Value And Semantic Characteristics In The Reflective Regulation Of Psychological States

Abstract

The article is devoted to the influence of the value and semantic characteristics on the features of the reflective regulation of students’ psychological states in the course of educational activity. In the theoretical part, revealed the role of the semantic structures of consciousness in the regulation of psychological states, shown the role of reflection in the emergence of new meanings and presented some modern approaches that emphasizes the interrelation of reflection and psychological states. The study involved 60 people of different specialties. In the course of the study, used various methods of diagnosing of value and semantic sphere, as well as methods of studying psychological states and reflection. Revealed the specificity of the individual terminal values influence on the reflective regulation of states. Shown that one of the leading elements of the reflective regulation of human psychological states is the place of value in its hierarchy. The dominance of a certain value effects on the choice of states’ self-regulation methods. Found that people with a high level of reflection feel better, have life goals and motivation to achieve them. The high level of semantic attitudes actualizes the state of activity, vigour and confidence. High reflective people with severe life orientations experience positive and equilibrium states.

Keywords: Psychological statereflectionregulationvaluesemantic

Introduction

The vital activity of a person actualizes the psychological states of various modalities, duration, intensity and sign. The necessity of regulation one's own states (self-regulation) arises, when his state is inadequate to circumstances and life situations. The essential condition of self-regulation is a person’s awareness of the necessity to change his own state. The latter is done by reflection (Prokhorov & Chernov, 2012).

By reflection occurs awareness, assessment, comparison of the current state with the desired one and then, if necessary, the subject makes a correction to the used methods and techniques of regulation. The involvement of reflective mechanisms is determined by the purpose of regulation — the necessity to change the psychological state as irrelevant to the situation. The necessity to change the psychological state is also realized by the subject through the reflection. Reflection activates the semantic structures of consciousness, determining their involvement in the regulation of psychological states (Prokhorov & Chernov, 2014).

It can be assumed that in the processes of states’ regulation levels of reflective activity can be distinguished: at a low level, reflected and controlled individual executive actions on the regulation of states, at a higher level the subject displays itself as “I - system (I-image, I-concept” ), making the planning and evaluation of actions. The latter is associated with the actualization of internal regulatory schemes and processes (metacognitive strategies) that developed during ontogenesis. Inclusion of reflective levels allows the subject to move from operational to psychological aspects of state regulation: performed self-control of states in the current situation, updated the methods and operational tools and strategies of states’ regulation in past situations and activities, their effectiveness under certain circumstances life, planned and forecasted probable future states and means of their control.

Subject's reflective processes and reflection generate new meanings, new relationships, creating and defining the emerging strategies and plans, methods and techniques of state regulation. Internal dialogue is the main psychological mechanism of reflection, which determines the transforming and generative functions that increase the measure of subjectivity of regulation (Leontiev, 2003). It leads to the arbitrary manipulation of ideal contents in the mental plane, based on experiencing the distance between his consciousness and his intentional object, connected with the directionality of this process towards himself as an object of reflection. Such actions (looking at oneself) make it possible to see the maximum number of elements (variants) of the states’ regulation and choose the optimal, adequate situation associated with different foci of the direction of consciousness: an external intentional object or oneself. These actions involve self-distancing, the ability to look at yourself from the outside and at foreign objects outside the current situation. The embeddedness and deployment of the above mechanisms in the structure of the reflective regulation of states is the basis for its effectiveness in the life of the subject.

Problem Statement

The works of Brown and Ryan (2003) show the positive connections of a conscious presence with openness to experience, clarity of experiencing emotions, attention to feelings, searching for novelty, creating new things, engaging in activities, attention to internal state, the need for cognition, and negative connections of a conscious presence with social anxiety and preoccupation. However, in the studies of Silvia, Eichstaedt, and Phillips (2005), no correlation was found between the focus on yourself and the productivity of thinking.

Later, Lyke (2009) put forward and tested hypotheses that people with a higher level of awareness will be happier and more satisfied with their lives than people with lower level of awareness. And that the interaction between self-reflection and awareness affects both happiness and satisfaction with life.

