Social representations about homosexuality among different generations of modern Russians

Relevance. The problem of homosexuality is constantly in the spotlight of the mass media, social media and politicians. Psychological studies of this phenomenon are easier to find in foreign rather than in Russian research. At the same time the cultural and national specificity of attitudes towards the phenomenon of homosexuality seems obvious as well as a significant polarization of opinions within society itself. This polarization can be gender, urban, class, and intergenerational, as evidenced by numerous sociological polls. With significant attention to this issue at the level of social strata, there are not many attempts to analyze the concept of homosexuality in line with the socio-psychological tradition.In a number of previous studies it was revealed that the modern Z Gen is distinguished by greater tolerance and freedom of views in terms of attitude towards traditionally segregated social groups. 

The purpose of this study was to identify perceptions of homosexuality among different generations of modern Russians. Homosexuality has been singled out among other sexual orientations (LGBT) as the most discussed in public discourse. The subject of the research is social perceptions of homosexuality, particularly among representatives of different generations. 

Methods. The methodological basis of the research was the study of the structure of social perceptions (metho P. Vergesse method). The research methods were the author's questionnaire aimed at identifying perceptions of homosexuality as well as a modified version of the RAHI questionnaire (Gulevich et al., 2016). The study sample consisted of 444 people (residents of the Russian Federation,16 to 65 years old). 

Results and Conclusions. The hypotheses of the study were confirmed: an inverse relationship between age (belonging to a generational cohort) and perceptions of homosexuality as normative was revealed. A significant difference was shown in the Z Gen perceptions in terms of tolerance of homosexuality. The so-called double standards were identified in terms of attitudes towards male and female homosexuality. The rooted concept of homosexuality as a relationship based on a sexual rather than a romantic-spiritual level, was stated. 

References

1. Bazarov T.Yu., Erofeev A.K., Shmelev A.G. (2014). Opyt kollektivnogo opredeleniya ponyatiya «kompetentsii». Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta(Bulletin of Moscow University).Series 14. Psychology. 1. 87–102 (in Russ.).

2. Baidenko V.I., Oskarsson B. (2002). Bazovye navyki (klyuchevye kompetentsii) kak integriruyushchii faktor obrazovatel'nogo protsessa. Professional'noe obrazovanie i formirovanie lichnosti spetsialista. Nauchno-metodicheskii sbornik. Moscow. (in Russ.).

3. Ballantain I., Pova N. (2003). Tsentry otsenki i razvitiya. Per. s angl. Moscow: HIPPO. (in Russ.).

4. Bashkin E.B. (2010). Effektivnost' strategicheskikh assessment-sessii v razvitii professional'nykh kompetentsii. Avtoref. dis. … kand. psikhol. nauk(Effectiveness of strategic assessment sessions in the development of professional competencies (PhD) Thesis). Moscow. (in Russ.).

5. Bodrov V.A. (2001). Psikhologiya professional'noi prigodnosti. Moscow: PER SE. (in Russ.).

6. Zhuravlev A.L. (2007). Osobennosti mezhdistsiplinarnykh issledovanii v sovremennoi psikhologii. Teoriya i metodologiya psikhologii: postneklassicheskaya perspektiva (pp. 15–32). Pod red. A.L. Zhuravleva, A.V. Yurevicha. Moscow: IPRAN. (in Russ.).

7. Zeer E.F. (2005). Kompetentnostnyi podkhod k obrazovaniyu. Obrazovanie i nauka. Izvestiya Ural'skogo otdeleniya Rossiiskoi akademii obrazovaniya. Zhurnal teoreticheskikh i prikladnykh issledovanii(News of the Ural branch of the Russian Academy of Education. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Research),3 (33), 27–39. (Retrieved from http://edscience.ru/sites/default/fles/2005/2005-3.pdf. (review date: 2005) (in Russ.).

8. Zimnyaya I.A. (2006). Klyuchevye kompetentsii: novaya paradigma rezul'tata sovremennogo obrazovaniya. Internet-zhurnal «Eidos».(Internet magazine «Eidos»).(Retrieved from http://www.eidos.ru/journal/2006/0505.htm. (review date: 05.05.2006) (in Russ.).

9. Kaptsov A.V. (2018). Model' otbora personala. Sovremennoe sostoyanie i perspektivy razvitiya psikhologii truda i organizatsionnoi psikhologii (pp. 64–76). otv. red. A.N.Zankovskii, A.L. Zhuravlev. Moscow: Institut psikhologii RAN. (in Russ.).

10. Karpov A.V. (1999). Psikhologiya menedzhmenta. Moscow: Gardariki. (in Russ.).

11. Mazilov V.A. (2017). Metodologiya psikhologicheskoi nauki: Istoriya i sovremennost'. Yaroslavl': RIO YaGPU. (in Russ.).

12. Martirosova N.V. (2014). Psikhologicheskoe obespechenie rasstanovki kadrov v podrazdeleniyakh okhrany obshchestvennogo poryadka organov vnutrennikh del: Avtoref. diss. … kand. psikhol. nauk. SPb. (in Russ.).

13. Mashkova A.S. (2011). Formirovanie modeli kompetentsii dlya rukovoditelei srednego zvena na osnove organizatsii opytno-eksperimental'noi raboty. Izvestiya Ural'skogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta: Seriya 1: Problemy obrazovaniya, nauki i kul'tury (News of Ural State University: Series 1: Problems of education, science and culture). 89,2, 197–206. (in Russ.).

