• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
Self-regulation in Russia, Psychological Institute of Russian Academy or Education, Lab of Self-regulation presenatation Tatiana Indina 2011
 

Self-regulation in Russia, Psychological Institute of Russian Academy or Education, Lab of Self-regulation presenatation Tatiana Indina 2011

on

  • 196 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
196
Views on SlideShare
196
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    Self-regulation in Russia, Psychological Institute of Russian Academy or Education, Lab of Self-regulation presenatation Tatiana Indina 2011 Self-regulation in Russia, Psychological Institute of Russian Academy or Education, Lab of Self-regulation presenatation Tatiana Indina 2011 Presentation Transcript

    • Personality and self-regulation study Lab of self regulation, PI RAEPsychological institute Russian Academy of Education, Moscow, Russia
    • Self regulation theories in Russia• Theory of functional systems (P.K. Anokhin);• Theory of movement behavior – (N.A. Bernstein);• A systemic-structural theory of activity and Concept of operative image – (D.A.Oshanin);• Theory of functional self-regulation of activity – (V.D.Shadrikov);• Theory of conscious self-regulation of behavior (O.A. Konopkin, V.I. Morosanova)
    •  Self-regulation: ability to initiate, organize, support, and manage individual activity, which is goal oriented. (Conscious self-regulation theory of O.A.Konopkin, 1970) Self-regulation processes:- Goal planning- Modeling of significant conditions- Programming of actions- Results evaluation
    • THEORY OF CONSIOUSS SELF - REGULATIONMemory • O.A. Konopkin proposed a conceptual model OF SELF- Goal REGULATION representing the most general structural- functional aspects of conscious Criteria self-regulation (Konopkin, Modeling system 1980). • The main functional Result components of conscious self- achievement regulation process ARE : Programm estimation • Goal of the activity (as it is understood and accepted by ing subject); Result information • Subjective model of activity conditions significant for the achievement of the goal; Correction • Program of the activity; • System of criteria of success of goal achievement; Program • Evaluation of information regarding the results of the realization activity.
    • Contemporary study of conscious self-regulation: Differential approach to self-regulation study (V.I. Morosanova)• Over the past years, PI RAE laboratory of self- regulation has been studying individual differences in conscious self-regulation across various types of activity – operator’s, athlete’s and scholar’s.• We have defined, described, and systematically analyzed the phenomenon of individual differences in self-regulation, which manifests itself in the way that people differ in the developmental level of conscious self-regulation, plan their activity goals and model the conditions of their achievement differently, apply different methods and algorithms to complete their actions, have different success criteria to evaluate the results (Morosanova, 1998).
    • Individual differences in self- regulationWe have found evidence suggesting the existence of persistent individualdifferences in the way a person plans, programs, and estimates the results ofhis/her activity. Essentially, it implies individual styles of self-regulation. Self-regulation styles are individual features of organization and management ofexternal and internal activity that are typical and most important to a person.These features constantly manifest themselves in various kinds of activities.Firstly, stylistic features of self-regulation are determined as individualdifferences in processes implementing the main components of self-regulation system.Secondly, stylistic features that characterize the function of all components ofself-regulation system are at the same time personal traits (e.g.independence, flexibility, and reliability). (V.I.Morosanova & self-regulationlab. PI RAE)
    • Individual differences in conscious self- regulation:1) Operative-processual differences• Goal planning;• Modeling of significant conditions• Programming of actions• Control and result evaluation2) Regulative-personality differences (subjectness) – autonomy, responsibility, persistence, assertiveness
    • Self-regulation diagnostic and evaluation methodsTo study and diagnose the described features the following questionnaire methods have been developed and standardized:• Style Features of Behavioral Self-Regulation (SSB),• Sportsman’s Self-Regulation in Preparing to a Contest (SPS),• Self-Regulation in Election Campaign of a Deputy (SIK),• Individual Self-Regulation of Students and Schoolars (ISSH) (Morossanova, 1998).
    • Individual profiles of self- regulation• The typical profiles can change at various levels of conscious self-regulation development.• For a highly developed self-regulation system, the profiles are characterized by highly developed and closely interconnected main components of self- regulation structure, i.e. harmonious self-regulation style, which allows one to compensate the influence of personality characteristics and traits hindering successful goal achievement.
