Self-regulation in Russia, Psychological Institute of Russian Academy or Education, Lab of...

Personality and self-regulation study

Lab of self regulation, PI RAE

Psychological institute Russian Academy of

Education, Moscow, Russia

Self regulation theories in Russia

• Theory of functional systems (P.K. Anokhin);

• Theory of movement behavior – (N.A. Bernstein);

• A systemic-structural theory of activity and Concept of operative image – (D.A.Oshanin);

• Theory of functional self-regulation of activity – (V.D.Shadrikov);

• Theory of conscious self-regulation of behavior (O.A. Konopkin, V.I. Morosanova)

Self-regulation: ability to initiate,

organize, support, and manage individual

activity, which is goal oriented.

(Conscious self-regulation theory of O.A.Konopkin, 1970)

Self-regulation processes:

- Goal planning

- Modeling of significant conditions

- Programming of actions

- Results evaluation

THEORY OF CONSIOUSS SELF - REGULATION

• O.A. Konopkin proposed a conceptual model OF SELF-REGULATION representing the most general structural- functional aspects of conscious self-regulation (Konopkin, 1980).

• The main functional components of conscious self-regulation process ARE :

• Goal of the activity (as it is understood and accepted by subject);

• Subjective model of activity conditions significant for the achievement of the goal;

• Program of the activity;

• System of criteria of success of goal achievement;

• Evaluation of information regarding the results of the activity.

Goal

Modeling

Memory

Criteria

system

Programm

ing

Result

information

Program

realization

Correction

Result

achievement

estimation

Contemporary study of conscious

self-regulation:

Differential approach to self-regulation study

(V.I. Morosanova) • Over the past years, PI RAE laboratory of self-

regulation has been studying individual differences in conscious self-regulation across various types of activity – operator’s, athlete’s and scholar’s.

• We have defined, described, and systematically analyzed the phenomenon of individual differences in self-regulation, which manifests itself in the way that people differ in the developmental level of conscious self-regulation, plan their activity goals and model the conditions of their achievement differently, apply different methods and algorithms to complete their actions, have different success criteria to evaluate the results (Morosanova, 1998).

Individual differences in self-

regulation

We have found evidence suggesting the existence of persistent individual differences in the way a person plans, programs, and estimates the results of his/her activity. Essentially, it implies individual styles of self-regulation. Self-regulation styles are individual features of organization and management of external and internal activity that are typical and most important to a person. These features constantly manifest themselves in various kinds of activities. Firstly, stylistic features of self-regulation are determined as individual differences in processes implementing the main components of self-regulation system. Secondly, stylistic features that characterize the function of all components of self-regulation system are at the same time personal traits (e.g. independence, flexibility, and reliability). (V.I.Morosanova & self-regulation lab. PI RAE)

Individual differences in conscious self-

regulation:

1) Operative-processual differences

• Goal planning;

• Modeling of significant conditions

• Programming of actions

• Control and result evaluation

2) Regulative-personality differences

(subjectness) – autonomy, responsibility,

persistence, assertiveness

Self-regulation diagnostic and

evaluation methods

To study and diagnose the described features the following questionnaire methods have been developed and standardized:

• Style Features of Behavioral Self-Regulation (SSB),

• Sportsman’s Self-Regulation in Preparing to a Contest (SPS),

• Self-Regulation in Election Campaign of a Deputy (SIK),

• Individual Self-Regulation of Students and Schoolars (ISSH) (Morossanova, 1998).

Individual profiles of self-

regulation

• The typical profiles can change at various levels of

conscious self-regulation development.

• For a highly developed self-regulation system, the

profiles are characterized by highly developed and

closely interconnected main components of self-

regulation structure, i.e. harmonious self-regulation style,

which allows one to compensate the influence of

personality characteristics and traits hindering successful

goal achievement.

Мethods - SSPM

SPQ (Self-regulation Profile Questionnaire, V.I. Morosanova, 2000).

• The statements of the questionnaire SPQ (Self-regulation Profile Questionnaire, V.I. Morosanova, 2000) were grouped into six scales, which diagnose individual typical peculiarities of regulatory processes

• training planning scale -Pl ;

• modeling of conditons – M;

• programming of actions scale - Pr ;

• results evaluation scale ER;

• regulatory tactical flexibility scale - Fl;

• independence of planning, programming and result evaluation scale (In).

• A l e v e l (degree) of development of the conscious self-regulation - the general questionnaire-based indicator.

