Psychosemantic aspect of the family worldview

 

PSYCHOSEMANTIC ASPECT OF THE IMAGE OF THE FAMILY WORLD

This article presents a theoretical basis for studying the family worldview of each spouse. Drawing on the psychosemantic concept of consciousness, the authors identify possible avenues for studying the nature of married couples' relationships and their influence on their family worldview. The spouses' consciousness is analyzed based on the fundamental tenets of the general psychological theory of activity. Family is characterized as a special type of joint activity. The authors reveal the multilayered nature of family worldviews and outline areas for experimental analysis of family worldviews. A methodological framework for studying spouses' interpersonal relationships is developed, incorporating various theories and concepts of social family psychology: J. Bowlby's work on attachment, M. Bowen's emotional family systems, theories based on role models of behavior and social exchange, and others.

Keywords: psychosemantics, image of the world, consciousness, multi-layeredness, family psychology, experience, joint activities.

Myskin S., Lukyantseva V.

PSYCHOSEMANTIC ASPECT OF THE IMAGE OF THE FAMILY WORLD

The article presents a theoretical justification for the study of the image of the family world that has developed in each of the spouses. Based on the psychosemantic concept of consciousness, the authors show possible directions for studying the nature of a couple's relationships and their influence on the image of the family world. The consciousness of the spouses is analyzed based on the main provisions of the General psychological theory of activity. The family is characterized as a special type of joint activity. The authors reveal the multi-layered nature of the image of the family world. The directions of experimental analysis of the image of the family world are indicated. The methodological basis for the study of interpersonal relationships of spouses, which includes various theories and concepts of social psychology of the family: the work on the study of attachment of J. p. Bowlby, M. Bowen's emotional family systems, theories based on role models of behavior and social exchange, etc.

Keywords: psychosemantics, image of the world, consciousness, multilayering, family psychology, experience, joint activity.

 

This article presents the author's theoretical model of psychosemantic research of the image of the family world as an essential component of the collective consciousness of spouses.

The relevance of examining the psychosemantics of family relations stems from the shift in the psychological hierarchy of values associated with shared life, driven by the global transformation of modern society. The psychosemantic analysis of family relations focuses on the formation and functioning of the individual and social consciousness of spouses. Our study examines the spouses' consciousness from the perspective of the general psychological theory of activity [6], which allows us to define family as a specific type of shared activity, and the object of analysis as the married couple's worldview. It should be noted that in the following discussion, we will use the terms "worldview," "picture of the world," and "world model" interchangeably.

The psychological (psychosemantic) aspect of the problem of spouses' consciousness is manifested in the following contradiction. The institution of the family in contemporary Russian society is undergoing qualitative changes not only in formal terms, but also in substantive ones. Thus, a trend toward an increase in common-law marriages is observed among young people. Young people are reluctant to formalize their relationships for many reasons: they fear legal difficulties associated with a possible divorce; they are trying to protect any material investments in their family made by their parents; they are confident in the temporary nature of their relationships (they settled down for the duration of their studies, a long business trip), etc. Moreover, at the current historical moment, "the state of public life of Russians can be characterized as critical, which is due to the aggressive coloring of social macrorelations" [10, p. 161]. Therefore, understanding and maintaining the value of marital relations is acquiring fundamental significance and a national priority.

In terms of content, marital relationships began to be built on new values. For example, women's economic independence and professional success led to the emergence of so-called egalitarian families. Functional relationships in these families are built on the principle of a "contract of equal status" between spouses. Moreover, this principle extends to all areas of family life: financial management, child rearing, home care, etc. [Ibid.].

Divorce statistics from various countries point to negative trends. According to the US National Center for Health Statistics [22], the divorce rate per thousand people in America reached 2.9 in 2017, which is twice the rate in the 1960s (Fig. 1).

