ISSN 0798 1015

Vol. 39 (Number 49) Year 2018. Page 2

Psychological structure of humane interpersonal relations among the subjects of educational activity

Estructura psicológica de las relaciones interpersonales humanas entre los actores de la actividad educativa

E.Y. KLEPTSOVA 1; N.N. KLEPTSOV 2; E.A. MISHUTINSKAYA 3; T.V. SHUBNITSYNA 4; N.V. TSVETKOVA 5

Received: 11/06/2018 • Approved: 26/07/2018 • Published 08/12/2018

Contents

1. Introduction

2. Materials and methods

3. Results

4. Discussion

5. Conclusion

Acknowledgments

References

1. Introduction

Humanization of interpersonal relations among subjects of educational activities is not widely studied in psycho-logical and pedagogical research. Despite the fact that the problems of education humanization were most actively studied in the last decade of the last Millennium the issues of the constructive interpersonal relations between the subjects of educational activity are not resolved yet. Humanization of interpersonal relations can be presented as the system of internal relations of the individual with the surrounding reality in the form of experience, activities, actions, positions that have become his/her world view. This system is expressed in respect (lack of respect) for dignity and human rights, values, sensitivity, humane treatment, empathy, assertiveness and other manifestations both to oneself and to other people.

2. Materials and methods

Humanization of interpersonal relations in educational activities is a multidimensional process. On the one hand, this process is the transition of the subject of pedagogical interaction from a negative (selfish) or natural level of interpersonal relations to a neutral level, and from the neutral level to the positive one. At the same time, the natural level does not always mean the negative one. The humane level of interpersonal relations may be natural as well. In this case, a person is not completely conscious of it. For instance, the person manifests humane interpersonal relation to other people, but he or she does not try to make other people become humane to himself/ herself and to other people. One more variant is possible (Kleptsova, 2013, 2012, 2016). The person manifests good deeds and humane interpersonal attitude just to him/herself, or in public; or the individual does not notice others or some other person becomes “your own other one”. However, humane interpersonal relations may be present in the mind of the person originally due to positive socialization. For example, a small child is humane by nature, if people surrounding him show acceptance, kindness, trust, and mutual support to him, themselves, and all other people (Kleptsova, 2012, 2013, 2013, 2016).

The negative relationship type is characterized by the orientation of a person to him/herself. The person identifies everybody in accordance with his/ her own standard of "good", "right". The person creates these standards in compliance with his/her own ideas, values and position in relation to another person. A negative relationship has significant limitations in the perception and understanding of the other person, especially when he/she is a stranger, incomprehensible and unpredictable. Negative relationships can be characterized by spontaneity; they limit the perception of the other due to negative evaluation. In this case the person manifests inhumanity which leads to inhumane interpersonal relations as a result. These relations are accompanied by the following arduous states and emotions: anger, jealousy, envy, fear, resentment, cynicism, apathy, aggression, regret, despair, anxiety, hatred, contempt, the desire to suppress and even destroy.

A negative relationship can turn into an indifferent kind of relationship or neutral interpersonal relationships. The person does not estimate him/herself, other people, events or any other information in the indifferent kind of relationship or neutral interpersonal relationships. Accordingly, due to the absence of volitional perception, for example, of actions of both his/hers and other people, lack of a person’s involvement at emotional, cognitive and behavioural levels results in lack of response, contemplation, observation, detachment, inaction.

Humane attitude is formed by the actualization of personal qualities as well as other components forming the levels of humane interpersonal relations. We assume humane interpersonal relations are the result of the position or disposition of subjects of educational activities that occur in the process of pedagogical interaction where cognitive, emotional and volitional levels of personal development are congruently realized in verbal communication.

The transition from one level of relationship to the other is possible in the presence of certain internal and external conditions, in particular, during hard and critical events in the life of an individual, such as job loss, illness, death or other accident with someone from the reference environment. Positive changes in a person's life, like the birth of a child, grandchild, love and other situations can contribute to the change of either coordination in the person’s world picture, or his/her worldview and values. Special training may contribute to the transition to some other type of relations as well. It should be noted that the levels of humane interpersonal relationships can change in reverse due to diseases or other physical ailments, lack of person’s work on him/herself, his/her perception of the situations, their analysis accompanied by negative emotional experiences and behavioral responses. In this case, there is a lack the intentions to the manifestation of humane interpersonal relations in the person’s worldview and values at the level of awareness and behavior.

