When arguing, remember that
this quarrel must end in friendship.
(Diodor)
Different personality types perceive, comprehend and transmit information to each other in different ways. They, like receivers, are tuned to different parameters of the received signals, their form and content. Some signals are perceived by them clearly and positively, others are not. Hence the problem of misunderstanding. So what is still better: when the partners are the same in character and temperament, or does "opposites attract"?
Let's see what socionics experts, who study the psychological types of people, tell us, and, remembering our life examples and starting from our life experience, we agree or not.
1. Identity relations
This relationship is largely similar people who understand each other very well. Built on trust and empathy, they are good for friendship, but marriage can be difficult due to the inability to help each other in solving problems. It is difficult for partners to correctly assess the activities of the other, since they have equally developed both strengths and weaknesses. These relationships are active in the presence of joint cases, when there is something to learn from a more experienced partner. With a lack of new information from the other, the relationship can quickly exhaust itself. Mutual understanding and ease in communication smooth out misunderstandings. Partners condescendingly refer to the same shortcomings of each other, and in some cases they manage to critically look not so much at each other as at themselves from the outside.
Relationships of complete understanding develop between identical partners, but inability to help each other. They look at the world with the same eyes, comprehend incoming information in the same way, draw almost the same conclusions, and also face the same problems. Seeing this, each has sympathy for the other. You want to support your partner, justify it in one way or another, because you feel that in this situation you yourself would have done the same.
On the other hand, identical communication quickly gets boring. Without receiving new information from a partner, you see the futility of such communication. An uninformative partner seems boring, uninteresting. Over time, either neutral or cool relations are established. This is not surprising, because after the exchange of information it is no longer interesting to discuss it, knowing in advance that you can come to the same conclusions yourself. The exception is the case of a large difference in experience or knowledge. Then there may be great interest and craving for each other, as there is a quick and effective learning - the transfer of information. Such relationships are ideal for a teacher-student pair. Joint work in this case is also effective, since the addition of forces occurs in one direction.
It should be said about the influence of subtypes on these relationships. With matching subtypes, communication is much more pleasant and easy. With mismatched subtypes, partners look at each other with some distrust. It seems that this person is too zealous, goes too far. Identity relationships are of great educational importance, as they allow you to look at yourself from the outside, objectively assess your strengths and weaknesses. And looking at yourself from the outside is not always a pleasant thing. Even your own voice, recorded on a tape recorder and then listened to, does not seem to be the same, much worse than you imagine. These relationships help develop an adequate (correct) self-esteem.
2. Dual relationship
The most comfortable and necessary relationships for a person are in family, friendship, cooperation: where one is weak, the other is strong. Partners see the difficulties, tasks and problems of each other. Mutual assistance is very effective, provided that responsibilities are properly distributed. This happens naturally and without unnecessary controversy. There is no leader in these relationships. Leadership at every moment passes to the one who is better versed in aspects of the situation. Partners willingly respond to each other's proposals and requests, constantly providing mutual assistance in difficult situations, both spiritual and material. It's a laid-back, pleasant relationship that never gets boring. Disputes arising from differences in thinking styles are educational in nature and enliven communication. Over time, pleasant relaxation leads to contemplation and focus on each other.
These are relationships of complete psychological complement, they are the most convenient, there is no need to adapt to each other. Communicating with the dual, a person can remain himself. There is a natural division of duties due to nature itself, and a person in such a pair gets the opportunity to do what is feasible and interesting for himself.
Conflicts rarely arise in dual couples, and if they do, they are quickly and painlessly resolved. Partners approach each other like two halves of a torn photograph, together making up one whole. But precisely because mutual understanding is quickly established and there are no internal sources of tension, you do not immediately distinguish the dual from other people. Dual seems too simple and clear, and therefore not worthy of attention. This is the first position that a person can take when he meets his dual. It is more typical of extroverts. The second position is when you say to yourself: he is too good for me, I can hardly like him. This position is more typical for an introvert. Both of these positions are found in people who had no experience of dual communication in childhood.
How to feel the effect of duality? During communication with the dual, a person does not initially experience much comfort. Everything proceeds normally and does not cause any emotions. The dual is perceived as a shadow, as something quite natural and therefore meaningless. How much you needed this person, you perceive only when you broke up with him. A person perceives and experiences the loss of the dual very acutely, for a long time he does not find a place for himself. Having got used to the duality, having gained the experience of dualization, you finally begin to realize that his presence calms you down, gives you a sense of security. With favorable subtypes, this effect is enhanced even more.
However, the importance of dual relations should not be overestimated. This is the norm of relations for everyday life, for everyday life. Having acquired duality, a person wants more, namely the social significance of his personality, some kind of struggle, deviation from the norm. Within the framework of duality, this goal is not achieved. But without dual security, it is extremely difficult for a person to achieve social recognition. Well, in general, a person cannot do without dualization only in two cases: firstly, when a person’s life itself is at stake, i.e. for survival in adverse conditions of the social environment, and secondly, when a person moves up the social ladder in a highly competitive environment, i.e. for a career.
3. Activation relations
These relationships are the easiest, communication is fastened almost immediately. There are no difficulties in communication, which at first pleasantly surprises. Partners, as it were, "warm up" each other, encourage each other's activity. Such communication, especially with favorable subtypes, is very attractive. Contact here is established faster than with the dual. However, over time, “overheating” sets in, fatigue appears from a partner who constantly activates you. Partners begin to make increased demands on each other. This leads to useless arguments and mutual frustration. Problems still have to be solved by everyone on their own. There comes emotional, and then physical overwork and fatigue from communication. Requires periodic rest from each other.
In this case, you need to move away from him. These relationships are good for spending leisure time, when you can relax, take Bad mood, stressful condition. The presence of strangers is beneficial and helps to distract from misunderstandings. Partners quickly forget grievances. A switch of attention or a break in communication normalizes the relationship. After a while, you want to experience the action of activation again. Relationships can become pulsating.
However, such pleasantness and ease of communication, which you really appreciate on vacation, is replaced by problems when partners are taken for joint daily activities. It hurts that they start giving each other advice on weak features, instead of taking these problems on themselves. However, the usefulness of such verbal instructions cannot be denied. The only bad thing is that, no matter how you treat your weak qualities, you still won’t be able to develop them in yourself the way you would like. Another difficulty is that the activators transmit each other's information in a completely different form than we would like to hear it. To one, it seems too vague, fuzzy, and to another, on the contrary, too rough, grounded, shallow. This is explained by the fact that in an activation pair one person is always rational, and the other is irrational. However, the content of the information suits each other.
Activation relationships are not well-suited for everyday life, because they do not provide optimal life functions. Their purpose is communication on holidays or in general in free time when you need to rest, not work. Two dual dyads, meeting each other, due to the activation relationship, experience a feeling of pleasant excitement and elation, a “festive” atmosphere is created. Too close and long contact depletes the activators. Doing one thing together is also difficult because of the unreliability, unpredictability of the partner. Everyone does as he wants, completely disregarding the partner. In fact, you can never fully rely on each other. The term "activation" in the full sense is suitable for two introverts who really become more active, open together. For two extroverts, it seems to act with the opposite sign: it calms, cools, introverts this couple.
4. Mirror relationship
These relationships got their name due to the fact that the words of one are reflected, as in a mirror, in the actions of the other. What one of the "mirrors" likes to talk about, the other unconsciously realizes with his behavior. However, such an implementation is never complete, 100%. The mirror turns out to be distorted, as each one corrects, corrects his actions based on completely different norms of behavior than the partner. For this reason, there is bewilderment, and sometimes claims to each other. Everyone seeks to correct the partner's behavior, but such attempts at re-education have no chance of success.