Figure 1. Divorce rates per 1,000 population in various countries (OECD Family Database http://www.oecd.org/els/family/database.htm). Sources: United Nations Demographic Yearbook, Eurostat Demographic Statistics; for Australia, Australian Bureau of Statistics; for Israel, CBS; for Japan, Statistics Japan; for Korea, Korean Statistical Information Service; for the United States, Centers for Disease Prevention and Control

 

The similar value for EU countries has almost doubled since 1965, from 0.8 in 1965 to 1.9 in 2016 [20]. As for the Russian Federation, according to UN data [11], it ranks first in the world with a value of 5 for the proportion of divorces per thousand people.

Despite the seemingly unfavorable divorce picture, the deep structures of Russian public consciousness demonstrate a persistent traditionalism in relation to national archetypal ideas. A study of national value orientations conducted by Russian scholars allows us to assert that "in Russian society, the family is based on the principles of collectivism and serves as a fundamental value" [10, p. 161]. The authors confirm this conclusion with estimates from the Center for Problem Analysis of State Management Design [16]. Of the 16 countries studied, Russians demonstrated the highest level of significance of traditional family relationships (i = 74.97 on a 100-point scale).

As can be seen, the problem of the modern Russian family is characterized by a contradiction between external behavioral characteristics (the prevalence of informal relationships, the increase in divorce) and internal psychological content (the value of family, collectivism). In our opinion, a solution to this contradiction is possible through an analysis of the spouses' perceptions that reveal the psychological content of their life together (joint activities). The "image of the world" is the most appropriate approach for analyzing and revealing the mechanisms of collective consciousness.

The concept of "image of the world" in psychology was first introduced by A.N. Leontiev, who defined this category as a mental reflection taken in the system of connections and relationships of the subject with the world around him [6]. In his works, the image of the world is presented as a holistic, multi-level system of a person's ideas about the world, other people, himself and his activities. A.N. Leontiev believes that the image of the world is multidimensional, including not only the four dimensions of space, but also a fifth quasi-dimension, "in which the objective world is revealed to a person. This fifth dimension is a semantic field, a system of meanings" [Ibid., p. 251]. The inclusion of the fifth dimension is explained by the fact that a person perceives an object impartially "not only in its spatial dimensions and in time, but also in its meaning" [Ibid., p. 253]. It was with the individual meaning of the perceiver that A.N. Leontiev correlated the construction of a multidimensional image of the world in the consciousness of an individual, his image of reality. The statement of A.P. Stetsenko develops this idea: «…The objective world initially appears to the child as filled with meanings, and not as a pile of raw sensory representations, disparate sensory data, which are only gradually understood by him» [15, p. 34].

In psychology, meaning as a leading constituent of consciousness is studied by psychosemantics [12]. V.F. Petrenko gives the following definition of meaning: it is «a unit of ideal constructions, models, in which forms of generalizations of the aggregate social experience are presented» [Ibid., p. 155]. Let us emphasize generalization as a key concept in this definition. Perceiving a particular object of the surrounding world, the subject categorizes it, i.e. «correlates it with a certain standard, stereotype or “type” ... in which the generalized and assimilated social experience of interaction with this class of objects by the subject is recorded» [Ibid., p. 156]. This is where the mechanisms of the generalization process are manifested: the perception and evaluation of the individual through the prism of the content of the set in which this individual is included. In this case, the individual is endowed with essential characteristics, qualities and attributes of the general. V.V. Davydov notes that during generalization, the essential attributes of the object of perception are separated from the unimportant ones; they are contrasted. The ordering and structuring of the essential characteristics of a phenomenon or object is the result of generalization [4]. From this perspective, the consciousness of a married couple can be characterized as follows. The image of the family is constructed based on the subjects' perception of social standards of family relations, which represent the generalized quintessence of cultural experience. In modeling the family, spouses primarily draw on close examples of their parents' family relationships and their characteristics. The parental example, in this case, serves as a cultural standard, the essential characteristics of which the spouses attribute to their relationship. Consequently, spouses perceive and create the family world indirectly, through social models of relationships.

