Appendix

1. Test - a questionnaire for assessing interpersonal relationships in a team.

When answering the questions of the test, choose one of the four possible answers.

How would you rate your belonging to the group?

a) I feel like a member of the group

b) I participate in the affairs of the group

c) I don't feel like a member of the group

d) I prefer to work separately from other group members

Are you satisfied with the attitude of your fellow students towards you?

a) Completely satisfied (on)

b) Satisfied (on)

c) Not satisfied enough (on)

d) Completely dissatisfied (on)

If you had the opportunity, would you transfer to another group?

a) Definitely not

b) Most likely, would stay in this group

c) I would rather pass over than stay

d) Would willingly move (la) to study in another group

What kind of relationship has developed in your group?

a) Better than in most other groups, it seems to me

b) Probably the same as in most other groups

c) Worse than in other groups

d) I think that it is much worse than in most other groups

What do you think, have you developed traditions of mutual support and assistance in your group?

a) Definitely yes

b) More likely than not

c) More likely no than yes

d) Definitely not

Data processing.

Each answer according to option "a" is estimated at 4 points, "B" - 3, "c" - 2, "d" - 1 point. Calculate the score for the selected answer options. The possible range of the test score is from 5 to 20. A higher score may indicate good relationships in the group and a high index of group cohesion, and vice versa.

Diagram of relationships in group No. 14.

70% of students have friendly relations with all members of the group;

20% - maintain a good relationship, but prefer their own social circle;

8% - communicate with classmates, since this is a necessity associated with study;

2% of students did not find a common language with the group.

2. Determination of the psychological climate of the class.

For a general assessment of the main manifestations of the psychological climate in the group, you can use the map-scheme. In it, on the left side of the sheet, those qualities of a team are described that characterize a favorable psychological climate, on the right - the qualities of a team with a clearly unfavorable climate. The severity of certain qualities can be determined using a seven-point scale placed in the center of the sheet (from +3 to -3).

Using the diagram, you should first read the sentence on the left, then on the right, and then with a “+” mark in the middle of the sheet the assessment that most corresponds to the truth. It should be borne in mind that estimates mean:

3 - the property indicated on the left always manifests itself in the team;

2 - the property is manifested in most cases;

1 - the property manifests itself quite often;

0 - neither this nor the opposite (indicated on the right) properties are manifested clearly enough, or both are manifested to the same extent;

1 - quite often the opposite property is manifested (indicated on the right);

2 - the property is manifested in most cases;

3 - the property is always manifested.

Positive features								Negative features
A cheerful and cheerful mood prevails								Depressed mood, pessimistic tone prevails
Goodwill prevails in relationships, mutual sympathy								Conflict in relationships, aggressiveness, antipathies prevail
There is mutual disposition and understanding in relations between groups within the collective.								Groupings conflict with each other
Team members like to be together, to participate in joint affairs, to spend their free time together								Team members show indifference to closer communication
The successes or failures of individual team members evoke empathy, participation of all team members								The successes and failures of team members leave the rest indifferent
Approval and support prevail, reproaches and criticism are expressed with good intentions								Critical remarks are in the nature of explicit and covert attacks.
Team members respect each other's opinions								In a team, everyone considers his opinion to be the main one and is intolerant of the opinions of his comrades.
In difficult moments for the team, emotional unity takes place according to the principle “one for all, all for one”								In difficult cases, the team becomes "limp", confusion appears, quarrels arise, mutual accusations
The achievements or failures of the team are experienced by everyone as their own.								The achievements or failures of the entire team do not find a response from its individual representatives
The team is sympathetic and friendly to new members, trying to help them get comfortable								Newcomers feel redundant, strangers, and often hostile
The team is active, full of energy								The team is passive, inert
The team responds quickly if you need to do a useful job								The team cannot be raised to a joint cause, everyone thinks only about their own interests
The team has a fair attitude towards all members, here they support the weak, act in their defense								The team is divided into “privileged” and “neglected”, here they contempt for the weak, ridicule them
Team members show a sense of pride in their team if they are celebrated by the leaders								The praise and encouragement of the team is indifferent here.

To give an overall picture of the psychological climate of the team, all the positive and negative points must be added up. The result obtained can serve as a conditional characteristic of the psychological climate of a greater or lesser degree of favorableness.

3. Individual training.

This form of training is unique.

Someone else's company.

Invite students to observe students in a class they are unfamiliar (or unfamiliar with) (or any organized group of people in general) and try to answer the following questions:

a) Who in the group is most popular and respected?

b) Why (his personal, business or other qualities)?

c) Who is the least popular?

d) Why?

e) Who is the tacit asset of the class?

f) Who is who in this asset (organizer, business and emotional leader, craftsmen, etc.)?

g) Who is the greatest individualist?

h) What groups of people are more closely related?

i) What can connect them?

Students can check the correctness of their conclusions by contacting members of the study group, which in itself represents a new level of mastering communication skills.

4. Group training.

This training allows you to reveal and identify the mechanisms of relationships in groups. These exercises are recommended by a psychologist.

Bad company.

The game involves twelve people: Leader, Authority, Approaches (two people). Toady, Jester, Puppets (two people), Dissatisfied (two people) and Hammered (two people). Initially, the performers of these roles should be selected by the presenter himself, but necessarily from among the volunteers, but in the future, it is necessary to invite viewers to this or that role and generally change the role within the most “successful”, primitive group, so that everyone is “in the shoes” of everyone.

The most important element of the game is the rules for the interaction of its participants, the implementation of which must be closely monitored by the host and, in addition to him, one of the non-players. These rules are as follows:

The leader has the right to cut off anyone. Authority - anyone except the Leader. Approximate - anyone except the Leader and Authority. Toady - anyone except the Approach, Authority and Leader. Jester - everyone except the Leader. Puppet - only the Dissatisfied and the Leader. Dissatisfied - everyone, except for the Leader and the Authority of the Hammered One, is cut off by anyone, he - no one.

The player who violated these rules is transferred to the Scored, but if they were violated by the Scored himself, then he can not only be condemned in unison, but also simply expelled.

However, in addition to the strict observance of the rules, this game needs a fairly high theatricalization due to masks, false beards, symbols, etc. (for a start, it is at least necessary that everyone has a sign with the name of the role). The author of the game proposes to conduct it in two versions - ordinary and theatrical, but for a number of reasons that simply cannot be cited here, we recommend using the theatrical version. There are quite a few forms of such theatricalization - a gang of gangsters, a pirate ship, a primitive tribe, a pack of wolves, etc., but the main thing here, perhaps, is that, despite a kind of "plot" provoking the aggressiveness of the participants, the theatrical version allows them to really play , simultaneously revealing many pressing sores of youthful relationships.

After the end of the game, it is advisable to hold its discussion, where the main thing should be the final discrediting of the "bad company" and a call for the creation of a genuine team.

5. Anatomy of communication.

The only luxury bestowed on a person is communication. The existence of a human community is impossible without and without communication. And it is no coincidence that numerous studies of psychologists have proved that there is a direct and strong connection between the quality of communication and the psychological climate in a group. To understand how a teenager builds his communication, you can conduct the following test.