New version of “Self-regulation Profile

Questionnaire, SPQ”

• New version of “Self-regulation Profile Questionnaire, SPQ” (Morosanova, 2004). In this new questionnaire version (SPQ-2008) basic scales are improved and a new Reliability scale is added. The Regulative Reliability scale diagnoses individual ability to regulate behavior in stressful situations.

• New questionnaire version includes 50 statements, grouped into 8 scales: Planning, Modeling, Programming, Result evaluation, Correction of regulation, Programming of actions, Autonomy and General level of conscious self-regulation scale.

• The data on the scales' factor structure, internal consistency, convergent and discriminate validity was confirmed on a sample of 820 subjects (students, teachers, rescuers, managers) in age from 16 to 32.

• Questionnaire can be used to diagnose individual differences of self-regulation as predictors of reliability and effectiveness in learning and professional activity.

Self-regulation styles typology

Typical profiles of Self-regulation for Extraverts and Introverts

1.Morossanova V.I. (2003) Extraversion and Neiroticism:

2.The typical profiles of Self-regulation, European Psychologist 4, 279-288

E

I

N

S

MPl Pr ER

Introverts No. 1

MPl Pr ER

Introverts No. 2

MPl Pr ER

Unstable

MPl Pr ER

Extraverts No. 1

MPl Pr ER

Extraverts No. 2

MPl Pr ER

Stable No. 2

MPl Pr ER

Stable No. 1

Personality traits and self-regulation differences study

(Morosanova, Plakhotnikova, 2006)

•

High Reflexivity group

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

Plan

ning

Mod

ellin

g

Prog

ram

min

g

Res

ult e

valu

atio

n

Flex

ibili

ty

Self-

suff

icie

ncy

Gen

eral

leve

l of s

elf-

regu

latio

n

53,30%

34,90%

5,40%

High Reliability group

0123456789

Plan

ning

Mod

ellin

g

Prog

ram

min

g

Res

ult e

stim

atio

n

Flex

ibil

ity

Self

-suf

fici

ency

Gen

eral

Sel

f-re

gula

tion

leve

l

32.30%

27%

24%

12.50%

High Responsibility group

0

12

34

56

78

9

Plann

ing

Mod

ellin

g

Progr

amm

ing

Res

ult e

valu

atio

n

Flexi

bility

Self-su

fficie

ncy

Gen

eral

sel

f-re

gula

tion

leve

l

45,50%

24%

High Anxiety group

012345678

Pla

nnin

g

Model

ling

Pro

gra

mm

ing

Res

ult

eval

uat

ion

Fle

xib

ilit

y

Sel

f-S

uff

icie

ncy

Gen

eral S

elf-

regula

tion lev

el

67,82%

13,80%

10,30%

PERSONALITY TRAITS AND SELF-REGULATION

DIFFERENCES STUDY (MOROSANOVA,

PLAKHOTNIKOVA, 2006)

Individuals with high Reflexivity, Reliability, Responsibility

Confidence, Anxiety are characterized with different self-

regulation profiles

High Confidence group

0123456789

Pla

nn

ing

Mo

dell

ing

Pro

gra

mm

ing

Resu

lt

ev

alu

ati

on

Fle

xib

ilit

y

Self

-

suff

icie

ncy

Gen

era

l S

elf

-

reg

ula

tio

n

lev

el

68.50%

23.40%

5.40%

Implementation of self-regulation theory

The results of Self regulation study were applied to

increase effectiveness

• Of Professional activity (politics, managers, athlets’,

lifesavers)

• Learning activity (high school and College students)

Personality and self-regulation of decision making

in political voting (Indina, Morosanova, 2007)

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Gen

eral

Sel

f-re

gula

tion

Pla

nnin

gM

odel

ling

Pro

gram

min

g

Res

ult e

stim

atio

nFle

xibi

lity

Ext

rave

rsio

nIn

trove

rsio

nThi

nkin

gFee

ling

Judg

ing

Per

ceiv

ing

Gen

eral

em

otio

nalit

y

Em

otio

nal e

xcite

men

t

Inte

nsiv

ity o

f em

otio

n

Influ

ence

of e

mot

ions

Ris

k re

adin

ess IQ

Rat

iona

lity

(per

sona

lity)

Rationals Emotionals

Regulation profiles of rational voters

(Indina, Morosanova 2007)