3. Results

Let us analyze the psychological structure of humane, neutral, and inhumane interpersonal relations presented in Table 1.

In accordance with the activity approach, we consider the psychological structure of humane, neutral, inhumane interpersonal relations as a complex of motivation and value, cognitive, emotional and volitional, and conative (behavioral) components of interpersonal relations.

The motivation and value component includes the system of values, ideas, views, meanings, motives of a per-son’s activities and behavior.

The cognitive component contributes to the comprehension of information about the person or event that re-quires understanding, objective analysis and estimation of the situation, statements of position, self-knowledge and knowledge of partner's identity, the acceptance or rejection of something or someone.

The emotional and volitional component is evident in the receptivity, emotional sensitivity to another person: passions and actual emotions – interest, excitement, joy, surprise, sorrow, suffering, anger, disgust, contempt, fear, shame, guilt; states and feelings, e.g. happiness, self-esteem, love, a sense of humor, irony, mockery, confusion, remorse, fear, shame, resentment, manifestation of stress as an expressive component of emotions presented in mimicry, pantomime, and intonation.

The behavioral (conative) component reveals the nature of the response to the situation, position, information or another person: adequate, inadequate response to the person’s actions in this particular situation.

Let us start the comprehension of the psychological structure of humane, neutral and inhumane interpersonal re-lations with the inhumane ones. They are destructive; so we can follow the formation of the humane interpersonal relations.

The basis of the motivation and value component of the inhumane interpersonal relations is the rejection of val-ues and ideas of humanism, kindness, tolerance, and non-violence. The main motives of behavior and attitudes can be, for example, the desire to be right, the humiliation of a competitor, the overthrow of a rival, change of another person’s behavior and views, indifference, selfishness, rejection of another person’s attitudes and views and the person him/herself.

The cognitive component of the inhumane interpersonal relations is evident in the lack of development of an acceptance mechanism: misunderstanding, rejection, negative evaluation of the situation, information, another person, partial understanding of the other person’s motives, behavior, way of thinking, views.

Signs of low cognitive complexity lead to intolerance, and, consequently, to inhumanity (Wilfley&Shore, 2015, Lipsitz&Markowitz, 2013, Chatterjee&Kulakli, 2015). The nature of understanding both the interlocutor and essence of events and attitudes depends on comprehension. Reflective consciousness and thinking are the leading factors in understanding. Understanding is the basis of acceptance and, consequently, humanity. Understanding without personal involvement may lead the person to alienation, indifference or neutrality. According to humanism oriented psychology, a person is the more mature, the more he/she is able to accept others for who they are, to respect their identity and their right to be themselves, to recognize their intrinsic value and to trust them.

The emotional and volitional component of the inhumane interpersonal relations is characterized by disregard-ing another person’s dignity and rights, his/her values, low degree of empathy, unevenness, aggression, irritability, anger, detachment, emotional instability, neglect, contempt, intolerance and other manifestations towards themselves and to other people.

The conative component of the inhumane interpersonal relations is characterized by aggressive behavior: dicta-torship, manipulation; praise, orders, verbal, emotional and other violence, prohibition, exhortation, aversion. These are relationships aiming at achieving material needs and purposes, such as greed, avarice, the need for high position, lust for power, recognition, and vanity.

Now let us consider the psychological structure of neutral interpersonal relations. The motivation and value com-ponent of the neutral interpersonal relations is characterized by partial acceptance of humanism ideas and values; a person favors them, as he/she wants to justify his /her behavior, lifestyle and thinking. Misunderstanding of humanism philosophy is quite possible in this case. The leading motives are egocentric motives of their own well-being, convenience, profit, alienation, helplessness, neglect, inaction.

The cognitive component of the neutral interpersonal relations differs from other types of interpersonal relation-ships by partial understanding of the situation, person’s features, difficulties in the characterization and identification of differences and similarities in the analysis of the individual’s behavior, information, views, opinions, etc. The cognitive component in this case results in the combination of both aggressive and (or) uncertain or passive response to the situation, information, human, or behavior, and helplessness, indifference, inaction. Understanding without personal involvement in the situation leads to lack of evaluation of the situation, to detachment, indifference, neutrality, and inaction.

