Conclusion: cognition and interpretation are side by side. The concept of "cognitive style

cognitive style is a term used in cognitive psychology to refer to consistent characteristics of how different people think, perceive, and remember information, or their preferred way of solving problems.

Cognitive style is usually distinguished from cognitive ability or level- the latter is measured by the so-called intelligence tests. There is still disagreement about the meaning of the term "cognitive style". However, the term "cognitive style" is widely used, especially in applied business psychology, as well as in educational psychology, where it has a synonym - "learning style").

Encyclopedic YouTube

1 / 3

24 Psychology of will

Psychological types. cognitive styles. Part 4

Social Psychology. Leon Festinger's theory of cognitive dissonance.

Subtitles

Story

The concept of cognitive style was first used by A. Adler to designate personality characteristics, which are stable individual features of cognitive processes that predetermine the use of various research strategies. Within the framework of his individual psychology, it was understood as the originality of the life path of a person, structured by setting and achieving goals.

In the former USSR, cognitive styles were studied by V. A. Kolga (Estonia), the Teplov-Nebylitsyn school (Moscow), M. A. Kholodnaya (Kiev, since the 1990s - Moscow), A. Libin, and others.

A closely related concept is metaprograms in NLP. Some of the cognitive styles listed below are at least correlated with metaprograms described in the literature.

Essence

The nature of cognitive styles is not fully understood. There is evidence of their connection with interhemispheric asymmetry, the level of intelligence, the properties of temperament, and with the motivation of the individual. At the same time, there is every reason to consider cognitive styles as an education that is formed in vivo under the influence of sociocultural factors. For example, it has been empirically proven that field dependence is more typical for women, as well as for children whose parents exercise excessive control over their behavior.

Varieties of cognitive styles

Most often, about 10-15 cognitive styles are considered in the literature (it is noted that many of them obviously correlate with each other, and the difference in terminology is due to the approaches of various authors):

• field independence - field dependence; Representatives of the field-dependent style trust visual impressions more when assessing what is happening and hardly overcome the visible field when it is necessary to detail and structure the situation. Representatives of the field-independent style, on the contrary, rely on internal experience and easily tune out from the influence of the field, quickly and accurately highlighting a detail from a holistic spatial situation.
• concreteness - abstractness; Concreteness-abstractness is based on such psychological processes as differentiation and integration of concepts. The pole of "concrete conceptualization" is characterized by insignificant differentiation and insufficient integration of concepts. For "concrete" individuals, the following psychological qualities are typical: a tendency to think in black and white, dependence on status and authority, intolerance of uncertainty, stereotyped decisions, situational behavior, less ability to think in terms of hypothetical situations, etc. On the contrary, the pole " abstract conceptualization" involves both high differentiation and high integration of concepts. Accordingly, "abstract" individuals are characterized by freedom from the immediate properties of the situation, orientation to internal experience in explaining the physical and social world, risk-taking, independence, flexibility, creativity, etc.
• smoothing - sharpening; Individual differences recorded in this cognitive style are related to the peculiarities of storage of memorized material in memory. For “smoothers”, the preservation of material in memory is accompanied by its simplification, loss of details, loss of certain fragments. On the contrary, in the memory of the sharpeners there is an emphasis, an emphasis on the specific details of the material being memorized. Subsequently, it was specially emphasized that this style parameter reveals itself in the conditions of perception and memorization of a sequence of stimuli, thus characterizing the sensitivity of the subjects to gradually increasing differences in a number of perceived influences.
• rigid - flexible cognitive control; This cognitive style characterizes the degree of subjective difficulty in changing the ways of processing information in a situation of cognitive conflict. Rigid control indicates difficulties in the transition from verbal to sensory-perceptual functions due to their low degree of automation, while flexible control indicates the relative ease of such a transition due to their high degree of automation.
• low - high tolerance for unrealistic experience; This cognitive style reveals itself in uncertain, ambiguous situations and characterizes the degree of acceptance of impressions that do not correspond or even contradict the ideas that a person has, which he regards as correct and obvious. Tolerant subjects evaluate experiences according to their actual characteristics, while intolerant subjects resist cognitive experiences in which the input data contradicts their current knowledge.
• focusing - scanning control; This cognitive style characterizes the individual features of the distribution of attention, which are manifested in the degree of breadth of coverage of various aspects of the displayed situation, as well as in the degree of consideration of its relevant and irrelevant features. Accordingly, some subjects quickly distribute attention to many aspects of the situation, while highlighting its objective details (the pole of broad, or scanning, control). The attention of other subjects, on the contrary, turns out to be superficial and fragmentary, while it fixes obvious, conspicuous characteristics of the situation (the pole of narrow, or focusing, control).
• impulsiveness - reflectivity; People with an impulsive style are quick to hypothesize in alternative choice situations, and they make many mistakes in identifying perceptual objects. For people with a reflective style, on the contrary, a slower pace of decision-making in such a situation is characteristic, respectively, they make few mistakes in identifying perceptual objects due to their careful preliminary analysis.
• narrow - wide range of equivalence; Representatives of the pole of a narrow range of equivalence (analytical style) tend to focus on the differences of objects, paying attention mainly to their details and distinctive features. Representatives of the pole of a wide range of equivalence (synthetic style), on the contrary, tend to focus on the similarity of objects, classifying them based on certain generalized categorical grounds.
• cognitive simplicity - complexity; Some people understand and interpret what is happening in a simplified form based on the fixation of a limited set of information (the pole of cognitive simplicity). Others, on the contrary, tend to create a multidimensional model of reality, highlighting many interrelated aspects in it (the pole of cognitive complexity).
• others (scales of questionnaires Myers-Briggs, NEO PI-R, etc.

Meaning

Cognitive style, like other personality style formations, performs the following functions: 3 1. adaptive, consisting in adapting the individual to the requirements of this activity and the social environment; 2. compensatory, since its formation is based on the strengths of the individual and taking into account the weaknesses; 3. system-forming, allowing, on the one hand, to form a style on the basis of many previously established characteristics of individuality, on the other hand, to influence many aspects of human behavior; 4. self-expression, which consists in the ability of an individual to express himself through a unique way of performing an activity or through a manner of behavior. The last function is related to the little-studied problem of the influence of cognitive styles on the variability of a person's real behavior in the field of communication (for example, on his self-disclosure and self-presentation). There is every reason to expect that the differentiation of objects (communication partners) at the sensory input will lead to the differentiation of behavioral responses at the output. The study of cognitive styles as determinants of human behavior seems to us very promising, since their study leads to the fundamental problems of a person's worldview.

Footnotes and sources

Links

• Methods diagnostics cognitive styles (unavailable link since 13-05-2013 )
• T. V. Kornilova,  G. V. Paramey. Approaches to the Study of Cognitive Styles: Twenty Years Later
• Man's style; psychological analysis (under the editorship of A. V. Libin) M .: Smysl, 1998.
• Tolochek VL Styles of activity: Model of styles with changeable conditions of activity. M., 1992.
• Kholodnaya M. A. Cognitive styles. On the nature of the individual mind. 2nd ed., revised. - St. Petersburg. "Peter", 2004.
• Kholodnaya M. A. Psychology of intelligence: paradoxes of research. - Tomsk: Publishing house of Tomsk, university; M.: Bars Publishing House, 1997. - 392 p.
• Shkuratova I. M. Cognitive style and communication. Rostov n/D.: Publishing house Rost, ped, un-ta, 1994.
• Allinson, C.W., and Hayes, J. "The cognitive style index: a measure of intuition-analysis for organizational research", Journal of Management Studies (33:1), January 1996, pp 119–135.
• Atherton, J.S. "Learning and Teaching: Pask and Laurillard", 2003. Retrieved 28 June 2003, from http://www.dmu.ac.uk/~jamesa/learning/pask.htm#serialists.
• Beiri, J. "Complexity-simplicity as a personality variable in cognitive and preferential behavior" Dorsey Press, Homewood, IL, 1961.
• Bobic, M., Davis, E., and Cunningham, R. "The Kirton adaption-innovation inventory", Review of Public Personnel Administration (19:2), Spring 1999, pp 18–31.
• Carey, J.M. "The issue of cognitive style in MIS/DSS research", 1991.
• Kirton, M. "Adaptors and innovators: a description and measure," Journal of Applied Psychology (61:5) 1976, pp 622–629.
• Kirton, M.J. "Field Dependence and Adaption Innovation Theories", Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1978, 47, pp 1239 1245.
• Kirton, M.J. Adaption and innovation in the context of diversity and change Routledge, London, 2003, p. 392
• Mullany, M.J. "Using cognitive style measurements to forecast user resistance", 14th Annual conference of the National Advisory Committee on Computing Qualifications, Napier, New Zealand, 2001, pp. 95–100.
• Peterson, E. R., & Deary, I. J. (2006). Examining wholistic-analytic style using preferences in early information processing. Personality and Individual Differences, 41, 3-14.
• Pask, G. "Styles and Strategies of Learning", British Journal of Educational Psychology (46:II) 1976, pp 128–148.
• Riding, R.J., and Cheema, I. "Cognitive styles - An overview and integration.", Educational Psychology (11:3/4) 1991, pp 193–215.
• Riding, R.J., and Sadler-Smith, E. "Type of instructional material, cognitive style and learning performance.", Educational Studies (18:3) 1992, pp 323–340.
• Witkin, H.A., Moore, C.A., Goodenough, D.R., and Cox, P.W. "Field dependent and field independent cognitive styles and their educational implications," Review of Educational Research (47:1), Winter 1977, pp 1–64.

A significant place in domestic and foreign psychology is given to the consideration of cognitive, or cognitive, styles of activity, the intensive study of which began by Western psychologists in the 1960s. (G. Witkin et al. [N. WitKin et all., 1967)) and somewhat later - domestic (V. A. Kolga, 1976; E. T. Sokolova, 1976; M. A. Kholodnaya, 1998, 2002, and etc.). True, the concept of cognitive styles did not appear suddenly. Already in separate works of the 1920-1930s. close phenomena were identified, for example, “lifestyle” by A. Adler, “rigidity” by R. Cattell and “rigidity of control” by J. Stroop, ideas about the relationship between the first and second signaling systems by I.P. Pavlov.

cognitive style- this is a collective concept for relatively stable methods of cognitive activity, cognitive strategies, consisting in peculiar methods of obtaining and processing information, as well as methods of its reproduction and methods of control.

cognitive styles- also, in some way, styles of activity, since they characterize the typical features of intellectual activity (learning), including perception, thinking and actions associated with solving cognitive problems, mainly in a situation of uncertainty (G. Klaus, 1987).

The American psychologist D. Ozbel (D. Ausubel, 1968) singled out 20 features of the intellect, among which are the tendency to acquire new knowledge or detail existing ones, rigidity or flexibility of thinking when solving problems, preferential memorization of certain information, etc.

In foreign and domestic literature, one can find mention of about a dozen different cognitive styles, including:
- by type of perception: field dependence field independence;
- by type of response: impulsiveness - reflexivity;
- according to the features of cognitive control: rigidity - flexibility;
- by equivalence range: narrowness - breadth;
- by complexity: cognitive simplicity - cognitive complexity, tolerance for unrealistic experience;
- by type of thinking: analytical - synthetic;
- according to the dominant way of processing information: figurative - verbal, according to the locus of control: external - internal.

Field dependence - field independence. For the first time these terms were introduced into scientific use by American scientists under the leadership of G. Witkin (N. A. Wit-Kin, D. R. Goodenough, 1982; N. A. WinKin et al., 1967, 1974) in connection with the study of the relationship in perceptual activity visual and proprioceptive cues.

Thus, the cognitive styles of field dependence - field independence began to be perceived as reflecting the features of solving perceptual problems. Field dependence is characterized by the fact that a person focuses on external sources of information, tends to ignore the less noticeable features of the analyzed object, which creates great difficulties for him in solving perceptual problems. Field independence is associated with a person's orientation to internal sources of information (knowledge and experience), therefore, he is less influenced by external landmarks, more inclined to highlight its essential, rather than more noticeable features in a situation.

Field independence is associated with a high rate of non-verbal intelligence (imaginative thinking), higher learning ability, success in solving tasks for quick wit, ease of changing attitudes, with autonomy, stability of the image of "I", more objective approaches to problems, resistance to suggestion, criticality, higher morality . However, those who are independent get along worse with people, tend to manipulate them, evaluate them and themselves less positively, and resolve conflicts more difficult. A group of independents rarely comes to an agreement on controversial issues.

Reflexivity - impulsiveness. These styles were singled out by D. Kagan (J. Kagan, 1965, 1966) in the study of intellectual activity, when in conditions of uncertainty it was necessary to make a decision and it was necessary to make the right choice from a certain set of alternatives.

Impulsive people want to achieve quick success, which is why they tend to quickly respond to a problem situation. However, at the same time, hypotheses are put forward and accepted by them without careful thought, so they often turn out to be wrong. Reflexive people, on the contrary, are characterized by a slow reaction in such a situation, the decision is made on the basis of a careful weighing of all the pros and cons. They try not to make mistakes, for which they collect more information about the stimulus before responding, use more productive ways of solving problems, more successfully apply the strategies acquired in the learning process in new conditions (D. Kagan et al.; R. Olt; D. McKinney ; V. Neisle ; D. Denny ).

Impulsive students are worse than reflexive ones in coping with tasks for solving problems, where alternative answers are not indicated.

The reflexive ones are more field independent than the impulsive ones. They have higher attention span. Impulsive people have less self-control, low concentration of attention, but a large amount of it (M. A. Gulina).

Rigidity - flexibility (flexibility) of cognitive control. This style is associated with the ease or difficulty of changing the mode of activity or switching from one informational alphabet to another. The difficulty of changing the switch leads to the narrowness and inflexibility of cognitive control.

The term "rigidity" was introduced by R. Cattell to refer to the phenomena of perseveration (from Latin perseveratio - "stubbornness"), i.e. obsessive repetition of the same thoughts, images, movements when switching from one type of activity to another.

These styles are diagnosed using the word-color test by J. Stroop. A conflict situation is created by an interference situation, when one process is suppressed by another. The subject must name the color in which the words denoting colors are written, while the color of the spelling of the word and the one that is indicated by the word do not correspond to each other.

Narrow-wide range of equivalence. These cognitive styles show individual differences on a scale that a person uses to evaluate the similarity and difference of an object.

The basis of such a discrepancy is not so much the ability to see the difference as the degree of "sensitivity" to the identified differences, as well as the focus on fixing different types of them.

The relationship of these cognitive styles with personal characteristics has been revealed. "Analyticism" is accompanied by increased anxiety, it is positively associated with the self-control factor, according to R. Cattell, and negatively with the self-sufficiency factor. "Analysts" try to fulfill social requirements well and are oriented towards social approval.

The analytical style is effective in the following training program: low rate of presentation of educational information, a large number of repetitions, low variability of educational tasks, emphasis on voluntary memorization and self-regulation of the functional state (1986; Klaus, 1984).

Tolerance for unrealistic experience. Tolerance (from Latin tolerantia - “patience”) means tolerance, indulgence towards something. As a characteristic, it suggests the possibility of accepting impressions that are inconsistent or even opposite to those that a person has (for example, when a picture of a horse changes quickly, a feeling of its movement arises). Intolerant people resist the visible, as it contradicts their knowledge that the pictures show a motionless horse (M.A. Kholodnaya, 1998). The main indicator of tolerance is the duration of the period in which the subject sees a moving horse. In fact, we are talking about the ability to accept information that does not correspond to existing settings and perceive external influences as they really are.

Cognitive simplicity is cognitive complexity. The theoretical basis of these cognitive styles is the theory of personality constructs by J. Kelly (2000). The severity of this or that style is determined by the measure of simplicity or complexity of the system of personal constructions in interpreting, predicting and evaluating reality on the basis of a certain way organized subjective experience. A construct is a two-pole subjective-measuring scale that performs the functions of generalization (establishing similarities) and opposition (establishing differences).

To diagnose these styles, the method of repertory grids developed by J. Kelly is used.

Cognitive complexity, according to some data, is associated with anxiety, dogmatism and rigidity, less social adaptation. J. Adams-Weber (J. Adams-Weber, 1979) found that cognitively complex subjects more accurately find a correspondence between the identified constructs and specific people and more successfully draw conclusions about a person's system of ideas after a brief conversation with him.

Attribution styles. Attribution styles, or explanations, are a characteristic way of interpreting events. With a negative style, a person tends to attribute negative events to stable internal causes (for example, a lack of ability). If an individual believes that he is not capable enough and is doomed to failure, then he will make less effort to achieve the result he needs. With a positive attribution style, successes are explained by one's abilities, and failures are explained by chance (M. Ross, G. Fletcher, 1985). Emotionally unstable women and extrovert women attribute adverse events to internal causes more often than women with opposite temperaments. However, this pattern was not found in the sample of men (W. Rim, 1991).

Externality - internality, or locus of control (from Latin locus - "location"). Some people tend to believe that they are able to manage events (internal locus of control, internality), others believe that little depends on them, since everything that happens to them is explained by external uncontrollable factors (external locus of control, externality). The concept of locus of control was proposed by D. Rotter (D. Rotter, 1966) as a stable characteristic of a person, which is formed in the process of his socialization.

People with an internal locus of control are more self-confident, consistent and persistent in achieving goals, prone to introspection, sociable, calmer and more friendly, more popular and independent. They find meaning in life to a greater extent, their readiness to provide assistance is more clearly expressed. Since internals blame themselves first of all for their failures, they experience more shame and guilt than externals (Faires [V. Phares, 1976).

