V. A. The development of a diagnostic questionnaire revealing the interaction positions of students specializing in psychological and pedagogical assistance. Znanie. Ponimanie. Umenie = Knowledge. Understanding. Ability. 2018; 1: 167–177. DOI: 10.17805/zpu.2018.1.13 (In Russ.)

24. Maralov V. G., Kudaka M. A., Smirnova O. V., Perchenko E. L., Tabunov I. A. Development of test for diagnostic people’s needs for safety. Uchenye zapiski Cherepoveckogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta = Scientific Notes of the Cherepovets State University [Internet]. 2016 [cited 2018 Nov 26]; 1: 12–17. Available from: https://elibrary.ru/item.asp? id=25849603 (In Russ.)

25. Maralov V. G., Malysheva E. Yu., Nifontova O. V., Perchenko E L., Tabunov I. A. Development of test on sensitivity to threats in adolescence. Perspektivy nauki = Prospects of Science [Internet]. 2012 [cited 2018 Nov 26]; 8: 32–37. Avaliable from: https://elibrary.ru/item.asp? id=18281541 (In Russ.)

26. Maralov V. G., Malysheva E. Yu., Smirnova O. V., Perchenko E. L., Tabunov I. A. Development of test on identification of ways of reaction in danger situations in adolescence. Al'manah sovremennoj nauki i obrazovaniya = The Almanac of Modern Science and Education. 2012 [cited 2018 Nov 26]; 12–1 (67): 92–96. Avaliable from: https://elibrary.ru/item.asp? id=18247102 (In Russ.)

27. Astanina N. B. Creation and approbation of the new personal questionnaire “A technique of studying of credibility to oneself”. Psihologicheskaya nauka i obrazovanie = Psychological Science and Education [Internet]. 2010 [cited 2018 Nov 26]; 3: 159–172. Avaliable from: https://elibrary.ru/item.aspid=15113790 (In Russ.)

28. Koryagina I. I., Maralov V. G., Sitarov V. A. Comparative characteristic of positions of interaction at medical students and students – future experts of the sphere of psychology and pedagogical maintenance. Obrazovanie i nauka = The Education and Science Journal [Internet]. 2018 [cited 2018 Nov 26]; 20, 5: 79–104. Available from: https://elibrary.ru/item.asp? id=35022000 (In Russ.)