E-mail: Send an e-mail
Introduction. The problem of differences between generati-ons rises in article. It is widely discussed in society. It is specified in article that the most part of researches of a question represents comparison of people of different age The author assumes that when studying differences between generations, the approaching based on division of selection on the basis of identification with generation will be more justified. The research objective consisted in identification of differences in hardiness level at people who carry themselves to different generational groups.
Materials and methods. 146 inhabitants of the Ural region of Russia (66 men and 80 women) aged from 17 up to 72 years participated in research. Russian-language version of the questionnaire of “Hardiness Survey” used for determination of level of hardiness of respondents. Kruskal-Wallis H test applied to mathematical data processing.
Results. It is revealed that congruent generational identificati-on prevails in all age groups (except group of people who are more senior than 60 years). Participants of a research identify themsel-ves more often with the Soviet or Post-Soviet generations. Signifi-cant distinctions on scales “Control”, “Challenge” and to the general point according to the questionnaire of hardiness between the people identifying themselves with different generations is established.
Discussion. Results of a research confirmed a hypothesis that the level of hardiness depends on identification with generation: the most durable are the people carrying themselves to the senior generations (post-war and Soviet), the people associating themselves with transitional generation are less durable. The lowest level of hardiness is observed at the people attributing themselves belonging to transitional generation.
Conclusion. Generations as independent social groups can act as the basis for identification of the personality since as a result of a research it was established that people with ease carry themselves to generational group which connects them with peers on the basis of community of values. The cultural and historical conditions of formation of the personality uniting people in one generation influence the level of hardiness of the person. In the Ural region trends of pendula in hardiness level when comparing gene-rations (a trend of U-shaped form) are observed: at representatives of the Soviet and Post-Soviet generations the level of hardiness is higher, than at representatives of transitional generation.
generational identification, hardiness, post-war generation, Soviet generation, transitional generation, Post-Soviet generation
Inhabitants of the Urals are inclined to identify themselves with generation of the peers. More this trend is characteristic of representatives of the Soviet and Post-Soviet generations.
Level of conviction is that the person can operate events of the life, has significant differences in different generational groups: the highest values are noted at representatives of post-war and Soviet generations, and the lowest — at representatives of transitional generation.
The belief that experience represents new points of personal growth depends on belonging to generation: the highest rates are recorded at representatives of post-war and Soviet generations, and the lowest — at representatives of Post-Soviet generation.
1. Howe N., Strauss W. (1991) Generations: the history of Americas future, 1584–2069. New York, William Morrow Paperbacks Publ. 538 р.
2. Dam M.J., Noben C.Y., Higgins M. (2017) Bridging generation gaps in medical education: a “light bulb moment” at the Association for Medical Education in Europe annual conference in Barcelona. Medical teacher. 39 (11), 1195–1196. DOI: 10.1080/0142159X.2017.1288865 (Scopus).
3. Campbell W., Campbell S., Siedor L., Twenge J. (2015) Generational differences are real and useful. Industrial and Organizational Psychology. 8 (3), 324–331. DOI: 10.1017/iop.2015.43 (Scopus).
4. Cucina J.M., Byle K.A., Martin N.R., Gast I.F. (2018) Generational differences in workplace attitudes and job satisfaction: Lack of sizable differences across cohorts. Journal of Managerial Psychology. 33(3), 246–264. DOI: 10.1108/JMP-03-2017-0115 (WoS, Scopus).
5. Rudolph C.W., Zacher H. (2017) Considering generations from a lifespan develop-mental perspective. Work, Aging and Retirement. 3, 113–129. DOI: 10.1093/workar/waw019 (WoS)
6. Yakimova, Z.V. & Masilova M.G. (2017) Pokolenie Z kak potencial'nyj segment rynka truda [Generation Z as potential segment of labor market]. Azimut nauchnykh issledovaniy: pedagogika i psikhologiya. 4, 21, 341–345. (In Russian).
7. Astashova, Yu.V. (2014) Teoriya pokolenij v marketinge [The theory of generations in marketing]. Vestnik Yuzhno-Ural'skogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. 8, 1, 108–114. Seriya «Ekonomika i menedzhment» [Series “Economics and Management”]. (In Russian).