There is a lack of warmth in these relationships. Both seek to teach and change the other, to impose their opinion. They are so similar and at the same time different from each other that both want to eliminate this difference. Usually discussions are peaceful and do not worsen relations. When the distance approaches, irritation may arise due to the inability to convince the partner. In addition, people are too understandable to each other to be constantly interesting. Relationships can be effective in discussing and solving problems that are within the power of both, but if a discussion arises, each will remain in his own opinion.
On the other hand, if we take into account the purely verbal side of communication, the mirror relationship can be called the relationship of constructive criticism. The fact is that in a mirror pair, both partners are always either theorists or practitioners. Therefore, they will always find common topics for conversations and discussions. Moreover, everyone sees only 50% of the same problem, so it is always interesting what the “mirror man” thinks about the same thing. As a result of joint work, mutual correction and clarification takes place. Criticism is almost always constructive, as it can really be taken into account.
These relationships are well suited for friendship based on shared interests and hobbies. Mirrorers are often good friends, they are interested in being together, although communication lacks complete frankness and warmth. A truly warm atmosphere arises only when the dual of one of them appears, which is necessarily an activator of the other. Subtypes have a rather strong effect on these relationships. If one of them has enhanced rationality, then a partner with enhanced irrationality is needed for the stability of the mirror pair. In the opposite case, they are combined much worse, and joint work is difficult due to the large difference in tempo.
For family life, these relationships are undesirable: the small goals of the partners coincide, but the global, far-reaching ones do not. There are also different ways to achieve the goal. This is based on the same discrepancy between first-order functions - rationality and irrationality.
5. Business relationship
Such relationships are effective when it is necessary to organize a new business, overcome difficulties, cope with an extreme situation, or win the competition. But these attitudes can change if general reasoning or creative discussions begin to prevail over real actions. In such cases, effective mutual assistance will be difficult due to different approaches to the same problem.
Despite the fact that partners can correctly assess the results of each other's work and are able to understand the interlocutor, they try to impose their understanding of the essence of what is happening on the other. Such disputes in the future can lead to finding faults and cooling relations. However, the difference in their worldviews maintains interest in each other. It is possible to find a compromise, exchange requests and suggestions. A common goal and active actions significantly improve relationships.
6. Mirage relations
The comfort of these relationships is relatively good, as long as the partners show attention to each other and mutual sympathy. Ignoring the views and interests of a partner can lead to conflicts over trifles, which, as a rule, are quickly forgotten. Communication is relaxing or distracting. Arguments are rare and usually end in a compromise solution.
Partners strive for moral support and mutual assistance, but a lack of understanding of the motives, goals and actions of the other has an inhibitory effect on their joint activities and sometimes makes it impossible. It is very difficult to choose a course of action that would suit both. At times, relationships become good, even warm, when partners relax together or discuss extraneous topics. Differences in views and the ineffectiveness of mutual assistance are compensated by the pleasant emotional nature of the relationship, when the partner does not seem so far from the ideal.
7. Quasi-identical (parallel) relations
Good relationship for camaraderie and cooperation, but not very favorable for closer relationships. There is a desire to understand the partner, to help him, to give advice. The views and methods of the other are unusual and interesting. This gives rise to many discussions and disagreements, but there is a desire to find a compromise. When approaching, especially when personal interests are affected, even a small quarrel can quickly destroy this relationship. There is a difficulty in mutual understanding and inability to take into account the interests of another.
In joint work, the difference in approaches leads to a desire to move away from the partner and do everything in your own way. Partners show interest in the same things, but view them from different points of view. Each prefers to go his own way, not looking back at the opinion and experience of the other. Because of this, both feel some unreliability of the partner, the ability to quit at a difficult moment, although these suspicions are usually unfounded.
8. Conflict relations
The most difficult relationship. There is a mutual imposition of one's own views and approaches in work and unwillingness to accept the life values of another. This leads to constant suppression of each other. Partners notice the slightest flaws in each other, often exaggerating them. They often argue, disagree, do not listen to the other, or do not recognize his arguments. Even jokes and compliments are misunderstood. All this does not contribute to the manifestation of sensitivity, mutual assistance, attention to the needs and interests of another. Over time, tension in relationships due to the ability to aggravate any situation and constant resentment cause a desire to move away.
Such relationships are difficult both in personal life and in joint work. At the beginning of the acquaintance, when the conflictors are still at a distance, they often sympathize with each other, admire the strengths of the other, and exchange views with interest. In the transition to more frequent and closer contacts, mutual irritation and misunderstanding arise. It is advisable to adhere to established traditions and warn of all changes in advance. Only a careful attitude towards each other can save these relationships.
9. Relationships of redemption / complete opposites (discussion of opposing opinions)
This is a relationship in which it is difficult to achieve complete mutual understanding. Despite mutual interest and commonality of views, partners often argue over petty contradictions, which they tend to pay too much attention to. By sticking out shortcomings and inability to support the initiative of another, they extinguish his activity in any activity. It is difficult to find tangible support in business in the face of such a partner, but the exchange of opinions, requests and proposals is always interesting.
It is better for them to work separately, as they constantly pay attention to the partner’s minor mistakes. This is especially unpleasant in the presence of strangers. Therefore, the third partner violates the unstable equilibrium even more. If personal interest is involved, this relationship can collapse. They are more tolerant at some distance. With closer and longer contact, fatigue and irritation occur due to protracted disputes.
10. Superego relationship (struggle of opposites)
This is a relationship of rivalry partners. Everyone tries to impress the other, to prove to him his importance or priority in something. Difficulty in understanding leads to a loss of a sense of trust and hope that you will be correctly understood. We have to adapt to each other, look for common ground, but the balance in relations does not come for long. Partners are very emotional about each other and can unwittingly hurt. Sometimes it seems that the other is doing everything out of spite.
Mutual irritation can develop into sharp conflicts, especially with closer relationships or a clash of personal interests. Mutual deafness is manifested in the lack of due attention to the interests of the other and the imposition of one's point of view. A rest from communication is required, after which relationships are sometimes restored. At a distance, this can be quite pleasant companionship with an interesting exchange of opinions. Lack of mutual understanding and lack of support in business over time leads to cooling.
11. Relationships
This is a good relationship for discussing common topics together, but difficult in more intimate relationships. Partners are well aware of the motives of the other and have common goals, but since they usually have different approaches to solving problems, they consult with each other, trying to find a compromise. If this does not happen, mutual distrust may arise and, as a result, disagreements and conflicts. There is a need for independence and freedom from each other.
Due to the heightened vision of the shortcomings of the other, the partners lack the proper tact in evaluating his performance. They can exert emotional pressure on each other, demanding the adoption of the decision that seems to them the only right one. The actions of a partner sometimes seem devoid of common sense or unpredictable for both. Routine is contraindicated for them. New experiences bring an unexpected release of tension into relationships. In companies, these relationships improve because the partner's behavior in contacts with other people is usually pleasant.
12. Semi-dual relations (incomplete addition)
Partners are attentive to each other's difficulties and problems and are responsive to proposals for cooperation. However, in joint work there is not enough coherence, individualism and stubbornness are manifested. Advice, complaints and requests, as a rule, are perceived correctly and it seems that the partner is ready for their implementation, but it does not always suit both. Everyone takes care, first of all, of their interests and conveniences, and only after that creates the necessary comfort for the partner. By their difference of views, they can arouse mutual interest. The partner seems mysterious and unpredictable, it is difficult to understand him. This is a romantic relationship in which everyone keeps something back. When approaching, due to the difference in worldviews and frequent disputes, fatigue from communication arises, but reconciliation occurs quite quickly, as soon as the partners rest from each other. 