V. Ryakhovsky test

This test makes it possible to determine the level of a person's sociability. You should answer his questions using three options - “yes”, “sometimes” and “no”.
Questions

You have an ordinary or business meeting. Does her expectation unsettle you? Yes; Sometimes; No. Do you postpone the visit to the doctor until it becomes completely unbearable? Yes; Sometimes; No. Do you feel confused or displeased with the assignment to make a presentation, message, information at any meeting? Yes; Sometimes; No. You have to go on a business trip to a city where you have never been. Will you do your best to avoid this business trip? Yes; Sometimes; No. Do you like to share your experiences with anyone? Yes; Sometimes; No. Are you annoyed if a stranger on the street asked you to (show the way, tell the time, answer any question)? Yes; Sometimes; No. Do you believe that there is a problem of “fathers and children” and that people of different generations find it difficult to understand each other? Yes; Sometimes; No. Are you ashamed to remind your friend that he forgot to return you 10 rubles, which he borrowed a few months ago? Yes; Sometimes; No. In a cafe or canteen, you were served an obviously poor quality dish. Did you keep silent when you pushed the plate aside only with irritation? Yes; Sometimes; No. Finding yourself one on one with a stranger, you will not enter into a conversation with him and you will be burdened if he speaks first. Is it so? Yes; Sometimes; No. You are horrified by any long line, wherever it is (in a store, library, cinema box office). Do you prefer to give up your intention, rather than stand in the tail and languish in anticipation? Yes; Sometimes; No. Are you afraid to participate in any conflict resolution commission? Yes; Sometimes; No. You have your own, purely individual criteria for evaluating works of literature, art, culture, and you will not accept any “other people's” opinions. This is true? Yes; Sometimes; No. Having heard somewhere on the “sidelines” an obviously erroneous point of view on a question well-known to you, do you prefer to remain silent? Yes; Sometimes; No. Do you get annoyed by someone asking for help in understanding a particular difficult question or study topic? Yes; Sometimes; No. Are you more willing to express your point of view (opinion, assessment) in writing than orally? Yes; Sometimes; No.

The key to the test . Answers “yes” - 2 points; “Sometimes” - 1 point; “No” - 0 points.

Interpretation of results. 30 - 32 points. You are clearly uncommunicative, and this is your problem, since you yourself suffer the most from this. But it is not easy for people close to you! You are hard to rely on in a group effort. Try to be more sociable, control yourself.

25 - 29 points. You are withdrawn, taciturn, prefer loneliness, and therefore you probably have few friends. New work and the need for new contacts, if not plunging you into panic, then throw you off balance for a long time. You know this feature of your character and are dissatisfied with yourself. But do not limit yourself only to such discontent: it is in your power to break these character traits. Doesn't it happen that with some strong enthusiasm you “suddenly” acquire full communication skills? One has only to shake things up.

19 - 24 points. You are sociable to a certain extent and feel quite confident in a familiar environment. New problems do not scare you, and yet you converge with new people with caution, you are not willing to participate in disputes and disputes. Sometimes there is too much sarcasm in your statements without any reason. These disadvantages are removable.

14 - 18 points. You have normal communication skills. You are curious, willingly listen to an interesting interlocutor, are patient enough in communicating with others, defend your point without passion. You go to meet new people without unpleasant feelings. At the same time, you do not like noisy companies, extravagant antics and verbosity irritate you.

9 - 13 points. You are very sociable (sometimes, perhaps even beyond measure), curious, talkative, like to speak out on various issues, which sometimes irritates others. Willingly meet new people, do not refuse a request to anyone, although you cannot always fulfill it. It happens, flare up, but quickly withdraw. What you lack is perseverance, patience and courage when faced with serious problems. If you want to, however, you can force yourself not to back down.

4 - 8 points. You must be a shirt-guy. Sociability hits you with a key. You are always up to date with all matters. Love to take part in all discussions, although serious topics can make you blues. You are willing to take the floor on any issue, even if you have a superficial understanding of it. You feel at ease everywhere. Take on any business, although you cannot always successfully complete it. For this reason, the manager and colleagues treat you with some apprehension and doubt. Consider these facts!

3 points or less. Your communication skills are painful. You are talkative, verbose, you interfere in matters that have nothing to do with you, you undertake to judge the problems in which you are completely incompetent. Willingly or unwillingly, you are often the cause of all sorts of conflicts. You need to do self-education.

6. Conflict.

Thomas test

With the help of this test, it is possible to determine your own style of behavior in a situation of disagreement. In order to determine which way of behavior a person is inclined, it is necessary, after carefully reading each of the double statements a) and b), to choose the one that is more consistent with how he usually acts and acts.

Statements

a. Sometimes I provide an opportunity for others to take responsibility for resolving a controversial issue.

b. Rather than discussing where we disagree, I try to draw attention to what we both agree on.

b. I am trying to settle a case about taking into account all the interests of the other person and my own.

b. Sometimes I sacrifice my own interests for the interests of another person.

a. I am trying to find a compromise solution.

b. I try not to hurt the feelings of the other person.

a. When settling a controversial situation, I always try to find support from another.

b. I try my best to avoid unnecessary tension

a. I'm trying to get out of trouble for myself.

b. I'm trying to get my way.

a. I try to postpone the decision of the controversial issue in order to finally resolve it over time.

b. I consider it possible to concede in something in order to achieve something else.

a. I usually strive persistently to get my way.

b. First of all, I try to define what all the interests and controversial issues are.

a. I think that it is not always worth worrying about any disagreements that have arisen.

b. I am making an effort to get my way.

a. I am determined to get my way.

b. I am trying to find a compromise solution.

a. The first step is to clearly define who all the interests and issues at stake are in.

b. I try to calm the other down and, above all, preserve our relationship.

a. I often avoid taking a position that might cause controversy.

b. I give the other person the opportunity to remain unconvinced about something, if he also meets halfway.

b. I insist that everything be done my way.

a. I tell the other my point of view and ask about his views.

b. I am trying to show others the logic and advantage of my views.

b. I try my best to avoid stress.

b. I usually try to convince others of the advantages of my position.

a. I usually strive persistently to get my way.

b. I try my best to avoid unnecessary stress.

a. If it makes the other happy, I will give him the opportunity to insist on his own.

b. I will give another the opportunity to remain unconvinced if he meets me halfway.

a. First, I try to identify what each of the interests and issues at stake are.

b. I try to postpone controversial issues in order to finally resolve them over time.

a. I try to overcome our differences immediately.

b. I try to find the best combination of gains and losses for both of us.

a. When negotiating, I try to be considerate of others.

b. I always tend to discuss the problem directly.

a. I am trying to find a position that is halfway between mine and that of the other person.

b. I defend my position.

a. As a rule, I am concerned with satisfying the desires of each of us.

b. Sometimes I leave it to others to take responsibility for resolving a dispute.

a. If the position of the other seems important to him, I try to meet him halfway.

b. I try to convince the other to compromise.

a. I am trying to convince the other that I am right.

b. When negotiating, I try to be considerate of the other's arguments.

a. I usually suggest the middle position.

b. I almost always strive to satisfy the interests of each of us.

a. I often try to avoid controversy.

b. If it makes the other person happy, I will give him the opportunity to insist on his own.

a. I usually strive persistently to get my way.

b. When settling a situation, I usually seek to find support from another.

a. I suggest the middle position.

b. I think it's not always worth worrying about disagreements.

a. I try not to hurt the feelings of the other.

b. I always take such a position in a dispute so that together we can succeed.