0123456789

Pla

nnin

g

Model

ling

Pro

gra

mm

ing

Resu

lt e

valu

atio

n

Fle

xibili

tyS

elf-su

ffic

iency

Rationally -esteeming Rationally-modelling

Rationally-programming Rationally-planning

Regulation profiles of emotional voters

(Indina, Morosanova 2007)

0

12

3

4

56

7

8

Planning

Modelling

Programm

ing

Resulr estim

ationFlexibility

Self-sufficiency

Emotionally-neurotic type Emotionally extraverted type

Personality types in high and low rationality group

Personality types in high emotionality group

Champion

13%

Healer

11%

Teacher

15%Councelor

8%

Performer

10%

Composer

8%

Promoter

5%

Crafter

6%

other types

24%

NF Idealist (Intuitively -feeling) 29% SP -Artists (Sensory-percepting) 47%

Keirsy personality types in high rationality group

other types

26%

Protector

12%

FieldMarshall

4%

Architector

11%

Mastermind

7%

Provider

5%Supervisor

16%

Inspector

11%

Inventor

9%

NT- Rationals (Intuitively thinking) 31% SJ -Guardian (Sensory-judging) 44%

Regulation & Personality factors

of Decision making in emergency situations

(Indina, Morosanova, 2009)

Relation btw decision making domains, self-

regulation processes and personality traits

(Indina, 2009)

Effectiveness

of decision making

General level

of self regulation Openness

Modeling of significant

conditions Agreeableness

Result estimation Conscientiousness

Regulation Personality

(r=0,48; p<0,001)

(r=0,67;p<0,001)

(r=0,52; p<0,001)

(r=0,33; p<0,01)

(r=0,35; p<0,01)

(r=0,27; p<0,05)

Regulation profiles in effective and not effective

decision making in emergency situations (Indina,

Morosanova 2010)

6,525,26

5,81

7,266,29

5,274,9

2,65

3,85

2,67

4,33,6

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

Plann

ing

Progr

amm

ing

Mod

elin

g

Res

ult e

valu

atio

n

Flexibi

lity

Auton

omy

Effective DM

Not effective DM

Personality profiles for effective and not effective

decision making (Indina, Morosanova 2010)

7,2 6,78

2,89

7,81

2,91

5,676,45

6,45

4,453,09

4,733,11

4,55

6,2

0123456789

Extra

version

Neu

rotis

cism

Agr

eeab

lene

ss

Con

scientious

ness

Ope

nnes

s

Rationa

lity

Risk read

ines

s

Effective DM

Not effective DM

Reliability of self-regulation in stress manifestations

study (Kondratuyk, Morosanova 2011)

Reliability of self-regulation study

(Kondratuyk, Morosanova 2011)

• Predictors of

reliability of

professional

activity of

extreme

profession

specialists

• It was confirmed that Conscious Self-regulation can be a resource of

coping with acute stress manifestations, meanwhile chronic stress

is more determined by personality dispositions

• Reliability of actions is determined by reliability of conscious self-

regulation system, determination of personality indicators on

reliability of actions is mediated by stylistic differences of self-

regulation.

• Self- consciousness and self-regulation study

(Aronova, Morosanova, 2005)

• Methods

• EPPS (Edwards Personal Preference Schedule - Russian version).

• POI (Personal Orientation Inventory - Russian version).

• SPQ (Self-regulation Profile Questionnaire, V.I. Morosanova, 2000).

• Findings

• The voluntary self-regulation is interrelated with the personal

preferences and orientations:

• People with high level of the voluntary self-regulation are primarily

orientated to the present rather than to the past and/or future, they

affirm primarily values of self-actualizing people and are aimed at

self-actualization and self-realization. Also they have a tendency to

leadership.

• People with low level of the voluntary self-regulation are

characterized by abasement.

Self- consciousness and self-regulation study (Aronova,

Morosanova, 2005)

Self- consciousness and self-regulation study (Aronova,

Morosanova, 2005)

Self-regulation of career choice study

(O.G. Vlasova 2011) Teleological type Reflective type

Situational type Operative type

• Teleological type (goal oriented) is characterized by orientation on

future perspective and programming of professional plans, but their

plans are not quite flexible

• Reflective type (self-oriented) is well aware about individual

personality resources and how they can be implemented in

profession, but are not enough aware about objective profession

demands

• Situational type (flexible in changing professional plans

according to situation) students are weak in long term goal

planning and more oriented at present, high modeling

• Operative type (programming, present oriented) students are

well informed about labor market options and demands, have high

programming, but weak in their own goal setting,

• Students with Controlling (result oriented) self-regulation type

have high reflexivity and good knowledge about profession but are

not able to correspond their personality resources with labor market

demands

Professional attitudes and self-regulation

domains in career choice (Vlasova, Vanin, 2010)