The emotional and volitional component of the neutral interpersonal relations may be expressed in a variety of ways. On the one hand, it is a veiled form of a postponed revenge, materialism, hypocrisy, self-promotion, conformity, etc. On the other hand, it may manifest understanding that sometimes it is better to conceal a true attitude, one’s own point of view. As for business communication (negotiation, correspondence) it assumes the performance of professional duties. For instance, an administrative employee of an educational institution shows a neutral attitude to somebody or something that concerns his occupation. One more feature characterizing the neutral interpersonal relations is lack of interest, desire, intention to be in the situation of interaction, be involved in it either emotionally or personally, to empathize with someone.

Patience as a psychological mechanism of interpersonal relations leads to the manifestation of the humane inter-personal relations; it is not present at a neutral interpersonal relationships. There is also lack of a volitional action as well as involvement in the situation. The person rejects the events taking place, and, consequently, he/she neglects another person, information or situation. Patience as a psychological mechanism of interpersonal relations enables to lower the sensitivity threshold to unfavorable factors. However, lack of patience as a psychological mechanism of interpersonal relations at this level of relations leads to manifestation of inaction and lack of emotional response.

We assume the neutral interpersonal relations at the conative level are characterized by ambiguity, contextuali-ty. On the one hand, they may have much in common with assertive responding. On the other hand, there may be manipulation, moralizing, edification, notation, learning, adaptation, conformism. In general, we can speak of the following processes, states and qualities of the person: contemplation, observation, detachment, lack of evaluation, involvement, and response, ignoring, inaction, passivity, insecurity, helplessness; ways of communication: lack or response, demonstration of helplessness. Moralizing, conviction, notation may be the sign of a protective reaction.

The psychological structure of the humane interpersonal relations is as follows.

The motivation and value component of the humane interpersonal relations is characterized by complete under-standing of the humanism philosophy, ethics, values and ideas such as tolerance, nonviolence, kindness, humility or another philosophical or religious concept, which proclaims the meanings of goodness, non-violence, tolerance, humility, and trust. The leading motivation is the motives of assistance, cooperation, love, support, accompaniment, trust, compliance, and leniency.

The cognitive component of the humane interpersonal relations is characterized by the ability to understand what is happening, motivation, the world picture of the opposite party, including reflexive consciousness and thinking. Understanding contributes to the restructuring of personal meanings; it is an important factor of personal growth and development. The signs of the cognitive component are as follows: cognitive complexity, lack of an explicit evaluative content, mobile assessment, integration of negative and positive information in a single image, criticism in relation to oneself, a greater degree of reconciliation with the faults of others; decentration as the ability to understand someone else's point of view in contrast to the infantile egocentrism; the ability to allocate significant and minor signs of the assessed object. They also include the ability for the ambivalent perception of the object, which means that the person can see both the positive and negative characteristics, as opposed to univalent black-and-white perception. The ability to establish similarities and differences between the same objects on different grounds, forming different ways of their grouping; the flexibility of thinking as willingness to change ideas about the object in accordance with the new information are also among the signs of the cognitive component (Torres, Domitrovich, &Bierman, 2015, O’Driscoll, 2013). The person having a complex system of personal constructs can easily reproduce a simple system, as his/her interpretation ability is slightly greater (Collie et.al., 2016, Baek, &Jung, 2015, Lösch et. al.).

The effect of the cognitive component on the person determines what experiences, states, feelings and, of course, behavioral responses will capture the personality afterwards.

The emotional and volitional component of the humane interpersonal relations includes the ability to overcome anger, fear, apathy, fury, irritability, inconsistency, to show restraint, composure, self-control and self-regulation. It is the first stage of interpersonal relations at which the person reveals a patience mechanism. Patience as a psychological mechanism causes a manifestation of humane interpersonal relationships; so it comes to the fore. This mechanism includes restraint, composure, and self-control. Partners restrain themselves with composure and use self-control to reallocate bias and selective attention to the interests of business. Thus, the restraining factor is the main one in compo-sure, and the reallocating factor is the leading one in self-control. They ensure the dominance of the higher motives over the lower ones, the overall principles over short-term aspirations, and the necessary self-restraint contributes to the achieving the goal at the implementation phase.