Questionnaire key

Question	Rivalry	Cooperation	Compromise	Avoid	Adaptation
1					B
2		V	A
3	A				V
4			A		B
5		A		B
6	B			A
7			B	A
8	A	B
9	B			A
10	A		B
11		A			B
12			B	A
13	B		A
14	B	A
15				B	A
16	B				A
17	A			B
18			B		A
19		A		B
20		A	B
21		B			A
22	B		A
23		A		B
24			B		A
25	A				B
26		B	A
27				A	B
28	A	B
29			A	B
30		B			A

7. Creation of the poster "We are together".

The game form of the class hour is a game aimed at uniting the group. Usually I spend this lesson at the beginning of the school year, when the children are still little acquainted with each other.

At the beginning of the lesson, there is a conversation about the importance of friendship and group cohesion.

Each member of the group is given templates of various objects (flower, sun, cloud, butterfly, tree, etc.), colored paper, felt-tip pens, scissors. Students are encouraged to choose a template, translate it onto colored paper, cut out and sign their name. After that, everyone sticks their "drawing" on a large Whatman paper. In the process of designing a poster, there is a discussion: what, where to paste. When the work is finished, there is a discussion of the received poster.

8. Security.

Questionnaire - a survey "Determining the level of safety of a teenager in a group."

Students are warned that the answers will not be known to classmates.

Application form

1. I am afraid that my classmates will laugh at me when I answer at the blackboard (yes, no).

2. No matter what happens in my life, when I enter class, I feel better (yes, no).

3. I often have a stomach or headache, often it seems to me that I am about to cry (yes, no).

4. In my group there is a person to whom I can tell about my problems (yes, no).

5. I know that no one in my group will hurt me (yes, no).

6. I am sure that my teacher (class teacher, master) will respect me, even if I make some mistake (yes, no).

7. I know the rules that must be followed in our school. I know what will happen if I break them (yes, no).

8. I am afraid that my classmates will mock me because of my appearance (yes, no).

The answers to these questions allow me to create a picture of how a teenager feels in school, in a group. Taking into account the information received, I build my interaction with each member of the group.

Assessing the teenager's relationship with the class

Interpersonal perception in a group depends on many factors. The most studied of them are: social attitudes, past experience, characteristics of self-perception, the nature of interpersonal relationships, the degree of awareness of each other, the situational context in which the process of interpersonal perception takes place, etc. As one of the main factors, interpersonal perception can be influenced not only by interpersonal relationships, but also by the attitude of an individual in a group. An individual's perception of a group is a kind of background against which interpersonal perception takes place. In this regard, the study of an individual's perception of a group is an important point in the study of interpersonal perception, linking together two different socio-perceptual processes.

The proposed methodology allows us to identify three possible "types" of perception by an individual of a group. In this case, the role of the group in the individual activity of the perceiver acts as an indicator of the type of perception.

Type 1. The individual perceives the group as a hindrance to his activities or treats it neutrally. The group does not represent an independent value for the individual. This is manifested in the avoidance of joint forms of activity, in the preference for individual work, in the limitation of contacts. This type of perception by the individual of the group can be called "individualistic".

Type 2. The individual perceives the group as a means that contributes to the achievement of certain individual goals. In this case, the group is perceived and evaluated from the point of view of its “usefulness” for the individual. Preference is given to more competent team members who are able to provide assistance, take on a difficult problem, or serve as a source of necessary information. This type of perception by an individual of a group can be called “pragmatic”.

Type 3. The individual perceives the group as an independent value. For the individual, the problems of the group and its individual members come to the fore, there is interest, both in the success of each member of the group and in the group as a whole, the desire to contribute to group activities. There is a need for collective forms of work. This type of perception by an individual of his group can be called "collectivist".

On the basis of the three described hypothetical "types" of perception by an individual of a group, a special questionnaire was developed, revealing the predominance of one or another type of perception of a group in the studied individual.

When developing the questionnaire, a list of 51 judgments was used as an initial “bank” of judgments, each of which reflects a certain “type” of perception by an individual of a group (namely, a study group). When creating the questionnaire, judgments from the test were used to study the orientation of the personality and the methodology for determining the level of socio-psychological development of the team. On the basis of an expert assessment, the most informative judgments for solving the assigned task were selected.

The questionnaire consists of 14 points, judgments, containing three alternative choices. At each point, the alternatives are arranged in a random order. Each alternative corresponds to a certain type of perception by the individual of the group. The questionnaire was created taking into account the specifics of study groups and was used to study perceptual processes in groups of intensive teaching of foreign languages, but with appropriate modification it can be applied in other groups as well.

For each item of the questionnaire, the subjects must choose the most suitable alternative for them in accordance with the proposed instructions.

QUESTIONNAIRE

1. The best partners in the group, I consider those who. A - knows more than I;

B - seeks to resolve all issues together;

B - does not distract the teacher's attention.

2. The best teachers are those who:

A - use an individual approach;

B - create conditions for help from others;

B - create an atmosphere in the team in which no one is afraid to speak out.

3. I am glad when my friends:

A - they know more than I do and can help me;

B - are able to achieve success on their own, without interfering with others;

B - help others when the opportunity presents itself.

4. Most of all I like it when in a group:

A - there is no one to help;

B-do not interfere with the task;

B - the rest are less prepared than me.

5. It seems to me that I am capable of maximum when:

A-I can get help and support from others;

B - my efforts are sufficiently rewarded, C - there is an opportunity to show initiative that is useful for everyone.

6. I like groups in which:

A - everyone is interested in improving the results of everyone;

B - everyone is busy with their own business and does not interfere with others;

B - each person can use others to solve their problems.

7. Students are rated as the worst such teachers who.

A - create a spirit of rivalry between students,

B-don't give them enough attention

B - do not create conditions for the group to help them.

8. Most of all satisfaction in life is given by:

A - the ability to work when no one bothers you;

B - the ability to receive new information from other people;

B - the ability to do something useful to other people.

9. The main role should be.

A - in the upbringing of people with a developed sense of duty to others;

B-in the preparation of people adapted to independent life;

B - in training people who know how to get help from communicating with other people.

10. If the group has a problem, then I:

A - I prefer others to solve this problem;

B - I prefer to work independently, not relying on others;

B - I strive to contribute to the overall solution of the problem.

11. I would learn best if the teacher:

A - had an individual approach to me;

B - created conditions for me to receive help from others;

B - encouraged students' initiative aimed at achieving overall success.

12. There is nothing worse than the case when:

A - you are not able to achieve success on your own;

B - you feel unnecessary in the group;

B - others do not help you.

13. Most of all I appreciate:

A - personal success, in which there is a share of the merit of my friends, B - general success, in which there is also my merit;

B - success achieved at the cost of their own efforts.

14. I would like to.

A - work in a team in which the basic techniques and methods of teamwork are applied,

B - work individually with a teacher, C - work with people competent in this field.