Adolescents with an internal locus of control have a more positive attitude towards teachers and law enforcement officials (P. Haeven, 1993). The propensity for an external locus of control is combined with uncertainty in one's abilities and the desire to postpone the implementation of intentions for an indefinite period, anxiety, suspicion, and aggressiveness. Such people have great difficulty in making a decision if it has serious consequences for them. For them, tension is more of a threat, so they are more vulnerable and prone to “burnout” (V. I. Kovalchuk, 2000).

There is a greater stress resistance of individuals with an internal locus of control (S. V. Subbotin, 1992; J. Rotter).

Locus of control influences motivation to learn. People with an internal locus are convinced that the successful development of the program depends only on themselves and that they have enough abilities for this. Therefore, it is very likely that they will do well in school and university. They are more receptive to feedback in the learning process and tend to correct their own shortcomings. They are more interested in their career and work than people with an external locus of control.

In general, people with an internal locus of control are more organized: they can quit smoking, use seat belts in transport, use contraceptives, solve family problems themselves, earn a lot of money and refuse momentary pleasures in order to achieve strategic goals (M. Findley, H. Cooper, 1983 ; H. Lefcourt, 1982; P. Miller et al., 1986).

At the same time, L. I. Antsiferova (1994) expresses the opinion that although internality is associated with the feeling of being a subject who controls his life, controls its events and is prone to an active, transformative style of behavior, by its nature it leads to a limitation of spontaneity ( free expression of feelings, emotions, manifestations of impulsive behavior).

It was found that, with age, internality increases in boys, while externality increases in girls (IT. Kulas, 1988). In adults, according to A.K. Kanatov (2000), in all age periods the level of subjective control is somewhat higher than in women of the same age. In addition, according to this author, it follows that with age, the level of subjective control (internality) decreases. And this is not surprising. With experience, people are increasingly beginning to understand that not everything in their life depends only on them.

An internal locus of control is a socially approved value. He always enters ideal self-image. Therefore, internality is more important for men than for women (K. Muzdybaev, 1983; A. V. Vizgina and S. R. Panteleev, 2001).

L.A. Golovei found that externality-internality affects the professional self-determination of schoolchildren. Students with a predominance of external control in the situation of choosing a profession are guided by its emotional attractiveness. They do not correlate their inclinations with this choice and prefer such professional areas as "man - man", "man - artistic image". Among externals, more often than among internals, there are persons with a low level of control. According to R. Cattell's questionnaire, they show high excitability (factor D), sensitivity (factor G), tension (factor QIV) and immediacy (factor N).

On the basis of these data, L. A. Golovey concludes that the process of self-determination in externals is passive, immature, which is associated with emotional characteristics, with the immaturity of such structures of self-consciousness as reflection, self-control and self-regulation, with the immaturity of the motivational sphere.

Professional self-determination of internals is distinguished by greater independence, awareness and adequacy. The range of their choice of profession is much wider than that of externals and is more differentiated. Motives and emotions are more stable. Internals are active in achieving the goal. According to the Cattell questionnaire, they are characterized by low neuroticism (factor C), self-control (factor QIIT), sociability (factor A), selective contact with others (factor L) and a tendency to normative behavior (factor G).

Thus, adolescents with internal control are more emotionally balanced, independent, active in achieving goals, have definite and stable attitudes for the future, and a higher level of self-control.

In a variety of occupations, people with an internal locus of control are more successful than those with an external locus of control. For example, insurance agents who believe that failure can be controlled sell more insurance policies. They are almost twice as likely to quit this job during the first year (M. Seligman, P. Schulman, 1986). People who have an internal locus of control are more likely to be passionate about and satisfied with their work, and to be committed to their organization.

Managers with an internal locus of control are less stressed than their counterparts with an external locus of control doing the same job. Similar data were obtained for accountants (Daniels and Guppy, 1994).

D. Miller (D. Miller, 1982) found that leaders have higher internal locus of control than non-managers. Managers, who have a high level of internal locus of control, tend to introduce many innovations into production, take significant risks and make decisions themselves, without inviting experts.

Introduction

1. Stages of the formation of the meaning of the term "style" and the style approach in psychology

1.1 Theoretical sources of the stylistic approach in the study of intellectual activity

1.2 Individual ways of categorization (J. Kagan's theory of cognitive pace)

1.3 Distinctive features of cognitive styles

2.Psychological characteristics of the main cognitive styles

2.1 Field dependence/field independence

2.2 Narrow/wide range of equivalence

2.4 Rigid/flexible cognitive control

2.5 Tolerance for unrealistic experiences

2.6 Focus/scan control

2.7 Smoothing/sharpening

2.8 Impulsivity/Reflectivity

2.9 Concrete/abstract conceptualization

2.10 Cognitive simplicity/complexity

3. The problem of the relationship of cognitive styles. Contradictions of "multiple" and "unitary" positions in the study of cognitive styles

Conclusion

Bibliography

Introduction

One of the most acute problems of psychology, of course, is the problem of individual mental differences between people. The psyche is, in essence, some abstract object that can be studied and described at the level of general patterns of organization and functioning. However, the phenomenon of an individual subject lies in the fact that the laws of individual behavior are not identical with the laws of behavior in general. Accordingly, the conceptual apparatus created within the framework of general psychology cannot be mechanically transferred to understanding the mechanisms of mental activity of a particular individual. Therefore, the concepts and approaches that made it possible to identify and describe the mechanisms of individual specificity of mental activity have always aroused particular interest in the scientific psychological community.

It is not surprising that the appearance of the concept of "style" in the system of psychological categories caused a kind of professional excitement associated with the growth of hopes for deepening our knowledge of the nature of human intelligence.

This paper discusses the history, current state and prospects of the stylistic approach in the psychology of cognition, associated with the study of stylistic characteristics of the cognitive sphere of personality (cognitive styles). cognitive styles

Much of what has happened and is happening in the field of style studies can be explained by the exceptionally strong enchanting influence of the word "style" itself. The stylistic approach is a vivid example of the situation in science, about which we can say that “in the beginning there was a word”: for many decades, the results of stylistic research were interpreted through the prism of some initial, a kind of romantic meaning that was invested in the concept of “style”.

After all, what is style? Style is evidence of some uniqueness, isolated from many other people, this is the charm, the presence of which unconditionally characterizes the owner of style (in clothes, demeanor, artistic skill or scientific creativity) as a person with a high level of mental organization. Indeed, finding your own style and being able to maintain it is evidence of talent and personal courage, it is always a sign of individuality.

It is said that the name given to the child subsequently influences his character. Of course, this is pure prejudice.

In the phrase "cognitive style" the substantive emphasis has always been shifted to the word "style". Therefore, at first it will be necessary to briefly dwell on the etymology and the main stages in the formation of this concept as a psychological category.

From the point of view of its original etymology, the word "style" (stylos- Greek) means a stick for writing on wax boards with sharp and blunt ends (the blunt end was erased incorrectly written). It is curious that already in its original metaphorical meaning, style is the possibility of simultaneous participation in the activity of two qualities that are opposite in meaning, equally necessary for its success.

In encyclopedic dictionaries, two - again opposed to each other - aspects of the meaning of this word are usually distinguished:

1) style as an individually-specific way (manner, techniques) of behavior, that is, a characteristic process activities;

2) style as a set of distinctive features of the work of a certain author, that is, a characteristic product activities.

Subsequently, the meaning of the word “style” was formed as an interdisciplinary concept, therefore, studies were carried out on the “style of the era”, “artistic style”, “style of scientific thinking”, etc.

Thus, the concept of style was originally ambiguous.

For psychology, whose categorical apparatus is characterized by insufficient content rigor, and the schemes for interpreting the results of psychological research often carry elements of subjectivism and arbitrariness, it was very risky to involve such a polysemantic term as "style" in its conceptual arsenal. Nevertheless, the deed was done: one of the many small compartments in Pandora's box was opened, and the concept of style began to actively gain its position in psychological science.

1. Stages of the formation of the meaning of the term "style" and the style approach in psychology

Alfred Adler(1927). He spoke about the existence of individual behavioral strategies that are developed by a person to overcome an inferiority complex. To do this, a person unconsciously resorts to various forms of compensation for his physical and mental deficits in the form of the formation of an individual life style. Compensation can be adequate (in the form of successfully overcoming feelings of inferiority by implementing the desire for superiority in a socially acceptable and approved form) and inadequate (in the form of hypercompensation due to one-sided adaptation to life as a result of excessive development of any one personality trait or neurotic care in disease, the symptoms that a person uses to justify his shortcomings and failures).

Gordon Allport(1937) used the concept of style to describe the expressive aspect of behavior that characterizes the dispositions of the individual (its motives and goals). Style is a way of realizing motives and goals to which a person is predisposed due to their individual characteristics (therefore, “style” is any personality traits, starting with selectivity of perception and ending with a measure of sociability). The formation of style, according to Allport, is evidence of the individual's ability to self-realization, which accordingly implies a high level of mental organization of the "I".

As can be seen, in these works, using the term "style", the very fact of the existence of individual differences was stated, which were no longer considered as annoying accidental costs of psychological research.

Further development of stylistic representations at this stage was associated with the "New Look" direction. (new looks) within which individual differences (primarily in the cognitive sphere) for the first time became the subject of special study. So, it was experimentally shown that individual "errors" of perception are not just individual differences, but rather a consequence of the action of some basic psychological factors, in particular, in the form of the phenomenon of "perceptual defense".

The individual-peculiar forms of perceptual defense testified to the presence "inside" the subject of special need-motivational states that influenced the individual-peculiar characteristics of the perception of objects and phenomena. For example, children from poor families (compared to children from wealthy families) when estimating the physical size of a coin, exaggerated its size, and to a greater extent, the higher its monetary value.

Thus, at this stage, the concept of style had rather a qualitative meaning; while the attention of researchers was focused on the importance of individualized aspects of behavior. It is characteristic that style, interpreted as a personal property, was considered as a manifestation of the highest levels of the mental development of individuality. The second stage of the stylistic approach falls on the 50-60s of the 20th century and is characterized by the use of the concept of style to study individual differences in the ways of knowing one's environment. In the works of a number of American psychologists, the study of individual characteristics of perception, analysis, structuring and categorization of information, designated by the term "cognitive styles" comes to the fore (see: Gardner, Holzman, Klein, Lipton, Spence, 1959; Kagan, 1966; Witkin, ltman , Raskin and Karp, 1971; and others).

In the domestic psychological literature, the term "cognitive style" (cognitive style) passed from English literature in the form of a tracing-paper term, although the exact translation English word cognitive in Russian corresponds to the word informative.

However, the terms "cognitive" and "cognitive" are not synonymous in relation to the modern conceptual structure of Russian psychology. " Cognitive" - ​​related to the process of reflecting reality in individual consciousness in the form of a cognitive image (sensory, perceptual, mnemonic, mental), i.e. this term is addressed to that What displayed in a cognitive way. "Cognitive" - ​​related to the mental mechanisms of information processing in the process of constructing a cognitive image at different levels of cognitive reflection, i.e. this term is addressed to How a cognitive image is built. Strictly speaking, within the framework of the second stage of the stylistic approach, it was about individual differences in the ways of processing information about one's environment, or cognitive styles proper as a certain kind of cognitive styles, which - in a broader sense of the word - should be understood as individual-peculiar ways of studying reality. .

The term "cognitive style" was used to specify a special kind of individual features of intellectual activity, which were fundamentally distinguished from individual differences in the success of intellectual activity, described by traditional theories of intelligence. In other words, the stylistic approach was formed as a kind of alternative to the testological approach as an attempt to find other forms of analysis of the intellectual capabilities of a person. In particular, it was argued that cognitive styles are a formal dynamic characteristic of intellectual activity that is not related to the content (productive) aspects of the work of the intellect. In addition, cognitive styles were considered as stable cognitive preferences characteristic of a given individual, manifested in the predominant use of certain methods of processing information - those methods that best corresponded to the psychological capabilities and inclinations of a given person.

A distinctive feature of this stage is the transition to operational definitions of cognitive styles, when a particular style property is determined through the procedure for measuring it (cognitive style is what is measured using a specific style technique). As a result, style studies turned out to be “instrumentally linked”. It was this circumstance that subsequently led to serious controversy on empirical level and, ultimately, to the destruction of the ideological foundations of the traditional stylistic approach. Finally, the third stage of the stylistic approach, the beginning of which can be dated to the 80s of the last century, is characterized by a tendency to overgeneralize the concept of style. In particular, the concept of cognitive style is expanding due to the emergence of new style concepts, such as “thinking style” (Grigorenko and Sternberg, 1996; 1997), “teaching style” (Kolb, 1984; Honey, Mumford, 1986; Liver, 1995), "epistemological styles" (Wardell, Royce, 1978), etc.

Moreover, the concept of style begins to apply to all spheres of mental activity (in accordance with the famous definition J. Buffon:"Style is a person"). So, in the last two decades, studies of “evaluative style” (Beznosov, 1982), “emotional style” (Dorfman, 1989), “style of pedagogical communication” (Korotaev, Tambovtseva, 1990), “style of mental activity of a preschooler” have appeared in Russian literature. (Stetsenko, 1983), "personal lifestyle" (Zlobina, 1982), "activity style" (Vyatkin, 1992), "style of coping with difficult life situations" Libina, 1996), "self-regulation style of activity" (Morosanova, 1998) etc.

Thus, within the framework of the third stage, there is an actual identification of style with individual differences in mental activity. However, if styles are always individual differences, then individual differences are by no means always styles. In other words, in modern style studies, the criteria for style specification have been lost. The trap slammed shut: the category of style, which fixes the fact of the individual originality of the individual's behavior, having absorbed and dissolved in itself all other psychological categories, began to claim to replace the subject of modern psychology with stylistic phenomenology.

So, the concept of cognitive style was born at the intersection of personality psychology and the psychology of cognition. This circumstance, apparently, determined the contradictory nature of the grounds on which the meaning of this phrase was built simultaneously “up” and “down”. Due to the word "style" it acquired a qualitative-metaphorical connotation, creating the illusion of the emergence of a universal explanatory principle, while the word "cognitive" returned it to the level of empirical facts, forcing it to seek explanations of the personality through particular cognitive dimensions. We add that if in the psychology of personality the idea of ​​style as a manifestation of the highest levels of individuality prevailed, then in the psychology of cognition the formal nature of the style properties of intellectual activity, which are not related to high or low indicators of psychological development, was fundamentally emphasized.

Nevertheless, the formation of the stylistic approach was evidence of the transformation of the subject of the psychology of cognition: if earlier the psychology of cognition acted as a science about the general laws of cognitive mental activity, now it turned into a science about the mechanisms of individual differences between people in ways of cognizing the world around.

Every scientific concept, like people, has its own destiny. To find the key to the fate of a person, it is necessary to analyze in detail his biography, all the nuances of his life path. In order to understand the content of the concept of cognitive style and evaluate all the complexities of the current state of style research, it is necessary to conduct a thorough retrospective analysis of the cognitive-style approach at the level of its theoretical and empirical primary sources, taking into account the nature of traditional studies of cognitive styles.

To do this, it is advisable to return to the second stage of the style approach, within which the concept of cognitive style was formulated and operationalized. An analysis of the phenomenology of cognitive-style studies will, firstly, establish empirically the initial content of those individual differences in cognitive activity that have been given the status of stylistic ones, and, secondly, trace the evolution of the concept of "cognitive style" in terms of changing the criteria for its specification.

1.1 Theoretical sources of the stylistic approach in the study of intellectual activity

Gestalt psychological tradition (G. Witkin's theory of psychological differentiation)

In works G. Witkina the concept of cognitive style was formed within the framework of Gestalt psychological ideas about the field and behavior in the field. In relation to different people, the factor of influence of the field (objective and social environment) reveals itself to a different extent. In particular, the behavior of some turns out to be more subject to the field (field-dependent type of behavior), while the behavior of others turns out to be more oriented towards internal activity (field-independent type of behavior) (Witkin, Dyk, Faterson, Goodenough, Karp, 1974; Witkin, Goodenough , Oltman, 1979; Witkin and Goodenough, 1982).

A small child tends to perceive what is happening in a field-dependent way, but as he grows up, his perception takes on a more field-independent form. Since the phenomenon of field dependence/independence is associated with age, it follows that field independent perception represents a higher level of psychological development. The most important aspect of mental development is the degree of psychological differentiation of different forms of experience.

Degree differentiation is essential characteristic of any system (psychological, biological, social).

In the broad sense of the word, differentiation characterizes the complexity of the structure. A less differentiated system is in a relatively homogeneous state, a more differentiated structure is in a relatively heterogeneous state.

In turn, the description of the system as more or less differentiated allows us to draw conclusions about the features of its functioning.

In the process of development, the child accumulates and forms a specific experience (“internal system of relations”) in the direction of moving from an initially unstructured state with limited separation from the environment to a more structured state with a greater separation of the “I”. Achieving a higher level of psychological differentiation means having a more articulated experience. According to Witkin, there are two aspects to the growing articulation of experience: the ability to analyze experience and the ability to structure it. A person with articulate experience can easily perceive the details of a complex whole, transform the field based on his own rules, etc.

The term “articulated” (synonyms are the terms “analytical”, “differentiated”, “structured”), being opposed to the term “global”, refers both to the assessment of the psychological state of the subject (the level of psychological differentiation), and to the assessment of the nature of psychological functioning (the method of individual activities). Accordingly, one can speak of two opposite approaches to one's environment: articulated and global.

