Life orientations and dominant state of members of post-guardian families

封面

如何引用文章

全文:

开放存取 开放存取
受限制的访问 ##reader.subscriptionAccessGranted##
受限制的访问 订阅或者付费存取

详细

The article is devoted to the study of the features of life orientations and the dominant psycho-emotional state of members of post-guardian families. 240 respondents participated in the study: the main group included 40 post-guardian families (of which 40 were post-guardian and 40 were aged 18–25 years). The comparison groups were guardian families who are in the period of guardianship and post-guardianship: There are 40 guardian families with children from 7 to 11 years old and 40 guardian families with children from 12 to 17 years old. The following methods were used: the questionnaire of life orientations (E.Yu. Korzhova), the “Dominant state” technique (L.V. Kulikov). Descriptive statistics methods, the Mann-Whitney criterion, the Fisher criterion, and Spearman correlation analysis were used for qualitative and quantitative data processing to identify the relationship between life orientations and dominant status in post-refugee families. The statistical package STATISTICA 10 was used to process the statistical data. The predominant type of subject-object orientations in guardian families is the “consumer of a life situation”. The relationship between life orientations and dominant states in post-guardian families has been established. Post-guardians with an active lifestyle, willingness to change, and a high level of subjective control over life situations have higher levels of cheerfulness, vitality, calmness, and stability of emotional tone, as well as more self-confidence. Students with a focus on mastering the inner world have a greater activity in relation to the life situation and a stable emotional background. Those who strive for familiar situations are more likely to demonstrate cheerfulness, calmness and relaxation.

全文:

受限制的访问

作者简介

E. Korzhova

A.I. Herzen Russian State Pedagogical University

编辑信件的主要联系方式.
Email: elenakorjova@gmail.com

ScD. (Psychology), Professor of the Department of General and Social Psychology at the Institute of Psychology

俄罗斯联邦, 191186, 48 Moika River Embankment, Saint Petersburg

O. Tuzova

A.I. Herzen Russian State Pedagogical University

Email: olg.tuzova@yandex.ru

PhD. (Psychology), Associate Professor, Senior Researcher at the Institute of Psychology

俄罗斯联邦, 191186, 48 Moika River Embankment, Saint Petersburg

A. Karasaeva

A.I. Herzen Russian State Pedagogical University

Email: aliya-13@mail.ru

Assistant Professor at the Department of General and Social Psychology at the Institute of Psychology