There are two types of the most complex, asymmetric relationships in which equality of positions is impossible. These are relationships that drive progress in society, but, due to increased energy-information exchange, create unnecessary tension in personal life. These include the relationship of social ordering and social audit. Therefore, we will simultaneously consider two types of relations, united by a common name, but ambiguous in nature. In the relations of social order, this is the relationship of the transmitter of the order (customer) with the receiver of the order (executor), and vice versa, the executor of the order with the customer. In the relations of social audit - the relationship of the auditor (controller) with the audited (controlled) and the audited (controlled) with the auditor (controller). Let us consider these dual relations, which can achieve a short-term unstable balance with mutual maneuvering, in more detail.
13-14. Relations of social order (contract)
The executor of the order (receiver) in the presence of the customer (transmitter) is activated, trying to help him in some way. He understands the needs of a partner well, but reciprocity happens only at the beginning of communication. Over time, the harmony in relations is violated due to the fact that the customer does not perceive the arguments of the performer, tries to impose his point of view on him, even to guide his behavior. At the same time, the performer feels that it is difficult for him to refuse anything to such an authoritative partner. Inequality of positions in the future can lead to disputes and the desire of the performer to move away from his partner. In industrial relations, such a removal allows the executor of the order to perform his work more efficiently, and in his personal life leads to tension and conflict.
The customer (transmitter) perceives his partner as a person who needs his patronage and advice. He is impressed by the desire of the performer (receiver) to understand him and help in difficult situations, but from the point of view of the customer, effective assistance is not obtained, because he unwittingly underestimates the abilities of his performer or makes increased demands on him. The customer can take on some of the duties of the contractor, but over time this leads to overwork of the customer, he loses interest in his partner. The customer may experience a feeling of irritation due to the inability to understand the requirements and claims of the contractor. The latter, in turn, trying to reach mutual understanding, begins to overdramatize what is happening. It seems to him that the customer does not take into account his interests, he makes attempts to re-educate the partner, but it turns out to be useless, he still does not understand what they want from him.
The case may end in a break in relations if the performer does not come to terms with the role of the slave and does not stop finding fault with his partner instead of simply trying to help him and without further ado to do a common thing. It is the business that unites this couple, then the relationship becomes stimulating and productive.
15-16. Relations of social audit (control)
This is one of the most complex types relations in which there is usually no equality. At first, the audited (controlled) suffers more from the stubbornness and uncompromising nature of the auditor (controller), who is convinced that he is right. It seems to him that the partner is dissatisfied with him and seeks to re-educate him, imposing his values. In response, the other begins to follow every mistake of the auditor, proving to him that he is also not without sin. Mutual claims and intransigence can destroy relationships.
At best, partners value the other's ability to solve a difficult problem for him. In these relations, there is understanding until the auditor (controller) shows excessive adherence to principles, which hurts the audited (controlled) one. Then he begins to avoid communication with the auditor, or begins to find fault with him in response. To the auditor, the partner seems dull, or deliberately avoiding his duties. There is a desire to help the auditee, to teach something. However, the partner does not accept the advice and demands of the auditor, thereby causing bewilderment and even irritation of the latter. Clarification of relations can develop into a conflict. At the same time, mutual grievances and claims seem to the other unfounded, and shortcomings - exaggerated.
If the auditor stops re-educating the auditee and shows a tendency to compromise, and the auditee does not delve into the shortcomings of the auditor, this relationship can be stimulating and fruitful. It is only necessary to remember that the auditor sets the tone in these relations, relegating the role of the follower to the partner. The leader must be humane, but the follower must not pretend to be the leader in order to maintain the relationship.
One should not underestimate the potential application of socionics both in personal life and in other areas of activity, for example, in medicine. Unfortunately, for many doctors it remains a mystery why, despite a successful operation or treatment, some patients cannot recover for a long time. And this often happens because there are people next to them in the ward, communication with which they are morally and physically depressing.
It is extremely rare for people to be psychologically compatible at all levels of interaction. Even the best of relationships - dual - have a different degree of comfort and often also require correction. Socionics methods allow modeling the development of relations between people and revealing the hidden causes of misunderstandings. Any relationship can always be improved if you know and follow the rules for the interaction of different personality types.
Conventions for relationship types:
T- identical (similar)
D- dual (complementary opposites)
BUT- activation (toning)
W- mirror (mutual correction)
De- business (inciting to action)
M- mirage (relaxing)
Se- superego (mutual selfishness)
Pp- redemption (repayment by opposite opinions)
kW- quasi-identical (parallel)
To- conflict (relationships of misunderstanding)
Ro- related (problematic)
Pd- semi-dual (incomplete addition)
P- transmitter of social order (customer)
P- receiver of a social order or contract (performer)
R- auditor (social controller, educator)
R- auditable (under control, accountable)
To determine the type of relationship with the person you are interested in, you need to find the conditional letter designation of the type of relationship, which is located in the table at the intersection of the names of your personality type (left) and your partner's personality type (above). 
I hope that knowledge of the basics of socionics will help you in the formation of more harmonious relations in society.
Society does not consist of separate individuals, but reveals the sum of those connections and relations in which these individuals are relative to each other. The basis of these connections and relationships is formed by the actions of people and their mutual influence, which are called interactions. Interaction- this is the process of direct or indirect influence of objects (subjects) on each other, giving rise to their mutual conditioning and links1.
In interaction, the relation of a person to another person as to a subject who has his own world is realized. Under the interaction in social philosophy and psychology, as well as management theory, in addition, it is understood not only the influence of people on each other, but also the direct organization of their joint actions, which allows the group to realize common activities for its members. The interaction of a person with a person in society is also the interaction of their inner worlds: the exchange of opinions, ideas, images, the impact on goals and needs, the impact on the assessments of another individual, his emotional state.
Interaction is the systematic and constant performance of actions aimed at eliciting a response from other people. The joint life and activity of people both in society and in an organization, in contrast to the individual, has more severe restrictions on any manifestations of activity or passivity. In the process of real interaction, adequate representations of the employee about himself and other people are also formed. The interaction of people is the leading factor in the regulation of their self-assessments and behavior in society.
In the organization there are two types of interaction - interpersonal and intergroup, which are carried out in the system of interpersonal relations and communication.
Interpersonal interaction in the organization- these are long-term or short-term, verbal or non-verbal contacts between employees within groups, departments, teams, which cause mutual changes in their behavior, activities, relationships and attitudes. The more contacts there are between their participants and the more time they spend together, the more profitable is the work of all departments and the organization as a whole.
Intergroup interaction- the process of direct or indirect action of many subjects (objects) on each other, generating their interdependence and the peculiar nature of the relationship. Usually it is present between whole groups of the organization (as well as their parts) and is its integrating factor.
Interpersonal relationships (relationships)- these are the relationships between people, subjectively experienced and in which the system of their interpersonal attitudes, orientations, expectations, hopes is manifested, which are determined by the content joint activities 1. In an organization, they arise and develop in the process of joint activities and communication.