The growth of psychological differentiation, expressed in the increasing articulation of experience, is manifested in the characteristics of the four main psychological spheres.

The qualitative characteristics of the four psychological spheres are as follows:

1. Articulated intellectual functioning(measure of articulation of cognitive reflection). Initially, the phenomenon of field dependence/field independence was described on the basis of perceptual activity and was defined as "selective ability in perception" in the form of the ability to find a simple relevant detail in a complex perceptual image. Thus the concept field dependent/field independent cognitive style characterized the degree of articulation of individual perceptual experience.

Subsequently, the analytical ability in perception (perceptual articulation) began to be considered in connection with the ability to analyze and structure in a wide range of other types of intellectual activity. People with a field-independent style easily overcome a complex context (quickly isolate a detail from a complex whole, easily transform a given situation, single out the main contradiction in a problem without much difficulty, etc.), i.e., demonstrate an articulated approach to the field. Field-dependent people, on the other hand, struggle to navigate complex contexts (they need time to see a detail in a complex whole, they have a tendency to accept a situation as it is, they are not always able to detect a relevant contradiction in a problem, etc.). ), i.e., they demonstrate a global approach to the field.

It is this more generalized dimension, which characterizes the differences in the ways of cognitive activity, that was designated by the term "cognitive style", in relation to which perceptual field dependence/field independence acts as its particular component.

2. Articulated representation of your physical body(a measure of the articulation of the image of one's physical "I"). The growth of psychological differentiation is manifested in the transition from a global subjective view of one's body to a clear awareness of its constituent parts and their relationships, as well as its external boundaries.

3. Sense of personal identity(measure of allocation of "I" from the social environment). According to Witkin, the degree of differentiation of the image of the "I" finds its expression primarily in the tendency to act more self-sufficiently and autonomously in situations of interpersonal interaction. In particular, field-dependent (as opposed to independent) people tend to be interpersonal, especially in the face of uncertainty; prefer situations of communication to situations of solitude; tend to keep a shorter physical distance in terms of interpersonal contact; predominantly use social sources of information; frank in expressing their feelings and thoughts; they are distinguished by a delicate and considerate manner of relating to others, etc. (Witkin, Goodenough, 1977; Witkin, Goodenough, Oltman, 1979).

4. Specialized protections and controls in relation to potentially traumatic experiences and inhibition of affective reactions.

Psychological defenses can be non-specialized (using experience in a global way) or specialized (experience is involved on the basis of its preliminary differentiation). Non-specialized defenses include negativism And crowding out, which are characterized by complete rejection of the traumatic situation or complete blocking of unwanted experience. Specialized defenses include isolation, intellectualization And projection, since each of them involves the allocation of individual components of experience (a clearer awareness of individual impressions in relation to the rest, the separation of affective and rational aspects of experience, etc.).

Evidence suggests that field-independent people are more likely to use specialized defenses of isolation, intellectualization, and projection, while field-dependent people use more global defenses of negativism and repression. According to available data, gender-dependent children and adolescents are more likely to exhibit impulsive behavior than gender-independent subjects. It is the hyperactive children, whose striking feature is impulsive behavior due to the low level of control over their own affective states, that turn out to be the most dependent on the field.

The study of the above psychological spheres at different stages of ontogenesis allowed Witkin and his co-authors to formulate the so-called the differential hypothesis the essence of which is as follows: for a given individual (child or adult), the level of psychological differentiation achieved by him will be manifested in the indicators of each of the four spheres, and these indicators themselves will be interconnected. Thus, the differential hypothesis assumes the manifestation of greater or lesser differentiation simultaneously in different psychological dimensions: at the level of articulation of external experience (in the form of a field-dependent / field-independent cognitive style), articulation of internal experience (in the form of a body schema and the image of "I"), as well as mechanisms regulation of behavior (in the form of a system of protections and controls).

Psychoanalytic tradition (the theory of cognitive controls by J. Klein, R. Gardner, P. Holtzman, G. Schlesinger, etc.)

The concept of cognitive control was developed in the works of the Menninger Clinic J. Klein, P. Holzman, R. Gardner, G. Schlesinger and others (Gardner, Holzman, Klein, Linton, Spence, 1959; Gardner, Jackson, Messick, 1960). They tried to find some structural constants in the cognitive sphere of the personality, which acted as intermediaries between need-affective states and external influences. These mental formations are called "cognitive control principles" (or "cognitive controls").

Cognitive controls are, firstly, “structural restraints” in relation to affective urges (in particular, different people differ in how they organize their perception of the same situation, and it is these differences in perception that affect the regulation of needs and affects) and, secondly, the factors of coordination of the mental capabilities of the individual and the requirements of the situation, as a result of which individual behavior acquires an adaptive character. According to their phenomenology, cognitive controls are individual and unique ways of analyzing, understanding and evaluating what is happening.

Within this direction, six cognitive controls (cognitive styles - in modern terminology) were described: equivalence range, category breadth, rigid/flexible control, tolerance for unrealistic experience, focusing/scanning control, smoothing/sharpening.

According to the traditional psychoanalytic point of view, individual differences in cognitive activity are a “distorted” reflection of reality, since needs (drives) are directly projected onto the main cognitive processes, thereby generating psychological defense effects. From the point of view of representatives of the Menninger school, cognitive controls differ from psychological defense in their functions and sources of their development.

In particular, cognitive controls are conflict-free processes. They provide realistically adaptive forms of reflection and, accordingly, the most optimal type of behavior for a given individual in a certain class of life situations.

Consequently, it is impossible to talk about some universal standard of accuracy (adequacy) of reflection, since, being imposed on a person, it only worsens his activity. Cognitive controls are individual standards for the adequacy of cognitive reflection inside specific person.

There are individually peculiar adaptive strategies of intellectual behavior, i.e. a person himself chooses the most optimal way of processing information for himself among alternative ways of relating himself to the environment. Thus, cognitive differences between people "... reflect different adaptive approaches to reality, equally effective (if not quite accurate) ways of reflecting what is happening" (Gardner, Holzman, Klein, Linton, Spence, 1959, P. Gardner and his co-authors have consistently emphasized that personality cannot yet be judged by one specific cognitive control. One should take into account the complex of cognitive controls, which was designated by the term “cognitive style”, emphasizing two aspects of this concept: firstly, the cognitive style of a given person is a combination of cognitive control principles, therefore the style is more independent of specific situational requirements than that or another principle of control, and, secondly, the principles of control that form the cognitive style are independent of each other and can manifest themselves in a variety of individual-specific combinations. Thus, cognitive style provided a basis for predicting individual behavior that could not be made on the basis of characteristics of individual cognitive controls. Such a conclusion seems to be very significant, because, as we see, within the framework of this direction, the cognitive style was interpreted as a psychological quality that is multidimensional in nature. However, later this semantic connotation in the concept of cognitive style was lost, and in a more contemporary works individual cognitive variables (including the aforementioned cognitive controls) began to be called cognitive styles.

1.2 Individual ways of categorization (J. Kagan's theory of cognitive pace)

Initially J. Kagan studied individual differences in the processes of categorization of objects using two methodological procedures. So, the children were presented with images of three well-known objects, from which it was necessary to select two that were similar to each other. In addition, the method of sorting images of people was used. The study of the bases of similarity when combining objects made it possible to identify three main ways of categorization:

Analytical and descriptive (includes groupings based on the similarity of specific features or individual details of objects, for example: “zebra and T-shirt - have stripes”, “people with red hair”);

Thematic (includes groupings based on situational or functional relationships of objects, for example: "pan and chair - kitchen", "man, woman, boy - family");

Categorically-concluding (includes groupings based on some generalizing judgment using selected objects as examples of a certain category, for example: “clothes”, “people of the same profession”) (Kagan, Moss, Sigel, 1963).

The frequency of analytical responses has been shown to increase with age. In addition, it turned out that 7-10-year-old children with a predominance of analytical answers were more attentive in terms of educational activities, preferred the choice of intellectual professions (scientist, writer). In the subgroup of analytic boys, a greater slowdown of heart rate was observed when required to observe an external stimulus, which indicated their ability for sustained and concentrated attention in relation to the visual impact. In turn, in the subgroup of female analysts, there was a tendency to abandon traditional female polo-role interests (Kagan, 1966).

As a result, it was suggested that children prone to the analytical method of categorization are more attentive to the individual details of what is happening and better control their intellectual behavior, i.e., act reflexively. On the contrary, children who tend to demonstrate a thematic way of categorization find manifestations of impulsiveness in their behavior (they are less attentive and hyperactive in their actions).

1.3 Distinctive features of cognitive styles

So, cognitive styles are individually unique ways of processing information about one's environment in the form of individual differences in perception, analysis, structuring, categorization, and evaluation of what is happening. In turn, these individual differences form some of the typical forms of cognitive response in which groups of people are similar and different from each other (Gauss, 1978). Thus, the concept of cognitive style is used to designate, on the one hand, individual differences in the processes of processing information and, on the other hand, types of people depending on the organization of their cognitive sphere.

From the very beginning, the status of the phenomenology of cognitive styles was determined taking into account a number of fundamental points:

Individual differences in intellectual activity, designated as cognitive styles, were distinguished from individual differences in the degree of success of intellectual activity, identified on the basis of psychometric tests of intelligence (in the form of IQ differences);

Cognitive styles, being a characteristic of the cognitive sphere, at the same time were considered as a manifestation of the personal organization as a whole, since individualized ways of processing information turned out to be closely related to needs, motives, affects, etc.;

Cognitive styles were evaluated, in comparison with the individual characteristics of traditionally described cognitive processes, as a form of intellectual activity of a higher order, since their main function was no longer so much in obtaining and processing information about external influences, but in coordinating and regulating basic cognitive processes;

Cognitive styles were interpreted as intermediaries between the subject and reality, having a direct impact on the characteristics of the course of individual adaptation processes.

In fact, in this area of ​​psychological knowledge there has been a radical change in a number of positions in understanding the nature of individual intellectual differences. The criteria for assessing the intellectual capabilities of a person were revised. Those who received low marks in solving standard test problems were recognized as intellectually untenable in theories of intellectual abilities (intelligence).

In the theories of cognitive styles, on the contrary, it was argued that any indicator of the degree of manifestation of any cognitive style is a “good” result, since the degree of severity of one or another style pole characterizes the effectiveness of the intellectual adaptation of a given person to the requirements of objective reality. In other words, the pathos of the cognitive-style approach was an attempt to introduce a non-judgmental view of the intellectual capabilities of a person.

The special status of the stylistic characteristics of intellectual activity was associated with the recognition of their special role in the regulation of individual behavior, while the stylistic approach was considered as one of the variants of the explanatory theory of personality. In addition, in the theory of cognitive styles, the emphasis shifted to the problem of the individuality (uniqueness) of the human mind in the form of recognizing the existence of each person's individually unique ways of organizing cognitive contact with the world. As part of the stylistic approach, in fact, one could say about any person: "Everyone is smart in his own way."

Finally, a fundamentally new methodological toolkit was developed in style studies. Previously, the study of individual differences in intellectual activity was carried out mainly on the basis of the method of solving problems (primarily test ones). In the style study, the subject did not solve problems in the usual sense of the word. He was offered a fairly simple situation without any rigidly set conditions, requirements and time limits with an open-type instruction, according to which the subject could choose his own, most convenient and natural answer situations, make decisions at your natural pace, etc.). In the style study, there were no standards for assessing individual results. The assignment of the subject to one of the two poles of a particular cognitive style was carried out on the basis of such a criterion as the median (on the horizontal axis of a certain style parameter, all indicators to the left of the median were identified as one pole of this cognitive style, to the right - as its other pole).

In other words, if in a traditional study of individual intellectual differences the subject obviously turned into a certain object that was quite harshly manipulated from the outside, then in the style study the subject acted as a subject who had the opportunity to demonstrate his inherent ways of perceiving, analyzing and interpreting the experimental situation. Along with the undoubted advantages, the methods for diagnosing cognitive styles had one very significant drawback.

Unlike traditional psychometric tests of intelligence, as already noted, there were no norms in style methods. The use of such a criterion as the median led to a serious methodological contradiction: the separation of the subjects of this sample on a horizontal scale along the poles of the corresponding cognitive style (field dependence / field independence, impulsivity / reflectivity, tolerance / intolerance to unrealistic experience, etc.) to a large extent lost its meaning, since the subjects had such style properties only within their sample.

Given these methodological issues, G. Clause considered it possible to suggest that style methods are not intended for the purpose of making an individual diagnosis, but rather can be used to form experimental groups in the study of the psychological mechanisms of individual differences in intellectual activity (Clauss, 1978).

Nevertheless, it should be recognized that within the framework of cognitive styles, perhaps for the first time, the possibility of a transition from unipolar psychological measurements to bipolar ones was declared and, accordingly, from level criteria (low - high indicators) to typological ones (indicators of one type - indicators of another type) in the assessment of individual intellectual abilities. Finally, we can talk about changing the scheme of the diagnostic study itself. If in traditional psychodiagnostics an individual result was evaluated according to the principle “comparison with others” or according to the principle “comparison with the standard of performance”, then in the style study a new methodological position was proposed: “comparison of the subject with himself”.

Over time, however, the optimism of the representatives of the stylistic approach (both in foreign and domestic psychology) noticeably diminished, because as empirical data accumulated, they had to face a number of contradictions. To understand the nature of these contradictions, we will have to get acquainted in detail with the methods of diagnosing cognitive styles and specific facts from the field of style research. For, I repeat, it is possible to understand the nature of cognitive styles and evaluate the prospects of a stylistic approach only on the basis of a thorough and consistent retrospective analysis of scientific and literary primary sources and the main forms of style phenomenology.

2. Psychological characteristics of the main cognitive styles

In modern foreign and domestic literature, one can find descriptions of about two dozen different cognitive styles. First of all, let us dwell on the description of those cognitive styles that form the basis of the phenomenology of the style approach.

1. Field dependence / field independence.

2. Narrow/wide range of equivalence.

4. Rigid/flexible cognitive control.

5. Tolerance/intolerance to unrealistic experience.

6. Focusing/scanning control.

7. Smoothing / sharpening.

8. Impulsivity / reflectivity.

9. Concrete/abstract conceptualization.

10. Cognitive simplicity/complexity.

Our task is to reproduce the problematic of cognitive styles in its original theoretical and empirical foundations. At this stage of the analysis of the problem, we will try to refrain from interpretations and comments so as not to interfere with building an idea of ​​the so-called "objective state of affairs" from the position of an outside observer.

2.1 Field dependence/field independence

Popularity of Ideas Henry Witkin over the past decades has been surprisingly large, with the number of field dependence/field independence (FI/FI) studies numbering in the many thousands. The more interesting is the analysis of the evolution of ideas about the nature of this cognitive style.

G. Witkina I was interested in the features of behavior in the field, in particular, such effects as "figure - background" and "part - whole". This style parameter was first described by Witkin in connection with the study of individual differences in spatial orientation, when the subject was required to perform some manipulations with the object under the influence of the spatial context (Witkin and Asch, 1948; Witkin, 1949). A little later, individual differences in perceptual activity were described when solving the problem of detecting a simple detail in a complex one. geometric image(Witkin, 1950).

During the experiments, it turned out that some subjects rely on an external visible field, they hardly overcome its influence, it takes them a long time to “see” the desired detail in a complex image (this phenomenon is called field dependence). Other subjects, on the contrary, tend to control the influence of visual impressions by relying on some internal criteria (in particular, their own proprioceptive experience), easily overcome the influence of the visible field, quickly find a detail in a complex image (this phenomenon is called field independence).

2.2 Narrow/wide range of equivalence

This cognitive style characterizes individual differences in the peculiarities of orientation to similarities or differences in objects (Gardner, Holzman, Klein, Linton, Spence, 1959; Gardner, Jackson, Messick, 1960). In particular, in experiments on the free classification of objects, it was found that some subjects divide objects into many groups with a small volume (narrow equivalence range), while other subjects form few groups with a large volume (wide equivalence range). According to R. Gardner, a narrow range of equivalence suggests a more detailed categorization of impressions, which suggests that these subjects use more precise standards in assessing object differences. Subsequently, Gardner proposed to interpret the range of equivalence characteristic of a given individual as a manifestation of conceptual differentiation: the more groups of objects are allocated in terms of their categorization, the higher the conceptual differentiation. Thus, the essence of this cognitive style is how many or few categories are represented in an individual's conceptual experience.

In the works of Russian authors, this style parameter is interpreted as "analyticity" (the tendency to focus on identifying differences in a number of objects) and "syntheticity" (the tendency to focus on identifying similarities in a number of objects) (Kolga, 1976; Shkuratova, 1994).

2.3 Narrowness/breadth of the category

This cognitive style is, to a certain extent, close in meaning to the cognitive style "narrow / wide range of equivalence", although these are far from identical style manifestations.

The range of equivalence characterizes the degree of subjective differentiation of various objects on the basis of a set of conceptual categories (“large”, “irregularly shaped”, “red”, etc.). The breadth of the category reflects the degree of subjective differentiation of the content of a single category (different variations in the meaning of the category "large", the degree of differentiation of different shades of red, etc.). Thus, narrow categorizers tend to specify their impressions and limit the scope of a certain category, while broad categorizers, on the other hand, tend to subsume a large number of supporting examples under one category.