    • Мethods - SSPMSPQ (Self-regulation Profile Questionnaire, V.I. Morosanova, 2000).• The statements of the questionnaire SPQ (Self-regulation Profile Questionnaire, V.I. Morosanova, 2000) were grouped into six scales, which diagnose individual typical peculiarities of regulatory processes• training planning scale -Pl ;• modeling of conditons – M;• programming of actions scale - Pr ;• results evaluation scale ER;• regulatory tactical flexibility scale - Fl;• independence of planning, programming and result evaluation scale (In).• A l e v e l (degree) of development of the conscious self-regulation - the general questionnaire-based indicator.
    • New version of “Self-regulation Profile Questionnaire, SPQ”• New version of “Self-regulation Profile Questionnaire, SPQ” (Morosanova, 2004). In this new questionnaire version (SPQ-2008) basic scales are improved and a new Reliability scale is added. The Regulative Reliability scale diagnoses individual ability to regulate behavior in stressful situations.• New questionnaire version includes 50 statements, grouped into 8 scales: Planning, Modeling, Programming, Result evaluation, Correction of regulation, Programming of actions, Autonomy and General level of conscious self-regulation scale.• The data on the scales factor structure, internal consistency, convergent and discriminate validity was confirmed on a sample of 820 subjects (students, teachers, rescuers, managers) in age from 16 to 32.• Questionnaire can be used to diagnose individual differences of self-regulation as predictors of reliability and effectiveness in learning and professional activity.
    • Self-regulation styles typology
    • Typical profiles of Self-regulation for Extraverts and Introverts Unstable Pl M Pr ER Introverts No. 1 Extraverts No. 1 N Pl M Pr ER Pl M Pr ER Introverts No. 2 I Extraverts No. 2 E S Pl M Pr ER Pl M Pr ER Stable No. 1 Stable No. 2 Pl M Pr ER Pl M Pr ER1.Morossanova V.I. (2003) Extraversion and Neiroticism:2.The typical profiles of Self-regulation, European Psychologist 4, 279-288
    • 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Pl ann in • g Pla nni ng M od el lin Mo Pr g del l in og g ra m R m Pro es in gra ul g mm t ev ing al Re ua s ul tio t ev n al u ati o Fl n ex ib il iG Se ty Fle en lf- xi b er su ili t y al ffi se ci l f- en Sel re cy f-s gu Ge uff la ner ic ie ti o al l nc y n e ve le l of High Responsibility group High Reflexivity group ve sel l f-re gul at io n 24% 45,50% 5,40% 34,90% 53,30% 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Plann Plann i ng ing Mode Mod ll ing elling Pr og Progr amm ra mmin ing g Res u Resu lt est lt eva imati l uati o n on Flexi Flexi bili ty bility (Morosanova, Plakhotnikova, 2006) Self- Self-S su fficie uffic i n cy High Anxiety group enc y Gene High Reliability group Gene r al S elf- re ra l Se lf-re g gu lation ulat io level n leve l Personality traits and self-regulation differences study 24% 27% 10,30% 13,80% 67,82% 12.50% 32.30%
    • PERSONALITY TRAITS AND SELF-REGULATION DIFFERENCES STUDY (MOROSANOVA, PLAKHOTNIKOVA, 2006) High Confidence group 9 8 7 6 68.50% 5 23.40% 4 3 5.40% 2 1 0 General Self- Modelling Programming sufficiency Planning Flexibility evaluation regulation Result Self- levelIndividuals with high Reflexivity, Reliability, ResponsibilityConfidence, Anxiety are characterized with different self-regulation profiles
    • Implementation of self-regulation theoryThe results of Self regulation study were applied to increase effectiveness• Of Professional activity (politics, managers, athlets’, lifesavers)• Learning activity (high school and College students)
    • Ge ne r al Se lf -re 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 gu lat Pla ion n Mo ning P d Re rogr elli n su am g lt e mi sti n ma g Fle tion Ex xib tra i lit y Int versi rov on er s Th ion i nk i Rationals F e ng eli Ge Ju ng ne Pe dgi n Em ral rc g oti emo eivin Int ona tio g en l e na Inf sivity xcite lity lue m nc of e ent e o mo f t Emotionals Ris emo ionRa k r tio tio ea ns na din es l ity ( pe s rso IQ na in political voting (Indina, Morosanova, 2007) lity ) Personality and self-regulation of decision making