SR cluster Hesitation Rationality Optimism Self esteem Dependence

1

Impulsive type

Mean 2,08 5,10 4,70 5,77 3,82

St.Dev 1,977 1,298 1,598 1,489 1,652

2

Harmonic type

Mean ,95 4,93 4,73 6,25 3,31

St.Dev 1,395 1,518 1,628 1,027 1,578

3

Sticking

Mean 3,13 5,33 4,58 5,51 3,93

St.Dev 2,370 1,314 1,764 1,456 1,684

4

Operative type

Mean 2,99 5,65 5,28 5,80 4,20

St.Dev 2,509 1,548 1,351 1,486 1,557

General Mean 2,31 5,29 4,88 5,85 3,85

St.Dev 2,291 1,464 1,576 1,400 1,634

Cluster

Total

1

Impulsive

2

Harmonic

3

Sticking

4

Operative

Выбор Choice is clear Fr 35 36 22 60 153

% 77,8% 87,8% 73,3% 82,2% 81,0%

Choice is not

clear

Fr 10 5 8 13 36

% 22,2% 12,2% 26,7% 17,8% 19,0%

Relation between self-regulation components and time perspective

(Zimbardo)

• Students with high level of self-regulation are future oriented, active

life managers, effective in goal setting, modeling of significant

conditions, good at programming and result estimation

• Students with low self-regulation level are oriented on past and

negative future, are not able to change situation, are afraid of

failure.

• Students with Harmonic self-regulation profile are more effective in

career choice rather then students with Rigid style.

• Most effective in career choice are students with high self-regulation

level, effective in goal setting, future oriented, able to change the

negative past , improving their career choice in present

Self-regulation study of prosocial and antisocial

behavior (Garaleva, Morosanova,2006)

Planned aggression Spontaneous aggression Psychopathy aggression

General self-

regulation level

• Self-regulation of Aggressive behavior typology was built, it shows

interrelation between styles of self-regulation and personality

dimensions.

• Aggressive behavior manifestations are connected with self-

regulation differences.

• Self regulation differences define the type of aggressive behavior

(pro social, antisocial)

• Different types of aggressive behavior (spontaneous aggression,

planned aggression, psychopathic aggression are characterized by

different self-regulation and personality domains.

• Type of aggressive behavior is determined not only by personality

domains but mostly by different level of conscious self-regulation.

Role of Individual self-regulation

• Conscious self-regulation system has its projections on various levels of individuality

• Personality-temperamental dispositions can be described by individually-specific profiles of self-regulation

• The higher level of individual self-regulation gives better

opportunities for subjective voluntary behavior regulation and control. The lower level of individual self-regulation is – the more spontaneous and impulsive individual activity is.

• Conscious self-regulation is realized through the complex multilevel system of cognitive and personality recourses of individuality.

• System of conscious self-regulation integrates dynamic and substanial aspects of individuality, conscious and unconscious structures for individual goal planning and goal achievement in human life span.

Self-regulation and learning (Morosanova, Fomina, Borgoedova, Tsyganov, Vanin

2009-2011)

• Self-regulation in teacher- student interaction;

• Self-regulation and academic performance;

• Self-regulation questionnaire -preschoolers

version;

• Self‐regulation Profile of learning activity

Questionnaire;

• Individual personality and regulation differences

in learning ;

• Development of conscious self-regulation;

• Diagnostic and raining programs

,

Future study directions:

Functions of psychic self-regulation

Self regulation structure and components

Dynamics of self-regulation

Individual differences

Situational manifestations

S

E

L

F

-

R

E

G

U

L

A

T

I

O

N

D

E

V

E

L

O

P

M

E

N

T

The laboratory of self-regulation

PI RAE

The laboratory of self-regulation psychology was established in 1970 by O.A. Konopkin, a member of the Russian Academy of Education, who built the foundations of psychology of self-regulation as a scientific field in Russia based on the ideas of famous Russian psychologists P.K. Anokhin, N.A. Bernstein, D.A. Oshanin and V.D. Nebylitsyn (1980, 1995, 2005).

• Thank you!

www.pirae.ru