2.4 Rigid/flexible cognitive control

This cognitive style characterizes the degree of subjective difficulty in changing the ways of processing information in a situation of cognitive conflict. Rigid control indicates difficulties in the transition from verbal to sensory-perceptual functions due to their low degree of automation, while flexible control indicates the relative ease of such a transition due to their high degree of automation (Gardner, Holzman, Klein, Linton, Spence, 1959; Broverman , 1960).

2.5 Tolerance for unrealistic experiences

This cognitive style reveals itself in situations characterized by uncertainty and ambiguity. Tolerance for unrealistic experience implies the possibility of accepting impressions that do not correspond or even contradict the ideas that a person has, which he evaluates as correct and obvious (Klein, Gardner, Schlesinger, 1962).

Tolerant individuals evaluate experience according to actual characteristics and are less inclined to formulate it in terms of "usual", "expected", "known". Intolerant individuals resist cognitive experience in which the initial data contradict their existing knowledge.

2.6 Focus/scan control

This cognitive style characterizes the individual features of the distribution of attention, which manifest themselves in the degree of coverage of various aspects of the displayed situation, as well as in the degree to which its relevant and irrelevant features are taken into account (Gardner, Holzman, Klein, Linton, Spence, 1959). Initially, it was called "focusing control", since the subject's ability to concentrate attention on some objectively given characteristics of the stimulus came to the fore. However, later this term had to be abandoned, because the effects of concentration of attention were based on constant scanning (viewing) of the field. Accordingly, some subjects quickly distribute attention to many aspects of the situation, while highlighting its objective details (the pole of broad, or scanning, control). The attention of other subjects, on the contrary, turns out to be superficial and fragmentary, while it fixes obvious, conspicuous characteristics of the situation (the pole of narrow, or focusing, control).

According to Ch. Nosala, this cognitive style has the form of a procedure for viewing the perceived field, which is realized in two main forms: 1) viewing in accordance with some given criterion; 2) browsing under uncertain criteria (Nosal, 1990). It is these two forms of scanning that are reflected in the methods of diagnosing this cognitive style.

2.7 Smoothing/sharpening

Individual differences recorded in this cognitive style are related to the peculiarities of storage of memorized material in memory. The “smoothers” have the preservation of details, the loss of certain fragments. On the contrary, in the memory of the sharpeners there is an emphasis, an emphasis on the specific details of the material being memorized. Subsequently, it was specially emphasized that this style parameter reveals itself in the conditions of perception and memorization of a sequence of stimuli, thus characterizing the sensitivity of the subjects to gradually increasing differences in a number of perceived influences (Holzman and Gardner, 1960).

2.8 Impulsivity/Reflectivity

This cognitive style, in accordance with the initial assumption J. Kagan, characterizes individual differences in the propensity to make decisions quickly or slowly. This stylistic property manifests itself most clearly in conditions of uncertainty, when it is required to make the right choice from a certain set of alternatives. Impulsive subjects tend to react quickly in multiple choice situations, with hypotheses being put forward without analyzing all possible alternatives. Reflective subjects are characterized by a slow response rate in such a situation, hypotheses are tested and repeatedly refined, the decision is made on the basis of a thorough preliminary analysis of the features of alternative objects.

2.9 Concrete/abstract conceptualization

O. Harvey, D. Hait And G. Schroder analyzed the individual features of the conceptual sphere associated with differences in the degree of its concreteness/abstractness. Concreteness/abstractness is based on such psychological processes as differentiation and integration of concepts. The pole of "concrete conceptualization" is characterized by insignificant differentiation and insufficient integration of concepts. For “specific” individuals, the following psychological qualities are typical: a tendency to think in black and white, dependence on status and authority, intolerance of uncertainty, stereotyped decisions, situational behavior, less ability to think in terms of hypothetical situations, etc. On the contrary, the pole “ abstract conceptualization" involves both high differentiation and high integration of concepts. Accordingly, "abstract" individuals are characterized by freedom from the immediate properties of the situation, orientation to internal experience in explaining the physical and social world, risk-taking, independence, flexibility, creativity, etc. (Harvey, Hunt, Schroder, 1961).

In the course of ontogenetic development, an increase in the abstractness of an individual conceptual system occurs, which is due to an increase in the number of alternative schemes for perceiving and analyzing the same object, moving away from standard assessments due to an increasing ability for internal transformations and combinations of concepts.).

2.10 Cognitive simplicity/complexity

A person understands, interprets, evaluates and predicts reality on the basis of a certain way organized subjective experience, presented as a system of personal constructs (Kelly, 1955).

A construct is a bipolar subjective scale that simultaneously implements two functions: generalization (establishing similarities) and opposition (establishing differences) in terms of evaluating certain objects (primarily other people and oneself). An example is the constructs "good-natured - evil", "smart - stupid", "dangerous - safe", etc.

When analyzing the features of the organization of the subjective system of constructs, Kelly paid special attention to such a quality as the consistency of constructs. Constructs are not isolated formations, they are interconnected and interdependent in a certain way. Thus, it seems fundamentally important that the measure of the cognitive complexity of the subjective evaluative space should be judged both on the basis of the degree of differentiated constructive system (the number of existing independent constructs) and on the basis of the degree of its integration (the nature of the connections between the constructs).

3. The problem of the relationship of cognitive styles

So, what is the nature of cognitive styles, or (in a different formulation) are style properties fundamentally different from any other individual characteristics of intellectual activity, including differences in the success of intellectual performance, strategies for finding a solution, the content of the process of conceptualizing what is happening, etc.?

As you know, it is impossible to get a direct answer to a direct question - both in science and in everyday life. And the point is not the helplessness or cunning of the one to whom the question is addressed. The answer to a direct question (that is, an urgent question addressed to the essence) lies not in the plane of the question asked, but in the plane of its context. Therefore, the answer to a direct question (alas!) is always lengthy. In the study of the nature of cognitive styles, we will also have to “detour” and analyze the context of style issues. First of all, it is necessary to find out whether there are any grounds for the traditional list of cognitive styles and the expansion of their list. In other words, we will talk about the problem of the relationship of individual style parameters. As part of the discussion about the nature of the relationship between cognitive styles, two opposing positions have developed.

According to the first, cognitive styles are independent mental properties, so there are no stable links between them.

According to the second, there is some single cognitive basis (“meta-dimension”), in relation to which specific styles act as its particular manifestations.

Proponents of the first, "multiple" position, denying the interdependence of style parameters, propose to consider individual cognitive styles as independent psychological dimensions (Gardner, Holzman, Klein, Linton, Spence, 1959; Clauss, 1978; Widiger, Knudson, Rorer, 1980). Thus, from the point of view of representatives of the Menninger school, cognitive styles (“cognitive controls”, in their terminology) are organized into certain complexes that have different configurations for different people precisely because there are no permanent connections between styles. Such an idea was associated with the interpretation of cognitive styles as mechanisms of individual intellectual adaptation. Each control participates in the organization of individual behavior to a different extent and in combination with different controls, depending on the goals of the activity and individual criteria for its effectiveness.

For example, when looking for a new job, wide scanning in one person may be associated with field dependence, rigidity of cognitive control, in another - with field independence, flexibility of cognitive control, etc. Therefore, only knowledge of the entire complex of cognitive controls, taking into account the specifics of their combinations, can provide a reliable basis for explaining personality and predicting individual behavior.

So Over time, each person develops a relatively stable combination of cognitive controls, which allows him to coordinate his individual mental characteristics to the maximum extent possible with the objective requirements of the environment. Thus, if we talk about connections between different style parameters, then only in relation to the experience of the individual, and the nature of these connections will be different and unpredictable each time. A significant role in strengthening the "multiple" position was played by studies that demonstrated differences in the psychological sources of styles that seemed to be similar in their characteristics. So, M. Wallach tried to prove that Witkin's field dependence/field independence and Kagan's analytical/thematic styles of categorization are manifestations of the same psychological quality. In particular, it was assumed that one pole of these styles represents an analytical, active approach to the field (field independence and an analytical strategy for sorting objects based on highlighting their distinctive details), while the other is global, passive approach to the field(field dependence and thematic strategy for sorting objects based on situational context).

However, very unexpected results were obtained: firstly, these measurements themselves correlated extremely weakly with each other; secondly, the predominance of PNP correlated with non-verbal intelligence, while the predominance of the analytical style of categorization correlated with verbal intelligence.

As a result, Wallach concluded that it is impossible to have direct links between different styles due to the presence of “mediating variables” (for example, certain personality traits), under the influence of which the links between style indicators can take any form (Wallach, 1962).

Within the framework of the second, "unitary" position, attempts were made to prove that certain common mental mechanisms lie at the basis of different cognitive styles. According to V. A. Kolgi And I. P. Shkuratova, most of the parameters of cognitive styles are grouped around the measurement "analyticity - syntheticity", which characterizes the degree of fragmentation of the perception of the surrounding world (Kolga, 1976; Shkuratova, 1994). This assumption was based on the idea I. M. Paley about the existence of subjective evaluation measuring scales with different scales. Some people tend to build a fractional picture of the world, using subjective scales with a large number of gradations (analyticity pole) to assess what is happening, others - a holistic picture of the world, evaluating what is happening using subjective large-scale scales (syntheticity pole). According to B. A. Kolge, analyticity - synthesis should be considered as two "metastyles", in relation to which all other cognitive styles act as "substyles". I. P. Shkuratova also considers analyticity-syntheticity as a cross-cutting characteristic of most cognitive styles. At the level of empirical verification of this assumption, it was possible to obtain weak correlations between field independence (Gottschaldt and ACT-70 tests) and a narrow range of equivalence (r = 0.40 and 0.41 at P = 0.05), however, with cognitive simplicity/complexity, these the styles turned out to be unrelated (Shkuratova, 1983).

I would like to note some terminological incident, which, unfortunately, turned out to be duplicated in many domestic studies of cognitive styles. We are talking about the misuse of the term "syntheticity" ("synthetic approach") as a synonym for the term "global approach". In my time G. Witkin used the term "articulated" as opposed to the term "global" to characterize two opposing approaches to the environment. An articulated (analytical, structured, differentiated) approach presupposes the ability to single out individual elements of a perceived situation and establish connections between them (“the tendency to single out parts of organized fields as differentiated and organize unstructured fields into coherent wholes”), i.e. in terms of the Russian psychology of thinking - it is the ability to carry out analysis through synthesis.

On the contrary, the global (non-analytical, unstructured, undifferentiated) approach characterizes a view of what is happening in general terms based on some general vague impression of the situation with the actual absence of transformation of incoming information in the form of its analysis and synthesis. Thus, firstly, "articulateness" as the highest level of psychological differentiation in the cognitive sphere is characterized by the unity of analysis and synthesis, and, secondly, "globality" in principle is not a synonym for "syntheticity" (and also, by the way, "integrity" ). In essence, two mistakes were made here at once: one cannot separate the operations of analysis and synthesis into different metapoles, and one cannot identify the poles of field dependence, a wide range of equivalence, cognitive simplicity with “syntheticity” (or “integrity”).

A striking example of a "unitary" position is the point of view R. Riding, who proposed to combine all the cognitive styles described so far into two "fundamental dimensions" (or basic cognitive styles): "integrity - analyticity" (the tendency to process information in terms of either the whole or parts) and "verbality - imagery" (the tendency to represent information in the process of its processing in the form of words or in the form of visual images).

Initially, five cognitive styles were assigned to the holistic - analytical metastyle:

1) field dependence / field independence;

2) impulsivity/reflexivity;

3) divergent/convergent thinking;

4) smoothing/sharpening;

5) holistic / serialistic (the holistic style corresponds

field dependence, impulsivity, divergence, smoothing, holisticity).

The verbal-figurative metastyle characterized various forms of verbal-figurative coding described in the works A. Paivio, A. Richardson and others (Paivio, 1971; Richardson, 1977).

Naturally, the question arises: on what empirical basis were the currently known cognitive styles grouped according to these two criteria? As proof of the existence of two fundamental dimensions (integrity - analyticity and verbality - figurativeness), Riding and his followers usually refer to a work that presents the results of a factor analysis of the ratios of different cognitive styles (Riding, Cheema, 1991).

However, the empirical data presented in this paper can hardly be considered as a basis for such a hypergeneralization. Thus, we studied the correlation of such cognitive styles as field dependence / field independence (group version of the “Included figures” method), smoothing / sharpening (schematization method), impulsiveness / reflectivity (the “Comparison of similar drawings” method), the predominance of verbal / figurative ways of processing information ( method for verbal/figurative coding), while the Eysenck personality questionnaire was additionally used. The subjects were 12-year-old schoolchildren.

Based on the results of factorization of the indicators of the above methods, four factors were obtained, three of which contain the style indicators of interest to us (Riding, Cheema, 1991).

Factor I (“differentiation”): indicators of field independence and sharpening are included with a high weight; reflectivity indices enter this factor with an average weight.

Factor II (“representation”): indicators of figurative-verbal coding and extraversion-introversion are included with a high weight (that is, extroverts tend to be verbalizers, and introverts are visualizers).

Factor IV ("neuroticism"): high weight includes indicators of neuroticism and medium - reflectivity.

As can be seen, firstly, within the framework of this study, only four cognitive styles in early adolescence were the subject of study, and, secondly, factor analysis revealed only partial relationships between individual style indicators. Therefore, Riding's conclusion that All styles are a special case of two fundamental dimensions, is not justified from an empirical point of view. Subsequently, evidence was given that the cognitive style of impulsiveness/reflexivity cannot be attributed to the integrity-analyticity metastyle, since it does not meet the criteria of style (it is not stable, it has a value aspect, it is not bipolar, etc.) (Jones, 1997) .

However, in a later work S. Reiner And R. Riding ~ and again with reference to the above article - already 14 styles are considered as particular manifestations of the basic cognitive style "integrity-analyticity", including:

impulsivity/reflexivity;

Rigid/flexible cognitive control;

Analytical/thematic categorization;

Narrow/wide equivalence range;

Field dependence / field independence;

Sharpening/smoothing;

Cognitive simplicity/complexity;

convergence/divergence;

Globality/consistency;

adaptability/innovativeness;

Logic/intuitiveness;

Algorithmic / constructive;

Concrete/abstract approach to learning;

Analytical/methodological way of processing information.

Particular manifestations of the basic cognitive style "verbality - figurativeness" are 3 styles:

Concreteness/abstractness of conceptualization;

Tolerance for unrealistic experience;

Visual/Verbal Information Processing Strategies (Rayner and Riding, 1997).

VIEWS R. Riding have become very popular in recent years. He developed a method for assessing the severity of two basic styles, namely the Cognitive Styles Analysis test, which also exists in a computer version (Cognitive StylesAnalysisTest - CSA) (Riding, 1991).

Ways to organize information

Two-dimensional matrix of cognitive styles, according to C. Nosal (Nosal, 1990)

1 - field dependence/field independence;

2 - perceptual articulation;

4 - narrow/wide range of equivalence;

5 - cognitive simplicity/complexity; concreteness/abstractness;

6 - tolerance for unrealistic experience;

7 - sharpening/smoothing;

8 - focusing/scanning control;

9 - impulsiveness/reflexivity;

10 - rigid/flexible control;

11 - external/internal locus of control;

12 - slow / fast passage of time

The theoretical significance of this classification, according to Ch. Nosala, lies in the possibility of correlating the phenomenology of cognitive styles, firstly, with theories of information processing and, secondly, with theories of abilities (theories of psychometric intelligence). Its pragmatic meaning lies in the statement of "gaps" in the form of missing matrix nodes, which suggests the existence of cognitive styles not yet described in the scientific literature.

Undoubtedly, multidimensional classifications of cognitive styles are a significant advance in understanding the nature of relationships between individual style parameters. In them, firstly, the non-linear nature of the correlation of styles is stated, taking into account the multi-level, hierarchical form of their organization, and, secondly, an attempt is made to describe the mechanisms of stylistic behavior.

However, the validity of multidimensional classifications of cognitive styles remains in question for the reason indicated above: at the level of empirical research, it is not possible to prove or disprove these classifications. Due to the contradictory nature of the revealed correlations.

Conclusion

In this paper, the history, current state and prospects of the stylistic approach in the psychology of cognition associated with the study of stylistic characteristics of the cognitive sphere of personality (cognitive styles) were considered.

Thus, to cognitive styles- these are individually peculiar ways of processing information that characterize the specifics of the mindset specific person and distinctive features of his intellectual behavior.

There are three stages in the formation of the meaning of the term "style" and, accordingly, the style approach in psychology.

At the first stage, the style was considered in the context of personality psychology to describe the individual-peculiar ways of a person's interaction with his social environment. For the first time the term "style" appeared in psychoanalytic works Alfred Adler(1927). He spoke about the existence of individual behavioral strategies that are developed by a person to overcome an inferiority complex. To do this, a person unconsciously resorts to various forms of compensation for his physical and mental deficits in the form of the formation of an individual life style.

The second stage of the stylistic approach is the 50s-60s of the XX century and is characterized by the use of the concept of style to study individual differences in the ways of knowing one's environment. In the works of a number of American psychologists, the study of individual characteristics of perception, analysis, structuring and categorization of information, designated by the term "cognitive styles", comes to the fore. A distinctive feature of this stage is the transition to operational definitions of cognitive styles, when a particular style property is determined through the procedure for measuring it (cognitive style is what is measured using a specific style technique).

The third stage of the stylistic approach, the beginning of which can be dated to the 80s of the last century, is characterized by a tendency towards hypergeneralization of the concept of style. In particular, the concept of cognitive style is expanding due to the emergence of new style concepts, such as “thinking style” (Grigorenko and Sternberg, 1996; 1997), “teaching style” (Kolb, 1984; Honey, Mumford, 1986; Liver, 1995), "epistemological styles" (Wardell, Royce, 1978), etc.

