Introduction. In current conditions, professional development does not have rigid boundaries, so students, in order to maintain the ability to compete and develop, independently model their professional route, in addition, they will have to overcome uncertainty in all areas of social life, cope constructively with stressful situations, which can be facilitated by tolerance to uncertainty as a personal characteristic. The goal is a theoretical substantiation and experimental verification of the relationship between tolerance for uncertainty and coping strategies among students of the Faculty of Psychology.

Materials and methods. The study of the relationship between uncertainty tolerance and coping strategies among students of the Faculty of Psychology includes three stages: search and preparatory, experimental, control and generalizing. Experimental base of the study: South-Ural state Humanities-Pedagogical University”, faculty of psychology (N = 17). The study was implemented using theoretical (analysis and modeling, generalization, goal setting) and empirical methods: ascertaining experiment, testing according to the following methods: (Badner uncertainty tolerance scale (adaptation by T.V. Kornilova, M.A. Chumakova); “Indicator coping-strategies” (D. Amirkhan); “Diagnosis of coping behavior in stressful situations” (S. Norman, D. F. Endler, D. A. James, adapted by T. L. Kryukova); method of mathematical statistics: rank correlation criterion C. Spearman.

Results. The study revealed the predominance of the average level of tolerance and intolerance; tolerance at a high level and above average — not revealed. The majority of respondents showed an average level of dominance of the problem-solving strategy; the strategy of seeking social support is also at the middle level, which reflects the trend towards social mobility and the establishment of interpersonal relationships. Least of all respondents use the strategy of avoiding problems; emotion-oriented coping is predominant. The results of mathematical and statistical processing showed that a statistically significant correlation was established between tolerance/intolerance to uncertainty and indicators of coping strategies (orientation to emotions and problem solving).

Discussion. In the process of discussing the cognitive results of tolerance for uncertainty, its potential role in influencing the attitude of students towards the educational environment was revealed. Students who are tolerant of uncertainty can take an active part in social activities and can contribute not only to their own development, but also to the development of the educational organization. To achieve the necessary results in educational and social activities, it is necessary to take into account the level of stress tolerance.

Conclusion. The study showed the need to monitor students' tolerance for uncertainty with the subsequent use of its data in the process of modeling practical programs for transforming the educational environment. In the process of implementing psychological and pedagogical programs, special attention should be paid to the study of tolerance, intolerance, coping strategies, stress resistance and take into account the determinants, personality characteristics, integral individuality, and mental characteristics of each student. This approach will allow psychology students to develop constructive coping strategies to overcome situations of uncertainty and stress.

The model for the formation of constructive coping strategies for students of the Faculty of Psychology to overcome situations of uncertainty consists of interrelated components: goals, objectives, formative interactions, methods used in formative work, results.

The phenomenon of tolerance for uncertainty is not yet sufficiently disclosed in the psychological and pedagogical literature, however. the available conclusions allow defining the basic concepts, characteristics, choosing methods for the ascertaining experiment, conducting exercises, games, conversations, solving situational problems.

The level of manifestation of constructive coping strategies among students of the Faculty of Psychology to overcome situations of uncertainty confirms the combination of both poles (tolerance and intolerance) with the predominance of one of them.

1. Jach H.K., Smillie L.D. (2019), “To fear or fly to the unknown: tolerance for ambiguity and Big Five personality traits”, Journal of Research in Personality, vol. 79, pp. 67–78. DOI 10.1016/j.jrp.2019.02.003

2. Caulfield M., Andolsek K., Grbic D. (2014), “Roskovensky L. Ambiguity tolerance of students matriculating to U.S. medical schools”, Academic Medicine, vol. 89, pp. 1526–1532. DOI 10.1097/ACM.0000000000000485.

3. Blustеin D.L., Ali S.R. & Flоrеs L.Y. (2019), “Vоcatiоnal Psychоlоgy: Еxpanding thе Visiоn and Еnhancing thе Impact”, Thе Cоunsеling Psychоlоgist, vоl. 47 (2), pp. 166–221. DOI: 10.1177/0011000019861.

4. Kasymova, G.K. (2019), Integrativnaya model' preodoleniya stressa studenta i prepodavatelya: korrektsiya otnosheniy v obrazovatel'nom, professional'nom i lichnostnom vzaimodeystvii [Integrative model of overcoming student and teacher stress: correction of relations in educational, professional and personal interaction]. Vestnik Natsional'noy Akademii Nauk Respubliki Kazakhstan, 3, 169-179. (In Russian).