    • Regulation profiles of rational voters (Indina, Morosanova 2007)98765432 Rationally -esteeming Rationally-modelling1 Rationally-programming Rationally-planning0 cy g ng on y ing ilit llin en mi ati n xib de i an fic alu ram Fl e MoPl uf ev og lf-s lt Pr su Se Re
    • Regulation profiles of emotional voters (Indina, Morosanova 2007)876543210 Pla Mo Pr Re Se Fle og l f- su d nn xib ell su ram lr in ilit ing ff es g ici m y tim ing en ati cy n o Emotionally-neurotic type Emotionally extraverted type
    • Personality types in high and low rationality group Personality types in high emotionality group Champion other types 13% 24% Healer Crafter 11% 6% Promoter 5% Teacher 15% Composer Performer Councelor 8% 10% 8% NF Idealist (Intuitively -feeling) 29% SP -Artists (Sensory-percepting) 47% Keirsy personality types in high rationality group other types Inventor Architector 26% 9% 11% FieldMarshall 4% Mastermind 7% Inspector Provider 11% 5% Supervisor Protector 16% 12% NT- Rationals (Intuitively thinking) 31% SJ -Guardian (Sensory-judging) 44%
    • Regulation & Personality factorsof Decision making in emergency situations (Indina, Morosanova, 2009)
    • Relation btw decision making domains, self-regulation processes and personality traits(Indina, 2009) Effectiveness Regulation of decision making Personality (r=0,67;p<0,001) (r=0,33; p<0,01) General level Openness of self regulation (r=0,48; p<0,001) (r=0,27; p<0,05) Modeling of significant Agreeableness conditions (r=0,52; p<0,001) (r=0,35; p<0,01) Result estimation Conscientiousness
    • Regulation profiles in effective and not effective decision making in emergency situations (Indina, Morosanova 2010) 8 7 6,52 7,26 6 5,26 6,29 5 5,81 5,27 Effective DM 4 4,9 4,3 Not effective DM 3 3,85 3,6 2 2,65 2,67 1 0 ty y g g ng n om in in io i li ni m el ib at on an od ex am lu tPl va Fl M Au gr te o Pr ul es R
    • Personality profiles for effective and not effective decision making (Indina, Morosanova 2010) 9 8 6,45 7 6,2 7,2 5,67 7,81 6,78 6 6,45 5 Effective DM 4 Not effective DM 3 4,55 4,73 4,45 2 2,91 3,11 3,09 2,89 1 0 ion lity ss ss ss ism ss e ne na rs ine ne nn isc ve ble t io us ad e ot tra Op Ra ea io re urEx nt re Ne sk cie Ag Ri ns Co
    • Reliability of self-regulation in stress manifestations study (Kondratuyk, Morosanova 2011)
    • Reliability of self-regulation study (Kondratuyk, Morosanova 2011) • Predictors of reliability of professional activity of extreme profession specialists
    • • It was confirmed that Conscious Self-regulation can be a resource of coping with acute stress manifestations, meanwhile chronic stress is more determined by personality dispositions• Reliability of actions is determined by reliability of conscious self- regulation system, determination of personality indicators on reliability of actions is mediated by stylistic differences of self- regulation.
    • • Self- consciousness and self-regulation study (Aronova, Morosanova, 2005)• Methods• EPPS (Edwards Personal Preference Schedule - Russian version).• POI (Personal Orientation Inventory - Russian version).• SPQ (Self-regulation Profile Questionnaire, V.I. Morosanova, 2000).• Findings• The voluntary self-regulation is interrelated with the personal preferences and orientations:• People with high level of the voluntary self-regulation are primarily orientated to the present rather than to the past and/or future, they affirm primarily values of self-actualizing people and are aimed at self-actualization and self-realization. Also they have a tendency to leadership.• People with low level of the voluntary self-regulation are characterized by abasement.