The emergence of stylistic metaconcepts (“metastyles”) is noted, replacing the entire set of specific cognitive styles described so far:

Articulation - globality (Witkin, Dyk, Faterson, Goodenough, Karp, 1974);

Analyticity - syntheticity (Kolga, 1976; Shkuratova, 1994);

Imagery - verbality and integrity - detail (Riding, 1997), etc.

Moreover, the concept of style begins to apply to all areas of mental activity. Thus, within the framework of the third stage, there is an actual identification of style with individual differences in mental activity.

The original ambiguity of the term "cognitive style" revealed itself in the diversity of those phenomena that were brought under this concept. In particular, cognitive style was understood as:

Persistent differences in cognitive organization and cognitive functioning (Ausubel, 1968);

Individual features of cognitive processes that are consistently manifested in different situations when solving various problems (Soloviev, 1977);

Preferred way of analyzing and structuring one's environment (Witkin et al., 1974);

A set of cognitive control principles that provide the possibility of realistically adaptive forms of cognitive reflection based on the regulation of affective states (Gardner et al, 1959);

Intelligence Profile (Broverman, 1960);

Stable traits of a higher order that predetermine the way in which cognitive abilities and affective properties are interconnected in acts of individual behavior (Wardell, Royce, 1978), etc.

Nevertheless, various definitions of cognitive style have some common denominator associated with the fixation of a series hallmarks this mental quality:

1) cognitive style is a structural characteristic of the cognitive sphere, indicating the features of its organization and not directly related to the features of its content;

2) cognitive style - these are individually peculiar ways of obtaining one or another cognitive product, i.e., an instrumental characteristic of intellectual activity, which can be opposed to its productive characteristic;

3) cognitive style, in contrast to traditional unipolar psychological measurements, is a bipolar dimension, within which each cognitive style is described by referring to two extreme forms of intellectual behavior (in the form of field dependence / field independence, impulsivity / reflectivity, etc.) ;

4) value judgments are not applicable to cognitive styles, since representatives of one or another pole of each cognitive style have certain advantages in those situations where their individual cognitive qualities contribute to effective individual adaptation;

5) cognitive style is a stable characteristic of the subject, stably manifested at different levels of intellectual functioning and in different situations;

6) cognitive style is a preference for a certain way of intellectual behavior (i.e., the subject, in principle, can choose any way of processing information, but he involuntarily or arbitrarily prefers any certain way of perceiving and analyzing what is happening, which is most appropriate to his psychological capabilities) .

In fact, in this area of ​​psychological knowledge there has been a radical change in a number of positions in understanding the nature of individual intellectual differences. The criteria for assessing the intellectual capabilities of a person were revised.

Bibliography

1. Cold M. A. cognitive styles. On the nature of the individual mind. 2nd ed. - St. Petersburg: Peter, 2004. - 384 s:. - (Series "Masters of Psychology")

Cognitive style in a broad sense is a way of processing information - its receipt, storage and use. The most common styles perception and styles thinking. The concept of cognitive style was used earlier than others by G. Witkin, who, studying perception, drew attention to the fact that different people are more or less oriented to the context. The ability to resist the influence of background features when highlighting a figure was called by him field independence, and field dependence meant inclusion in the context.

field dependence reflects the level of mental development associated with the degree of differentiation: if at the beginning of life a person does not distinguish himself from the situation as a subject, then he begins to realize the boundaries between the external and internal, to distinguish parts of the world around him and himself.

Later, J. Kagan singled out such a stylistic characteristic as impulsivity - reflexivity(tendency to a more or less detailed analysis of the problem before making a decision, the number of concepts that a person uses to solve a problem). Cognitive style shows how different people come to the same result, i.e. reflects predominantly procedural, dynamic characteristics of activity, and is largely determined by temperamental characteristics. Currently, in addition to those already mentioned, there are also such properties as analytic - synthetic, externality - internality, detail - wholeness, cognitive complexity - simplicity.

And within the framework of the Meninger study, G. Klein and R. Gardner, who study cognitive styles (which they called cognitive controls) from the standpoint of psychoanalysis, identified the following five characteristics. 1. equalization- sharpening characterizes a measure of sensitivity to differences: for example, you can ignore sharp differences between objects, or you can notice the smallest discrepancies. 2. High - low tolerance to unrealistic experience indicates a person's willingness to accept facts that contradict his personal experience. 3. Narrow - wide range equivalence shows how different objects fall into the same class, are recognized as the same. 4. Focus - scan characterizes the features of concentration of attention on the main objects. 5. Rigidity - flexibility show a measure of the arbitrariness of cognitive activity.

Apparently, the selected characteristics can be especially valuable in the study of social intelligence, describing the features of the development of the individual as a whole. Cognitive styles are psychological qualities, which, being attributed in most works to formal dynamic properties, nevertheless seem to be the most promising in solving the problem of integrating cognitive and affective processes, dynamic and meaningful in the structure of individuality.

68- Field dependence / field independence or globality, articulation means the ability to resist the destructive influence of conflicting background features in the perception of visual forms and connections

The most famous style parameter is fielddependence / fieldindependence- is based on one of the most attractive theories. To explain the field dependence construct, G. Witkin used the hypothesis of psychological differentiation.

In general terms, this hypothesis is described using two basic provisions. First, differentiation in one psychological system necessarily associated with the same processes in interconnected systems. Therefore, reflected, for example, in the degree of articulation of perception, psychological differentiation can be measured empirically with the help of perceptual tests. The most famous of them - the Test of Hidden (or Nested) Figures - is built on the basis of applying the principles of gestaltism, and diagnostics are based on assessing the ability of the subject to find a disguised simple geometric shape in a complex colored figure.

The second important basis of the hypothesis is that the rate of differentiation during the entire period of human development only partially depends on constitutional factors. The life experience of an individual can significantly modernize this process and is therefore the primary object of empirical research. One of the main signs of psychological differentiation in a person is the division in the sphere of consciousness into "mine" and "not mine". In this case, the distinction between "I" and "not-I" indicates the formation of the boundary between the internal and external. Differences in the degree of articulation of the "I" lead to differences in the essence of what is used as a means of resolving uncertainty: the field (i.e. environment) or one's own "I". The tendency to rely on oneself or the field as a source of obtaining the necessary information is a manifestation of the parameter "dependence / independence from the field",

Internal, internal, or external, external, signals act on an individual orientation directed towards the main source of social information - other people. Numerous data indicate that field dependents use information received from others more effectively when they are in a situation of uncertainty, which allows them to avoid a mismatch between action and result. Field independents act with a greater degree of autonomy, ignoring the opinions or promptings of others. However, when the situation is well structured and other people included in it are not a source of information significant for decision-making, field-dependent and field-independent subjects do not differ in their reactions to external social stimuli.

In accordance with the hypothesis of the psychologist from St. Petersburg University I.M. Paley (1974), the common denominator for a number of individual psychological characteristics, including field dependence, is the scale (division value) of subjective scales, which is reflected in the softness-hardness of the decision-making criterion. Field-dependent, characterized by the softness of the criterion, allow some uncertainty in the estimates. Field independents have stability in the assessment of signs, a more definite subjective assessment.

Checking the reliability of the field dependence indicator, MKepner and I. Neimark re-tested the same subjects in the intervals between solving cognitive tasks. Four types of changes in indicators were identified during repeated testing: stable field dependence, stable field independence, mixed type, latent field dependence (transition during retest examination from field dependence to independence field). According to the researchers, these changes reflect the most typical individual differences in the articulation of perception.

- Analytic/Synthetic(conceptual differentiation) or narrowness/breadth of the range of cognitive equivalence - characterizes an individual depending on the number of concepts that he uses to classify a set of objects, solve a problem, form categories in the process of generalization

The parameter of the range of cognitive equivalence (CCE) singled out by RTardner differentiates people according to what they are more focused on in the process of cognition: difference or similarity, specific in observed phenomena or general.

"Analysts" - focus on the specific in objects; use a smaller subjective unit of measure, which leads to a reassessment of the physical time interval; a set of insignificant, secondary features is perceived as integral; focus on the emotional properties of the object, which corresponds to the reaction of distress; the degree of left-hemispheric predominance of activation in the occipital regions is expressed (according to EEG data); expressed anxiety and high conflict in the categories of "life goals" and "fears and apprehensions". For example, the presence or absence of a connection between analyticity and the effectiveness of perceptual activity depends on the level of anxiety.

"Synthetics" - individual stimuli are perceived as a whole; underestimate the physical time interval; protective mechanisms are actualized by the type of repression, denial; the orientation of the temporal context from the present to the past is expressed, which is possibly associated with the activity of the right hemispheric mechanisms of information processing.

A relationship between the analyticity/syntheticity parameter and learning strategies was found. Thus, analytical students learn more easily according to the following program - a low rate of presentation of educational information, a large number of repetitions, low variability of tasks, an emphasis on arbitrary memorization. Synthetics have such successful professional functions as design, as well as the ability to systematize and link the available data.

- impulsivity/reflexivity reveals the tendency of the individual to a more or less detailed and detailed analysis of the situation before making a decision.

First proposed by J. Kagan (Kagan, 1966), these style parameters are considered to be predictors of how a person solves problems containing alternatives. The impulsiveness/reflexivity construct describes the tendency to reflect on and question the criteria put forward as the basis for making a decision in the face of choosing from several plausible alternatives, as well as the degree of uncertainty about which of them will turn out to be more correct.

The most common test for measuring impulsiveness/reflexivity is the Test of Similar Figures (Kagan, 1966), in which it is necessary to choose from the available very similar alternative images one that exactly repeats the reference image. Impulsive ones make a lot of mistakes when performing a task, respond quickly and are characterized by a very short latent period (that is, the length of time between the first presentation and the first answer). In contrast, reflexive ones evaluate the stimulus more actively (for example, they more often turn to the standard example); more often look at the available options, trying to collect more information on which their answer is based; they pause to consider their choice of alternatives, which leads them to eventually come up with more correct answers. The definition of impulsiveness includes, as a rule, the average response time and the number of errors made in the responses.

Own research (Lybinu 1993) discovered the fact of violation of feedback in impulsive subjects between the results obtained and the process of activity itself, as well as a decrease in their ability to analyze their own mistakes. The temperament of the impulsive ones is characterized by much higher values ​​of emotionality than the reflexive ones (ibid., cJ 16). It can be assumed that a high sensitivity bordering on anxiety to a possible discrepancy between the results obtained and the expected ones is a prerequisite for the disorganization of the behavior of the impulsive, which manifests itself in a more chaotic manner of performing the task.

- Categorical latitude/narrowness reveals people's ideas about the limits of variability of events or processes in relation to the maximum allowable and minimum possible values. To understand the meaning of this characteristic, it is enough to answer several questions below, choosing only one of the indicated answer options (alternatives):

1. The average weight that a person can lift is one hundred kilograms.

The largest weight that a person can lift: a) 300 kg; b) 500 kg; c) 600 kg; d) 1 ton. The smallest weight that a person can distinguish:

a) 1 g; b) 0.01 g; c) 0.001 g; d) 0.0001 p

2. average price a glass of "Bordeaux" in the restaurant "Maxim's" is equal to ten dollars. What can be the maximum price of a glass of wine:

a) $100; b) $500; c) $700; d) $1000. What can be the minimum price of a glass of wine: a) 90 cents; b) 50 cents; c) 30 cents; d) 10 cents People who more often mark points c) and especially d), regardless of the correctness of the answers, are characterized by a greater breadth of thinking, allowing a significant limit of variability even of phenomena unknown to them. These studies also include the study of the polarity of judgments, which is expressed in the tendency of some people use extreme alternatives more often than average alternatives,

- Detail/integrity understood as hypersensitivity to small nuances and minor features, exaggeration of any changes, resistance and even displacement of the original stimuli,

- Tolerance/Instability to unreal experience determines the degree of the individual's susceptibility to information that contradicts his picture of the world, knowledge of reality. Manifested in the speed of the appearance of illusions

- Cognitive complexity/simplicity or the degree of differentiation of conceptual systems reflects the ability to perceive and evaluate the surrounding reality in a more multidimensional way. This measurement of style is based on the procedure for evaluating people and phenomena through similarities and differences using bipolar scales.

J. Bieri used a standard repertoire grid for diagnostics. The subjects named twelve acquaintances corresponding to the role definitions of the test ("pleasant acquaintance", "business partner", etc.), and then ranked these people according to the twelve identified dichotomies. During processing, the rows of the resulting matrix or constructs were compared with each other. The lower the number of coincidences, the higher the index of cognitive complexity, indicating the relative degree of differentiation of the conceptual system of the individual. In other words, cognitive complexity-simplicity is a set of constructs of varying degrees of differentiation, that is, they differ from each other when evaluating different people, as well as events. The theoretical model of this style parameter is interpreted as follows. A complex system consists of a larger number of structures, thanks to which it is easier to process, perceive, assimilate non-standard information with its help, and the subjective-original experience logically "fits" into the existing conceptual system. Bieri suggested that "cognitive complexity" is related to the ability to anticipate events, as well as the accuracy of analyzing the behavior of other people. The results of numerous studies of this style characteristic show the following. "Cognitively complex" subjects have a more differentiated attitude towards people, draw more accurate conclusions about a person's system of ideas after a brief conversation with him, and are able to look at what is happening from different points of view. There is a connection between "cognitive complexity" and social efficiency, which is understood as the ability to see events as others see them, with the ability to handle life situations and social adaptability. Interesting results were obtained by NLamon, who found that the accumulation of experience in any field of activity leads to an increase in contingency, that is, to an increase in "cognitive simplicity" between previously different constructs used to evaluate this professional field.

- Rigidity/flexibility cognitive control is evaluated as the effectiveness of overcoming the stereotype, assessed by the speed and accuracy of the critical task. It is also characterized by the noise immunity of an individual in the process of switching to other types and methods of activity in accordance with objective requirements.

- Internality/externality as a manifestation of the locus of control in the form of generalized expectations of the individual about the fact that the consequences of his actions depend mainly on his own efforts (or external forces).

70Attribution(lat. attribute- attribution) - a psychological term denoting a mechanism for explaining the reasons for the behavior of another person.

In particular, it may be an attribution social facilities(person, group, social community) characteristics that are not represented in the field of perception. The need for attribution is due to the fact that the information that observation can give a person is insufficient for adequate interaction with the social environment and needs to be “finished”. Attribution is the main way of such "completion" of directly perceived information.

Under causal attribution is understood as the interpretation of the behavior of a communication partner by making assumptions about his motives, intentions, emotions, causes of behavior, personality traits, and then attributing them to the partner. Causal attribution determines social perception (perception) the more, the greater the lack of information about a communication partner. The results of attribution can become material for the formation of social stereotypes. Stereotyping perception leads to two different consequences. First, to simplify the knowledge of another person (people). Secondly, to the formation of prejudices in relation to representatives of various social groups (professional, socio-economic, ethnic, etc.)

1. Observation of human behavior

2. Logical inference about human intentions

3. Attributing to a person the motives of behavior

Attribution styles:

§ Internal (dispositive) attribution - linking a person's behavior with his characteristics.

§ External attribution - linking a person's behavior with the situation.

Attribution style factors:

§ Consensus - behavior inherent in many is more often attributed to situational motives, and non-standard - personal.

§ Intentionality - personal motives are more often attributed to deliberate behavior, and situational motives are more often attributed to unusual ones.

§ Consistency - personal motives are more often attributed to consistent behavior, and situational motives are attributed to a single one.

Fundamental attribution error- the tendency to explain behavior by dispositional (personal) reasons to the detriment of situational ones.

A person is inclined to explain his successes dispositionally, and failures - situationally, for other people's successes and failures, everything is exactly the opposite.

For the doer, the figure is the situation, and for the observer, the situation is the background, and the figure is the doer. Therefore, the actor is less prone to fundamental attribution error, and the observer is more prone.

B. Weiner proposed three dimensions of the locus (concentration) of causality:

§ internal - external

§ stable - unstable

§ controlled - uncontrolled

Eight models, compiled by various combinations of these dimensions, allow a motivated assessment of the event.

Locus of control[from lat. locus - place, location and French. controle - check] - a personal characteristic that reflects the predisposition and inclination of the individual to attribute responsibility for the successes and failures of his activity either to external circumstances, conditions and forces, or to himself, his efforts, his shortcomings, to consider them as his own achievements or the results of his own miscalculations, as well as simply the lack of appropriate abilities or shortcomings. At the same time, this individual psychological characteristic is a fairly stable, poorly changeable personal quality, despite the fact that it is finally formed in the process of socialization. In many ways, this stability of the locus of control is due to the fact that it is almost directly related to such an indicator of the social orientation of the individual as externality (external, or external locus of control) and internality (internal, or internal locus of control). It is generally accepted that the very concept of "locus of control" was introduced into social psychology and personality psychology by the American psychologist D. Rotter. Subsequently, methodological tools were developed that allow the experimental psychologist, on the one hand, to determine the nature of the locus of control inherent in a particular subject, and on the other hand, to fix those patterns and dependencies that reveal the connection of this personal characteristic with others. Quite unequivocally, a number of experimental studies have shown that individuals who demonstrate their commitment to internal locus of control, as a rule, have adequate self-esteem, they most often (if these are not purely situational circumstances) do not manifest unjustified anxiety, guilt and fear, they are prone to a fairly consistent solution of the tasks set, they know how to stand up for themselves, they are justifiably friendly to others, they are sociable and are ready to interact on a partnership basis. As for those individuals who are characterized by an external locus of control, they are often excessively anxious and subject to unjustified frustration, unsure both in their abilities in general and in their individual capabilities, and therefore most often are not ready to solve the tasks facing them in the logic of "today and here”, but rather tend to approach their solution according to the “tomorrow and somewhere” scheme. In addition, they, as a rule, are not capable of personal self-determination in a group, adequate attribution of responsibility in conditions joint activities, demonstrate the absence of effective group identification. It should be specially noted that the locus of control of an individual often predetermines his status in the informal power structure of the community. Thus, in groups with a high level of socio-psychological development, it is most often the internal locus of control that turns out to be one of the reasons for the psychologically favorable position of the individual, while, for example, in corporate groupings, the external locus of control in combination with an official high power position, as a rule, characterizes the leader of the group.