Restraint and composure can be combined with self-control, which is an attribute of self-awareness. Together they regulate all spheres of human mental life. It is an ideal combination; not many people may boast of it. We consider it depends on the degree of a person’s volitional training. Patience as a psychological mechanism makes it possible to lower the threshold of sensitivity to adverse factors. It also results in manifestation of tolerance at this level of interpersonal relations.

The second stage of the humane interpersonal relations is the actualization of the patience mechanism as the highest manifestation of interpersonal relations. At this stage we see work of a person on oneself. It is the highest manifestation of the humane relations – empathy, love, respect, interest, joy, peacefulness, forgiveness, gratitude, reverence, wonder, awe, appreciation.

The conative component of the humane interpersonal relations means assertive behavior. Assertiveness has three main meanings: confidence and willingness to take responsibility for actions; a constructive approach to solving problems; a desire not to infringe upon the interests of others. The basis of the assertive behavior is the principle “Live and let live”. Assertiveness helps to go beyond one’s own self-centeredness, helps to "hold a pause" and contributes to the desire to find positive aspects in an unfavorable situation. Assertive behavior is characterized by dialogue, support, belief, explanation, agreement, cooperation, assistance, explanation, warning. Assertive forms of behavior are persuasion, explanation, agreement, approval, explanation, and warning. Interpersonal relations, related to the satisfaction of such needs as knowledge, striving for harmony, fulfillment, happiness, are accompanied by joy, gratitude, amazement, awe, gratitude, reverence, compassion. The humane interpersonal relations can be considered in the framework of psychological resilience as a dynamic process of positive adaptation to adversity. Resilient people are people with optimistic attitudes and dominant positive emotions. They are able to find a balance between negative and positive emotions (Onen &Kocak, 2012, Nesi, Miller, & Prinstein, 2017, Luthar, Cicchetti, &Becker, 2010)

4. Discussion

Inhumane interpersonal relations can be the starting point of the movement to the development of humane in-terpersonal relationship. Neutral interpersonal relations are the intermediate stage between the inhumane interpersonal relationships and humane interpersonal relations.

It should be noted that the levels of interpersonal relations under consideration are reflected in the external mani-festations of the person to something or someone, and they deeply affect ingrained, persistent and typical reactions specific to a person. For example, an adult says that he/she is pleased or displeased with something. One more example: a child is naughty and moans: "I don't like the thing" "I don’t want to play with these children" or with joy and excitement asks to repeat something: "I like doing this", "It is very interesting with Klavdia Petrovna", "still want to play with the children". Manifestations of relations modality are different; people have a positive attitude to what they like, what causes a positive emotional response. A negative attitude includes something that causes displeasure, turns away or rejects. A neutral attitude is the result of indifference, of a neutral position, of what is not important, when a person says that it does not matter, and, consequently, a person is inactive. This reaction is often accompanied by instability of attitudes to something or something. For instance, in children it is caused by age-related characteristics and conditions that support this attitude of education and the environment. This instability requires that the adult cares about maintaining interest, for example, to studies or good deeds. Sometimes adult subjects of the educational process demonstrate the inhumane interpersonal relations to other subjects of educational activities. They allow themselves disapproving remarks of the teacher in front of the child, criticize the other parent, react to the actions of some other child too emotionally. Thus, they show their own children negative emotional experiences, aggressive response and behavior, and, accordingly, form the level of interpersonal relations.

5. Conclusion

The humane interpersonal relations are the result of position or disposition of subjects of the educational activi-ties. They take place in the process of pedagogical interaction that congruently realizes the cognitive, emotional, and volitional levels of a person’s development in verbal communication.

Table 1
Comparative analysis of the psychological structure of
humane, neutral, and inhumane interper-sonal relations

Let us give some empirical results to confirm the problem. The study of the humane interpersonal relations among subjects of educational activities is based on the results of the experiment carried out from October 1999 to November 2015. Teenagers and students (296), teachers (187), and heads of educational institutions of different re-gions of the Russian Federation took part in this experiment.

The experiment aimed at studying the levels of the humane interpersonal relationships among subjects of ed-ucational activities and their relation to other personality characteristics.