Instructions for the subjects: “We are conducting a special study with the aim of improving the organization of the educational process. Your answers to the questionnaire help us with this. For each item of the questionnaire, 3 answers are possible, designated by the letters A, B and C. From the answers to each item, select the one that most accurately expresses your point of view. Remember that there are no “bad” or “good” answers in this questionnaire. Only one answer can be selected for each question. "

On the basis of the answers of the subjects with the help of the "key", the points are calculated for each type of perception by the individual of the group. One point is assigned to each selected answer. The points scored by the subjects for all 14 items of the questionnaire are summed up for each type of perception separately. In this case, the total score for all three types of perception for each subject should be 14. When processing data, the “individualistic” type of perception by an individual in a group is denoted by the letter “I”, “pragmatic” - “P”, “collectivist” - “K”. The results of each subject are recorded as a polynomial:

a И + b П + c К,

where a is the number of points received by the subject according to the "individualistic" type of perception, b - "pragmatic", c - "collectivistic", for example: 4I + 6P + 4K.

Key for processing the questionnaire

Personality questionnaires aimed at studying the characteristics of interpersonal interaction. Assessment of aggressiveness in relationships. Assessment of the psychological climate. Assessment of the level of sociability. Diagnostics of attitudes in interpersonal relationships. Communicative tendencies. Affiliation level. Leadership styles. The questionnaire is intended to be filled in by people who have been observing the behavior of a particular adult for a long time. The questionnaire includes seventeen signs of antisocial behavior. The presence of five or more signs allows their carrier to be attributed to the Questionnaire is intended to be filled in by parents (preferably both) or by people who have been observing the child for a long time. The questionnaire includes eight signs of antisocial behavior. The presence of three or more signs makes it possible to classify their carrier as ka. The questionnaire is intended to be filled in by parents (preferably both) or by people who have been observing a teenager (boy / girl) for a long time. The questionnaire includes twelve signs of antisocial behavior. The presence of four or more features allows the method proposed below is used to study empathy (empathy), i.e. the ability to put oneself in the place of another person and the ability to voluntary emotional responsiveness to the experiences of other people. Empathy is accepting the feelings that the other person is experiencing as if they were our own. The purpose of the methodology is to study and assess interpersonal relationships in a group of preschool children. The technique is one of the children's variants of the sociometric technique. The procedure is as follows. This technique is designed to assess a person's ability to be a leader. This quality is important for a teacher, since he must be a leader, at least in the children's collective. This methodology makes it possible to judge the pedagogical abilities of a person on the basis of what way he finds from a number of pedagogical situations described in it. The next questionnaire assesses not a person's leadership qualities, but his possible practical activity as a leader in terms of its potential effectiveness. The technique was created by T. Leary (T. Liar), G. Leforge, R. Sazek in 1954 and is intended to study the subject's ideas about himself and the ideal "I", as well as to study relationships in small groups. With the help of this technique, the prevailing type of attitude towards people in self-esteem and mutual esteem is revealed. Disorganizing emotional states in the mode of oppression of the psyche: dysthymia, depression, apathy, hypothymia, confusion, anxiety, fear, delusional mood. The level of subjective feeling of loneliness. It is aimed at studying the attitude of parents to different aspects of family life. This technique was developed by V.P. Zakharov. The methodology is based on 16 groups of statements reflecting various aspects of interaction between the management and the team. The methodology is aimed at determining the style of leadership of the workforce. ... To assess some of the main manifestations of the psychological climate of the team, one can use L.N. Lutoshkin. A. Assinger's methodology ("Assinger [Asinger] questionnaire") determines whether a person is correct enough in relation to others and whether it is easy to communicate with him. For greater objectivity of the answers, a mutual assessment can be carried out when colleagues answer the questions Description of the Bass-Darki psychological test for detecting aggression. Affiliation is understood as a person's need to establish, maintain and strengthen good relations with people. An individual with this need not only constantly strives for people and experiences satisfaction from emotionally positive communication with them, but sees one of the main meanings of life in human relationships. The questionnaire is designed to identify the main life positions of the subject. Life position here means an element of a person's life strategy, conscious or unconscious, that determines the basic behavior in interpersonal communication of a person.It is assumed that a person has three interpersonal needs and those areas of behavior that relate to these needs, sufficient to predict and explain interpersonal phenomena. The proposed methodology allows us to identify three possible "types" of perception by an individual of a group. In this case, the role of the group in the individual activity of the perceiver acts as an indicator of the type of perception. With the help of this technique, the emotional and personal attitude of a person to some other person who is a member of the same social group that the subject belongs to is determined. The level of general communicative tolerance is evidenced by the fact that you do not know how, or do not want to understand or accept the individuality of other people. The individuality of the other is, first of all, what constitutes the special in him: given by nature, brought up, assimilated in the environment. Veiled cruelty in attitudes towards people, in judgments about them. Open cruelty in relations with people. Reasonable negativism in judgments about people. Grumbling, that is, the tendency to make unreasonable generalizations of negative facts in the field of relationships with partners and in observing social reality. Friendship is very important. And what do you have? Some people find it very difficult to look at themselves from the outside. Many people think that they are "darlings", they are pleasant in communication, it is pleasant for the interlocutors to communicate. In fact, it often happens that we underestimate the feelings of our neighbor, are rude and insult, without noticing it ourselves. This test (the so-called Leary questionnaire) is very popular among professional psychologists due to its convenience and information content. Try it yourself. Are you kind and attentive to others? Are you able to give the last shirt to whoever needs it? What is the dominant feature of the organization in which you work, male or female? To find out it is enough to answer a number of questions. Shyness. What is your management style: directive, collegial or conniving. Communicative tendencies. Organizational inclinations. Test for women. Contact people feel free in any company. They easily meet strangers. Conflict level. The technique is intended solely for personal use. It will help to identify people in their environment who are prone to fraud. This test will help you figure out if you are really touchy, as you sometimes hear. Or you yourself are tolerance. Most people spend about 8 hours a day at work and communicate with their colleagues as much as they do with their families. Therefore, relationships with colleagues are an important element of a person's life. Bad relationships with colleagues can not only damage a career, business, but also unbalance any person for a very long time. Sometimes it is difficult for a person to look at himself from the outside. This test is designed to find out how pleasant you are in communication. Sometimes it's helpful to be a tough leader. Here, however, a sober assessment of the characteristics of the style of your leadership and your character is necessary. To help you with this self-assessment, a simple but useful test was developed by American management specialists. It is based on the thesis that each leader has two types of mental resources: D-resources and B-resources. Are you adamant and, sorry, stubborn? Does the firmness of your convictions go well with the great subtlety, flexibility of your mind? Take this test (the so-called McLean test) in order to finally find out if you can speak and listen. Do you have developed listening skills? Try to identify aggressive tendencies in yourself by answering yes or no to the judgments and situations suggested below. Are you ready to help your neighbors and respond to any of their requests? Do you offer your help when no one asks for it? Empathy is the ability to empathize. Rational channel of empathy. Emotional channel of empathy. Intuitive channel of empathy. Attitudes that promote empathy. Penetrating ability in empathy. Empathy identification. This version of the stimulus material of the Rosenzweig test, containing 15 pictures, was developed and tested by V.V. Dobrov. The test for assessing the level of sociability, communicativeness contains the ability to determine the level of a person's sociability. Assertiveness is the ability not to act to the detriment of someone, respecting the rights of other people, but at the same time not allowing them to "twist ropes out of themselves."

The technique is designed to study a person's ideas about himself and the ideal "I", as well as to study relationships in small groups. With the help of this technique, the prevailing type of attitude towards people in self-esteem and mutual esteem is revealed.