Studies of the locus of control were carried out mainly using the internality-externality scale developed by J. Rotter. They allowed not only to concretize the differences between internals and externals regarding attributing control over one's own life to internal or external sources, but also revealed a number of interesting patterns. So, B. Strickland, K. Velstone and B. Velstone established, “... that internals are more likely than externals to actively seek information about possible problems health. Internals are also more likely than externals to take precautions to maintain or improve their health, such as quitting smoking, starting to exercise, and seeing a doctor regularly.” This means that, contrary to the image created by some writers of a convinced fatalist, who is "knee-deep in the sea", who does not part with a glass and pipe and is distinguished at the same time by phenomenal health, in fact, the external locus of control, among other things, significantly increases the risk of serious diseases. Moreover, in the case of illness, the internal locus of control promotes recovery, while the external one, which generates in extreme cases, the so-called acquired helplessness syndrome, on the contrary, prevents it. As D. Myers notes in this regard, “in hospitals, “good patients” do not ring the bell, do not ask questions, do not control what is happening. Such passivity may be good for the "efficiency" of the hospital, but bad for the people. Feeling empowered and in control of your life promotes health and survival.”

The relationship between the type of locus of control and the mental health of the individual was also recorded. In particular, "research...shows that people with an external locus of control are more likely to have mental problems than those with an internal locus of control. For example, Fares reports that anxiety and depression are higher in externals and lower in self-esteem than internals. Also, internals are less likely to develop mental illness than externals. It has even been shown that the suicide rate is positively correlated (r = 0.68) with the average level of population externality.”

In addition, internality and externality are clearly related to the problem of conformism and nonconformity. According to L. Hjell and D. Ziegler, “...numerous studies show that externals are much more subject to social influence than internals. Indeed, Fares found that internals not only resist external influences, but also, when given the opportunity, try to control the behavior of others. Internals also tend to like people they can manipulate and dislike those they can't influence. In short, internals appear to be more confident in their ability to solve problems than externals, and therefore independent of the opinions of others.”

Given that all of the above suggests a conclusion about the preference of the internal locus of control over the external one, it would be deeply erroneous to perceive externality as a terrible and irreversible “curse”, and internality, on the contrary, as “blessing of the good fairy”.

First of all, internality and externality are not personality traits - innate and unchanging. In his works “... Rotter clearly shows that externals and internals are not “types”, since each has characteristics not only in its category, but also, to a small extent, another. The construct should be viewed as a continuum with a pronounced “externality” at one end, and “internality” at the other, while people's beliefs are located at all points in between, mostly in the middle. It is this kind of "confusion" of internality and externality, characteristic of most people, that underlies the repeatedly experimentally recorded phenomenon known in social psychology as a predisposition in favor of one's self.

The essence of this phenomenon lies in the fact that people tend to see the reasons for their success in their own abilities, personal qualities, efforts, i.e. they use an internal locus of control and, on the contrary, attribute failures to the action of external causes, resorting to an external locus of control. At the same time, this is observed even in cases where the social cost of an error is negligible. In one study, fourth-year psychology students were asked to complete a medium-difficulty creative task on their own for a week. They were told that the assignment was optional, i.e., not mandatory, and failure to complete it would in no way affect the student's progress. As expected, the vast majority of students ignored the task. When answering the question about the reasons for not completing the task, less than 10% of respondents indicated internal determinants such as "unwillingness", "laziness", "lack of interest". All the rest referred to external circumstances - from the banal "lack of time" to the "bad character of the head of the university library." Those who completed the task, without exception, all justified their actions by internal reasons: the desire to learn something new, the habit of bringing everything to the end, interest, etc.

P. Honey and A. Mumford described the same four styles of learning in simpler terms: activity, reflective, theoretical and pragmatic (Honey, Mumford, 1986). Subsequently, it was shown that, judging by the results of factorization of the data of the questionnaire developed by them, in reality one should speak of two styles: activity(orientation to the application of knowledge and the tendency to learn through practical situations) and analytical(orientation to logical analysis and theoretical substantiation).

A. R. Gregors defined learning styles depending on whether the student relies on concrete experience or abstract knowledge, and also on whether his learning strategies are sequential or random (Gregors, 1982). As a result, four types of students were identified with such learning styles as:

1) concrete-sequential(prefer direct, step-by-step learning based on clear visual experience);

2) specific-random(learn on the basis of trial and error, distinguished by an intuitive and independent approach to learning activities);

3) abstract-sequential(prefer an analytical, logical approach to learning based on verbal instructions and systematization of knowledge);

4) abstract-random(demonstrate a holistic approach to learning based on visual experience, preferring an unstructured form of presenting educational information).

Single person style concept

Serious difficulties in the study of the sources of stylistic originality and the interdependence of style with other psychological formations are caused by the lack of the necessary methodological justification, given the large amount of data obtained in different areas of psychology on the manifestation of stylistic features in human behavior and activity. The theoretical task of the approach under consideration, implemented in the laboratory of differential psychology and psychophysiology of the Institute of Psychology of the Russian Academy of Sciences, was to search for a single conceptual beginning in the study of the style characteristics of individuality and to determine the role of individual style as a mediating link in the interaction of biological and social factors in the functioning of individuality. The specificity of this study lies in the development of the concept of style as an integral characteristic of a person, expressing the correlation of various substructures of individuality with each other and with the parameters of specific situations in terms of compensatory, optimality, adaptability and effectiveness.

If the "new look", formed in the 1950s at the junction of the psychology of perception and individual differences, was expressed in the position on the need to take into account the processes of perception and cognition of personal variables, then the "new look-II", which was formed in the late 90s of the current century, reflects the desire of style researchers to go beyond the paradigm of individual differences and consider this problem through the prism of more general approaches.

Modern Analysis The nature of the stylistic originality of a person right now is beginning to acquire the features of a holistic and consistent theory. The existence of dozens of personality parameters, called style manifestations, is a reflection of the same psychological reality, denoted by different terms. At the same time, the stability of these manifestations makes us think about the existence of common factors, latent variables, with the help of which it is possible to create adequate explanatory models. It seems timely to introduce a new term for the phenomenon under study - a person's style. This emphasizes the integrity of this unique characteristic of the interaction of the subject with the outside world.

How can a definition of a person's style look like, reflecting the combination of general psychological - which sounds unusual in this context - and traditional differential psychological approaches? For example, yes. Man's style - it is a stable holistic pattern of individual manifestations, expressed in the preference for a specific form of interaction of the subject with the physical and social environment. The style structure is a certain type of relationship between different parameters of personality, on the one hand, and between these parameters and situational variables, on the other.

Each of us strives to be unique, emphasizing at the slightest opportunity our unique individuality, and at the same time, a person cannot exist without feeling that he belongs to a certain group. When characterizing ourselves or others, we almost always single out group characteristics among the first - gender, age, nationality or race, belonging to a cultural tradition, social class, etc.

So, another very important coordinate is added to the dimension of individuality - group status, which is made up of many components, forming a hierarchical structure (see Figure 20).

Thus, several demarcation lines are distinguished that conditionally delimit the sphere of individuality, defining one or another individual characteristic through the subject's belonging to a group - "I" as a representative of a certain race and nationality (this level of group status is characterized by a high degree of differentiation Dk and, accordingly, narrow S) , "I" as a man or a woman, a child, a teenager or an adult, with or without a deviation from the conventional norm (in physical, mental or personal development), etc. It is possible to trace the influence of the paradigm construction we have identified earlier on the group status. So, the criteria of race, sex and age correspond to the biological level (organism), differences in mental development - to the individual, socio-cultural, class characteristics are most pronounced at the level of the individual, and finally, differences

in lifestyles.

Group status of the subject:

S - spectrum of transitions between demarcation criteria (Dk); d is the degree of differentiation of the demarcation criterion itself (Dk).

The formula S \u003d 1 / d marks the relationship of inverse relationship between two variables of the group status of individuality - the higher the degree of differentiation between the studied groups (for example, racial and national characteristics), the narrower the spectrum of mutual transitions, which means the possibility of migration from one group to another,

characterize the personality of a person as a whole.

RESEARCH METHODS

The classification (and sequence) of the group characteristics of individuality considered in each of the chapters is based on the identification of different types of carriers of these differences:

* biological, manifested in the process of maturation of the organism;

* mental, acting as differences in sensorimotor, cognitive, emotional, regulatory characteristics;

* personal, defining differences in self-esteem, self-image, the sphere of higher emotions and motives, interests and ideas;

* integrative-individual, influencing the preference for different life modes and the choice of self-realization style.

To conduct research in any of these areas, a certain set of methods is used.

For example, the essence of the analysis of the age aspect of personality is to study the variability or stability of certain characteristics as they grow older. Basically, three approaches are used for this purpose:

* the cross-sectional method is used in the study of different groups of people of different ages;

* the longitudinal method is used to study the same group of people over a certain period of time;

* sequential (sequential) method combines the elements of the previous two.

Another equally important method that allows you to establish whether the selected patterns of features are preserved in different contexts or cultures is

* cross-cultural analysis, in which one or more of the methods listed above is used in more than one context.

1L2. Biological clock - genetically

DETERMINISTIC PATTERNS OF THE INDIVIDUAL

DEVELOPMENT

Many of the parameters in which some people differ from others are determined by different genetic factors.

programs. Arnold Gesell (Gesett, 1925) proposed the term "maturation" to define the sequence of pattern changes in development determined by genetic programs. The content of the maturation process is the differentiation of body systems, which ensures the expansion of the range of reactions to environmental influences. Due to the functioning in the human body of a special neuroendocrine apparatus for regulating the genetic development program (see Lopatina, Ponomarenko, \Eb1\Akinshchikova, 1977), any function is realized within the limits of the reaction norm, and the specific form of its manifestation depends on external influences.

According to modern ideas about the ontogenetics of individuality, age-related psychogenetic studies are built taking into account the following provisions (Egorova Maryutina 1990):

* the genotype performs a dual function in ontogeny, simultaneously typing and individualizing development; phenotype of any psychological sign may be the result of both a unique genetic constitution and a unique life experience;

* the organization of genetic systems controlling the development is subject to the temporal principle, that is, “genes are “turned on and off” during development; the heritability of the same phenotype trait can change with age, or, without changing in magnitude, can be determined by the influence of different genetic factors;

* the difference between genetic conditioning and stability of traits is that "psychological characteristics that demonstrate high stability in the process of development are not necessarily associated with the genotype and, conversely, genetically determined characteristics are by no means unchanged."

How extensive is the sphere of influence of genetic programs that regulate, for example, the process of maturation? The data, which can be metaphorically represented as marks on the dial of a biological clock, show that this influence affects a wide range of individual manifestations. Boys with earlier maturation, in addition to having superior physical strength compared to their peers, associated with the construct of masculinity, have an advantage in privileges, degrees of responsibility and nature of tasks typical of older ones (Eichorn, 1963), As for girls, the consequences of the difference in maturation are less obvious here. Data from the California Developmental Survey show that girls with later maturation had higher positions in school and were rated as more balanced, social, friendly, leading, and expressive (Weatherley, 1964)*

Another indicator included as an integral component in the evolutionary-constitutional factor is physical attractiveness. Many studies have found a pattern - quite consistent with the traditions of sociobiological theories - in the preference for men with a mesomorphic body type, characterized by well-developed muscles, broad shoulders, narrow hips (Lerner & Kot, 1972). Beautiful, physically attractive people are more popular with their peers, who attribute more positive personality characteristics to them, and adults consider beautiful children less prone to aggressiveness (Dion, 1972).

In addition to maturation, there is also a very important time line in the functioning of the biological systems of the body. When a person reaches the age of thirty, many functions begin to show a downward trend (of course, with certain assumptions). However, differences between individuals also play a decisive role here. One study compared a group of men aged seventy-one with younger men (Birren and Schaie, 1996). It turned out that there were practically no differences in the two selected subgroups - very healthy older and younger, just healthy for their age, men. Experimental facts are also known

that men at the age of forty-fifty years represent a kind of risk group, showing at this age a greater susceptibility to heart attacks associated with stress and competitive behavior. It is quite possible that this type of behavior is associated with a formal program characteristic of dominance rank preference, determined by an evolutionary, genetically fixed strategy.

An important dimension of biological time is associated with the most intimate function of behavior - sexual activity. A study of a group of people from sixty-seven to seventy-seven years of age revealed that they did not have a decrease in interest in the sexual side of life. However, both interest in sex later in life and physical ability to pursue this interest depend on regularity in sexual activity during life and also correlate with its level in younger years (Masters & Johnson, 1966).

11*3. Mental clock - age dynamics

mental functions

It cannot be said that the psychological clock* marking the time of changes in the psychic sphere runs its own independent course. But still, the course of mental time is determined by the laws of a somewhat different plan than genetic programs. Lagging, the individual's mental clock indicates mental retardation> noting, for example, his lower level of IQ (see Chapter 6). Ahead of the biological age, the mental time of the subject shows that before us, perhaps, the future Mozart or Landau. At the same time, mental development reflects the basic laws of the progressive process that characterizes the movement of a person through life.

The model of the general mechanism for the formation of a hierarchical structure of the mental world is still in the stage of theoretical and experimental verification.

262 Person in the group

(Vekker, 1998), A number of interesting data have been obtained in differential psychophysiological studies. There is experimental confirmation that "the properties of temperament and general abilities at the early stages of ontogenesis reveal a very close interaction" (Rustov-Dudin, 1995). However, an analysis of the density of correlations in the structure of the individuality of children and adults shows that with age, the influence of special factors increases and differentiation of the temperamental and intellectual levels of behavior regulation occurs. In adolescents, the number of significant correlation coefficients between the studied characteristics is not only greater, but also higher in terms of significance *

Sensory-perceptual sphere

It seems obvious that with age, psychomotor behavior changes - movements become, as it were, slowed down and less coordinated. However, the study of one of the main psychomotor indicators - reaction time - does not allow such an unambiguous interpretation. The effect of training is very strong and older athletes not only outperform their non-athlete peers in responsiveness, but also outperform younger non-athletes in a number of tasks (Spirduso, 1975). The deterioration in reaction time is more likely to be associated with general physical failure (hypertension and cardiovascular disorders) than with age. Moreover, this indicator (we are talking about a decrease in reaction time) appears to be a predictor of cardiovascular damage (Abrahams & Birren, 1973),

cognitive sphere

J. Block (Block et al, 1981) with his colleagues studied in a longitudinal study the stability of the style characteristic "narrowness-breadth of categorization" on the same group of children, tested periodically from four to eleven years of age. The indicators of narrowness-breadth, identified in four-year-old children, turned out to be

Developing personality. .. 263

weakly related to the results of their testing by the same method at the age of 11 (this was typical only for boys, since in girls the stability of relationships between indicators was disturbed due to the variation of task components). The results were interpreted in two ways - either the studied style characteristic is fundamentally unstable during this age period, or its psychological significance undergoes a transformation in the process of child development over a seven-year period.

The degree of intellectual development reveals a connection with the characteristics of the self-image. Self-description of schoolchildren with lower intelligence was more superficial and specific. The self-image of the older, but less intellectually developed child turns out to be similar to the self-image of the younger, but intellectually developed child for its age group (Livesley & Bromley \ 1973), This conclusion confirms the hypothesis of Jean Piaget (1969), suggesting mutual influence social factors and individual variables on cognitive development, in particular the ability to decenter.

Cognitive development also includes the active construction of the world of mental reality. According to Piaget (1969), the eleven-twelve-year-old age group has a striking specificity, consisting in their mastery of formal operations, which are usually characterized (Smart & Smart, 1978):

* free, mobile and flexible character as a result of the development of the ability to think abstractly;

* taking into account all possibilities;

* control, which consists in taking into account all relevant and irrelevant premises and information;

* an explanation, and not just a description of perceived phenomena.

Note that although the stage of formation of formal operations is experimentally confirmed fact, many individuals, including adults,

264___________________________________ Person in the group

can not always boast of demonstrating this type of thinking.

The most typical studies in differential psychology are those that consider the deterioration with age of such cognitive functions as attention and memory. Although the mechanism of this process is not entirely understood, it is clear that it is related to two variables - the capabilities of sensory recording systems and the process of transferring the received information to the storage of short-term memory. However, the time required to transfer information from the sensory system (analyzer) to short-term memory decreases during childhood and increases in late adulthood (Battes, Reese & Lipsitt, 1980). This means that very young children and the elderly "lose" a lot of information before it gets into short-term memory.