In disclosing the content of the image of the world, V.F. Petrenko notes that its structure includes not only a system of values and knowledge of certain global principles of the material and spiritual world, but also the position of the subject himself [12]. This thesis allows us to assert that the image of the world of spouses, as subjects of joint activity, is built on basic objective categories, as well as subjective categories reflecting subject-subject relations. These basic categories serve as the foundation of the family's image of the world. Moreover, dominant, leading positions in the hierarchy can be occupied by both objective (e.g., quality of life, living conditions, etc.) and subjective (emotionality of relationships, their empathy, trust, etc.). Thus, psychotherapy describes cases in which the collective consciousness of spouses is formed and functions on a strong destructive emotional state, subordinating cognitive structures. An example is the so-called «psychological games» described by E. Berne [2], the «irrational ideas» of A. Ellis [18], etc. The authors note that destructive emotions block reflexive processes, strengthening the unconscious nature of the basic categories of consciousness.

The spouses' worldview is a multi-layered formation. It is primarily created through sensory perception (experience) of the surrounding world, those cultural objects that are included or planned for inclusion in joint activities, as well as oneself in connections and relationships with a spouse. The second layer is created through the expression of these experiences in symbolic form. In other words, the perceived sensory content must be alienated from the subject and perceived secondarily, i.e. consciously. This is possible only in the process of communication, through speech and language. The second layer of consciousness is formed through symbolic perception [12]. In the course of communication, spouses become aware of the basic categories upon which their joint image of the family world is built. This assertion is confirmed by the fundamental tenets of the general psychological theory of activity [6]. The structure of activity, along with other components, includes a goal - an image of the final result. Joint activity is subordinated to a common goal [7]. By engaging in joint activity, people must recognize a common goal. This is possible only through communication [9].

V.F. Petrenko asserts that "the subject's worldview... is revealed through the subject's own development, in the broad context of its meaning-making, 'being that has not yet become'" [12, p. 176]. In other words, the image of the world appears as the sum total of the subject's potentials, which they can and want to realize. Applied to family relationships, the image of the family is a holistic representation of the types of joint activities, social roles, and behavioral models that spouses strive to embody.

Thus, the study of married couples' worldviews can be conducted in the following directions. First, an examination of the spouses' value system, which determines the uniqueness of their collective (family) consciousness. Second, an analysis of the relationship between cognitive and emotional content in the hierarchy of basic categories of collective (family) consciousness. Third, an assessment of the awareness of family relationships, their nature, role repertoire, behavioral patterns, etc., which serves as an indicator of the multilayered/flattened nature of collective (family) consciousness.

Research into the worldview of married couples must be complemented by an examination of their interpersonal relationships. Theoretical tools for analyzing the interpersonal relationships of spouses can be found in generally accepted concepts that reveal specific psychological and socio-psychological patterns. Here is a brief analysis.

Theories based on role models of behavior. The term "social role" as a unit of social structure was introduced into scientific use in 1930 by the American anthropologist R. Linton [24]. Almost simultaneously and independently, this concept, as a type of direct interaction between people, appeared in the works of one of the founders of symbolic interactionism, J. Mead [21]. Even earlier, in 1921, J.L. Moreno (the founder of modern sociology) began to actively use the influence of the role played by an individual on him in his psychotherapeutic practice [8]. In social psychology, the opinion that a role uniquely determines a person's reactions and behavior still dominates [17, pp. 250-256].

A detailed examination of the social roles chosen by individuals and their responses to these roles was the subject of I. Hoffmann's 1959 work, "Presentation in Everyday Life" [3]. Quoting Shakespeare's "All the world's a stage," Hoffmann writes: "Of course, all the world is not a stage, but it is hard to find important areas of life for which this would not be true" [Ibid., p. 272]. This work focuses on the individual's presentation and perception of themselves, and the coordination of their actions depending on the response they receive from others. It is emphasized that in any social interaction, roles mediate each other. The idea of a threat to individuality is constantly evident in Hoffmann's work, and he constantly studies people's attempts to preserve their identity in everyday life—in the face of others and society as a whole.

One of the most prominent family therapists of the 20th century, V. Satir, identified four basic roles played in family relationships: the appeaser, the critic (the critic), the computer (the overly rational person), and the slob [13]. It was noted that playing one role, by initiating a cycle of persistent reactions, activates the playing of other roles. At the same time, if the performer does not receive the desired reinforcement from others, the role quickly ends.