2. Technique q - sorting in. Stefanson.

Diagnostics of the main tendencies of behavior in a real group and ideas about oneself. The methodology allows one to determine six main tendencies of human behavior in a real group: dependence, independence, sociability, lack of communication, acceptance of "struggle" and "avoidance of struggle". The tendency towards dependence is defined as the internal desire of the individual to accept group standards and values: social and moral-ethical. The tendency towards sociability indicates contact, the desire to form emotional ties both in one’s group and outside it. The tendency to "struggle" is the active desire of the individual to participate in group life, to achieve a higher status in the system of interpersonal relationships.

3. Sociometric test proposed by J. Moreno. Explores the subjective interpersonal preferences (choices) of group members in certain areas. On the basis of the number of subjective choices received by a member of the group, the individual sociometric status of the individual (leader, outcast, isolated), the structure of interpersonal relations, group cohesion, etc. are determined.

4. Observation and peer review techniques ... Situational test. Methods for the study of interpersonal relations, in which the emphasis is on an objective and extensive description of interpretation, which is subsequently interpreted based on certain theoretical views.

5. Game "Prisoner's Dilemma".

methods of diagnostics of interpersonal relationships

Questionnaire "Behavior of parents and attitude of adolescents to them" (POR, E. Shafer)

A. Mehrabian's Affiliation Questionnaire

Test "PARI" - "Parent-Child Relationship"

Questionnaire "Behavior of parents and attitude of adolescents to them"

Determination of the Sishora group cohesion index

The psychological climate of the classroom (V.S.Ivashkin, V.V. Onufrieva)

Method "Q-sorting" tendencies of behavior in the group

Methods for diagnosing parental attitudes (PAD) A. Ya. Varga, V. V. Stolin

Methodology for the diagnosis of interpersonal relations T. Leary. The history of the creation of the technique

One of the attempts to create a systemic battery for diagnosing interpersonal relationships of an individual belongs to T. Leary and his co-workers. Based on the fact that personality manifests itself in behavior actualized in the process of interaction with others, T. Leary systematized empirical observations in the form of 8 general or 16 more specific variants of interpersonal interaction. On the psychogram, they are presented in the form of a closed continuum, along the perimeter of which the characteristics of the style of interpersonal behavior are located. Variants of negatively correlated types are located in polarity with respect to each other. According to the types of interpersonal behavior, a questionnaire was developed, which is a set of fairly simple characteristics-epithets (128 in total).

The test was conceived as a clinical diagnostic tool and was validated by comparing the test with the Minnisota Multidimensional Personality Questionnaire (MMPI) survey. A significant relationship was found between the types of interpersonal behavior and certain clinically described conditions, manifesting similarly to behavioral characteristics, which was reflected in the corresponding increases in the MMPI profile scales. Formation of T. Lcrc occurred on the basis of the use of contrasting, morbidly sharpened models of the interpersonal style of behavior characteristic of persons with mental disabilities. (47)

The first publications on the application of the method of interpersonal diagnostics and its adapted version of diagnostics of interpersonal relations in the USSR date back to 19-2, work was carried out to study the style of interpersonal interaction in sports teams (L.N. patients with borderline neuropsychiatric disorders (L.N.Sobchik). GS Vasilchenko and Yu. A. Reshetnyak investigated the features of mutual evaluations of married couples in the context of problems associated with sexual dysfunctions. The technique has been widely used in the study of the relationship between a sick person and doctors of different styles of psychotherapeutic influence (L. N. Sobchik, L. I. Wasserman, V. V. Bocharov, V. A. Tashlykov). The work on the study of the problem of interpersonal interaction in industrial and other small groups was carried out according to this method at industrial enterprises, in student groups, in groups for the study of foreign languages ​​(L.N.Sobchik, M.S. Maleshinaidr.).

LN Sobchik, proposing a modified version of this technique, examines the phenomenology of the method in the context of a different concept, from the standpoint of an individual-typological approach. Based on the position of S.L. Rubinstein on the role of innate individual properties, through the prism of which the assimilated social experience is refracted in the process of personality formation, and proceeding from the understanding of personality as a unity of biological and social factors, L.N.Sobchik suggests the following typology of stable personality traits, which is based on the theory of leading tendencies of behavior. (47)

Brief description of the technique

The technique is a set of laconic characteristics by which the subject assesses himself his actual "I". This is the image of your own "I" at the time of the survey. Each of the 128 characteristics has its own serial number.

The results of all measurements are translated into the so-called psychogram-circle, consisting of 8 psychological tendencies (octant), which are in a certain way oriented relative to the two main axes in interpersonal relations: dominance - submission and friendliness - aggressiveness. Octants embody qualities that correspond to 8 psychological tendencies. The method of diagnostics of interpersonal relations is a modified version of T. Leary's interpersonal diagnostics. The author of this technique is a follower of the ideas of G.S. Sullivan. G.S. Sullivan's theoretical approach to understanding personality is based on the idea of ​​the important role of assessments and opinions of those around him that are significant for a given individual, under the influence of which his personification occurs, that is, the personality is formed. In the process of interacting with the environment, the personality manifests itself in the style of interpersonal behavior. Realizing the need for communication and the fulfillment of his desires, a person conforms his behavior with the assessments of significant others at the level of conscious self-control, as well as (unconsciously) with symbolic identification. (47)

Possibilities of the technique

The technique is multifunctional, with minor changes in the instructions it is used to study the subject's ideas about himself and about others, the accuracy of interpersonal perception, assessing the social behavior of a person, relationships in a small group, self-esteem, “ideal I”, leadership style, etc. quantitative and qualitative interpretation of the data obtained, to compare the results of different subjects. These methods allow a new approach to the problem of self-esteem, criticality and self-control of the individual, and also significantly enrich the socio-psychological study of small groups. The technique can be used in the study of the problems not only of persons with borderline mental disorders, but also in the contingent of the norm in the study of the socio-psychological structure of educational, sports and industrial groups, as well as in the process of solving complex issues of personnel selection, placement of personnel. (47)

Sociometric method

The word "sociometry" literally means "social dimension". The technique was developed by an American psychologist J. Moreno and is designed to assess interpersonal relationships of an informal type: likes and dislikes, attractiveness and preference.

The sociometric procedure may aim at: a) measuring the degree cohesion-disunity in Group; b) identification of "sociometric positions", that is, the relative authority of the members of the group on the basis of likes-dislikes where the “leader” of the group and the “rejected” find themselves at the extreme poles; c) detection of intragroup subsystems, cohesive formations, which may be headed by their own informal leaders.

The use of sociometry makes it possible to measure the authority of formal and informal leaders for regrouping people in teams so as to reduce tensions in the team arising from mutual hostility of some group members. The sociometric technique is carried out by a group method, its implementation does not require much time (up to 15 minutes). It is very useful in applied research, especially in work to improve team relationships. But it is not a radical way of resolving intragroup problems, the reasons for which should be sought not in the likes and dislikes of the group members, but in deeper sources. The reliability of the procedure depends primarily on the correct selection of sociometry criteria, which is dictated by the research program and preliminary acquaintance with the specifics of the group.

The results obtained using sociometric methods can be presented in the form of matrices, sociograms, special numerical indices.

The number of choices received by each person is a measure of his position in the system of personal relations, measures his "sociometric status". The people who get the most choices enjoy the most popularity, sympathy, and are called "stars." Usually, the group of "stars" according to the number of choices received includes those who receive 6 or more choices (if, under the conditions of experience, each member of the group made 3 choices). If a person receives an average number of choices, he is referred to the category of "preferred" only deviations are categorized as "rejected".