Table 2
Component description of interpersonal
relationships of teenagers and youths

Table 2 it should be noted that teenagers and youths characterized by the humane interpersonal relations tend to accept subjects of reality as “friends”, “close.” This group of respondents shows the least difference while evaluating subjects they like more or less. According to Student’s t-test the more the difference is, the higher the rejection degree is. The groups of teenagers and youths characterized by neutral and inhumane interpersonal relations, respectively, show more extreme indicators of acceptance/ rejection. It conforms the lower degree of acceptance and higher degree of rejection of subjects of reality. It may lead us to the conclusion about higher degree of isolation and indifference, bias to subjects of reality. It is expressed in rejection, alienation, isolation of teenagers and youths with neutral and abusive interpersonal relationship.

We have the same results while studying teenagers and youths’ assertive, aggressive, and uncertain behavior.

Teenagers and youths with dominant humane interpersonal relations prefer assertive models of interaction. However, lack of confident and constructive behavior is possible in this group of respondents. It may become an im-portant goal for developing and forming work.

Indicators of impulsivity (aggression) predominate over the other behavioral characteristics in the age groups under consideration, which of course requires correction. Uncertainty (passivity) indicator in combination with aggres-siveness, intolerance (impulsivity) in teenagers and youths with inhuman interpersonal attitude is alarming, because they become active when there is lack of skills of assertive communication.

The coevals are needed to assert themselves, find their status and self-determination. The need for friendly re-lations, the norms of the emerging or existing relations in the group if not always acceptable, the status of the child take the main part in the inner life of a teenager. That’s why we consider that the formation of skill of constructive and as-sertive interaction in teenagers is of utmost importance. These skills contribute to the optimal entry into a reference group, develop the personality of a teenager in the leading activity, and actualize the predominant age need.

Teenagers are extremely critical towards others, outright rude behavior meets their aggression and counter-intolerance. Thus, the atmosphere surrounding a teenager is extremely important, both in a class and in the educational institution.

Table 3
Component description of interpersonal relationships among
teachers and administrative employees of educational institutions

Table 3 shows that mostly heads of educational institutions and teachers characterized by the humane level of interpersonal relations reveal empathy, trust, friendliness to subjects of educational activities. Heads of educational institutions and teachers characterized by the humane level of interpersonal relations to subjects of educational activi-ties (children, parents, colleagues) whom they do not like very much, show positive feelings and emotions: the desire to soothe, balance; compassion; love; care; attention; respect for the individual; satisfaction; joy at meeting. Heads of educational institutions and teachers with the inhumane level of interpersonal relations focus more on negative experi-ences, and show lack of empathy: animosity; internal barrier; rejection of a person; irritation from the effort not to show hostility; the desire to correct the behavior; shame; confusion; disgust, indignation, turning into disgust; nausea; lack of sympathy; there is no joy of communication; self-confidence.

Acknowledgments

Thus, we have concluded that teenagers and youths, heads of educational institutions and teachers with the humane level of interpersonal relations have empathy characterized by a higher degree of frankness to the subjects of educational activities, even to those who give them more of inconvenience and trouble. Heads of educational institu-tions, teachers, teenagers and youths with the inhumane level of interpersonal relations to subjects of educational ac-tivities focus on the negative restraint towards a particular person. For example, it may be shown to a parent: "dislike"; "internal barrier"; "rejection of the identity"; "irritation from the effort not to show hostility"; "the desire to correct the behavior"; "shame"; "confusion"; "disgust," "indignation, turning into disgust"; "nausea"; "no sympathy"; "there is no joy of communication"; "arrogance".

The data of the experiment are alarming, especially if we consider the difference in attitudes and feelings to subjects of the educational activities, for instance to parents. Our questionnaire shows that teachers often have nega-tive feelings and emotions towards parents, and they can’t help feeling the same towards these parents’ children. Ac-cording to teachers with the inhumane level of interpersonal relations to subjects of educational activities, they assess children irritating them on this or that reason in a worse way than children they like. That’s why the level of goodwill, trust, and friendliness to these children is lower, as for degree of control it is higher. These attitudes have a negative im-pact on the mental health of children; they constrain and undermine their personal growth and development. This neg-ative impact may be revealed later, it often results in the negative traits of a person.

Thus, heads, teachers, teenagers, and youths characterized by the humane level of interpersonal relations to subjects of the educational activities show more empathy, trust, friendliness, and acceptance degree to these subjects of educational activities. Teenagers, youths, heads, and teachers with the inhumane level of interpersonal relations to subjects of educational activities differentiate their attitudes to subjects of educational activities. They accept the sub-jects of the educational activities they like; and they reject and show a biased attitude to those subjects (parents, chil-dren) who irritate them.