S. Wegszyda-Kroes, a popular American author, consultant, and coach, has explored roles that are now beginning to be recognized as classic in cases of alcohol and drug (chemical) addiction. She defines these roles as: Enabler, Hero, Scapegoat, Lost Child, and Clown [25], suggesting that if a chemically dependent person is present in a family, the behavior patterns of the remaining family members can be characterized by the roles outlined above.

To date, numerous authors have described the concept of pathologizing roles in the family, introduced to understand how dysfunctions in the "husband and wife" subsystem give rise to those forms of deviant behavior that are most frequently encountered in everyday life. H. Richter, in his book "The Family as a Patient," provides a lexical image of a family in which the transition to a system of pathologizing roles is programmed [23].

Our study plans to identify the perceptions of both spouses about the roles they play within a particular family.

Social exchange theory. Research on marriage and close relationships frequently draws on social exchange theory. This approach draws on Thibaut and Kelley's interdependence theory [5, pp. 3-24], which argues that relationship dynamics are the result of a process of social exchange, understood as a series of costs and rewards between partners and other participants in the interaction. This theory's conceptual framework allows for the use of multiple variables (identified through various methods and questionnaires) and explains how their combination influences marital quality and outcome.

For our work, it seems important to determine which parts of interaction with the family system each of the individuals surveyed positions as a personal cost or reward.

Attachment theory. Of particular interest in this study are attachment theories based on D. Bowlby's work [19] on the relationships between newborns and their caregivers. The theory's central premise is that the nature of early close relationships determines how close relationships will develop throughout life. Bowlby believed that the development of attachment to significant adults in primate infants was a result of evolution, as such behavior increased the infant's likelihood of survival in the wild.

Based on this theory, it seems appropriate to identify the characteristics of a couple's relationship with their own parents in terms of attachment.

M. Bowen's family systems theory. This work also plans to utilize the ideas of M. Bowen, an American psychiatrist and psychologist who developed family systems theory. Bowen's theory focuses primarily on the emotional functioning of the family. The human family is described as an emotional field. The term "field" refers to the complexity of emotional stimuli transmitted and perceived by family members at different levels of interaction [1].

M. Bowen's main assertion is that spouses are subject to two opposing forces: the degree of differentiation of each spouse and the degree of anxiety. The concept of differentiation arose from studies of biological cells. Cells in complex organisms differentiate from one another as the organism grows. They become delimited, developing specific functions, but they never completely separate from one another.

M. Bowen used the concept of cellular differentiation as a metaphor to describe intrafamilial relationships. He suggested that people, functioning as healthy cells, achieve their greatest effectiveness when they view themselves as autonomous yet connected to other members of a larger emotional organism, such as the family. Emphasizing the powerful influence of the emotional field on the individual, he wrote: "If you can build interpersonal relationships with every living member of your family, it will contribute more to your personal growth than anything you've ever done before in your life" [Ibid., p. 97].

M. Bowen's theory emphasizes the importance of identifying the degree of differentiation and anxiety of each spouse, which is subject to study within the framework of questions directed at this topic.

It's appropriate to highlight the objective problem of marriage: its perception by spouses as a guaranteed lifelong commitment. Legally formalizing a relationship enshrines the rights to care, fidelity, and affection between partners. Marriage creates a stable, state-protected foundation for creating a shared space for a prosperous existence and raising children. The downside of legally established relationships is the danger of feelings becoming trivialized and losing interest in the partner's personality. Meanwhile, the deep bond between a man and a woman remains the natural mechanism that can withstand the challenges threatening the family in the modern world.

The renowned Russian philosopher V. Solovyov defined marital love as "the attraction of one living being to another for the purpose of union and mutual fulfillment of life." In his pivotal work, "The Meaning of Love," he explores the question of whether love is limited solely to procreation or something more. The philosopher arrives at the concept of absolute wholeness, achieved precisely in these relationships [14, pp. 501–508].