Communication- a complex multifaceted process of establishing and developing contacts and connections between people, generated by the needs of joint activities and includes the exchange of information and the formation of a unified strategy for interaction, mutual synergy2. Communication in organizations is included mainly in the practical interaction of people (joint work, teaching) and provides planning, implementation and control of their activities. The direct basis of communication between people in an organization is a joint activity that unites them to achieve a specific goal. A broader understanding of the factors that motivate people to communicate is outlined in Western scholarship. Among them, first of all, the following can be mentioned:
Exchange theory (J. Homans): people interact with each other based on their experience, weighing possible rewards and costs;
Symbolic interactionism (J. Mead, G. Bloomer): the behavior of people in relation to each other and objects of the surrounding world is set by the values that they provide to them;
Impression management (E. Hoffman): situations of social interaction similar to dramatic performances in which actors try to create and maintain pleasant impressions;
Psychological theory (Z. Freud): the interaction of people is strongly influenced by ideas learned in early childhood and conflicts.
In the process of selecting personnel, forming production groups and teams, the manager should take into account a number of psychological features of the behavioral reactions of individuals from the initial stage of the development of their interaction.
So, at the initial stage (low level), interaction is the simplest primary contacts of people, when there is a certain primary and very simplified mutual or one-sided "physical" influence on each other for the purpose of exchanging information and communication, which, as a result of specific reasons, can not achieve its goal, and therefore not acquire all-round development.
The main thing in the success of initial contacts lies in the acceptance or non-acceptance of each other by the partners in the interaction. At the same time, they do not represent a simple "sum" of individuals, but are some completely new and specific formation of connections and relationships that are regulated by real or imaginary difference - similarity, similarity - contrast of people involved in joint activities (practical or mental). Differences between individuals is one of the main conditions for the development of their interaction (communication, relationships, compatibility, wear), as well as themselves as individuals.
Any contact begins with a concrete sensory perception of the appearance, characteristics of the activity and behavior of other people. At this moment, as a rule, the emotional-behavioral reactions of individuals to each other dominate.
Relationships of acceptance - rejection are found in facial expressions, gestures, posture, gaze, intonation, an attempt to end or continue communication. They indicate whether people like each other or not. If not, then mutual or unilateral reactions of rejection occur (sliding gaze, pulling away the hand when shaking, avoiding the head, body, guarding gestures, "sour mine", fussiness, running away, etc.). Conversely, people turn to those who smile, look straight and open, turn their faces, respond with a cheerful and cheerful tone, as those who are trustworthy and with whom further cooperation can be developed through joint efforts.
Of course, the acceptance or non-acceptance of each other by partners in interaction has deeper roots. Therefore, it is necessary to distinguish between scientifically substantiated and verified levels of homogeneity - different rarity (degree of similarity - differences) of the participants in the interaction.
The first (or lower) level of homogeneity is the ratio of individual (natural) and personal parameters (temperament, intelligence, character, motivation, interests, value orientations) of people. Special meaning in interpersonal interaction have age and gender differences of partners.
The second (upper) level of homogeneity - heterogeneity (degree of similarity - contrast of participants in interpersonal interaction) - represents the ratio in the group (similarity - difference) of opinions, attitudes (including sympathies - antipathies) to oneself, partners or other people and to the objective world (including in joint activities). The second level is divided into sublevels: primary (or ascending) and secondary (or effective). The primary sublevel is an ascending one, given in interpersonal interaction, the ratio of opinions (about the world of objects and their own kind). The second sublevel is the ratio (similarity - difference) of opinions and attitudes, as a result of interpersonal interaction, the exchange of thoughts and feelings between participants in joint activities1. The effect of congruence also plays an important role in the interaction at its initial stage.
Congruence(lat. Congruens, congruentis - proportionate, appropriate, what coincides) - confirmation of mutual role expectations, the only resonant rhythm, the consonance of the experiences of the participants in the contact.
Congruence provides for the minimum amount of roughness in the key moments of the lines of behavior of the participants in the contact, which results in stress relief, the emergence of trust and sympathy at a subconscious level.
Congruence is enhanced by the feeling of complicity caused by the partner, interest, search for mutual activity based on his needs and life experience. It may appear from the first minutes of contact between previously unfamiliar partners or not arise at all. But the presence of congruence indicates an increase in the likelihood that the interaction will continue. Therefore, in the process of interaction, it is necessary to try to achieve congruence from the first minutes of contact.
In shaping the organizational behavior of the employees of the organization on the basis of the development of interpersonal interaction, it is necessary to take into account a number of factors that contribute to the achievement of congruence. The main ones include:
1) the experience of co-ownership, which occurs in the following cases:
Connectivity of the goals of the subjects of interaction with each other;
Having a basis for interpersonal rapprochement;
Belongings of subjects to one social group;
2) empathy (gr. Empatheia - empathy), which is more easily implemented:
For establishing emotional contact;
Similarities in behavioral and emotional reactions of partners;
Having the same attitude towards a certain subject;
In case of drawing attention to the feelings of partners (for example, they are simply described)
8) identification, which is enhanced:
When living various behavioral processes of the interacting parties;
When a person sees traits of his character in another;
When partners seem to exchange views and conduct discussions from each other's positions;
Subject to commonality of opinions, interests, social roles and positions.
As a result of congruence and effective initial contacts, feedback is established between people - a process of mutually directed responses that contributes to the maintenance of subsequent interaction and during which there is also an intentional or unintentional communication to another person about how his behavior and actions (or their consequences) are perceived or experienced.
There are three main feedback functions. He usually are:
Regulator of human behavior and actions;
Regulator of interpersonal relations;
source of self-knowledge.
Feedback can be of different types and each of its variants corresponds to one or another specificity of interaction between people and the emergence of stable relationships between them.
Feedback can be:
Verbal (transmitted in the form of a voice message);
Non-verbal, that is, such that is carried out with the help of facial expressions, posture, intonation of voice, etc.;
So that is embodied in the form of action, focused on identifying, showing another person understanding, approval, and turns out to be in general activity.
Feedback can be direct and delayed in time, brightly emotionally colored and transmitted by a person to another person as a kind of experience, or be with a minimum manifestation of emotions and corresponding behavioral reactions.
In different options for joint activities, their own types of feedback are appropriate. Therefore, it should be noted that the inability to use feedback significantly hinders the interaction of people in the organization, reduces the effectiveness of management.
The psychological commonality of the participants in organizational interaction, the situation strengthens their contacts, helps the development of relationships between them, contributes to the transformation of their personal relationships and actions into common ones. Attitudes, needs, interests, relationships in general, being motives, determine the promising directions of interaction between partners, while their tactics are also regulated by a mutual understanding of the characteristics of people, their images-representations about each other, about themselves, the tasks of joint activity.
At the same time, the regulation of the interaction and relationships of people is carried out not by one, but by a whole group of images. In addition to the images-representations of partners about each other, the system of psychological regulators of joint activity includes images-representations about oneself - the so-called I-concept, the totality of all the ideas of the individual about himself, which leads to the conviction of his behavior, with the help of which the personality determines who he is. there is. This is also added to the idea of partners about the impressions they make on each other, the ideal image of the social role that partners perform, views on the possible results of joint activities. And although these images-representations are not always clearly understood by people, the psychological content, concentrated in attitudes, motives, needs, interests, relationships, turns out with the help of volitional actions in various forms of behavior directed at a partner.
At the initial stage of the process of interaction between people in a group (organization), active cooperation gradually develops and becomes more and more embodied in an effective solution to the problem of combining the mutual efforts of employees. This stage is called productive joint activity.
There are three forms, or models, of organizing joint activities:
Each participant performs his part of the overall work independently of the other;
The overall task is performed sequentially by each participant;
There is a simultaneous interaction of each participant with all the others (characteristic in the conditions of a team organization of labor and the development of horizontal ties), the actual existence of which depends on the conditions of the activity, its goals and content.