For each member of the group, it is not so much the number of choices that matters as satisfaction with their position in the group:

Qud = number of mutual choices / number of choices made by a given person.

So, if an individual wants to communicate with three specific people, and of these three no one wants to communicate with this person, then Kud - 0/3 = 0.

The satisfaction coefficient can be equal to 0, and the status (the number of elections received) is, for example, 3 for the same person - this situation indicates that the person is not interacting with those with whom he would like. As a result of the sociometric experiment, the leader receives information not only about the personal position of each member of the group in the system of interpersonal relationships, but also a generalized picture of the state of this system. It is characterized by a special diagnostic indicator - the level of well-being of relationships (BWL). The BWL of a group can be high if there are more "stars" and "preferred" than the "neglected" and "isolated" members of the group. The average level of well-being of the group is fixed in the case of approximate equality ("stars" + "preferred") = ("neglected" + "isolated" + "outcast"). A low BWL is noted when people with a low status prevail in the group, and the "isolation index" is considered a diagnostic indicator - the percentage of people deprived of choices in the group.

Sociometric procedure.

The general scheme of actions in sociometric research is as follows. After setting the research tasks and choosing the measurement objects, the main hypotheses and provisions are formulated regarding possible criteria for interviewing group members. There can be no complete anonymity, otherwise sociometry will be ineffective. The experimenter's demand to disclose his likes and dislikes often causes internal difficulties for the respondents and manifests itself in some people in unwillingness to participate in the survey. When the questions or criteria of sociometry are selected, they are entered on a special card or offered orally by the type of interview. Each member of the group is obliged to answer them, choosing one or another member of the group depending on their greater or lesser inclination, their preference over others, sympathies or, conversely, antipathies, trust or distrust, etc. Group members are invited to answer questions , which make it possible to discover their likes and dislikes one to one, towards leaders, members of the group, which the group does not accept. The researcher reads out two questions: a) and b) and gives the subjects the following instruction: “Write on the pieces of paper under the number 1 the name of the group member you would choose first, under the number 2 - who would you choose if it were not for the first, under the number 3 - who would you choose if it were not for the first and second ”. Then the researcher reads out the question about personal relationships and also gives instructions. In order to confirm the reliability of the answers, the study can be carried out in a group several times. Other questions are taken for re-examination. Sample questions for studying business relationships 1. a) whom with your group mates would you ask to provide assistance in preparing for the lessons (first, second, third), if necessary? b) Which of your group mates would you not like to ask, if necessary, to provide you with assistance in preparing for classes? 2. a) with whom would you go on a long business trip? b) Which member of your group would you not take on a business trip? 3. a) which of the group members will better perform the functions of a leader (headman, trade union organizer, etc.)? b) Which of the group members will find it difficult to act as a leader? Sample Questions for Learned Personal Relationships 1. a) Whom in your group would you turn to for advice in a difficult life situation? b) with whom from the group would you not like to consult about anything? 2. a) if all members of your group lived in a hostel, with whom of them would you like to share a room? b) if your whole group were reformed, which of its members would you not want to keep in your group? 3. a) who from the group would you invite to your birthday? b) who from the group would you like to see on your birthday?

At the same time, the Sociometric Procedure can be carried out in two forms. The first option is a nonparametric procedure. In this case, the subject is asked to answer the questions of the sociometric card without limiting the number of the subject's choices. If, say, 12 people are counted in a group, then in this case each of the respondents can choose 11 people (except for himself). Thus, the theoretically possible number of choices made by each member of the group towards other members of the group in this example will be equal to (N-1), where N is the number of members of the group. Likewise, the theoretically possible number of elections received by the subject in the group will be equal to (N-1). Let us immediately understand that the indicated value (N-1) of the received elections is the main quantitative constant of sociometric measurements. In a nonparametric procedure, this theoretical constant is the same both for the individual making the choice and for any individual who has become the object of the choice. The advantage of this version of the procedure is that it allows you to identify the so-called emotional expansiveness of each member of the group, to make a cut of the diversity of interpersonal relationships in the group structure. However, with an increase in the size of a group to 12-16 people, these connections become so numerous that it becomes very difficult to analyze them without the use of computer technology. Another disadvantage of the nonparametric procedure is the high probability of obtaining a random selection. Some subjects, guided by a personal motive, often write in the Questionnaires: "I choose everyone." It is clear that such an answer can have only two explanations: either the subject really developed such a generalized amorphous and undifferentiated system of relations with others (which is unlikely), or the subject knowingly gives a false answer, hiding behind formal loyalty to others and to the experimenter (which is most likely) ... The analysis of such cases forced some researchers to try to change the very procedure for applying the Method and thus reduce the likelihood of a random choice. This is how the second option was born - the parametric Procedure with the limitation of the number of elections. The subjects are asked to choose a strictly fixed number from all members of the group. For example, in a group of 25 people, everyone is asked to choose only 4 or 5 people. The magnitude of the restriction on the number of sociometric elections is called "sociometric restriction" or "election limit". Many researchers believe that the introduction of a "sociometric constraint" significantly exceeds the reliability of sociometric data and facilitates statistical processing of the material. From a psychological point of view, sociometric constraint forces the subjects to pay more attention to their answers, to choose for the answer only those members of the group who really correspond to the proposed roles of a partner, leader or comrade in joint activities. The election limit significantly reduces the likelihood of random answers and makes it possible to standardize the conditions of elections in groups of different sizes in one sample, which makes it possible to compare the material for different groups. At present, it is generally accepted that for groups of 22-25 participants, the minimum value of the "sociometric constraint" should be selected within 4-5 elections. A significant difference between the second version of the sociometric procedure is that the sociometric constant (N-1) is retained only for the system of elections received (i.e., from group to participant). For the system of given elections (i.e., to a group from a participant), it is measured by a new value d (sociometric constraint). By introducing this value, one can standardize the external conditions of elections in groups of different sizes. To do this, it is necessary to determine the value of d according to the probability of a random choice, which is the same for all groups. The formula for determining such a probability was proposed at the time by J. Moreno and E. Jennings: P (A) = d / (N-1), where P is the probability of a random event (A) of sociometric choice; N is the number of group members. Typically, the value of P (A) is selected in the range of 0.20-0.30. Substituting these values ​​into formula (1) to determine d with a known value of N, we obtain the required number of "sociometric constraints" in the group selected for measurements. The disadvantage of the parametric procedure is the inability to reveal the diversity of relationships in the group. It is possible to identify only the most subjectively significant connections. As a result of this approach, the sociometric structure of the group will reflect only the most typical, “selected” communications. The introduction of "sociometric limitation" does not allow judging the emotional expansiveness of the group members. Sociometric card or Sociometric questionnaire is drawn up at the final stage of the program development. In it, each member of the group must indicate his attitude towards other members of the group according to the selected criteria (for example, in terms of teamwork, participation in solving a business problem, spending leisure time, playing, etc.) The criteria are determined depending on the program of this study : whether relationships are studied in a production group, a leisure group, in a temporary or stable group.