Interesting data were obtained in the study of secondary images-representations, in particular * dreams. After examining 240 adults aged 19 to 50 years, Singer (Singer, 1966) found that most of the dreams that characterize a person appear in the period from 19 to 29 years, and their flow density decreases in the range of 40-49 years. Two assumptions have been put forward to explain the revealed boundary: an increase in responsibility and the amount of time associated with work and obligations; as well as a decrease in life prospects caused by the fact that a middle-aged person has achieved a certain stability in determining his life role in the context of his own future *

11.4. Social clock - stages of development

reality

These clocks also measure time according to their own standards. In every culture or life context, the social clock (Helson, Mitchell & Moane, 1984) determines the time for children to enter school, the approximate time of marriage and childbirth, the time of retirement, etc. Although the main our topic is the study of differences, it is interesting to note the fact that there is rare agreement among representatives of very different age groups about " right age"for the exercise of important socialized forms of choice (Neugarten, Moore & Lowe, 1965):

* the best age for marriage for a man is 20-25 years old,

* the best age for marriage for a woman is 19-24 years old,

* when is the best time for a man to start a career - 24-26 years old,

"when most men reach the top of their career - 45-50 years old,

* the age of highest achievement for a woman is 30-45 years.

Of course, neither genetically determined programs of behavior, nor long-term social influence of a certain kind, determine the stability of patterns over time. The features of a difficult childhood do not predetermine the fatally terrible life of an adult, just as a happy childhood does not guarantee life satisfaction in the future. The volume of living space, exposed to a huge number of factors, is too large. However, the probability of an accurate forecast in this case remains high, since not all factors are associated with randomness - many of them are based on regular processes.

Interestingly, predictors based on comparisons of different periods of adult life are quite predictive compared to predictors based on the analysis of childhood-adulthood factors. For example, longitudinal data show that the best predictor of satisfaction with social (as well as, by the way, sexual) activity in late adulthood is the level of personal satisfaction with these same manifestations of activity in middle age (Palmor, 1981),

Motivation, as one of the main driving forces of human life, is largely subject to change. A study of groups of young workers and older professionals revealed the following trend in their attitude towards their main job. Young people saw a source of motivation primarily in the internal aspects of work, associated with the possibility of changing attitudes, the need for creativity, the possibility of using it for personal growth and learning. Seniors, in contrast, were motivated by external conditions such as money, promotion, and position security.

Not everyone decides to change the established way of life at a certain age. For example, changing jobs at the age of forty-five, not to mention changes in career orientation. Research shows that job stability increases with age. What is more due to the change in the course of the previously planned professional career - circumstances or certain personal characteristics? Comparing a group of 45-year-old men who changed jobs with their peers who didn't, the researchers found that the former scored lower on personality tests that measured desire for power and dominance. At the same time, high rates for these parameters characterize the most successful professionals in the field of entrepreneurship, to which the subjects belonged.

1L5- Personal time - "I * in the past,

PRESENT AND FUTURE

Personal time is, perhaps, the most important indicator of the level of development of individuality, acting as an integrator, correlating the indicators of all "clocks" in the subjective time continuum. We are not talking now about the subjective-personal feeling of time, say, the course of one's life, the life of all mankind, or the unceasing movement of the Universe. We single out formal indicators that make it possible to characterize the features of personality structures in development.

The unconsciously folding, amorphous self-concept of a small child does not yet go beyond the boundaries of the sensorimotor sphere. Interacting in a random and manipulative way with objects, as well as developing ways of communication, the child begins to acquire a vague "gross feeling" (in the words of I.M. Sechenov, 1947) that he is an active principle in this process of interaction. Nine-twelve-month-old babies, placed in front of a mirror, try to play with the mirror image, which is still perceived by them as "Someone". Psychologists marked the nose of babies with a speck, and not one of them, looking in the mirror, tried to touch his own nose. This test to determine the level of awareness of the Self was also done on infants of another age group. Among those whose life experience was measured in terms of twenty-one months*, three-quarters demonstrated the emergence of a primary level of manifestation of awareness, touching their nose, looking at a mirror image (Lewis & Brooks, 1978),

This is how the initial coordinate of the most important, along with biological and social, vector in the determination of individuality arises, which can be called the vector of life experience or self-determination. Time, going at first outside the focus of consciousness, is increasingly beginning to be realized as a criterion for ongoing intra-individual changes. However, regardless of the degree of awareness, age-related changes affect all areas of the personality.

Younger children are more likely to describe themselves by emphasizing physical data and pointing to external characteristics, while for older children it is more important to emphasize their specific psychological characteristics and the nature of relationships with other people.

The phenomenon of the relationship between chronological age and the personal feeling of this age is called "psychological age", which is considered an integral indicator of a person's attitude to the time of his life and is defined as a person's self-assessment of himself on the scale of his own life time (Kronik, 1994). but colored) age testifies to the ability of a person to find an acceptable pace of life for himself, to correlate his claims and opportunities. Such people are characterized by a multidimensional and holistic image of the world, a willingness to perceive the new in all its completeness and inconsistency (Parilis, 1988). Inflated psychological age (when a twenty-five-year-old person tends to consider himself forty) is associated with a pessimistic and impoverished life outlook. Data obtained as a result of examination of victims during Chernobyl accident nuclear reactor, showed that the indices of well-being, activity and mood background were significantly lower among the respondents who turned out to be psychologically older than in the other groups. Persons who did not reveal differences between chronological and psychological age had the lowest level of anxiety, and their index of anxiety, even in such an extreme situation, did not exceed the upper norm. An overestimated psychological age was also revealed in adolescents in a boarding school or colony. This trend was accompanied by a decrease in the adequacy of self-esteem and pronounced consumer orientations. D. Elkind and R. Bowen (1979) analyzed the textbook example of adolescent egocentrism in connection with the study of the level of development of self-awareness in different age groups, which was understood as a tendency or unwillingness to report to an imaginary audience. It turned out that the average age group of adolescents (thirteen years plus or minus nine months) is distinguished by the most developed self-awareness (compared to both the younger and older age groups). At the same time, girls showed a higher level of development of self-awareness than boys. This result, as we see, confirms the hypothesis of "difficult age", the main characteristic of which is the unwillingness to submit to stereotyped requirements and opinions that are considered authoritative.

Adolescence is considered a time necessary for reflection on oneself and life, the course of which is greatly influenced by the cultural context (socio-economic position, family ideology, etc.). But, regardless of the emerging context, one can distinguish HOW the thinking of the individual is organized. Adolescents were presented with a hypothetical situation in which a thousand people were sent to the Pacific Islands to create some new community there (Adelson, 1975). The subjects were asked to describe what the new government and social order should be like. One of the most obvious differences in age groups was the level of abstractness in reasoning (which confirmed Piaget's data on the stages of cognitive development). The younger ones were inclined to personalize the whole history, calling the ruler "he" and talking about the influence of the state on the lives of individuals. The group of fifteen-year-olds expressed more abstract hypotheses that concerned the regulation of the life of the state from the point of view of the general usefulness of the formulated laws, which can be modified depending on from circumstances.

The system of personal orientations, measured by the "identification-association" scale, is also subject to age-related changes. K. Bowerman and J. Kinch compared four age groups of adolescents in terms of parameters (the essence of which, for convenience, we will present in the form of questions asked to adolescents): identified (question: "Who understands you better - parents or peers? 1"), association (question: "Who do you like to do business with - with family or peers?"), normativity (the question: "Who would you prefer in the event of a conflict of interests - family or peers?"), The results showed that the weighted average coefficient of family orientation sharply decreases with age - from 87.1% among fourth graders to 31.6% among ninth graders; the propensity to associate more with peers than with family increases from 8.9% in the youngest group to 55.7% in the oldest group. However, the desire for identification with the family, contrary to expectations, turned out to be not so subject to change, decreasing from 81% to 52% in the extreme age groups. Since the identification parameter implies a preference for who one would like to be like, the family turns out to be in many cases a more influential factor than peers.

A comparative study of two groups of adults, differing in marital status, showed that singles (widows and widowers, as well as those who never had a family) are much less satisfied with life and less adapted than their married peers).

The flow of personal time, in contrast to the flow of mental time, is, as a rule, irreversible, and the image of the future may portend the completion of the life cycle. Thoughts about death visit a person at any age, but even here their own patterns are revealed. A study of the ideas of three-five and nine-ten-year-old children about death showed that for the first age group there is no assessment of death as the end and end of everything. Death is presented as a reversible process associated with life. In the next stage (between five and eight years), death is perceived as the final, but not necessarily inevitable stage of life - it can be outwitted. Only in the older age group - nine-year-olds - does the understanding that a person is mortal begin to arise, and this is inevitable. However, the artors conclude that cognitive development, rather than chronological age, predicts children's understanding of the meaning of death. Adults, especially older people (after sixty), react differently to thoughts of death. However, only 10-30% of people in the older age group show a pronounced fear of death (Jeffers & Verwoerd, 1969). It is curious to note that William Sheldon, who proposed a constitutional typology of people, believed that it was cerebrotonics (occupying approximately 15-25% of the total population) who were characterized by a pronounced fear of death. However, experimental confirmation of this hypothesis is not yet known.

Adults, as a rule, are more afraid not of death, but of diseases associated with aging, loss of their usual social role and self-determination, dependence. They are afraid of being a burden to others. The emerging attitudes towards aging and approaching death largely depend on the attitudes developed in the process of accumulating life experience. Thus, it was found that the level of fear shown by adolescents significantly correlates with the level of fear characteristic of a parent of the same sex (Tempter, Ruff & Franks, 1971). At the same time, no significant correlations were found between age and the level of anxiety about death.

B * Neugarten (Neugarten, 1995), studying people who are at the stage of reassessment of life values ​​(the period of a person's life from 50 to 65 years - see Libinau 1995), identified two extreme groups. The first includes people who have been able to appreciate all the delights of a new stage of life - greater freedom and independence, a new vision of the reasons for their successes and failures. The second group includes those who experience bitterness and disappointment from the futility of the lived (that is, irretrievably lost) life. Having crossed the line of seventy years, the second become "old old men", and the first - "young old men" \ who, having retired, retain energy and desire for a full personal and social life,

In most highly multiethnic societies, such as the United States, the process of stratification occurs as a result of social and economic factors. To designate a set of variables that in a differential psychological context play the role of a situational determinant with a stable influence, the concept of Socio-Economic Status (SES) (from English - socio-economic status - SES) is introduced, determined on the basis of an analysis of occupation, income level and education. All these indicators, of course, correlate with each other, which gives grounds for their selection as a kind of integrative criterion that divides any modern society into strata. The stratification system also includes such variables as living conditions, lifestyles (including attitudes and value orientations), and finally, expectations as an indicator of the direction of development. Taken together, these parameters form the context against which the most important process of the child's socialization takes place.

There are two approaches to the analysis of differences between people due to the phenomenon of stratification. The first is connected with the allocation of a continuum scale "bottom-up", the second is based on a comparison of the so-called middle class with disadvantaged groups of the population. Studies conducted among various groups of the population within the framework of the first approach distinguish five socio-economic levels - "lower (unfavorable) class", working class ("blue collar") t class-below-middle ("white collar", employees) , upper-middle class (businessmen and independent professionals), "high-class". The percentage of the population attributable to each class identified in the population turns out to be quite stable and amounts to 18, 48, 21, 10 and 3 for the USA, respectively.

Ecology of individual development

The influence of the social class or stratum in which the individual is included often manifests itself throughout the entire life path of the subject - from the characteristics of the course of the mother's pregnancy to the formation of a mature personality. D. Cartwright (Cartwright, 1974) distinguishes two interrelated clusters of features that characterize the effect of social status features on the personality. Let us present these data, as well as the results of studies by other authors, in a generalized form (see Table 11).

It is noteworthy that almost every member of the various troupes is well aware of the existence of a social hierarchy. At the same time, clear criteria for evaluating

People find it difficult to give a "social label", pointing only to those of their acquaintances who are "below" or "above" their own level. However, psychologists have identified at least eight components that can serve as criteria for determining a status position - the rank of a man's profession in terms of its prestige, family income, quality of household, reputation of the area of ​​\u200b\u200bresidence, connections with social clubs and organizations, church attendance, education of a man, woman's education. Of course, one of the most important components influencing the manifestation of individual differences is the specificity of intra-family interaction.

Influence on the personality of socioeconomic factors

As has been repeatedly noted earlier, the pathos of the stylistic approach consisted in asserting the possibility of explaining the personality by analyzing the features of the organization of its cognitive sphere (individually peculiar ways of analyzing, structuring, categorizing, interpreting, predicting what is happening). Therefore, each cognitive style was initially considered as a psychological trait of a higher order, "removing" in itself not only cognitive, but also motivational, emotional and other personal characteristics. Moreover, some authors consider cognitive styles (in particular, PZ/PNZ) as a personal property (Selivanov, 1998).

In connection with the above, it is of interest to discuss two main questions:

• Are specific stylistic parameters really associated with personality traits and characteristics of social behavior?
• If there is a fairly stable empirical picture of such connections, then why do cognitive styles play such a significant role in the organization of the personality and the regulation of activity?

One of the most surprising findings in the field of cognitive style research lies precisely in the fact that there are many and varied relationships between style parameters and personality traits. Let's think about this situation! At the operational level, to measure different cognitive styles, fairly simple procedures are used that are focused on identifying seemingly particular individual differences in cognitive activity (the speed of finding a simple detail in a complex figure, the amount of interference of verbal-speech and sensory-perceptual functions, reliance on narrow or broad categories when understanding what is happening, the accuracy of perceptual scanning, etc.). However, these particular differences in cognitive activity turn out to be associated with a wide range of very different psychological characteristics of individuality, from sensorimotor skills to psychological defense mechanisms.

In my opinion, the very fact of this kind of deep penetration of cognitive styles into personal organization is an additional argument in favor of the assumption about the special role of style properties in the regulation of mental activity.

Striking in this sense is the contrast with IQ, which at the level of empirical research is associated with a small number of personality traits and features of social behavior. This leads to the conclusion that the IQ value, determined by the indicators of success in performing traditional psychometric tests of intelligence, has a very indirect relation to the regulation of a person's mental life. From this point of view, stylistic parameters act as a more referential indicator of the level of his intellectual maturity.

Let's try to consider and systematize the available data on the relationship of individual cognitive styles with the peculiarities of personal properties and the peculiarity of the social behavior of representatives of the corresponding style poles.

Field dependence / field independence. Field independent individuals show high personal autonomy, a stable self-image, low interest in other people, resistance to suggestion, criticality, competence, and aloofness (Witkin and Goodenough, 1977). Field dependence, diagnosed by the "Rod-Frame" test, according to the Cattell questionnaire, correlates with such personality traits as sociability, cheerfulness, and group dependence (Cooper, Lyne, 1977). At the same time, if pictures depicting aggressive scenes are presented on the TAT, PPs more quickly and directly express aggression in their ideas and experiences. They are more prone to risk as a result of the tendency to avoid situations of uncertainty. According to I. G. Skotnikova, At the heart of the propensity for risk of PZ persons is the desire to get out of the situation of uncertainty as soon as possible, which they cannot restructure or redefine (Kochetkov, Skotnikova, 1993).

When completing the MMPI questionnaire, PD individuals have higher scores on the F scale, which indicates their tendency to eccentricity and deliberate simulation in terms of answering the questions asked. Characteristically, in the group of MI subjects, there is a greater number of correlations between the MMPI scales compared to the group of POI subjects (Libin, 1991). This fact is indirect evidence in favor of the less articulated experience of PZ individuals.

It is reported about the ratio of PZ / PZP with the features of moral judgments. Higher levels of moral judgments associated with social independence, moral courage, propensity to make moral decisions about the social environment, etc., are found in facial PNP (Gibbs et al., 1986), especially if PNP is combined with an internal locus of control (Guthrie, 1985).

As for behavior in psycho-traumatic situations, PNP individuals use defenses that involve active processing of cognitive experience (isolation, intellectualization, projection), while PZ individuals typically use defenses associated with the rejection of emotional content (repression, negativism). Thus, according to Witkin, people who are independent of the field show a greater ability to control executive actions and regulate affective states.

The data on the relationship between PZ/PZN and anxiety are rather contradictory. Witkin at one time suggested that a higher level of anxiety should be inherent in PD individuals due to less developed control skills and less perfect defenses. However, at the level of empirical studies, this hypothesis could not be proved (Dargel, Kirk, 1973), including under conditions of IQ control (Loo, Cauthen, 1976).

In the studies of K. Groot, the anxiety of the students-students was assessed by the pulse rate before performing three variants of the methodology for diagnosing PZ/PNZ. A curvilinear relationship was obtained between the level of anxiety and the performance of these tests, i.e. field independence corresponds to the average level of anxiety. Curiously, the field dependent group included both low and high anxiety subjects (Groot, 1984).

In my opinion, these results demonstrate the effect of "splitting" of the poles of PZ and PZN, but from the point of view of differences between the representatives of the respective subgroups in terms of anxiety levels. The average level of anxiety, apparently, is primarily shown by the subgroup of "mobile

PNZ” (it is possible that the subgroup of “fixed PNZ”, on the contrary, will have a high level of anxiety). Among the PTs of the subjects, a low level of anxiety is most likely shown by "mobile PTs", while a high level is shown by "fixed PTs". Thus, the impossibility of obtaining the theoretically expected relationship between PAD / PNP and the level of anxiety is due to an inadequate strategy for the correlation study of the sample as a whole, while taking into account the four stylistic subgroups, the relationship of this stylistic parameter with anxiety could be identified, as one might assume, more clearly.