5. Eley D.S., Leung J.K., Campbell N. & Cloninger C.R. (2017), “Tolerance of ambiguity, perfectionism and resilience are associated with personality profiles of medical students oriented to rural practice”, Medical Teacher, vol. 39, pp. 512-519. DOI 10.1080/0142159X.2017.1297530.

6. Kornilova, T.V. (2013), Rigidnost', tolerantnost' k neopredelennosti i kreativnost' v sisteme intellektual'no-lichnostnogo potentsiala cheloveka [Rigidity, tolerance for uncertainty and creativity in the system of intellectual and personal potential of a person]. Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta, 4, 36-47. (In Russian).

7. Hein G., Morishima Y., Leiberg S., Sul S., E. Fehr E. (2019), “The brain’s functional network architecture reveals human motives”, Science, vol. 351 (6277). pp. 1074–1078. DOI 10.1126/science.aac7992.

8. Erickson, E. (1996), Identichnost': yunost' i krizis [Identity: youth and crisis]. Progress, Moscow, Russia. ISBN. 5-01-004479-Х (In Russian).

9. Han P.K., Schupack D., Daggett S., Holt C.T. & Strout T.D. (2015), “Temporal changes in tolerance of uncertainty among medical students: insights from an exploratory study”, Medical Education Online, vol. 20, pp. 285. DOI 10.3402/meo.v20.28285.

10. Dolgova V.I., Kondratieva O.A. & Sencheva L.A. (2018), Model' pedagogicheskoy korrektsii konfliktnogo povedeniya studentov v obrazovatel'noy srede kolledzha [Model of pedagogical correction of conflict behavior of students in the educational environment of the college], Kontsept, 9, 39–46. (In Russian). DOI 10.24422/MCITO.2018.9.16650. (In Russian).

11. Amirkhan J.H. (1990), “A factor analytically derived measure of coping: The Coping Strategy Indicator”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, vol. 59 (5),pp. 1066–1074. DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.59.5.1066.

12. Kryukova T.l. (2001), O metodologii issledovaniya i adaptatsii oprosnika diagnostiki sovladayushchego (koping) povedeniya [On the methodology of research and adaptation of the questionnaire for the diagnosis of coping (coping) behavior], Sbornik nauchnyh trudov “Psikhologiya i praktika” [Collection of scientific papers “Psychology and practice”], Izdatel'stvo Kostromskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta imeni N. A. Nekrasova, Kostroma, no. 1, pp. 70–82. (In Russian).

13. Sorokova M. (2014), Metody matematicheskoy statistiki v psikhologii [Methods of mathematical statistics in psychology], Palmarium Academic Publishing, Saarbrucken. ISBN 978-3-659-98884. (In Russian).

14. Gol I. & Erkin O. (2019), “Association between cultural intelligence and cultural sensitivity in nursing students: A cross-sectional descriptive study”, Collegian, vol. 26, pp. 485–491.

15. Dimitrijevich A.A., Starchevich J. & Marjanovich Z.J. (2019), “Can ability emotional intelligence help explain intercultural effectiveness? Incremental validity and mediation effects of emotional vocabulary in predicting intercultural judgment”, International Journal of Intercultural Relations, vol. 69, pp. 102–109. DOI 10.1016/j.ijintrel.2019.01.005.

16. Lauriola M., Foschi R., Mosca O. & Weller J. (2016), “Attitude toward ambiguity: empirically robust factors in self-report personality scales”, Assessment, vol. 23, pp. 353–373. DOI 10.1177/1073191115577188.

17. Liou K.T., Jamorabo D.S., Geha R.M., Crawford C.M., George P. & Schiffman F.J. (2019), “Foreign bodies: is it feasible to develop tolerance for ambiguity among medical students through Equine-Facilitated learning?”, Medical Teacher, vol. 41, pp. 960–962. DOI10.1080/0142159X.2019.1578876.

18. Corradini A., Antonietti A. (2019), “Mirror neurons and their function in cognitively understood empathy”, Consciousness and Cognition, vol. 22(3), pp. 52–61. DOI 10.1016/j.concog.2013.03.003.

19. Troitskaya E.A. (2018), Osobennosti empatii v polikul'turnoy srede [Features of empathy in a multicultural environment], Vestnik Moskovs-kogo gosudarstvennogo lingvisticheskogo universiteta, 6 (814), 217–229.

20. Dolgova V.I., Belikov V.A. & Kozhevnikov M.V. (2019), “Partnership as a factor in the effectiveness of practiceoriented education of students”, International Journal of Education and Practice, vol. 2, pp. 78–87. DOI 10.18488/journal.61.2019.72.78.87.