In an organization or its subdivisions, people's aspirations can still lead to clashes in the process of agreeing on positions, as a result of which people enter into "agreement-disagreement" relationships one after another. In case of agreement, partners are involved in joint activities. In this case, the distribution of roles and functions between the participants in the interaction takes place. These relations cause a special direction of volitional efforts in the subjects of interaction, associated either with a concession or with the conquest of certain positions. Therefore, partners are required to show mutual tolerance, composure, perseverance, psychological mobility and other volitional qualities of the individual, based on intelligence and high level his consciousness and self-consciousness. At the same time, the interaction of people is actively accompanied and mediated by the manifestation of complex socio-psychological phenomena, which are called compatibility and incompatibility or wear and tear - lack of distribution. Interpersonal relations in a group (organization) and a certain degree of compatibility (physiological and psychological) of its members give rise to another socio-psychological phenomenon, which is commonly called "psychological climate".
There are several types of human compatibility. Psychophysiological compatibility is based on the interaction of temperamental characteristics, the needs of individuals. Psychological compatibility involves the interaction of characters, intellects, behavioral motives. Socio-psychological compatibility has a prerequisite for coordinating social roles, interests, value orientations of participants. Finally, socio-ideological compatibility is based on the commonality of ideological values, the similarity of social attitudes in relation to various facts of reality related to the implementation of ethnic, class and confessional interests. There are no clear boundaries between these types of compatibility, while the extreme levels of compatibility, for example, physiological and socio-psychological, socio-ideological, have obvious features1.
In joint activities, control by the participants themselves is noticeably activated (self-control, self-examination, mutual control, mutual examination), which affects the executive part of the activity, including the speed and accuracy of individual and joint actions.
However, it should be remembered that the engine of interaction and joint activity is primarily the motivation of its participants. There are several types of social motives for interaction (that is, motives due to which a person interacts with other people):
Maximization of the common (joint) gain (motive of cooperation)
Maximizing your own gain (individualism)
Relative Gain Maximization (Competition)
Maximizing another's gain (altruism)
Minimizing the gain of another (aggression);
Minimization of differences in gains (equality) 2. Mutual control, which is carried out by participants in a joint
activity, may lead to a revision of individual motives of activity, if there are significant differences in their direction and level. As a result, individual motives begin to be adjusted and coordinated.
During this process, thoughts, feelings, relations of partners in joint activities are constantly coordinated in various forms of the impact of people on each other. Some of them encourage the partner to act (order, request, suggestion), others authorize the actions of partners (consent or refusal), others cause a discussion (question, reflection), which can take place in different forms. However, the choice of influence is more often determined by the functional-role relations of partners in joint work. For example, the control function of the leader (manager) encourages him to use orders, requests and authorizing answers more often, while the educational function of the same leader often requires the use of discussion forms of interaction. Thus, the process of mutual influence of partners in interaction is realized. With its help, people "process" each other, trying to change and transform the mental states, attitudes and, ultimately, the behavior and psychological qualities of the participants in joint activities.
Lecture 4. General characteristics of interaction
The essence of interaction. Society does not consist of separate individuals, but expresses the sum of those connections and relations in which these individuals are with each other. The basis of these connections and relationships is the interaction of people.
Interaction- this is the process of direct or indirect influence of objects (subjects) on each other, generating their mutual conditioning and connection.
It is causality that constitutes the main feature of interaction, when each of the interacting parties acts as the cause of the other and as a consequence of the simultaneous reverse influence of the opposite side, which determines the development of objects and their structures. If the interaction reveals a contradiction, then it acts as a source of self-movement and self-development of phenomena and processes.
In interaction, the relation of a person to another person as to a subject who has his own world is realized. The interaction of a person with a person in society is also the interaction of their inner worlds: the exchange of thoughts, ideas, images, the impact on goals and needs, the impact on the assessments of another individual, his emotional state.
Interaction in domestic social psychology, in addition, is usually understood not only as the influence of people on each other, but also as the direct organization of their joint actions, which allows the group to realize common activities for its members. The interaction itself in this case acts as a systematic, constant implementation of actions aimed at causing an appropriate reaction from other people. Joint life and activity, in contrast to the individual, at the same time has more severe restrictions on any manifestations of activity-passivity of individuals. This forces people to build and coordinate
create images of "I - He", "We - They", coordinate efforts among themselves. In the course of real interaction, adequate ideas of a person about himself, other people, and their groups are also formed. The interaction of people is the leading factor in the regulation of their self-assessments and behavior in society.
Features of interaction. Usually distinguish between interpersonal and intergroup interaction.
Interpersonal interaction- these are accidental or intentional, private or public, long-term or short-term, verbal or non-verbal contacts and connections between two or more people, causing mutual changes in their behavior, activities, relationships and attitudes.
The main features of such interaction are:
The presence of an external goal (object) in relation to the interacting individuals, the achievement of which involves mutual efforts;
Explicitness (accessibility) for observation from outside and registration by other people;
Situation - a rather rigid regulation by specific conditions of activity, norms, rules and intensity of relations, due to which interaction becomes a rather changeable phenomenon;
Reflexive ambiguity - the dependence of its perception on the conditions of implementation and the assessments of its participants.
Intergroup interaction- the process of direct or indirect influence of multiple subjects (objects) on each other, giving rise to their mutual conditionality and the peculiar nature of the relationship. Usually it takes place between whole groups (as well as their parts) and acts as an integrating (or destabilizing) factor in the development of society.
The basis of intergroup interaction is the functioning of the phenomena "we" and "they". Any community of people, any relationship between them arise, strengthen and function only as long as the awareness of the feeling of “we”, i.e. while all people (or most of them) consider themselves to belong to this group, identify themselves with it. "We" is nothing but a reflection in the consciousness of a particular social community of the fact of the objective Conditions for the coexistence of its representatives.
But for the stability of the “we” phenomenon, the “they” phenomenon must inevitably exist, i.e. another group, not similar, different from us. It is the realization that there are "they", in turn, gives rise to the desire to self-determine in relation to "them", to separate from "them" as "we". Analyzing the idea of L. Feuerbach about replacing the category of “I” as a subject of knowledge with the category “I and you”, one of the most famous scientists of our country B.F. Porshnev came to the conclusion that social psychology becomes a science only when not “I and you”, but “we and them” is put in place of the original psychological phenomenon, but instead of the relationship of two individuals - the relationship of two communities (Porshnev B.F., 1967).
The “they” phenomenon, just like the “we” phenomenon, has its own real basis: if the objective conditions of life and activity of people, the psychological reflection of which are the “we” and “they” phenomena, coincide, turn out to be the same, then the opposition of one community the other one will fade away sooner or later.
Nevertheless, "we" have always endowed ourselves with more merit than "they." People tend to overestimate the virtues of "their" nation and, conversely, downplay the strengths of others. As for the shortcomings, the opposite is true here. The well-known proverb that “a mote is visible in someone else’s eye, but you won’t notice a log in your own” just clearly characterizes this pattern.
"Our" ideas, views, feelings, behavior are more correct, more just than "theirs". In this case, we are not talking about a real comparison, i.e. not about what is better, based on common sense and worldly logic. A simple person usually does not make such a comparison. “Alien” seems “bad” not because for some reason it is worse than “ours”, but because it is “foreign”.
Lecture 5. The content and dynamics of human interaction
At present, in Western science there are many points of view explaining the reasons for the interaction of people (Table 1). In our country, its study by psychologists is given
very little attention. For a better understanding of its essence, it is necessary to represent, first of all, the epistemology of the emergence and development of interaction, understanding it as a complex multi-stage process of transformation (transformation) of some social-psychological phenomena into others.
It is possible to divide the process of human interaction into three stages (levels): initial, intermediate and final (Scheme 1).