References

Baek, Y. M., & Jung, Ch. S. (2015). Focusing the mediating role of institutional trust: How does interper-sonal trust promote organizational commitment. The Social Science Journal, 52 (4), 481-489.

Chatterjee, A., & Kulakli, A. A. (2015). Study on the impact of communication system on interperson-al conflict. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 210 (2), 320-329.

Collie, R. J., Martin, A. J., Papworth, B., & Ginns, P. (2016). Students' interpersonal relation-ships, personal best (PB) goals, and academic engagement. Learning and Individual Differences, 45, 65-76.

Kleptsova, E.Y. (2013). Types of Interpersonal Relations. Proceedings of the Samara scientific center of RAS (Izvestia Samarskogo nauchnogo tsentra RAN), 15 (2), 382-387.

Kleptsova, E.Y. (2012). Humanization of Interpersonal Relations in Educational Activities: Monograph. Kirov: VSU Publishing House.

Kleptsova, E.Y. (2013). Psychological Structure of Humane Interpersonal Relations Among Subjects of Educa-tional Activities. Education and Self-development, 3 (37), 28-36.

Kleptsova, E.Y. (2013). Monitoring of Interpersonal Relations Humanization in Educational Activities. Bulletin of Cherepovets State University (Vestnik Cherepovetskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta), 1 (46), Т. 2.,133-135.

Kleptsova, E.Y. (2013). Psychological Characteristics of Humane Interpersonal Relations and Problems of Psy-chological Support of Professional Deformation and Destructive Behaviour of Teachers and Administrative Employees of Educational Institutions. Bulletin of Vyatka State University of Humanities (Vestnik Vyatskogo Gosudar-stvennogo Gumanitarnogo Universiteta), 2 (3), 144-151.

Kleptsova, E. Y., & Balabanov A.A. (2016). Development of Humane Interpersonal Relationship. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 11 (8), 2147-2157.

Lipsitz, J. D., & Markowitz, J.C. (2013). Mechanisms of change in interpersonal therapy (IPT). Clinical Psychology Review. 33 (8), 1134-1147.

Lösch, T., Lüdtke, O., Alexander Robitzsch, A., Kelava, A., Nagengast, B., & Trautwein, U. (2017). A well-rounded view: Using an interpersonal approach to predict achievement by academic self-concept and peer ratings of competence. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 51, 198-208.

Luthar, S. S., Cicchetti, D., & Becker, B. (2010). The Construct of Resilience: A Critical Eval-uation and Guidelines for Future Work. Child Development, 71 (3), 543-562.

Nesi, J., Miller, A. B., & Prinstein, M. J. (2017). Adolescents' depressive symptoms and subse-quent technology-based interpersonal behaviors: A multi-wave study. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 51, 12-19.

O’Driscoll, J. (2013). The role of language in interpersonal pragmatics. Journal of Pragmatics, 58, 170-181.

Onen, A.S., & Kocak, C. (2012). The Metacognitive Evaluation of Student Teacher's Interpersonal Relationship Dimensions. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 47, 1900-1905.

Torres, M .M., Domitrovich C. E., & Bierman, K. L. (2015). Preschool interpersonal relationships predict kindergarten achievement: Mediated by gains in emotion knowledge. Journal of Applied Developmental Psy-chology, 39, 44-52.

Wilfley D. E., &, Shore A. L. (2015). Interpersonal Psychotherapy. International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences (Second Edition), 631–636.

1. Practical Psychology Department, Vyatka State University, Moskovskaya Street, 36, Kirov, 610000, Russia. E-mail: klepcovale@mail.ru

2. Pedagogical Institute, Vyatka State University, Moskovskaya Street, 36, Kirov, 610000, Russia

3. Linguistics and Translation Department, Vyatka State University, Moskovskaya Street, 36, Kirov, 610000, Russia

4. Practical Psychology Department, Vyatka State University, Moskovskaya Street, 36, Kirov, 610000, Russia

5. Department of general and special psychology, Vyatka State University, Moskovskaya Street, 36, Kirov, 610000, Russia