| Article |
|---|
| Article name |
Understanding the Phenomenon of Trust in Russian Psychology |
| Authors |
Bendyukov M.A. Doctor of Psychology, Professor, 2741282@bk.ruKedich S.I. Candidate of Psychology, Associate Professor, kedichsi@inbox.ruSavrilova N.S. Candidate of Psychology, Associate Professor, sav-nat@mail.ru |
| Bibliographic description |
Bendyukov M. A., Kedich S. I., Savrilova N. S. Understanding the Phenomenon of Trust in Russian Psychology // Scholarly Notes of Transbaikal State University. Series Pedagogy. Psychology. 2016. Vol. 11, No. 2. PP. 84–91. |
| Section |
General and Social Psychology |
| UDK |
316.6 |
| DOI |
|
| Article type |
|
| Annotation |
The article studies the notion of trust existing in Russian psychology. It is shown that notions of trust in psychology differ from the understanding of trust in economics and sociology. Socio-economic studies taking into account trust are numerous. Another situation is in Russian psychology. It is shown that although trust is considered to be an important phenomenon, its studies are not numerous. The article presents the results of a content analysis of the definitions of trust in scientific texts in Russian. Nine basic notions which help to describe trust in Russian psychology are identified. They include sense, willingness to action, relation, expectations, attitudes, capacity, state, cognitive evaluation, and mood. This diversity allows us to conclude that trust in psychology is not a phenomenon, and not a scientific term, but a concept is the semantic sign with vague content. The article presents a study of the psychological community perceptions of trust as a psychological phenomenon. Research method is quantitative content analysis (pairwise comparison method). It was revealed that psychologists consider trust as relation, cognitive evaluation, attitudes and feelings. The concept of trust as willingness to action, ability, mood (emotional during low severity) and the mental state of professional consciousness of psychologists is much less significant. Correlation analysis of the data showed that psychologists quite confidently detect the difference of the conceptual bases of terms proposed for evaluation. In evaluating them, they base on the subjective importance of these concepts for the description of the trust, and demonstrate the existence of a subjective hierarchy of importance.
|
| Key words |
trust, phenomenon, concept, quantitative content analysis, psychological community2 |
| Article information |
|
| References |
1. Alekseeva A. Yu. Osnovnye elementy i struktura mezhlichnostnogo doveriya // Sotsiol. zhurnal. 2009. № 3. S. 22–40
2. Alekseeva A. Yu. Uverennost’, obobshchennoe doverie i mezhlichnostnoe doverie: kriterii razlicheniya // Sotsial’naya real’nost’. 2008. № 7. S. 85–98.
3. Antonenko I. V. Sotsial’no-psikhologicheskaya kontseptsiya doveriya. M.: Flinta: Nauka, 2006. 480 s.
4. Bek U. Obshchestvo riska: Na puti k drugomu modernu. M.: Progress-Traditsiya, 2000. 383 s.
5. Belyanin A. V. Zinchenko V. P. Doverie v ekonomike i obshchestvennoi zhizni. M.: Liberal’naya missiya, 2010. 164 s.
6. Bendyukov M. A., Lisovskaya N. B., Kharchuk A. D. Metodologicheskie osnovaniya teorii professional’nogo razvitiya lichnosti v liberal’noi ekonomike // Psikhologiya obrazovaniya v polikul’turnom prostranstve. 2012. T. 3, № 19. S. 11–17.
7. Bendyukov M. A. Mediaintellektualy: problema doveriya // Materialy vseros. nauch.-prakt. konf. «Sovremennye SMI v kontekste informatsionnykh tekhnologii» SPb.: SPBGUTiD, 2015. S. 40–43.
8. Bendyukov M. A., Shelonaev S. I. Effektivnaya vnutriorganizatsionnaya kommunikatsiya i PR: setevoi podkhod // Materialy vseros. nauch. konf. «Karminskie chteniya». SPb.: PGUPS, 2015. S. 107–111.
9. Granovetter M. Ekonomicheskoe deistvie i sotsial’naya struktura: problema ukorenennosti // Ekonomicheskaya sotsiologiya. 2002. № 3. T. 3. S. 44–58.
10. Granovetter M. Sila slabykh svyazei [Elektronnyi resurs] // Ekonomicheskaya sotsiologiya: elektron. zhurnal. T. 10, № 4. 2009. S. 31–50. Rezhim dostupa: http://www.ecsoc.msses.ru (data obrashcheniya: 25.03.2016).
11. Delez Zh. Gvattari F. Chto takoe filosofiya? SPb.: Aleteiya, 1998. 288 s.
12. Zhuravlev A. L., Kupreichenko A. B. Nravstvenno-psikhologicheskaya regulyatsiya ekonomicheskoi aktivnosti. M.: IP RAN, 2003. 436 s.
13. Zaman A. Reputatsionnyi risk: upravlenie v tselyakh sozdaniya stoimosti. M.: Olimp-Biznes, 2008. 416 s.
14. Zen’kovskii V. V. Istoriya russkoi filosofii. M.: Akademicheskii proekt, 2001. 880 s.
15. Il’in E. P. Psikhologiya doveriya. SPb.: Piter, 2013. 288 s.
16. Kupreichenko A. B. Psikhologiya doveriya i nedoveriya. M.: IP RAN, 2008. 571 s.
17. Skripkina T. P. Psikhologiya doveriya. M.: Akademiya, 2000. 264 s.
18. Fligstin N. Polya, vlast’ i sotsial’nye navyki: kriticheskii analiz novykh institutsional’nykh techenii [Elektronnyi resurs] // Ekonomicheskaya sotsiologiya: elektron. zhurnal. T. 2, № 4. 2001. S. 28–56. Rezhim dostupa: http://www.ecsoc.msses.ru (data obrashcheniya: 25.03.2016).
19. Shelonaev S. I. Institutsionalizatsiya mediaprostranstva. SPb.: Vlados Severo-zapad, 2013. 180 s.
20. Shtompka P. Doverie – osnova obshchestva. M.: Logos, 2012. 445 s. |
| Full article | Understanding the Phenomenon of Trust in Russian Psychology |
