Introduction. The concept of psychological well-being is based on the thesis that a person always strives for development, self-realization and self-actualization. He feels his psychological integrity and satisfaction, depending on how successfully he fulfills these needs. The purpose of the study is to identify the features of the psychological well-being of students with different

levels of subjective experiences of loneliness.

Materials and Methods. The study was carried out based on the main provisions of the system-structural, psychological and socio-psychological theories. The empirical study went through four stages: selection of diagnostic tools; ascertaining input diagnostics (N = 60) using selected methods; processing of received data; analysis and summing up the results of the study. Two scales were used: subjective experience of loneliness by S. V. Dukhnovsky and psychological well-being” by K. Riff (adaptation by T. D. Shevelenkova, P. P. Fesenko); methods of descriptive and correlation analysis (Spearman’s correlation coefficient).

Results. The relationship between subjective loneliness and such scales of psychological well-being as “positive relationships with others” and “autonomy” was revealed, and a training program was drawn up aimed at correcting psychological well-being through strengthening communication skills to establish positive relationships between people, which in turn will help reduce the experience of subjective loneliness and increase the level of psychological well-being among university students. The training was used in the educational process and in the process of individual counseling.

Discussion. Particular attention in the process of discussing the results was paid to creating favorable conditions, rules and methods for implementing an active style of communication; development of skills of psychological self-regulation, interpersonal communication and empathy in a situation of loneliness; development of communicative competence; development of abilities in creating a favorable psychological contact in communication; knowledge of their capabilities in the process of effective communication; expanding knowledge of human emotions.

Conclusion. The study confirms the theoretical significance of the work, which expands the understanding of the currently developing definition of the well-being of the individual as a key priority in life, focusing on his loneliness, psychological resources and opportunities. The practical significance of the study lies in the development and implementation of training interaction for the development of the components of psychological well-being, taking into account the severity of the subjective experience of loneliness.

Between subjective experiences of loneliness and the backbone elements of psychological well-being (positive relationships with others; autonomy; environmental management; personal growth; goal in life; self-acceptance; integral indicator) and subjective experiences of loneliness, there may be relationships that reveal differences in levels of anxiety.

It is possible to correct the subjective experiences of loneliness of modern students in the conditions of constructive targeted psychological and pedagogical interaction.

1. Shamionov, R.M. (2010), O nekotorykh preobrazovaniyakh struktury sub"yektivnogo blagopo-luchiya lichnosti v raznykh usloviyakh professional'noy sotsializatsii [On some transformations of the structure of the subjective well-being of the individual in different conditions of professional socialization], Mir psikhologii, no. 1 (61), pp. 237–249. EDN: LTFDER (In Russian).

2. Oboznov A.A. & Bessonova Yu.V. (2018), Kul'tura bezopasnosti v tekhnogennom mire [Safety culture in the technogenic world], Mir psikhologii, no. 4 (96), pp. 115–123. EDN: WIISLV (In Russian).

3. Ryff C.D. & Keyes C.L.M. (1995), “The structure of psychological well-being revisited”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, vol. 69, pp. 719–727. (Scopus, WoS).

4. Shamionov R.M. & Beskova T.V. (2018), Metodika diagnostiki sub"yektivnogo blagopoluchiya lichnosti [Methods of diagnosing the subjective well-being of the individual], Psikhologicheskiye issledovaniya, vol. 11, no. 60, pp. 8–14. EDN: YLUVCH (In Russian).

5. Chopik W.J. (2022), “A space-time theory of psychological development”, Current Research in Ecological and Social Psychology, vol. 4, pp. 100085. DOI 10.1016/j.cresp.2022.100085.

6. Zhuravlev A.L. & Yurevich A.V. (2014), Kollektivnyye smysly kak predposylka lichnogo schast'ya [Collective meanings as a prerequisite for personal happiness], Psikhologicheskiy zhurnal, vol. 35, no. 1, pp. 5–15. EDN: RXREYJ (In Russian).

7. Schultz K., Taylor E., McKinney S. & Hamby S. (2023), “Exploring strengths, psychological functioning and youth victimization among American Indians and Alaska Natives in four southern states”, Child Abuse & Neglect, vol. 11, pp. 106197. DOI 10.1016/j.chiabu.2023.106197.

8. Wang X., Fielding K.S. & Dean A.J. (2022), “Nature is mine/ours”: Measuring individual and collective psychological ownership of nature”, Journal of Environmental Psychology, vol. 85, pp. 101919. DOI 10.1016/j.jenvp.2022.101919. (Scopus, WoS).

9. Dukhnovskiy S.V. (2009), Diagnostika mezhlichnostnykh otnosheniy. Psikhologicheskiy praktikum [Diagnostics of interpersonal relations. Psychological workshop], Rech’, St. Petersburg, 141 p. ISBN 978-5-9268-0771-9. (In Russian).

10. Shevelenkova T.D. & Fesenko P.P. (2005), Psikhologicheskoye blagopoluchiye lichnosti [Psychological well-being of the individual], Psikhologicheskaya diagnostika, no. 3, pp. 95–121. (In Russian).

11. Perevozkin S.B. & Perevozkina Yu.M. (2017), Metody matematicheskoy statistiki v nauchno-issledovatel'skoy rabote psikhologa [Methods of mathematical statistics in the research work of a psychologist], Novosibirskiy gosudarstvennyy universitet ekonomiki i upravleniya, Novosibirsk, 162 p. ISBN 978-5-7014-0797-6. (In Russian).

12. Korniyenko D.S. (2014), Lichnostnyye prediktory psikhologicheskogo blagopoluchiya [Personal predictors of psychological well-being], Fundamental'nyye issledovaniya, no. 11-2, pp. 429–432. EDN: TQHXIV (In Russian).

13. Howell A. J. & Demuynck K. M. (2023), “Psychological flexibility and the Eudaimonic Activity Model: Testing associations among psychological flexibility, need satisfaction, and subjective well”, Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science, vol. 27, pp. 65–71. DOI 10.1016/j.jcbs.2022.12.002. (Scopus, WoS).

14. Ojala A., Kostensalo J., Viik J., Matilainen H., Wik I., Virtanen L. & Muilu-Makela R. (2023), “Psychological and physiological effects of a wooden office room on human well-being: Results from a randomized controlled trial”, Journal of Environmental Psychology, vol. 89, pp. 102059. DOI 10.1016/j.jenvp.2023.102059. (Scopus, WoS).

15. Douglas I.P., Murnane E.L., Bencharit L.Z., Altaf B., Reis C.J.M., Yang J., Ackerson M., Srivastava C., Cooper M., Douglas K., King J., Paredes P.E., Camp N.P., Mauriello M.L., Ardoin N.M., Markus H.R., Landay J.A. & Billington S.L. (2022), “Physical workplaces and human well-being: A mixed-methods study to quantify the effects of materials, windows, and representation on biobehavioral outcomes”, Building and Environment, vol. 224, pp. 109516. DOI 10.1016/j.buildenv.2022.109516. (Scopus, WoS)

16. Kislitsyna O.A. (2016), Izmereniye kachestva zhizni i blagopoluchiya: mezhdunarodnyy opyt [Measuring the quality of life and well-being: international experience], Institut psikhologii Rossiyskoy Akademii nauk, Moscow, 62 p. ISBN 978-5-9940-0541-5. (In Russian).