Sociometric card

When polling without limiting the choices in the sociometric card, after each criterion, a column should be highlighted, the size of which would allow for sufficiently complete answers. When polling with limited choices, as many vertical columns are drawn on the card to the right of each criterion as there are choices we propose to allow in this group. Determination of the number of elections for groups of different size, but with a predetermined value of P (A) in the range of 0.14-0.25, can be made using a special table (see below). Values ​​of restriction of sociometric choices

Number of group members	Sociometric constraint d	The probability of a random choice P (A)

Processing of results When sociometric cards are filled in and collected, the stage of their mathematical processing begins. The simplest methods of quantitative processing are tabular, graphical and indexological. Sociomatrix (table)... First, you should build the simplest socio-matrix. An example is given in the table (see below). The election results are distributed across the matrix using a legend. The results tables are filled in first, separately for business and personal relationships. The names of all members of the group being studied are recorded vertically behind the numbers; horizontally - only their number. At the corresponding intersections, the numbers +1, +2, +3 denote those who were selected by each subject in the first, second, third stage, the numbers -1, -2, -3 - those whom the subject did not choose in the first, second and third order ... Mutual positive or negative choice is circled in the table (regardless of the order of choice). After the positive and negative choices are entered in the table, it is necessary to calculate vertically the algebraic sum of all choices received by each member of the group (the sum of the choices). Then you need to calculate the sum of points for each member of the group, taking into account that the choice is, first of all, +3 points (-3), in the second - +2 (-2), in the third - +1 (-1). After that, the total algebraic sum is calculated, which determines the status in the group.

	Danilova
	Alexandrova
	Adamenko
	Petrenko
	Kozachenko
	Yakovleva
	Number of elections
	Number of points
	Total amount

Note: + positive choice; - negative choice. The analysis of the socio-matrix for each criterion gives a fairly clear picture of the relationship in the group. Summarized socio-matrices can be constructed that give a picture of the elections according to several criteria, as well as socio-matrices according to the data of intergroup elections. The main advantage of the sociomatrix is ​​the ability to present elections in numerical form, which in turn allows you to rank group members by the number of elections received and given, to establish the order of influences in the group. On the basis of the socio-matrix, a sociogram is built - a map of sociometric elections (sociometric map. Sociogram... Sociogram - a graphic representation of the reaction of the subjects to each other when answering the sociometric criterion. The sociogram allows for a comparative analysis of the structure of relationships in a group in space on a certain plane ("shield") using special signs (Fig. Below). It gives a visual representation of the intragroup differentiation of group members according to their status (popularity). An example of a sociogram (map of group differentiation) proposed by Ya. Kolominsky, see below:

-> positive one-sided choice,<-->positive mutual choice, ------> negative one-sided choice,<------>negative mutual choice.

Sociogram technique is an essential addition to the tabular approach in the analysis of sociometric material, because it makes it possible to deeper qualitative description and visual representation of group phenomena. The analysis of the sociogram consists in finding the central, most influential members, then mutual pairs and groupings. Groupings are composed of interconnected individuals seeking to choose each other. Most often in sociometric measurements there are positive groupings of 2, 3 members, less often of 4 or more members.

Diagnostics of interpersonal relationships using the Leary test (Sobchik). (DMO)

The method of diagnosing interpersonal relationships is a questionnaire in which short characteristics reflect the individual style of communication of a particular person with others. Depending on the given instruction, the technique can reveal: 1) a subjective assessment of the I in comparison with the ideal of my I; 2) assessment of other persons included in the experiment when studying a small group, whose characteristics can also be considered in comparison with the ideal; 3) congruence or tension in relationships in a small group - be it family, collective, team, etc. The basis for the creation of the methodology was the test of the American psychologist T. Leary, a follower of the ideas of G.S. Sullivan. Opposing his teacher Sigmund Freud, who deduces personality traits mainly from the problems of early childhood in the context of unconscious erotic experiences, Sullivan understood personality formation as a process in which the most important role is given to the opinion of the people around him who are significant for a given individual, under whose influence his personification occurs, that is, personality-forming identification with significant others. In the process of interacting with the environment, the personality manifests itself in a certain style of interpersonal behavior. Realizing the need for communication and the realization of their desires, a person conforms his behavior with the assessments of significant others at the level of conscious self-control, as well as (unconsciously) with the symbolism of identification. Based on this concept, the American psychologist Timothy Leary systematized his empirical observations in the form of 16 options for interpersonal interaction and used his technique mainly in a clinic. In this technique, back in 1969, I was attracted by the orthogonality of features (each property is opposed to a radically opposite quality), which makes it possible to reduce the factors of the technique to eight types of interpersonal behavior. Modifying the test and adapting it to the needs of a practical psychologist consists in revising the questionnaire presented in the form of 128 characteristics, in dividing factors into 8 octants with different characterological essence, in creating a new grid, convenient for registering answers and quickly calculating the data obtained, in turning the indicators clockwise techniques.

results

After the subject assesses himself and fills in the grid of the registration sheet, points are calculated for 8 options for interpersonal interaction. For this, a "key" is used with which blocks of 16 numbers are allocated, each block forms one of the 8 octants of the technique. The number of numbers crossed out by the test subject in each block is placed on the table of quantitative results, respectively, for each octant, reflecting one or another variant of interpersonal relations.

PERSONAL PROPERTIES

When studying personality traits of great interest is the difference between the indicators of the real and ideal self-image of a particular person. The simplest and most common option is the presence of insignificant quantitative differences, which make it possible to judge which features of the individual's style of interpersonal behavior do not suit the individual. Experience shows that the images of the real and ideal I are an integral part of the structure of the integral I. These are the contradictory tendencies that often impede self-understanding, forcing a person to the end of his days to reflect on what he really is. People around him are more often perceived according to his ideal I, and his actual I often represents his internal problems, to some extent conscious and taken under control. Moderate (non-conflicting) discrepancy, or rather incomplete coincidence, should be considered as a necessary condition for the further development of personality and self-improvement. Dissatisfaction with oneself is more often observed in persons with low self-esteem (V, VI, VII octants), as well as in persons in a state of prolonged interpersonal conflict (IV octants). The opposition in the real and ideal self of octants I and V is characteristic of persons with a problem of painful vanity, unrealized authoritarianism; the same with respect to IV and VIII: they reveal the conflict between the desire of the individual to be recognized by the group and his own spontaneous aggressiveness (the problem of suppressed hostility), III and VII octants reveal the struggle of multidirectional motives - self-affirmation and affiliation (the desire to merge with others); Octants II and VI are contrasted in the real and ideal I in persons with the problem of independence-obedience, arising in an office, educational or family situation and forcing obedience despite internal protest. Individuals who, according to the DME, show dominant, aggressive and independent behavioral traits, are much less likely to show dissatisfaction with their character and interpersonal relationships, however, they may also have a tendency to improve their style of interpersonal interaction with the environment; at the same time, an increase in the indices of one or another octant in the image of the ideal I will determine the direction in which a person develops in order to improve himself. This is of great importance for a psychologist when choosing methods for correcting an individual's behavior, taking into account personal resources and the degree of awareness of existing problems. The presence of a pronounced intrapersonal conflict, manifested by a significant discrepancy in the indicators of DME in assessing the real and ideal I, is evidence of high neurotization.