Beginning of interaction. On the first stage(initial level) interaction is the simplest primary contacts of people, when between them there is only a certain primary and very simplified mutual or one-sided "physical" influence on each other for the purpose of exchanging information and communication, which, for specific reasons, may not reach its goals, and therefore not receive all-round development 1 .
The main thing in the success of initial contacts is the acceptance or rejection of each other by the partners in the interaction. At the same time, they do not constitute a simple sum of individuals, but are some completely new and specific formation of connections and relationships, which is regulated by a real or imaginary (imagined) difference - similarity, similarity-contrast of people involved in joint activity (practical or mental). Differences between individuals are one of the main conditions for the development of their interactions (communication, relationships, compatibility, workability), as well as themselves as individuals.
Any contact usually begins with a concrete sensory perception of the external appearance, features of the activity and behavior of other people. At this moment, as a rule, emotional-behavioral reactions of individuals dominate. Acceptance-rejection relations are manifested in facial expressions,
The concept of "contact" is used in several meanings. "Contact" can mean touch (from lat. contactus, contingo- touch, touch, grab, get, reach, have a relationship with someone). In psychology, contact is the convergence of subjects in time and space, as well as a certain measure of closeness in a relationship. In this regard, in some cases they speak of "good" and "close", "direct" or, conversely, of "weak", "unstable", unstable, "mediated" contact; in other cases, about contact as a necessary condition for correct interaction. The presence of contact, i.e. known stage of intimacy, is always regarded as the desirable basis for effective interaction.
1The presented article is devoted to such totally widespread phenomena of society as attitude and relationships. In the process of research, the fact of a fundamental difference in the meanings of the concepts "relationship" and "relationship" is stated due to the possession of the last property of emergence. At the same time, the “attitude” is evaluative in nature and expresses a certain position of the actor towards the other side, determining both the nature of his individual actions and all his activities. The presence of two sides related to each other also predetermines the use of the concept of “relationship”, which is defined as a manifestation of the mutual activity of actors relative to each other in an emotional or evaluative form. At the same time, social relations are often conscious in terms of their necessity and are formed in the form of a certain relatively self-sufficient, operationally closed integrity. Social interactions are defined as the source and manifestations of attitudes and relationships in society. In general, this topic is of fundamental importance, since in the sociological reference literature there is no fundamental distinction between the meanings of the concepts sought.
attitude
relations
actions
relationship options
relationship signs
relationship
social relations
interactions
1. Andreeva G.M. Social psychology: a textbook for higher. school - M.: Aspect-Press, 1996. - 375 p.
2. History of sociology in Western Europe and the USA: a textbook for universities / Ed. G.V. Osipov. - M.: NORMA, 1999. - 563 p.
3. Kolesov D.V. Society (psychology of connections and relations): textbook. allowance. - M .: Publishing House of Moscow. psycho-social in-ta; Voronezh: MODEK, 2003. - 765 p.
4. Krysko V.G. Social psychology: textbook. for stud. higher textbook establishments. – M.: Vlados press, 2002. – 447 p.
5. Marx K. On the Critique of Political Economy // Marx K., Engels F. Soch. Ed. 2nd. -M.: Gospolitizdat, 1959. - T. 13. - S. 489-499.
6. Marx K. Capital // Marx K., Engels F. Soch. - M.: Goslitizdat, 1962. - T. 23. - 908 p.
7. Myasishchev V.N. Personality and neuroses. - L .: Publishing House of Leningrad State University, 1960. - 428 p.
8. Novinsky I.I. The concept of connection in Marxist philosophy. - M.: Higher school, 1961. - 200 p.
9. Platonov Yu.P. Fundamentals of social psychology. - St. Petersburg: Speech, 2004. - 620 p.
10. Smirnova E.O. Formation of interpersonal relations in early ontogenesis // Questions of psychology. - 1994. - No. 6. - P. 5–15.
11. Social psychology: textbook. allowance for students. higher textbook institutions / A.N. Sukhov, I.V. Solodnikova, V.V. Solodnikov, V.N. Kazantsev and others; ed. A.N. Sukhova, A.A. Derkach. – M.: Academy, 2001. – 600 p.
12. Sociological encyclopedic dictionary / editor-coordinator G.V. Osipov. – M.: Infra-M, 1998. – 481 p.
13. Sushkov I.R. Psychology of relationships. - M.: Academic Project, IP RAS; Yekaterinburg: Business book, 1999. - 447 p.
14. Sztompka P. Sociology: analysis modern society: textbook. – M.: Logos, 2005. – 655 p.
15. Yadov V.A. Strategy of sociological research: description, explanation, understanding of social reality: textbook. for universities. – M.: Dobrosvet, 1998. – 596 p.
People's relationships are extremely important for them, representing a special kind of reality, which is definitely not reducible to interaction, joint activity, or communication. The fundamental significance of this reality for people's lives is beyond doubt.
In everyday life, the concepts of “relationship” and “relationship” are used. And it is by no means always taken into account that in their meaning these concepts - despite their kinship and apparent identity - differ.
The singular or plural determines in this case the difference in the meanings of each of the terms. For example, a person has a “relationship” (i.e., he relates to someone or something in a certain way), and he maintains “relationships”. Therefore, the concept of "relationship" expresses a certain position of the actor to the other side. Thus, an attitude is an established stable emotional-volitional attitude of an agent towards something or someone, i.e. it is an expression of his position. And "relationships" are interactions.
An analysis of the phenomenon of "relationship" allows us to highlight several important points.
1. The word "relationship" in Russian is a suspensive noun (from the verb "wear"), the meaning of which means the action of the relationship. This action assumes that someone is relating something. Therefore, it implies the existence of a subject (source) of what relates, an object (where or to whom it relates) and a content (i.e., what relates). Moreover, the specificity of this action lies in the fact that it is not a thing or object, but something ideal, which can only be in the mind of the agent. Therefore, you can only attribute what the actor already has.
2. The object cannot be perceived by the actor otherwise than through a relation. The very phenomenon (or awareness) of an object means its reference to some ideal form that exists in the mind of the agent. Moreover, if the content of the relationship is far from always realized by the agent, then the object of this relationship must necessarily exist for him in one way or another, and, therefore, be perceived by him. Thus, the relation can be represented as an action that unfolds at the level of consciousness and in which the real and ideal form actually coincide.
3. There is an ambiguous relationship between attitude and action. On the one hand, relation cannot be reduced to action for the following reasons: unlike action, relation has no purpose and cannot be arbitrary; attitude is a state rather than a process; the relationship does not have culturally normalized external means of implementation and, therefore, cannot be represented and assimilated in a generalized form, it is always extremely individual and specific.
At the same time, attitude is inextricably linked with action in the following way: it can generate action; is formed and arises in action; changes and transforms in action.
It turns out that a relation can be both a source of action and its product. But it may not be, because. far from always the attitude expresses itself in external activity.
4. In any respect, one side of it is always a living being, and the other side can be both a living being and an inanimate object, as well as natural phenomena and various situations.
5. The system of needs, motives, and inclinations of a person is determined through the attitude, this is a generalized internal condition of the system of his actions. In fact, the attitude expresses the active position of a person, determining both the nature of his individual actions and the nature of his entire activity. In this case, the attitude acts as an indicator and means of expression, objectification of all human actions.
6. The attitude is holistic, being the integral position of the actor as a whole. The relation cannot be made either impersonal or partial. It is always the expression of the actor as a whole, it is personal and holistic. It may not be a part of a person, not individual processes in the human body, but the whole person as a conscious individual. In the concrete variety of manifestations of a relation, the content of the agent's reactions and the meaning of these reactions are always united.