In conclusion, it should be noted that this study of the image of the world of married couples, based primarily on the works of A.N. Leontiev [6 et al.], as well as the study of family interpersonal relationships, will allow us to find out what meaning individuals attribute to themselves and their partner, to the supposed rights and responsibilities, to characterize the marital «self-image», the images of parents, the role aspect of the interaction of spouses, the needs and capabilities of the couple, the idea of rights and responsibilities, the individual significance of each of the listed components.

 

 

Literature

1. Baken K. Murray Bowen's Family Systems Theory. Moscow: Cogito Center, 2015. 496 p.
2. Bern E. Games People Play. People Who Play Games. Moscow: Eksmo-Press, 2008. 576 p.
3. Hoffman I. Presenting oneself to others in everyday life. Moscow: Canon-Press-C Kuchkovo Pole, 2000. 304 p.
4. Davydov V.V. Types of Generalization in Teaching (Logical and Psychological Problems of Constructing Academic Subjects). Moscow: Pedagogika, 1972. 424 p.
5. Kelly G., Thibault J. Interpersonal Relationships. Interdependence Theory // Modern Foreign Social Psychology. Moscow: Moscow University Publishing House, 1984. pp. 61-81
6. Leontiev A.N. Selected psychological works. Moscow: Pedagogy, 1983. 392 p.
7. Lomov B.F. Methodological and theoretical problems of psychology. Moscow: Nauka, 1984. 448 p.
8. Moreno J.L.. Psychodrama: Trans. from English G. Pimochkina. M.: Publishing house of the Institute of Psychotherapy, 2008. 492 p.
9. Myskin S.V. Psycholinguistic aspects of professional communication // Bulletin of Volgograd State University. Series 2: Linguistics. Volgograd: VolSU, 2013. No. 2(18). P. 199-206.
10. Myskin S.V., Zavyalova N.B. Sociocultural aspects of domestic violence // Journal of the Russian Sociological Association "Sociology". Moscow: Moscow State University, 2014. No. 3. P. 159-163.
11. United Nations [electronic resource] URL: https://www.un.org/ru/databases/
12. Petrenko V.F. On the Problem of Constructing the Image of the World: Psychosemantic Aspect // Communication. Language Consciousness. Intercultural Communication. Collection of Articles / Institute of Linguistics, Russian Academy of Sciences. Kaluga: KSPU named after K.E. Tsiolkovsky, 2005. Pp. 155-177.
13. Satir V., Spitzer R. You and Your Family. A Guide to Personal Growth. Moscow: Eksmo Press, 2003. 320 p.
14. Solovyov V.S. The Meaning of Love. Works: in 2 volumes. Vol. 2. Moscow: Mysl, 1988. 822 p.
15. Stetsenko A.P. The concept of the image of the world and some problems of the ontogenesis of consciousness // Bulletin of Moscow University. Series 14. Psychology. No. 3, 1987. Pp. 26–37
16. Russia's Values: Reality and Myths. Part I. Center for Problem Analysis and Public Administration Design. [Electronic resource] URL: http://problemanalysis.ru/idea/idea14.html
17. Cialdini R. Psychology of influence. St. Petersburg: Piter, 2019. 336 p.
18. Ellis A. Psychotraining by the Albert Ellis method. St. Petersburg: Peter Kom, 1999. 288 p.
19. Bowlby J. Attachment and loss: Vol. I. Attachment. NY: Basic Books, 1969. 326 p.
20. EUROSTAT Statistics Explained [electronic resource] URL: https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Marriage_and_ divorce_ statistics
21. Mead GH. Mind, Self and Society. Chicago, 1963. 347 p.
22. NCHS — National Center for Health Statistics [electronic resource] URL https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/marriage-divorce.htm
23. Richter H.-E. Patient Family. Rowohit: Reinbek, 1970.
24. Linton R. The Study of Man. NY; L., 1936. 235 p.
25. Wegscheider-Cruse Sh. Another chance: hope and health for the alcoholic family. Palo Alto, CA: Science and Behavior Books, 1981. 213 r.