8. Schaberle W., Roth R., Lothaller H., Endler C. (2018) Psychological distress, closeness, distance and sense of coherence (SOC) of physiotherapists in individual therapy. Physioscience. 4, 161–169. DOI: 10.1055/a-0749-0831 (WoS).
9. Bue S.L., Kintaert S., Taverniers J., Mylle J., Delahaij R., & Euwema M. (2018) Hardiness differentiates military trainees on behavioural persistence and physical performance. International journal of sport and exercise psychology. 16 (4), 354–364. DOI: 10.1080/1612197X.2016.1232743 (WoS).
10. Maddi S.R., Khoshaba D.M., Harvey R., Fazel M., Resurreccion N. (2011) The personality construct of hardiness, V: Relationships with the construction of existential meaning in life. Journal of Humanistic Psychology. 51 (3), 369–388. DOI: 10.1177/0022167810388941 (WoS, Scopus).
11. Postnikova M.I. (2016) Osobennosti zhiznestojkosti molodezhi [Features of resilience of youth]. Nauchnyy dialog. 1, 49, 298–310. (In Russian).
12. Lyons S.T., Schweitzer L. (2017) A qualitative exploration of generational identity: making sense of young and old in the context of today’s workplace, Work, Aging and Retirement. 3 (2), 209–224. DOI: 10.1093/workar/waw024 (WoS).
13. Lyons, S.T., Schweitzer, L., Urick, M.J. & Kuron L. (2019) A dynamic social-ecological model of generational identity in the workplace. Journal of Intergenerational Relationships. 17 (1), 1–24. DOI: 10.1080/15350770.2018.1500332 (WoS).
14. Twenge M. (2017) IGen: Why today’s super-connected kids are growing up less rebellious, more tolerant, less happy — and completely unprepared for adulthood — and what that means for the rest of us. New York, Simon and Schuster. 352 р.
15. Sivrikova N.V. (2014) Features of social identification of inhabitants of South Ural // В мире научных открытий. 9 (57), 322–337. DOI: 10.12731/wsd-2014-9-22
16. Stone-Johnson C. (2018) Generational identity, educational change, and school leadership. New York, Routledge Publ. 108 р.
17. Jun Y., Chun-Sheng Yu., Jun W. (2018) Work values across generations in China. Chinese Management Studies. 12 (3), 486–505. DOI:10.1108/cms-12-2017-0357 (WoS, Scopus).
18. Pishchik V.I. (2018) Tipologicheskie i identifikacionnye priznaki pokolenij [Typological and identification signs of generations]. Russian psychological journal. 15, 2, 215–236. (In Russian).
19. Leontyev D.A. & Rasskazova E.I. (2006) Test zhiznestojkosti [Test of resilience]. Moscow, Smysl. 63 p. (In Russian)
20. Shvareva E.V. (2010) ZHiznestojkost' u podrostkov iz raznoj obrazovatel'noj sredy [Resilience at teenagers from the different educational environment]. Nauka i sovremennost'. 6-1, 411–414. (In Russian).
21. Kuasheva E.R. (2011) ZHiznestojkost' i cennostno-smyslovye predpochteniya lichnosti: soglasovannost' i protivorechiya (na materiale sotrudnikov organov vnutrennih del) [Resilience and valuable and semantic preferences of the personality: coherence and contradictions (on material of staff of bodies of internal affairs)]. Vestnik adygeyskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Seriya 3 “Pedagogika i psikhologiya” [Series 3 “Pedagogics and psychology”]. 3, 173–178. (In Russian).
22. Ivanova N.L. & Rumyantseva T.V. (2009) Sotsial'naya identichnost': teoriya i praktika [Social identity: theory and practice]. Moscow, Sovremennyy gumanitarnyy universitet. 453 p. (In Russian).
23. Parry E., Urwin, P. (2017) The evidence base for generational differences: Where do we go from here? Work, Aging and Retirement. 3 (2), 140–148. DOI: 10.1093/workar/waw037 (WoS).