7. Attitude, covering current processes, includes the prospect of certain reactions, not limited to reactions only in the present. In its meaning, the relation has not only a procedural, but also a potential nature of reactions, which allows other actors to foresee the behavior of the person they are looking for in relation to certain phenomena of life in the future.
Attitude arises where there is a meritorious phenomenon. Moreover, the attitude merges with the attitude of readiness for a certain activity, the occurrence of which depends on the presence of such conditions as the need that actually manifests itself in a person, and the objective situation of satisfying this need.
The reason for the attitude may be the values and deep structures of the unconscious. They are one of the main forms of reflection by a person of the reality around him and express the existence of the vital significance of the object to which it arises, for the one in whom it arises (forms, forms).
The relation is connected with the fact of reflection, which precedes the interaction. The genesis of the attitude of one or another personified actor, manifested in his specific actions, can be represented by the following logical scheme: the values of the actor are reflected in his vision of these values, which, in turn, forms the attitude of the actor, which determines his certain actions.
The attitude "finds a concrete embodiment in any contacts, interactions of a person with a person, material and ideal things and phenomena" . "In any act of interaction between people, there is always their relation to another." Repeating again and again under the influence of a stable system-forming factor (factors) and becoming a stable phenomenon, remaining even without the direct influence of the factor (factors), and not a single (situational) attitude of the actor to someone or something, the attitude retains its status precisely relations.
A person in his relation manifests himself as an active figure, selectively connected with reality, characterized by this selectivity and on its basis directing his activity. Attitude determines the nature of the interaction of the actor with the environment. This happens through evaluation. Therefore, the meaning of the concept of "relationship" is always evaluative. And "a person is able to show his assessment, and realize, and express" . Therefore, the relationship can be diagnosed.
It is obvious that the attitude itself can never arbitrarily arise from anywhere: it is a consequence of certain actions of the phenomena of the environment or the internal factors of the actor, which cause him to have a certain attitude towards someone or something. Thus, the relationship, in fact, is a manifestation of interaction, although to a greater or lesser extent mediated, and at the same time, a consequence of interaction.
Therefore, the relationship should be considered as a kind of special case of the consequence of interactions, which has certain specific characteristics. These include the actor's evaluative position (the content of which can only be rational, only emotional, or combining the features of both) and the one-sided activity of the actor (without the direct active participation of the other side in it).
The evaluative position of the desired figure in the context of his attitude to one or another phenomenon (phenomena) of the environment can be represented in the form of two scales (respectively, for rational and emotional evaluation). By setting the evaluation norms for each scale, it is possible to identify the actor's evaluative position towards a certain environmental phenomenon.
Consideration of the phenomenon of relation in the context of its understanding as a manifestation of interactions (even very indirect ones), allows us to state the existence of two types (kinds) of relations:
One-sided relationship (in this case, the interaction is either very indirect and often non-obvious or direct; but in both cases, the subject of the relationship is one side, i.e. the desired actor);
The mutual relationship of the parties involved in the interaction (as a rule, in this case the term “relationship” is used and often in the plural, i.e. “relationship”; sometimes the term “relationship” is used, but the context allows it to be interpreted as a mutual relationship, i.e. e. relationship).
Possessing the features that characterize the relationship, the relationship has the following specific features:
1) “The very fact that there is a relationship (meaning “relationship”) means that it has two sides that relate to each other.”
2) Relationship (meaning “relationship”) should be understood as mutual dependence of the related parties.
3) The state of the relationship (meaning “relationship”) refers to the various sides of the participants in the relationship. Those. relationship is a holistic phenomenon that embraces both each side of the actors showing the mutual relationship, and each of them, representing in the aggregate integrity.
4) A common feature of the relationship is the influence of the participants in the relationship mutually on each other.
The following components of relationships are distinguished: cognitive; affective; behavioral.
In a relationship, there is a mutual evaluation by the figures of each other. Evaluating each other figures can either hide their evaluation of the other side, or not hide it. Or they may want the other party to know about this assessment. An indifferent attitude of one or the other side to the evaluation is also possible.
The various variants of the relation described above (where the evaluation was singled out as the objective core of any relation) can be simplistically classified as follows:
Attitude (manifestation of the activity of the figure in the form of emotion and / or evaluation);
Relationship (manifestation of mutual activity of actors relative to each other in the form of emotions and / or assessments).
At the most general level of consideration, both attitude and relationship are a specific consequence and manifestation of interaction, where the carriers of activity in certain cases are personified or collective figures.
Both attitude and relationship manifest themselves as a single act or separate episodic acts that do not represent a systemic unity.
Repeating again and again under the influence of a factor (several factors) that determines (determines) the stable predetermination of such a repetition, individual relationships as a result of these repetitions acquire a qualitatively different character, becoming now a different - systemic - phenomenon. The reason for this is that in this case a certain integrity of relationships is formed, which is already qualitatively different from separate, episodic and unrelated relationships. Accordingly, this formed integrity has new properties, namely, emergent ones. Such phenomena are commonly referred to as "relationships" (they will be discussed below).
Thus, based on the criterion of singularity / systemicity, the phenomena described above can be arranged in the following order (increasing from single to systemic): attitude; relationship; relations (they can also be called “relationships” if a mutual assessment of the parties involved in the relationship is supposed).
It involves the actualization of knowledge in a figurative-conceptual form about the community or about the personality of those who interact;
At the same time, it updates a certain treatment with the figures who have entered into interaction;
The presence of a goal pursued by a personified figure, interacting with other figures;
The presence of needs that directly affect the nature of the relationship of the personified figure with the figures who have interacted with him;
The presence of an emotional reaction of one figure, relative to another, who entered into interaction with him;
Assumes the selectivity of the manifestation, determined by the number of signs that are significant for the establishment and reproduction of relationships;
The psychological attitude of the personified figure to social objects contains an emotional attitude.
The mutual relation of each interacting agent to each other is determined by:
The type of interaction that occurs under specific conditions;
The degree of expression of this type of interaction.
The nature of the interaction in this case can be essentially determined by the nature of the mutual assessment of each other by the interacting (or capable of interacting) parties, since Evaluation has a motivating or inhibitory (obstructive) force with respect to interaction.
And this force can remain potential, i.e. not lead to interaction (even with a favorable assessment). Or it can be relevant and in this case manifest itself in interaction. It is this aspect of interaction that is usually denoted by the term "maintain relations", i.e. this phrase reflects both the fact of interaction and the fact of evaluation of the other party and / or the interaction itself.
Most interactions that occur between the same actors and are not only repetitive or regular, but also regulated, are called social relations. Social (“public” according to G.M. Andreeva) relations are “given” in interaction through that real social activity, the form of organization of which interaction is. In structures that have not been transformed by commodity exchange, social (“public” according to K. Marx) relations appear for people “as their own personal relations, and are not clothed in the costume of social relations of things, products of labor” .
“Social relations exist when they are not only felt or recognized as such by the individuals participating in them, but their necessity is also realized, and also to the extent to which mutual rights and obligations of participants occur from them. In other words, social relations are relations that have an objective character.
Relationships exist between individual people (personalized actors), an individual person (actor) and collective(s) actor(s), collective actors.
It should be clarified that the concept of "social relations" is narrower than the concept of "human relations".
Relationships are the result of a network of repetitive interactions that form relationships, create them. At the same time, in established relationships, ongoing interactions occur in the network of these already established relationships and are more or less influenced by them.