 

 

 

References

1. Bejken K. Teorija semejnyh sistem Mjurreja Boujena [Murray Bowen's Theory of family systems]. : Kogito-Centr, 2015. 496 s.
2. Bern E. Games that people play. People who play games. Moscow: Eksmo-Press, 2008. 576 p.
3. Gofman I. Presenting yourself to others in everyday life [Predstavlenie sebja drugim v povsednevnoj zhizni]. : Kanon-Press-C Kuchkovo pole, 2000. 304 s.
4. Davydov VV Types of generalization in training (Logical and psychological problems of building educational subjects) [Types of generalization in training (Logical and psychological problems of building educational subjects)]. : Pedagogika, 1972. 424 p.
5. Kelly G., Thibault J. Interpersonal relationships. The theory of interdependence // Modern foreign social psychology. : Moscow University Publishing House, 1984. P. 61-81
6. Leont'ev AN Izbr. psycholog. proizvedenija [Selected psychological works]. : Pedagogika, 1983. 392 s.
7. Lomov BF Metodological and theoretical problems of psychology. : Nauka, 1984. 448 p.
8. Moreno Ja. L. Psychodrama [Psychodrama]: Per. s engl. / G. Pimochkinoj, E.: / M.: Izd-vo Instituta Psihoterapii, 2008. 492 s.
9. Myskin SV Psycholinguistic aspects of professional communication // Bulletin of the Volgograd State University. Series 2: Linguistics. Volgograd: VolGU, 2013. No. 2(18). P. 199-206.
10. Myskin SV, Zav'jalova NB Sociokul'turnye aspekty semejnogo nasilija [Sociocultural aspects of family violence] // Zhurnal Rossijskoj Sociologicheskoj Associacii «Sociologija» [Journal Of The Russian Sociological Association «Sociology»]. M.: MGU, 2014. vol. 3. S. 159-164.
11. Organizacija Ob#edinennyh Nacij [United Nations] [jelektronnyj resources] URL: https://www.un.org/ru/databases/
12. Petrenko VF On the problem of building an image of the world: psychosemantic aspect // Obshchenie. YAzykovoe soznanie. Mezhkul'turnaya kommunikatsiya. [Language consciousness. Intercultural communication. Collection of articles] Collection of articles/ Institute of Linguistics of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Kaluga: KGPU im. K. E. Tsiolkovsky, 2005. P. 155-177.
13. Satir V., Spitzer R. You and Your Family. A Guide to Personal Growth. Moscow: Jeksmo Press, 2003. 320 pp.
14. Solov'jov VS Smysl ljubvi [The Meaning of love]. Soch.: v 2 t. T. 2. M.: Mysl', 1988. 822 s.
15. Stecenko A.P. The Concept of the Image of the World and Some Problems of Ontogenesis of Consciousness // Bulletin of the Moscow University. Series 14. Psychology. No. 3, 1987. P. 26–37
16. Russian values: reality and myths. Part I. Center for problem analysis and public administration design. [Electronic resource] URL: http://problemanalysis.ru/idea/idea_14.html
17. Chaldini R. Psychologija vlijanija [Psychology of influence]. SPb: Piter, 2019. 336 s.
18. Ellis A. Psychotrening po metodu Al'berta Ellisa [Psycho by the method of albert Ellis]. : Piter Kom, 1999. 288 s.
19. Bowlby J. Attachment and loss: Vol. I. Attachment. NY: Basic Books, 1969. 326 p.
20. EUROSTAT Statistics Explained [electronic resource] URL: https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Marriage_and_ divorce_ statistics
21. Mead GH Mind, Self and Society. Chicago, 1963. 347 p.
22. NCHS — National Center for Health Statistics [electronic resource] URL https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/marriage-divorce.htm
23. Richter H.-E. Patient Family. Rowohit: Reinbek, 1970.
24. Linton R. The Study of Man. NY; L., 1936. 235 p.
25. Wegscheider-Cruse Sh. Another chance: hope and health for the alcoholic family. Palo Alto, CA: Science and Behavior Books, 1981. 213 r.