Research Questions

The article examines the inclusion of value and semantic characteristics in the process of regulation of mental states. Analysed the influence of reflection direction on the specifics of psychologicalstates’ regulation. It is assumed that there is a specificity of the reflective regulation of psychological states depending on the dominant value orientation of the individual.

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of the study is to investigate the influence of personality values and meanings on the reflective regulation of human psychological states.

Research Methods

The study involved 60 people of various specialties, boys - 22, and girls - 38 people. The following methods were used during the study: 1) A method for diagnosing well-being, activity and mood (questionnaire SAN - Doskin, Lavrentyeva, Miroshnikov, & Sharay, 1973); 2) The method "Relief of the psychological state of the individual" (Prokhorov, 2004); 3) The test of life meaning orientations (LMO) (Leontiev, 2000); 4) The method of studying the level of expression and direction of the reflection (Grant, 2001); 5) The technique of "Value Orientations" by Rokeach (1973).Used standard Mathematical Analysis Package SPSS 18.0. For the analysis of the research results used Pearson correlation analysis, short statistics and multivariate analysis of variance.

Findings

According to the results of the correlations analysis, revealed the following interrelations of psychological states and reflections (Table 1 ).

Self-reflection and the total reflection index have correlations with all the components of psychological states: with well-being and mood at the significance level p ≤ 0.01, with activity at the significance level p ≤ 0.05. The relationship of person psychological state indicators and his personal meaning is shown in the table, where there is a direct relationship between the "performance" and all indicators of the psychological state of a person. The indicator of locus of control - I has significant correlations with mood (p≤0.05) and at the level of p ≤ 0.05 with well-being and activity. Note that the indicator of personal meaning - the "goal of life" has no correlations. “Locus of control - life” is interconnected with a person’s mood (at a significance level of p≤0.05) and there is a direct connection between life meaning orientations (LMO) and mood (p≤0.05).

The table shows that the components of psychological states are associated with the severity level of self-reflection (p≤0.05). The substructure of the “experience” of a person correlates with the indicators of personal meaning - “the process of life” and its “effectiveness”, this relationship is direct at the significance level p≤0.05. Two indicators of a person’s psychological state - “psychological processes” and “behaviour” have direct interrelations with all indicators of personal meaning. All these connections are significant at the level of p ≤ 0.01. The substructure “physiological reactions” is associated with the “process of life, its effectiveness” and the general indicator of LMO.

Table 1 shows that almost all indicators of psychological state at a significance level of p≤ 0.01 correlate with self-reflection, a general reflection index and with social reflection (p ≤0.05). Apparently, the key factors affecting psychological states are the “effectiveness of life” and the overall level of a student’s life meaning orientations.

Consider the effect of life meaning orientations on psychological states in people with different levels of reflection. This model of variance analysis is statistically significant at the level of p ≤ 0,000 and explains about 55% of the variance of psychological states’ average values (Table 2 ). The influence of life meaning orientations on the average indicators of the psychological states’ substructures is statistically significant, whereas the influence of reflection does not reach the required level of confidence. Statistically significant (according to Fisher's F-criterion) are the indicators of the interaction influence of general reflectivity and life meaning orientations on psychological states (p ≤ 0.05) (Table 2 , Figure 1 ).

Note: LMO - life meaning orientation, * - the interaction of indicators.

See Full Size >

Vertically: the intensity of the general state, horizontally: the severity of life meaning orientation

The low and medium levels of reflection are similar in their influence on psychological states: while increases the level of life meaning orientations, the intensity of the experienced psychological states is also increases. In individuals with a high level of reflection, low and medium levels of life meaning orientations contribute to the general state of low intensity, i.e. stiffness, passivity, feeling of insecurity and instability. High indicators of life meaning orientations in highly reflective subjects have a positive effect on the general state, providing tone, improving the awareness of their activities and a sense of stability. Thus, people with a high level of reflection feel better, have life goals and motivation to achieve them.