14. Metodicheskii instrumentarii po ustanovleniyu kvalifikatsionnykh trebovanii dlya zameshcheniya dolzhnostei gosudarstvennoi grazhdanskoi sluzhby (2017). Versiya 3.2. Moscow. (in Russ.).

15. Mitina L.M. (1994). Uchitel' kak lichnost' i professional (psikhologicheskie problemy). Moscow: Delo. (in Russ.).

16. Mitina L.M. (2004). Psikhologiya truda i professional'nogo razvitiya uchitelya. Moscow: Akademiya. (in Russ.).

17. Morozov V.P. (2011). Neverbal'naya kommunikatsiya. Eksperimental'no-psikhologicheskie issledovaniya. Moscow: Kogito-Tsentr. (in Russ.).

18. Polani M. (1982). Lichnoe znanie. Moscow: Progress. (in Russ.).

19. Pryazhnikov N.S., Pryazhnikova E.Yu. (2005). Psikhologiya truda i chelovecheskogo dostoinstva. Moscow: Akademiya. (in Russ.).

20. Pochebut L.G., Chiker V.A. (2002) Organizatsionnaya sotsial'naya psikhologiya: Uchebnoe posobie. SPb.: Rech'. (in Russ.).

21. Raven Dzh. (2002). Kompetentnost' v sovremennom obshchestve: vyyavlenie, razvitie i realizatsiya. Moscow: Kogito-Tsentr. (in Russ.).

22. Rubtsova N.E. (2012). Psikhologicheskaya klassifikatsiya sovremennoi professional'noi deyatel'nosti: integrativno-tipologicheskii podkhod. Tver': Tver. fil. MGEI. Kn. 1, 2. (in Russ.).

23. Simonova N.N. (2014). Adaptatsiya k rabote vakhtovym metodom v ekstremal'nykh usloviyakh Krainego Severa. Arkhangel'sk: ID SAFU. (in Russ.).

24. Spenser L.M., Spenser S.M. (2005). Kompetentsii na rabote. Moscow: Hippo. (in Russ.).

25. Spravochnik kvalifikatsionnykh trebovanii k spetsial'nostyam, napravleniyam podgotovki, znaniyam i umeniyam, kotorye neobkhodimy dlya zameshcheniya dolzhnostei gosudarstvennoi grazhdanskoi sluzhby s uchetom oblasti i vida professional'noi sluzhebnoi deyatel'nosti gosudarstvennykh grazhdanskikh sluzhashchikh (2017). Moscow.(in Russ.).

26. Suvorova A. (2006). Kompetentsii kak mif i real'nost' sovremennoi HR-praktiki, ili Pochemu tak putayutsya mysli (Retrieved fromhttp://www.hr-zone.net/. (review date: 26.07.2006)(in Russ.).

27. Tolochek V.A., Krayushenko N.G. (1998). Psikhologicheskie faktory spetsializatsii i uspeshnosti v vidakh okhrannoi deyatel'nosti. Vestnik Mosk. un-ta (Bulletin of the Moscow university). Ser. 14. Psikhologiya, 3, 52–63 (in Russ.).

28. Tolochek V.A. (2011). Sopryazhennaya professional'naya kar'era sub"ekta: konteksty i izmereniya. Chelovek. Soobshchestvo. Upravlenie (Man. Community. Management),2, 48–61 (in Russ.).

29. Tolochek V.A. (2017a). Professional'noe stanovlenie sub"ekta: sposobnosti i professional'no vazhnye kachestva, kompetentsii i kompetentnost'. Institut psikhologii Rossiiskoi akademii nauk. Organizatsionnaya psikhologiya i psikhologiya truda (Institute of Psychology of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Organizational psychology and psychology work), 2, 2, 3–30(Retrieved from http://work-org-psychology.ru/engine/documents/document241.pdf. (review date: 2017)(in Russ.).

30. Tolochek V.A. (2019). “Psikhologicheskie nishi”: topos i khronos v determinatsii professional'noi spetsializatsii sub"ekta. Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta. Seriya 14. Psikhologiya (Bulletin of Moscow University. Series 14. Psychology),1, 195–213 (in Russ.).

31. Tolochek V.A. (2019). Kompetentnostnyi podkhod i PVK-podkhod: vozmozhnosti i ogranicheniya. Vestnik SPbGU. Ser. Psikhologiya (Bulletin of St. Petersburg State University. It is gray. Psychology), 9, 2 (30), 123–137. (in Russ.).

32. Tolochek V.A. (2020). Psikhologiya truda. 3-e izd.dop. St. Petersburg: Piter. (in Russ.).

33. Uiddet S., Kholliford S. (2003). Rukovodstvo po kompetentsiyam. Moscow: HIPPO. (Retrieved from http://www.eidos.ru/journal/2005/1212.htm. (review date: 12.12.2005)(in Russ.).

34. Shadrikov V.D. (1982). Problemy sistemogeneza professional'noi deyatel'nosti. Moscow: Nauka. (in Russ.).

35. Shadrikov V.D. (2013). Psikhologiya deyatel'nosti cheloveka. Moscow: InstitutpsikhologiiRAN.(inRuss.).