Already established relationships can be largely independent of ongoing interactions. Those. represent an operationally closed integrity. Moreover, they can influence (and often even decisively) the interactions that take place. That is, having been formed as a result of stable interactions and, therefore, being the result of interactions, established relations, having become integrity and acquiring a certain independence due to their own potential, are themselves, in turn, able to determine the content, mode and trends of interaction (and often in a decisive way ).
An important factor predetermining the formation of social relations in the form of a certain relatively self-sufficient operationally closed integrity is the social relationship. More precisely, the repetitive social relationship of the parties is so long that a stable evaluation complex (a certain evaluation) is formed, often having an emotional connotation. The established assessment of the actor or actors (especially those having an emotional modality) literally "penetrates" the emerging or established social relations and either strengthens them, or destroys them, or manifests itself neutrally.
In the process of relations, the formation of a “cumulative fund” of a common and new one, created by the interacting parties, is possible. It can be thoughts, feelings, actions, states, structures. At the same time, it can be difficult to say where one’s own is, and where is someone else’s - both of them become “ours”.
Thus, on the basis of the study, it can be argued that:
There is a fundamental difference between the meanings of the concepts "relationship" and "relationship";
Attitudes and relationships are a consequence and manifestation of interactions in society.
Reviewers:
Ignatiev V.I., Doctor of Philological Sciences, Professor, Head of the Department of Sociology, Novosibirsk State Technical University, Novosibirsk;
Romm M.V., Doctor of Philological Sciences, Professor, Dean of the Faculty of Humanitarian Education, Novosibirsk State Technical University, Novosibirsk.
The work was received by the editors on December 30, 2014.
Bibliographic link
Kreik A.I., Kolomenskaya A.S., Komf E.V. ATTITUDE AND RELATIONSHIPS AS A CONSEQUENCE AND MANIFESTATION OF INTERACTIONS IN SOCIETY // Fundamental Research. - 2014. - No. 12-11. – S. 2496-2500;URL: http://fundamental-research.ru/ru/article/view?id=36721 (accessed 03/20/2020). We bring to your attention the journals published by the publishing house "Academy of Natural History"
Ecology of Consciousness: Psychology. Frequent mistakes in understanding people's motives cause most conflicts and emotional disorders.
Relationships are something to MAINTAIN
My title may seem like a gimmick. It is clear that no rules can fully define such a complex mechanism as human behavior. But despite this, most people tend to make the same mistakes. These errors are quite frequent and cause conflicts. Knowing these rules will help you avoid such mistakes.
People strive to be nice, friendly, interesting, etc.
In books about human relationships, you can find two statements that are quite distant from each other:
- It is clear that people generally understand the forces that drive them, but do not always manage them well. They want to be nice, considerate, etc.
- Quite complex theories can explain human behavior, but they are difficult to formalize.
Between these two points, there seems to be useful information that can be applied in practice, although this is not always obvious. Frequent mistakes in understanding people's motives cause most conflicts and emotional disorders.
seven rules
Here are the seven rules I'm talking about. Of course, this is not an exhaustive list, or vice versa, these seven rules can be somehow reduced to three, more significant ones. However, seven is a good number.
Rule 1: Do not look for malice in what can be easily explained by vanity
People don't worry or think about you. This is not because they are low or harmful, but simply becausethey are mostly self-centered.
Most of the thoughts and aspirations of a person are directed at himself. His goals. His problems. His feelings. Much less of his focus is on relationships and how they affect him. What does a friend think of me? How did my boss rate my work?
And a person pays very little attention to sympathy. Empathy is a rare case where one person experiences the emotions and problems of another person. Instead of asking myself what a friend thinks of me, I ask myself what a friend thinks.
This small percentage of attention is shared among the many people they know. As a result, each of us occupies a value close to zero in the minds of other people. Even if you are in the thoughts of another person, then this is more likely to apply to your relationship, but not to you personally.
What does this mean?
- All kinds of embarrassment and embarrassment do not make sense. Since others focus a very small part of their thoughts on you,your self-esteem is much more important.
- People who appear low or mean usually don't do it on purpose. Of course, there are exceptions, but more often than not, the resentment you get from them is a side effect, but was not the main reason for their actions.
- Relationships are something to be maintained. Don't expect them to fold by themselves.
Rule 2: Social behavior is rarely obvious
Basically this rule means that most of the intentions behind our actions are hidden. If a person feels depressed or angry, the resulting behavior usually distorts their true feelings. If I feel that you are treating me with disdain, I can restrain myself now, but ignore you later.
A person can say “fine” while experiencing the opposite feeling.
Hence, in order to be effective, you need to not only hear the person, but also focus on how they feel. Demonstrate trust, build rapport, try to learn it little by little. By focusing on empathy, you are more likely to be able to understand the other person and solve a possible problem.
Another application of this rule ismost of the time no one knows how you feel. So don't get angry when people don't understand you.
Rule 3: Behavior is largely dictated by selfish altruism
To say that everyone is completely selfish would be an overstatement. Of course, there are acts of kindness, sacrifice and love. But most (not all, but most) actions proceed from the principles of selfish altruism.
Selfish altruism is when helping you directly or indirectly benefits me. Here are a few examples of how this applies:
1. Deals- If I buy a car, both I and the dealer get some benefit. I get the car I want. The dealer makes money to improve his life. This is the predominant form of selfish altruism that has no emotional ties.
2. Family- We are arranged so that we are inclined to protect people connected with us by ties of kinship. Sometimes this rule can be transferred to close friends and loved ones.
3. Status Helping someone is a sign of strength. People can offer their help to increase self-esteem and reputation.
4. Assumed reciprocity- Such a relationship can be based on the idea that if I help you one day, someday you will help me.
Sometimes behavior falls outside of these categories. Actions can be completely disinterested. But they are a minority, while most actions can be explained by some form of selfish altruism.
How can this rule be applied? You can understand people's motives and treat them like selfish creatures.Find ways to help people. Don't expect them to offer you help beyond selfish altruism. This is certainly possible, but unlikely.
Rule 4: People don't have very good memories.
A person will almost certainly forget the name of another person who introduces himself very quickly. People rarely remember the details of events after a few days. People tend to remember similarities rather than differences.
Humans are naturally forgetful, so don't take it as intent or disinterest if someone has forgotten about you. The other side of this rule is that you can demonstrate the reliability of your memory either by developing it or by using some technical memory systems.
Rule 5: Everyone is emotional
Perhaps this is an exaggeration. But in general, people tend to have stronger feelings than they show outwardly. People who regularly exhibit outbursts of anger, depression, or enthusiasm are frowned upon by much of society. This is especially true for men.
As a consequence, one should not think that everything is fine just because no one has a nervous breakdown. To be effective and anticipate a problem situation in time, one must be sensitive to the undercurrents of the human condition.
Additionally, you can say that people will assume that everything is fine with you, unless you explicitly demonstrate the opposite.
Rule 6: People are lonely
This seems like a broad generalization. But it's amazing how many people who seem to have a lot suffer from loneliness. As social beings, humans are particularly sensitive to any threat of being taken out of society. Lonely can be even surrounded by many people.
Since loneliness is quite common, in this sense (of loneliness), you will never be alone. Seriously, pay attention to the interests of other people, maybe you will find common ground with your interests. On the other hand, others people are unlikely to find out your interests on their own if you do not tell them about it.
Rule 7: People are self-absorbed
It's kind of like repeating rule number one. The facts that people tend to be extremely self-interested, that they are often lonely, that they are more emotional and sensitive than they let on, give us food for thought and increase our effectiveness.
I love optimistic, but at the same time realistic ideas about people. People in general try their best, but make mistakes and suffer from unintentional egocentrism. In other words, they basically look like you.published