The proof of the above are the results of studies E. V. Golovina, in which PZ/PZP correlated with indicators of personal confidence (the latter was measured using the questionnaires of V. G. Romek, V. B. Vysotsky and the “Acceptance of oneself” scale from the method of socio-psychological adaptation of Rogers and Diamond), taking into account the phenomenon of “splitting” of the poles this cognitive style. Evidence suggests that all three measures of personal confidence are significantly positively associated with an additional measure of implicit learning on the Included Figures test. That is, mobile PPP and mobile PZ, the subjects - compared with fixed PZP and fixed PZ - feel more confident, they have higher self-esteem, they evaluate their knowledge and skills as more effective. At the same time, the main indicator of the “Included figures” test (the average time spent by a simple figure in a complex one) is significantly associated only with the confidence indicator according to the Romek questionnaire: PNZ persons are more self-confident (Golovina, 2004).

Perhaps most clearly this cognitive style manifests itself in the field of communication. A higher level of need for communication was repeatedly noted among PP persons, which, in particular, was manifested in an increase in the frequency of contacts. PNZ children in kindergarten prefer solitary games. Among athletes involved in group sports, there are more PBs compared to those involved in individual sports. When describing PPP faces, other people tend to use "hard" language, evaluating them as demanding, ambitious, power-hungry, insensitive, etc., while when describing PPP faces, they use "soft" language, describing them as friendly, warm , attentive, etc.

The peculiarity of the representatives of the poles of this cognitive style is very clearly manifested in the features of interpersonal interaction in the conditions of educational activity. Thus, PZ teachers are oriented towards interpersonal contacts, love debatable forms of education, while PZ teachers keep a distance from students and prefer lecture forms of education. When the poles of the cognitive style of the teacher and the student coincide, they describe each other more positively, giving each other a higher rating (“smart”, “creative”, etc.), i.e. we once again have confirmation of the everyday maxim "we like those who are like us."

In surveys, adolescents and adult men tend to prefer women's PZ and men's PZ. However, in real life Estimates can change in surprising ways. In one of the studies, the level of satisfaction with the marital relations of married couples was revealed under the initial hypothesis that communication with a PP partner would be more positively assessed by another partner. However, it turned out that men married to PZ wives were characterized by low satisfaction with their marriage and family relationships (Sabatelli, 1983).

Of particular interest are the data on the effectiveness of the response in the situation of solving problems in pairs, consisting of representatives of different poles of a given cognitive style. According to G. Whitkin And D. Goodnow, the best results in the development of a joint compromise solution were achieved by field-dependent pairs (95% of cases of conflict resolution), heterogeneous pairs were in second place (82%), and field-independent pairs were in third (65%) (Witkin, Goodenough, 1977). Opposite data were later reported by P. N. Ivanov. In an experiment in which one subject described a graphic image, and the other, based on these descriptions, had to identify the original image, the field-independent pairs turned out to be the most effective (92% of correct identifications), the second place was taken by heterogeneous pairs (75%) and the third place - field dependent pairs (56%) (Ivanov, 1985).

Therefore, one can call into question the notion of PP persons as socially effective. Apparently, all the socially useful qualities of field dependent persons (friendliness, tact, charm, etc.) cannot be considered as a manifestation of their social competence, since they are rather a means of compensating for their cognitive failure. And wouldn’t the converse statement be true: the personal qualities of field-independent persons (individualism, coldness, emotional isolation, criticality, etc.) are a consequence of their cognitive viability, which reveals itself in the ability to more fully and articulately reflect what is happening.

In fact, the basic difference between PP and PPP subjects lies in the specifics of their information retrieval strategies: PP use another person as a means of resolving problem situations - hence the increased need for cooperative and attractive forms of communication, while PPP subjects rely on their own experience, preferring to independently analyze the situation and make decisions.

A number of studies have discussed the relationship between PH/PHP and psychotherapeutic practice (Witkin, 1965; Witkin and Goodenough, 1982). Thus, the patient expresses greater satisfaction with the treatment if the therapist has a cognitive style similar to him. However, the similarity of styles does not affect the effectiveness of the treatment. At the same time, work with PD patients requires a greater amount of influence, since they either talk a lot that is not to the point, or are limited to brief remarks, demonstrating a tendency to agree with any initiative of the psychotherapist.

Psychotherapists with PNZ style prefer directive-instructive or passive-observant type of communication with the patient, while PD psychotherapists prefer various forms of emotional contact.

It is noted that PP/PNP changes in the course of psychotherapy. Practice has shown that patients change their attitudes and behavior to the greatest extent (for them, the probability of shifting to the pole of PD is higher, since they more easily learn behavioral skills typical of PD people).

The stylistic approach has always emphasized that the different poles of certain cognitive styles are associated not with the degree of psychopathology (and not with a tendency to psychopathology), but with its form.

Thus, in schizophrenia, there are more patients with PD style among depressive patients, and among paranoid patients, with PNZ style. Characteristically, PNG individuals have an incorporation phobia: they struggle to maintain distance between themselves and the group because participation in the work of the group seems to threaten their self-esteem. On the contrary, PP persons have a phobia of loneliness, because they believe that it is isolation that threatens their self-esteem (Witkin, 1965; Witkin and Goodenough, 1982).

Narrowness/breadth of the equivalence range. A narrow range of equivalence is associated with increased anxiety, and the anxiety of “analysts” is primarily a consequence of their incredulity, alertness, centering on their own “I”: the value of the correlation coefficients between the indicators “number of groups” and “maximum number of objects in a group” (when sorting words) and the factor L "gullibility/suspicion", according to Cattell, is 0.60 and -0.66, respectively, at P = 0.01. It should be noted that factor L is usually interpreted as a propensity for psychological defense (Kholodnaya, 1990).

Further, the “analysts” are dominated by the emotions of fear, while the “synthetics” are dominated by the emotions of anger (Paley, 1982). Recall that anxiety and fear are related to asthenic (passive) experiences, and anger - to sthenic (active) experiences. Finally, a narrow range of equivalence is positively associated with the self-control factor (Q 3) and negatively with the self-sufficiency factor (Q 2) according to the Cattell questionnaire. In other words, "analysts" try to fulfill social requirements well and are oriented towards social approval (Shkuratova, 1994).

The pole of the breadth of the equivalence range (the “number of groups” indicator) reveals a negative correlation with the level of self-confidence (according to the indicators of the Romek and Vysotsky questionnaire): the tendency to build a holistic picture of what is happening using generalized categories is the key to greater personal self-confidence (Golovina, 2004 ).

Rigidity/flexibility of cognitive control. Persons with rigid control assess themselves as excitable, sensitive and labile, they are less resistant to interference (if it is necessary to memorize with noise, the results in persons with high interference worsen, while in persons with low interference they may even improve). In addition, the interference effect is positively associated with neuroticism (Helode, 1982).

In addition, rigid faces demonstrate less patience in situations of obstacles that arise in the course of performing activities and, at the same time, a higher level of desire to overcome this obstacle (Wardell and Royce, 1978). Thus, this cognitive style manifests itself in the conditions of “goal obstruction”, which allows us to speak about the inclusion of a motivational component in its structure.

Intolerance/tolerance for unrealistic experiences. Persons intolerant to unrealistic experience, apparently due to their unwillingness to accept information that contradicts their initial expectations, knowledge and attitudes, are characterized by a higher level of anxiety. On the contrary, the more the mind is open in terms of its willingness to build objectified representations of emotionally difficult situations, the lower the anxiety (quoted in Ausubel, 1968).

Focusing/scanning control. Narrow scanners in a stressful situation use such psychological defenses as suppression and denial (in the form of a refusal to accept a traumatic experience or its distortion). In other words, in a traumatic situation, there is a destruction of mental representations towards the growth of their subjectivation. Broad scanners, when perceiving an emotional situation, are focused on fixing its objective details, and not on their subjective impressions of the situation (Gardner, Holzman, Klein, Linton, Spence, 1959).

Impulsivity / reflectivity. In the study J. Block, J. G. Block and D. Harrington personality traits of representatives of this cognitive style were determined taking into account four style subgroups (Block, Block, Harrington, 1974). Psychological portraits of schoolchildren obtained on the basis of the results of questionnaires, observations, etc., look as follows.

Impulsive (fast/inaccurate): anxious, sensitive, vulnerable, rigid and stereotyped when stressed, not prone to humor, not popular with peers, self-doubt.

Quick/Accurate: Intelligent, popular with peers, enthusiastic, self-confident, rational, energetic in problem solving, independent.

Reflective (slow/accurate): reasonable, calm, tactful, trustworthy, smart and competent, in good contact with peers, obedient, reluctant to defend their rights, look at what is happening with confidence.

Slow/Inaccurate: Aggressive, competitive, poor anticipation of consequences, have difficulty restraining their desires and conforming to normative restrictions, self-centered, relatively lively and uninhibited, tend to respond directly to conflicts.

In addition, according to the indicators of the California Children's Questionnaire, slow/inaccurate - compared with other subgroups - have the lowest level of ability to control their affective-motivational states and expressive behavior, while slow/accurate - the highest (Block, Block, Harrington, 1974).

It is impossible not to notice that the subjects who are at different poles of the "cognitive pace" measurement and have radically different quantitative indicators of it - fast / inaccurate and slow / inaccurate - nevertheless, show a clear similarity, which makes it possible to attribute their behavior to an impulsive type. Similarly, fast/accurate and slow/accurate, again being at the opposite poles of this dimension, nevertheless, they are similar to each other in their personal manifestations, actually demonstrating a reflective (more precisely, controlled) type of behavior.

In its psychological meaning, the pole of impulsivity is identical to a kind of "temporary myopia", or insufficient attention to the future (Jones, 1997), which once again emphasizes the connection of this cognitive style with personal factors. In particular, impulsivity as a personality trait has been defined in a number of studies as the tendency to choose any immediate reward, while refusing a more significant, but delayed reward.

In recent years, interest in the problem of impulsivity has increased dramatically due to its interpretation as a source of delinquent behavior and aggressiveness. However, most studies report no relationship between the impulsivity/reflexivity cognitive style measured using the Kagan technique and various behavioral measures of impulsivity (natural circling pace, time perception patterns, etc.), as well as aspects of actual antisocial behavior. On the contrary, if impulsivity is measured as a personality trait using questionnaires, then the relationship with manifestations of real antisocial behavior, as a rule, takes place (cited in: Wingrove, Bond, 1997).

Moreover, there is a lack of correlation between the measure of impulsiveness/reflexivity of students (according to the Kagan method) and assessments of their actual impulsivity by teachers (Carrillo-ge-la-Pena,

Otero, Romero, 1993). Such strange results can be explained in different ways.

Firstly, calculation of linear correlations between indicators of impulsiveness/reflexivity and other behavioral variables (including features of social behavior) does not reveal the real basis of their relationship due to the existence of the phenomenon of "splitting" of the poles of the style axis. Recall that in the study J. Block, J. G. Block And D. Harrington, constructed taking into account four style subgroups of schoolchildren, the correlation of this cognitive style with learning and social behavior was radically different among representatives of the same pole (Block, Block, Harrington, 1974).

Secondly, it can be assumed that impulsivity is a multidimensional quality that manifests itself differently at the cognitive, behavioral and social levels. At the same time, however, the absence of direct correlations between cognitive-style and behavioral impulsivity can have a very simple explanation: people who are aware of their impulsivity try not to show it.

Concrete/abstract conceptualization. The cognitive style under consideration most clearly reveals itself in the differences in the social orientations of people.

O. Harvey, D. Hunt And X. Schroder identified four structural levels of organization of the conceptual system, depending on the degree of differentiation and integration of concepts, or the measure of its “conceptual complexity” (see their description in Chapter 1). These four levels of "conceptual complexity" correspond to different social orientations:

I level- positive orientation to social referents (for example, the authority of parents, power, religious or other conventional values), benevolence, conformal type of behavior (the pole of "concreteness");

II level- negative orientation towards the same social referents, resistance to social norms of behavior, active rejection of authorities, manifestations of aggression and negativism (an intermediate position on the stylistic axis at the pole of "concreteness");

III level- orientation towards friendly (attractive) relations with other people as an attempt to get rid of the feeling of loneliness and fear of social isolation, developed skills of manipulating communication partners (an intermediate position on the style axis of the "abstract" pole);

TV level- orientation to one's own inner experience in understanding what is happening, independence and self-sufficiency, evaluation of other people based on their competence (the "abstract" pole) (Harvey, Hunt, Schroder, 1961).

Cognitive simplicity/complexity. The study of this style parameter, as a rule, is limited to the sphere of communication. It is noted that in the study of students, cognitively complex subjects are mostly extroverts. Again, on a student sample, it was shown that anxious and emotional students had the greatest cognitive complexity (cited in: Shkuratova, 1994; Paralis, 1988). Similarly, the propensity of cognitively complex students to manipulative forms of communication, as well as communicative and personal anxiety has been demonstrated (Kocharyan, 1986).

At the same time, there is evidence that cognitively complex workers are viewed by colleagues as more capable of understanding communication partners. Cognitively complex people evaluate themselves and other people more critically, noting more differences between themselves and their acquaintances. On the contrary, cognitively simple people evaluate themselves and their acquaintances more positively, emphasizing their similarity with them to a greater extent (Shkuratova, 1994).

Curious are the results of studies, according to which there is a curvilinear relationship between indicators of cognitive simplicity/complexity and the time spent in support homes for alcoholics. So, cognitively simple people cannot stay in these houses for more than 7 weeks and leave from there. However, "long-livers" (stay over 20 weeks) are also predominantly cognitively simple (Orford, 1974). The author explains the early departure of cognitively simple people by their social incompetence, which results in frequent interpersonal conflicts. "Longevity" is explained by the social inadequacy of the cognitively simple.

The explanation, as can be seen, is traditional and therefore contradictory. In fact, in this case, we can talk about the phenomenon of "splitting" the pole of cognitive simplicity at the behavioral level: apparently, there are two different types of "cognitively simple" people: one - rebel against living conditions in a boarding school (perhaps this is a subgroup of "generalizing") , while others are resigned to them (a subgroup of "cognitively simple").

According to A. L. Yuzhininova, cognitively complex students enter into conflict relations with unpleasant members of the student group in 4% of cases, while cognitively simple students - in 20% (Yuzhaninova, 1990). It is possible that the low conflict content of cognitively complex people is explained by the fact that some of them (the subgroup of "compartmentalizers") are prone to manipulative forms of communication and hiding their own aggressive states.

Thus, although the empirically recorded connections between individual cognitive styles and various personal properties are variegated and a certain kind of inconsistency, nevertheless, these connections exist, moreover, the severity of certain poles of cognitive styles correlates both with manifestations of personal growth and manifestations of psychopathological symptoms ( Padun, 2009; Dean at al., 2007; Todd et al., 2004; Zhang, 2009).

In this regard, it seems very characteristic that G. Witkin regarding the fact that in the set of characteristics interpreted as a manifestation of a lower or higher level of psychological differentiation, it is the properties of the cognitive sphere that play a special role. This circumstance, in his opinion, "...partly explains why the study of cognitive functioning in recent years has increasingly provided the basis for understanding the organization and functioning of the individual" (Witkin, Dyk, Faterson, Goodenough, Karp, 1974, p. 383 ).

D. Wardel And J. Royce tried to use the phenomenology of cognitive styles as the basis of the theory of personality (Wardell, Royce, 1978). In their opinion, although cognitive styles are considered mainly in the context of cognition, they nonetheless contain elements of affective states in a removed form. Cognitive styles, therefore, act as highly organized traits in the sense that they determine the way in which cognitive abilities and emotional properties of a person are connected in individual behavior. Wardell and Royce described three "general styles" - rational, empirical and metaphorical - each of which is characterized by a certain balance of cognitive and emotional components of experience (see the classification of styles by D. Wardell and J. Royce in chapter 3).

The rational style involves the simultaneous development of conceptual abilities (verbal abilities, the ability to reason) and emotional independence (personal autonomy, impartiality), the experiential style - perceptual abilities (the ability to visualize, memory) and manifestations of intro / extraversion (general restraint, social restraint ), metaphorical style - symbolic abilities (the ability to generate new images and fluency of ideas) and emotional excitability (a variety of emotional experiences, anxiety).

As a result, a model of integrated individuality was proposed, in which styles are considered as intermediaries that combine the cognitive and emotional properties of the subject. The style system acts as an integrator of the cognitive and affective spheres, thereby influencing such individual properties as the Image of the world, the Image - "I" and lifestyle (Wardell, Royce, 1978) (Fig. 14).

Apparently, the empirical and theoretically postulated connections of individual style parameters with various personality traits and characteristics of social behavior can be explained taking into account the nature of cognitive styles associated with the formation of the mechanism of involuntary intellectual control (in the form of breadth and intensity of perceptual scanning, accounting and structuring of the context, implicit learning ability, connection to the information processing process of a system of concepts of varying degrees of generalization, operational changes in cognitive schemes under the influence of unusual information, regulation of the degree of participation of affective experience in acts of cognitive reflection, etc.).

Rice. 14.

Thus, cognitive styles as metacognitive abilities characterize, firstly, the ability to build objectified mental representations of what is happening and, secondly, the ability to self-regulate their own affective states. Accordingly, the degree of severity of style characteristics, as can be assumed, determines the potential for objectification in a person's assessments, judgments, positions and actions - this is why cognitive styles turn out to be associated with such a wide range of personality traits and features of social behavior.