俄罗斯联邦, 191186, 48 Moika River Embankment, Saint Petersburg

A. Povkhova

A.I. Herzen Russian State Pedagogical University

Email: povhova.anastasia@yandex.ru

Laboratory researcher

俄罗斯联邦, 191186, 48 Moika River Embankment, Saint Petersburg

参考

  1. Aldasheva A.A., Zelenova M.E., Sivash O.N. Sotsial’no-pertseptivnyy obraz priemnogo rebenka u zameshchayushchikh roditeley s raznoy formoy opeki. Sotsial’naya psikhologiya i obshchestvo. 2021. V. 12. № 2. P. 110–128. doi: 10.17759/sps.2021120207. (In Russian)
  2. Bretskikh E.A. Issledovanie kliniko-psikhologicheskikh osobennostey semey, ozhidayushchikh ili imeyushchikh priemnykh detey (v svyazi s zadachami analitiko-sistemnogo semeynogo psikhologicheskogo soprovozhdeniya). Izvestiya Rossiyskogo gosudarstvennogo pedagogiches-kogo universiteta im. A.I. Gertsena. 2009. № 102. P. 341–348. (In Russian)
  3. Vagapova A.R., Markelova A.Yu. Osobennosti roditel’skoy pozitsii v sem’yakh raznogo tipa. Izvestiya Saratovskogo universiteta. Novaya seriya. Ser. Akmeologiya obrazovaniya. Psikhologiya razvitiya. 2018. V. 7. № 2. P. 170–175. doi: 10.18500/23049790-2018-7-2-170-175. (In Russian)
  4. Korzhova E.Yu., Tuzova O.N., Karasaeva A.M., Povkhova A.V. Zhiznennaya situatsiya postopeki v sub’ektivnykh otsenkakh chlenov krovnorodstvennykh semey. Vestnik Sankt-Peterburgskogo universiteta. Psikhologiya. 2024. V. 14. № 2. P. 241–259. (In Russian)
  5. Korzhova E.Yu., Volkova E.N., Miklyaeva A.V., Bezgodova S.A., Yurkova E.V. Sobytiynaya napolnennost’ zhiznennoy perspektivy opekunov kak kharakteristika otnosheniy v sem’yakh krovnoy i nekrovnoy opeki. Sotsial’naya psi-khologiya i obshchestvo. 2020. V. 11. № 3. P. 86–98. doi: 10.17759/sps.2020110306. (In Russian)
  6. Korzhova E.Yu. Psikhologiya zhiznennykh orientatsiy cheloveka. Saint Petersburg: Izd-vo RKhGA, 2006. 384 p. (In Russian)
  7. Kulikov L.V. Rukovodstvo k metodikam diagnostiki psikhicheskikh sostoyaniy, chuvstv i psikhologicheskoy ustoychivosti lichnosti. Opisanie metodik, instruktsii po primene-niyu. Saint Petersburg: SPbGU, 2003. 183 p. (In Russian)
  8. Makhnach A.V. Tendentsii v izuchenii sem’i i kharakte-ristik sostava, svyazannykh s ee zhiznesposobnost’yu. Vestnik RGGU. Seriya: Psikhologiya. Pedagogika. Obrazovanie. 2019. № 2. P. 37–50. doi: 10.28995/2073-6398-2019-2-37-50. (In Russian)
  9. Oslon V.N. Problemy sirotstva v Rossii: sotsial’no-istoricheskiy i psikhologicheskiy aspekty. Semeynaya psikhologiya i semeynaya terapiya. 2001. № 11. P. 5–36. (In Russian)
  10. Psikhologiya opekunskoy sem’i: situatsionnyy podkhod. E.Yu. Korzhova, S.A. Bezgodova, A.V. Miklyaeva, E.V. Yurkova. Saint Petersburg: Izd-vo RGPU im. A.I. Gertsena, 2020. 248 p. (In Russian)
  11. Shul’ga T.I., Antipina M.A. Emotsional’naya sreda zameshchayushchey sem’i, prinyavshey na vospitanie podrostkov, ostavshikhsya bez popecheniya roditeley. Psi-khologicheskaya nauka i obrazovanie. 2018. V. 23. № 5. P. 51–66. doi: 10.17759/pse.2018230506. (In Russian)
  12. Chateauneuf D., Turcotte D., Drapeau S. The relationship between foster care families and birth families in a child welfare context: The determining factors. Child and Family Social Work. 2018. V. 23. P. 71–79. doi: 10.1111/cfs.12385.
  13. Chisolm A., Morris T.L. Psychological Adjustment of Children in Foster Care: Review and Implications for Best Practice. Journal of Public Child Welfare. 2012. V. 6. № 2. doi: 10.1080/15548732.2011.617272.
  14. Gillis-Arnold R., Crase S.J., Stockdale D.F., Shelley M.C. Parenting attitudes, foster parenting attitudes, and motivations of adoptive and nonadoptive foster parent trainees. Children and Youth Services Review. 1998. V. 20 (8). P. 715–732. doi: 10.1016/s0190-7409(98)00033-4.
  15. Grotevant H.D., Rueter M., Von Korff L., Gonzalez C. Post-adoption contact, adoption communicative openness, and satisfaction with contact as predictors of externalizing behavior in adolescence and emerging adulthood. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry. 2010. V. 52. № 5. P. 529–536. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-7610.2010.02330.x.
  16. Labella M.H., Lind T., Sellers T., Roben C., Dozier M. Emotion regulation among children in foster care versus birth parent care: differential effects of an early home-visiting intervention. Journal of abnormal child psycho-logy. 2020. V. 48(8) P. 995–1006. doi: 10.1007/s10802-020-00653-4.
  17. Orme J.G., Buehler C. Foster Family Characteristics and Behavioral and Emotional Problems of Foster Children: A Narrative Review. Family Relations. 2001. V. 50. P. 3–15. doi: 10.1111/j.1741-3729.2001.00003.x.
  18. Selwyn J. Post-adoption support and interventions for adoptive families: Best practice approaches. Munich, Germany: Deutsche Jugendinstitut, 2017. 54 p.
  19. Skrallan D.M., Johan V., Marijke R., Femke V., Frank V.H. Foster parents’ coping style and attitudes toward parenting. Children and Youth Services Review. 2015. V. 53. P. 70–76. doi: 10.1016/j.childyouth.2015.03.

补充文件

附件文件
动作
1. JATS XML

版权所有 © Russian Academy of Sciences, 2025