FAMILY COUNSELING

DME makes it possible to ascertain interpersonal conflict in the family, as well as to better understand the reasons for psychological incompatibility, which can lurk both in different characters and behavioral patterns of family members, and in the presence of intrapersonal incongruence (internal conflict) in some of them. The DME test allows you to structure the existing picture of relationships, determine the zone of conflict and understand the reasons for its occurrence, recognize antagonistic and friendly family members. At the same time, each family member evaluates his real and ideal I, and then evaluates other family members and outlines the ideal (in his view) image of each of them. The mismatch of the ideal with the real image of the person being assessed is of significant interest for assessing the current situation as a whole, as well as for understanding the severity of the cognitive dissonance of the examined person, that is, the degree of inconsistency between the real-life individual and the ideal idea of ​​what he should be in the eyes of this particular subject. ... Here, a wide variety of existing options is found, which are based on the comparison of both contrasting and additional characteristics that are revealed using DME. To simplify, one can start from the main two directions: dominance-obedience (the ratio of indicators of I - II octants with V - VI octants) and aggressiveness-benevolence (ratio of indicators III - IV with VII - VIII octants).

SMALL GROUP STUDY

To study the structure of a small group, be it a work collective, a class, or a team, social psychology often uses the sociometry procedure first proposed by J. Moreno. However, in the study of sociometric structures, individual members of a group, acquiring a certain status, are perceived as a kind of abstraction, a faceless unit. The group structure highlighted by sociometry answers only the question: what is this structure who ended up in what role, while it is very important to understand why this is how the structure of relations developed and what personalities formed it. It is these questions that can be answered by the results of testing the DME. After the subject evaluates himself and his ideal self, it is proposed to evaluate all members of the group in the same way. The subject should identify among them who he considers to be the de facto leader, then - the best for cooperation and the worst for cooperation of the group member, the best for companionship and the least suitable for this role. Each member of the group goes through such a study, evaluating himself and his ideal, then - conjunctive (attractive) and disjunctive (separating, repulsive) choices both in terms of cooperation and in terms of friendly relations, as well as highlighting the most powerful, proactive, leading personality in group. Analysis of the data obtained allows us to draw conclusions about the existing structure of relations, about mutual attraction and repulsion.

IDENTIFICATION OF SELF-ASSESSMENT

To find correct approach to correction of a particular type of interpersonal behavior that creates a conflict situation, when developing individualized measures of education and leadership, it is important to determine such a key factor as self-esteem ... Individuals with a predominant style of interpersonal relations of the type of leading-imperious or independently competing (I and II octants) have high self-esteem, and the reaction to the opinion of others is ignoring. A straightforwardly persistent and distrustful suspicious type of behavior (III and VI) is combined with a predominance of a critical and negative attitude towards other opinions with a tendency to overestimated self-esteem. The submissive-shy and dependent-obedient type of behavior (V and VI octants) is characterized by low self-esteem and excessive respect for the opinions of others, cooperating-conventional and responsible-generous - the VI and VIII octants - are characterized by fluctuations in self-esteem due to its instability (“seeking recognition ") And a pronounced focus on the opinion of significant others. With low self-esteem (prevalence of V, VI octants) and pronounced internal dissatisfaction with oneself (the difference in octants of the real and ideal self is more than 4 points), the reaction to the opinion of others is positive if this opinion is more consistent with the subjective ideal of the individual than with the assessment of one's I. In the process of internal processing of the critical remarks of others when comparing self-esteem with the ideal I, such a person, under the influence of imperative pressure, forms an unconditional conciliatory reaction that levels out any creative activity and suppresses independence of decisions. On the contrary, with the coincidence of the actual and ideal I, which is more often observed in persons with a predominance of an imperious-leading or independently-dominant style of interpersonal behavior, complete satisfaction with oneself (self-sufficiency), overestimated self-esteem and a critical attitude to the opinion of others are revealed, which makes it difficult to correct from the outside. If, in the variant with low self-esteem, the method of support and encouragement increases the motivation for achievement and the readiness for responsible fulfillment of the instructions of the leadership (educator), then for self-sufficient individuals this approach is not very effective, while imperative methods of influence encounter protest and reactions of emancipation. This is especially true for impulsive and rigid individuals. The critical opinion of others in these cases should be mediated through the internal integrative assessment of the individual in such a way that it is not felt by him as imposed from the outside, but is perceived as his own, noticed and suggested by others in a respectful form. The most common is the third option, when self-esteem does not completely coincide with the ideal I, that is, there is no complete satisfaction with oneself (the difference in octants of the actual and ideal I is within 4 points), when, with a sufficiently expressed self-esteem and a positive overall assessment of one's personality, there is a tendency to further self-improvement and a known dissatisfaction with oneself. In this case, the reaction to criticism of others is the most adequate, as is characteristic of a mature adaptive personality, the level of dignity and flexibility of which can serve as a measure of harmonious interpersonal relations. Such individuals in collectives carry out conflict-free opposition to unreasonable forms of authoritarian-imperative pressure and contribute to the implementation of other, more democratic methods of leadership or education. They, as it were, constitute a stable core of the team, on which the organizational leading "top" can rely. Thus, the use of the DMO test in socio-psychological study of a small group allows a differentiated approach to solving complex problems of recruiting effectively interacting teams and the formation of a favorable psychological microclimate.

EVALUATION TO TEACHER

When trying to identify students' assessment of their teachers in an experiment carried out in one of the Moscow schools, the following was discovered. In general, the image of an ideal teacher among the majority of students was characterized by high altruism, a responsible-generous style of interpersonal behavior combined with leadership traits and the ability to empathize (VIII, VII and I octants). Usually, such assessments were awarded to the most experienced teachers with long experience of work. Teachers using the imperative didactic style were endowed with more aggressiveness (III octant); formally doing their job well, but somewhat distant in style of behavior, teachers received an assessment with a predominance of the II octant (snob, narcissist, self-sufficient personality). The female teacher was more often idealized by male students, while the male teacher was more often by female students. According to the DME, this was manifested by the prevalence of octant VIII scores (generosity, altruism) in assessing the personality of an adored teacher. The image of a low-respected, low professionally rated teacher was reflected in the DME psychogram by empty (unshaded) octants VIII and VII, which testified to the fact that he had no altruism and the ability to empathize in the opinions of students. So, the use of DME in a differentiated choice of educational measures is convenient because of its simplicity and brevity. However, given the vulnerability of the technique in the face of motivational distortions and subjectivity of self-esteem, ITO, the method of color choices, the Szondi test and other psychodiagnostic techniques should be used in addition to it. Today, we can say with confidence that the DME test is a very effective tool for psychodiagnostic research, which has found its application in various fields of applied psychology, including in the daily work of a school psychologist.

PSYCHOGRAM TO THE DME TEST

Anxiety is a child of evolution

Anxiety is a sensation that is familiar to absolutely every person. Anxiety is based on the instinct of self-preservation, which we inherited from our distant ancestors and which manifests itself in the form of a defensive reaction "Run or fight". In other words, anxiety does not arise from scratch, but has an evolutionary basis. If at a time when a person was constantly threatened with danger in the form of an attack by a saber-toothed tiger or an invasion of a hostile tribe, anxiety really helped to survive, today we live in the safest time in the history of mankind. But our instincts continue to operate at a prehistoric level, creating many problems. Therefore, it is important to understand that anxiety is not your personal flaw, but a mechanism developed by evolution, which is no longer relevant in modern conditions. Anxiety impulses, once necessary for survival, have now lost their expediency, turning into neurotic manifestations that significantly limit the life of anxious people.