The influence of individual values on the reflective regulation of psychological states. The main sample of 60 people was divided into groups depending on the choice of the main value according to the Rokeach’s (1973) method.

Without considering all the values, we turn to the individual. The first sample included subjects who, according to Rokeach’s (1973), chose the core value (ranked value from 1 to 3) - health (physical and psychological). Total – 40 people. The obtained results of the correlation analysis are presented in Table 3 . Revealed the significant correlations of self-reflection with the activity of cognitive processes, behaviour and somatic processes and human experiences. Social reflection correlates with the activity of behaviour and somatic processes.

There is a close relationship of self-reflection and social reflection with functional states (mood and well-being) in the group, where the main value is human health.

The following sample was made on the basis of 29 subjects experiencing “The beauty in nature and in art” as the main value. The results of the correlation analysis are presented in Table 4 .

Found the significant correlations of mood with self-reflection, and also a common indicator of reflection with social reflection. Established a direct relationship between the substructures of “psychological processes” and “behaviour” with self-reflection, social reflection and a general indicator of reflection. Found a direct correlation between the “somatic reactions” and self-reflection.

For the terminal value of “Happy family life and love” (spiritual and physical intimacy with a loved one), the distinctive feature is the correlation of functional and psychological states with self-reflection and the absence of a significant connection with social reflection. These subjects are characterized by a high degree of themselves awareness, experiences and motives of behaviour, which contributes to higher control over the activity of cognitive processes, behaviour, somatic processes, but low control over experiences (Table 5 ).

Conclusion

The study of the life meaning orientations influence showed the presence of the following tendency: the low and high reflective people more likely to experience high intensive psychological states. The individuals with a high level of reflection and low and average values of life meaning orientations dominates the state of anxiety. The high level of semantic attitudes actualizes the state of activity, vigor and confidence. High reflective people with severe life orientations experience positive and equilibrium states.

As a result of the analysis, revealed the specificity of the individual terminal values influence on the reflective regulation of psychological states. Established the relationships of values with various manifestations of reflection in the regulatory process. One of the leading elements of the human psychological states’ reflective regulation is the rang of value in its hierarchy. The prevalence of a particular value in a person’s life directly influences the peculiarities of psychological states’ self-control in the current situation and the updated methods of regulation.

Acknowledgments

The study was carried out with the financial support of the Russian Foundation for Basic Research, project No. 17-06-00057а

References

1. Brown, K.W., & Ryan, R.M. (2003). The Benefits of Being Present: Mindfulness and Its Role in Psychological Well-Being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(4), 822–848.
2. Doskin, V.A., Lavrentyeva, N.A., Miroshnikov, M.P, & Sharay, V.B (1973). Test of differentiated self-esteem of the functional state. Questions of psychology, 6, 141–145.
3. Grant, M. (2001). Rethinking psychological mindedness: metacognition, self-reflection, and insight. Behavior Change, 18(1), 8–17.
4. Leontiev, D.A. (2003). Psychology of meaning: nature, structure and dynamics of semantic reality. Moscow: Meaning.
5. Leontiev, D.A. (2000). Test of life meaning orientations (2nd Ed). Moscow: Meaning.
6. Lyke, J. (2009). Insight, but not self-reflection, is related to subjective well-being. Personality and Individual Differences, 46, 66–70.
7. Prokhorov, A.O. (2004). Methods of diagnosis and measurement of psychological states of a person. Moscow: PER SE.
8. Prokhorov, A.O., & Chernov, A.V. (2012). Reflective regulation of psychological states. Humanity Science, 6(154), 244-257.
9. Prokhorov, A.O., & Chernov, A.V. (2014). The influence of reflection on the psychological state of students in the process of learning activities. Experimental Psychology, 7(2), 82-93.
10. Rokeach, M. (1973). The Nature of Human Values. New York: The Free Press.
11. Silvia, P., Eichstaedt, J., & Phillips, A. (2005). Are rumination and reflection types of self-focused attention? Personality and Individual Differences, 38, 871–881.