Introduction. The article considers the problem and specifics of the study of social norms at the present stage of development of psychological science. The author proposes an analysis of the results of an empirical study of cognitive (cognitive distortions, cognitive maps), characterological (neuroticism level) features and features of the moral profile of a person with different levels of moral and ethical responsibility.

Materials and methods. The main methods of research are the analysis of the literature on research issues; author's research questionnaire I. S. Luchinkina "Cognitive distortions in the course of the Internet"; method of diagnosing the level of moral and ethical responsibility of the individual I. G. Tymoshchuk; G. Eysenck's personal questionnaire; method MFQ-32 J. Graham, J. Haidt, B. Nosek (adapted); SPSS-26 (Kruskal-Wallis H-test).

Results. In the course of the study, significant differences were obtained in terms of cognitive, characterological and behavioral characteristics of a person with different levels of moral and ethical responsibility. It was revealed that groups with an average and high level of moral and ethical responsibility are characterized by average indicators on the scale of neuroticism. In the course of the study, it was analyzed that all respondents in the sample have high rates of cognitive distortions, however, respondents with an average level of moral and ethical responsibility demonstrate the highest values for this parameter.

Discussion. The results of the study showed that respondents with an average level of moral and ethical responsibility, largely, are characterized by the severity of cognitive distortions and neuroticism, while respondents with a high level of moral and ethical responsibility demonstrate average values for these indicators. Respondents with an average level of moral and ethical responsibility, who demonstrate high rates of neuroticism and cognitive distortions, need an empirical study. The results obtained can form the basis of a program of psychological support for a person with destructive forms of moral and ethical responsibility

Conclusion. The study made it possible to identify and statistically confirm cognitive (cognitive distortions, cognitive maps), characterological (neuroticism level) features and features of the moral profile of a person with different levels of moral and ethical responsibility. It was revealed that high rates of neuroticism, cognitive distortions and cognitive map-review, to a greater extent, are inherent in respondents with an average and high level of moral and ethical responsibility. It should be noted that the least pronounced values on the scale of concern in the study of the moral profile of the individual were found among respondents with a low level of moral and ethical responsibility.

Existing studies of social norms do not fully represent the cognitive and characterological specificity of a person with different levels of moral and ethical responsibility;

There are significant differences in cognitive, characterological and moral profile indicators among respondents with different levels of moral and ethical responsibility.

1. Cherkesov B.A. (2007), Social'nye normy i deviantnoe povedenie [Social norms and deviant behavior], Fundamental’nye issledovaniya, 9, 112–116. (In Russian).

2. Kryukova Y.E. (2022), Social'nye normy v obshchestve kak neot"emlemyj faktor formirovaniya i ocenki reputacii individa [Social norms in society as an integral factor in the formation and evaluation of an individual's reputation], Filosofskaya mysl', 7, 87–96. (In Russian).

3. Kislyakov P.A. (2020), Moral'nye osnovaniya i social'nye normy bezopasnogo prosocial'nogo povedeniya molodezhi [Moral Foundations and Social Norms of Safe Prosocial Behavior of Youth], Obrazovanie i nauka, 22, 116–138. (In Russian).

4. Shestopal E.B. & Selezneva A.V. (2018), Sociokul'turnye ugrozy i riski v sovremennoj Rossii [Sociocultural Threats and Risks in Modern Russia], Sociologicheskie issledovaniya, 10, 90–99. (In Russian).

5. Lebedeva R.V. (2019), Nravstvennaya sfera i lichnostnye osobennosti studentov s raznymi tipami zhiznennyh orientacij [Moral sphere and personal characteristics of students with different types of life orientations], Mir nauki. Pedagogika i psihologiya, 7. Available at: https://mir-nauki.com/PDF/54PSMN219.pdf (Accessed: 10.12.2022). (In Russian).

6. Cheshko V.F. & Glazko V.I. (2009), High Hume (Biovlast' i biopolitika v obshchestve riska) [High Hume (Biopower and Biopolitics in a Risk Society)], Moscow, 375 p. (In Russian).

7. Gilinsky Ya.I. (2022), Kriminologiya postmoderna: o prestuplenii i nakazanii [Postmodern criminology: about crime and punishment], Sociologicheskie issledovaniya, 4, 76–84. (In Russian).

8. Zhikhareva L.V., Luchinkina I.S. & Kolchik E.Yu. (2021), Osobennosti ponimaniya normativnogo povedeniya v real'nom i v virtual'nom prostranstve [Features of understanding normative behavior in real and virtual space], Mir nauki. Pedagogikaipsihologiya, 3, 1–9. (In Russian).