    • Self- consciousness and self-regulation study (Aronova, Morosanova, 2005)
    • Self- consciousness and self-regulation study (Aronova, Morosanova, 2005)
    • Self-regulation of career choice study (O.G. Vlasova 2011)Teleological type Reflective type Situational type Operative type
    • • Teleological type (goal oriented) is characterized by orientation on future perspective and programming of professional plans, but their plans are not quite flexible• Reflective type (self-oriented) is well aware about individual personality resources and how they can be implemented in profession, but are not enough aware about objective profession demands• Situational type (flexible in changing professional plans according to situation) students are weak in long term goal planning and more oriented at present, high modeling• Operative type (programming, present oriented) students are well informed about labor market options and demands, have high programming, but weak in their own goal setting,• Students with Controlling (result oriented) self-regulation type have high reflexivity and good knowledge about profession but are not able to correspond their personality resources with labor market demands
    • Professional attitudes and self-regulation domains in career choice (Vlasova, Vanin, 2010) SR cluster Hesitation Rationality Optimism Self esteem Dependence 1 Mean 2,08 5,10 4,70 5,77 3,82Impulsive type St.Dev 1,977 1,298 1,598 1,489 1,652 2 Mean ,95 4,93 4,73 6,25 3,31Harmonic type St.Dev 1,395 1,518 1,628 1,027 1,578 3 Mean 3,13 5,33 4,58 5,51 3,93 Sticking St.Dev 2,370 1,314 1,764 1,456 1,684 4 Mean 2,99 5,65 5,28 5,80 4,20Operative type St.Dev 2,509 1,548 1,351 1,486 1,557 General Mean 2,31 5,29 4,88 5,85 3,85 St.Dev 2,291 1,464 1,576 1,400 1,634 Cluster 1 2 3 4 Impulsive Harmonic Sticking Operative TotalВыбор Choice is clear Fr 35 36 22 60 153 % 77,8% 87,8% 73,3% 82,2% 81,0% Choice is not Fr 10 5 8 13 36 clear % 22,2% 12,2% 26,7% 17,8% 19,0%
    • Relation between self-regulation components and time perspective (Zimbardo)
    • • Students with high level of self-regulation are future oriented, active life managers, effective in goal setting, modeling of significant conditions, good at programming and result estimation• Students with low self-regulation level are oriented on past and negative future, are not able to change situation, are afraid of failure.• Students with Harmonic self-regulation profile are more effective in career choice rather then students with Rigid style.• Most effective in career choice are students with high self-regulation level, effective in goal setting, future oriented, able to change the negative past , improving their career choice in present
    • Self-regulation study of prosocial and antisocial behavior (Garaleva, Morosanova,2006) General self- regulation level Planned aggression Spontaneous aggression Psychopathy aggression
    • • Self-regulation of Aggressive behavior typology was built, it shows interrelation between styles of self-regulation and personality dimensions.• Aggressive behavior manifestations are connected with self- regulation differences.• Self regulation differences define the type of aggressive behavior (pro social, antisocial)• Different types of aggressive behavior (spontaneous aggression, planned aggression, psychopathic aggression are characterized by different self-regulation and personality domains.• Type of aggressive behavior is determined not only by personality domains but mostly by different level of conscious self-regulation.
    • Role of Individual self-regulation• Conscious self-regulation system has its projections on various levels of individuality• Personality-temperamental dispositions can be described by individually-specific profiles of self-regulation• The higher level of individual self-regulation gives better opportunities for subjective voluntary behavior regulation and control. The lower level of individual self-regulation is – the more spontaneous and impulsive individual activity is.• Conscious self-regulation is realized through the complex multilevel system of cognitive and personality recourses of individuality.• System of conscious self-regulation integrates dynamic and substanial aspects of individuality, conscious and unconscious structures for individual goal planning and goal achievement in human life span.
    • Self-regulation and learning (Morosanova, Fomina, Borgoedova, Tsyganov, Vanin 2009-2011)• Self-regulation in teacher- student interaction;• Self-regulation and academic performance;• Self-regulation questionnaire -preschoolers version;• Self‐regulation Profile of learning activity Questionnaire;• Individual personality and regulation differences in learning ;• Development of conscious self-regulation;• Diagnostic and raining programs
    • , Future study directions: S E L Functions of psychic self-regulation F - R E G U L Self regulation structure and components A T I O N D E Dynamics of self-regulation V E L O P M Individual differences Situational manifestations E N T
    • The laboratory of self-regulation PI RAEThe laboratory of self-regulation psychology was established in 1970 by O.A. Konopkin, a member of the Russian Academy of Education, who built the foundations of psychology of self-regulation as a scientific field in Russia based on the ideas of famous Russian psychologists P.K. Anokhin, N.A. Bernstein, D.A. Oshanin and V.D. Nebylitsyn (1980, 1995, 2005).
    • • Thank you! www.pirae.ru