Psychological Characteristics of the “New Generation”: Homogeneity vs Heterogeneity


Researchers of the “new generation” (born in 2000-2017), also called “Z”, “Net Generation”, “iGen”, demonstrate the manifestation of similar features in different countries: an obsession with smartphones, the predominance of online contacts, dependence on parents, a tendency to depression, social liberality. However, numerous Russian and international studies mainly compare representatives of different generations, and less attention is paid to the problem of uniformity of psychological characteristics within one generation. The aim of the present empirical study was to find uniformity/heterogeneity in the psychological characteristics of representatives of the “new” Russian generation ( N = 434, Russians, 228 - girls, 206 - boys,) in two groups: university students (128 girls, 120 boys aged 19-20 years) and high school students (100 girls, 86 boys aged 16-17 years). To determine the characteristics of representatives of the generation, we used the questionnaire by Twenge; The Brief Measure of Big-Five Personality Traits (TIPI-RU), The Questionnaire for Measuring Values through Fears (by Pischik), The Questionnaire for Measuring Beliefs in Conspiracies (by Pischik, & Mutalimova), The Social Axioms Questionnaire (by Bond & Leung), questionnaire “Motivation for Help” (by Nartova-Bochaver). As a result, it was found that in both groups of the “new generation”, the most pronounced personality traits were shown: agreeableness, conscientiousness and openness; and belief in a conspiracy: political, secret organizations, globalism. At the same time, in the group of high school students the openness to experience, awareness of values, belief in globalism are more expressed. In the group of university students there is a high value for the Others, but the belief in a secret organizations and the conscious commitment of catastrophization are prevailing. Thus, in both groups of representatives of the “new generation”, most of the studied psychological characteristics showed similarity of values, but it is impossible to speak about their complete uniformity, which is confirmed by the differences in factor structures. The practical significance of the study lies in the application of the obtained data in preventive, advisory, educational activities in working with youth.

About the authors

Vlada I. Pishchik

Don State Technical University

Author for correspondence.

Doctor of Psychology, is Professor at Department of Educational Psychology and Organizational Psychology of the Faculty of Psychology, Pedagogy and Defectology

1 Gagarina Sq, Rostov-on-Don, 344000, Russian Federation


  1. Arendachuk, I.V. (2018). Dynamics of value and meaning characteristics of social activity of modern youth. RUDN Journal of Psychology and Pedagogics, 15(3), 287–307. (In Russ.)
  2. Avdulova, T.P., & Motyleva, L.A. (2015). Social Representations in Risk-Taking Adolescents. Social Psychology and Society, 6(2), 105–116. (In Russ.)
  3. Baker, K., & Gippenreiter, Y.B. (1995). Vliyanie stalinskih repressij konca 30-h godov na zhizn' semei v trekh pokoleniyah. Voprosy Psikhologii, (2), 66–84. (In Russ.)
  4. Bruder, M., Haffke P., Neave, N., Nouripanah, N., & Imhoff, R. (2013). Measuring individual differences in generic beliefs in conspiracy theories across cultures: Conspiracy Mentality Questionnaire. Frontiers in Psychology, 49, 225. fpsyg.2013.00225
  5. Campbell, S.M., Twenge, J.M., & Campbell, W.K. (2017). Fuzzy but Useful Constructs: Making Sense of the Differences Between Generations. Work, Aging and Retirement, 3(2), 130–139.
  6. Chicca, J., & Shellenbarger, T. (2018). Connecting with Generation Z: Approaches in Nursing Education. Teaching and Learning in Nursing, 13(3), 180–184.
  7. Chuev, S.V. (Ed.). (2017). Cennostnye orientacii rossijskoi molodezhi i realizatciya gosudarstvennoi molodyozhnoi politiki: rezul'taty. Moscow: Publishing house of State University of Management. (In Russ.)
  8. Dejonckheere, E., Bastian, B., Fried, E.I., Murphy, S.C., & Kuppens, P. (2017). Perceiving social pressure not to feel negative predicts depressive symptoms in daily life. Depression and Anxiety, 34, 836–844.
  9. DiGuiseppi, G.T., Davis, J.P., Meisel, M.K., Clark, M.A., & Barnett, N.P. (2020). The Influence of Peer and Parental Norms on First-generation College Students’ Binge Drinking Trajectories. Addictive Behaviors, 103, 106227.
  10. Duffy, M.E., Twenge, J.M., & Joiner, T.E. (2019). Trends in Mood and Anxiety Symptoms and Suicide-Related Outcomes Among U.S. Undergraduates, 2007–2018: Evidence From Two National Surveys. Journal of Adolescent Health, 65(5), 590‒598.
  11. Gavrilova, A.V. (2016). Social and psychological features of the “New generation” mentality. Bulletin of Udmurt University. The Series of Philosophy. Psychology. Pedagogy, 26(2), 58–63. (In Russ.)
  12. Goh, E., & Okumus, F. (2020). Avoiding the hospitality workforce bubble: Strategies to attract and retain generation Z talent in the hospitality workforce. Tourism Management Perspectives, 33, 100603.
  13. Hayes, J.B., Parks, C., McNeilly, S., & Johnson, P. (2018). Boomers to Millennials: Generational Stereotypes at Work in Academic Librarianship. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 44(6), 845–853.
  14. Howe, N., & Strauss, W. (1991). Generations: The History of America’s Future, 1584 to 2069. New York: William Morrow & Company.
  15. Issa, T., & Isaias, P. (2016). Internet factors influencing generations Y and Z in Australia and Portugal: A practical study. Information Processing & Management, 52(4), 592–617.
  16. Kochergina, E.V., Nye, J., & Orel, E.A. (2013). The Big Five traits as predictors of academic achievements in university students. Psikhologicheskie Issledovaniya, 6(27), 4. (In Russ.)
  17. Kornilova, T.V., Zirenko, M.S., & Guseynova, R.D. (2017). Cross-cultural validation of the brief measure of Big-Five personality traits (TIPI): Russian and Azerbaijani student samples. Psikhologicheskie Issledovaniya, 10(55), 7. (In Russ.)
  18. Lebedeva, L.G. (2017). Social and Institutional Foundations of Intergenerational Continuity in Contemporary Russian Society. Ural Federal University Journal. Series 3. Social and Political Sciences, 12(4), 57‒68.
  19. Marcus, J., Ceylan, S., & Ergin, C. (2016) Not So “Traditional” Anymore? Generational Shifts on Schwartz Values in Turkey. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 48(1), 58–74.
  20. Nartova-Bochaver, S.K. (1992). Eksperimental'noe issledovanie situatsionnoi izmenchivosti motivatsii pomoshchi. Psikhologicheskii Zhurnal, 13(4), 15–23. (In Russ.)
  21. Ng, E., Schweitzer, L., & Lyons, S. (2010). New generation, great expectations: A field study of the millennial generation. Journal of Business and Psychology, 25(2), 281–292.
  22. Pishchik, V. (2020). Features of the mentality of generations X, Y, Z. Innovative Technologies in Science and Education (ITSE-2020). E3S Web Conf., 210, 20007.
  23. Pishchik, V.I. (2010). Psychology of the transformation of the mentality of generations. Ph.D. in Psychology Thesis. Rostov on Don: Institute of Management, Business and Law. (In Russ.)
  24. Pishchik, V.I. (2019). Value measurements of generations through actualized fears. Social Psychology and Society, 10(2), 67–81. (In Russ.)
  25. Pishchik, V.I., & Mutalimova, S.Sh. (2014) Osobennosti konspirativistskogo mentaliteta russkikh i kumykskikh grupp pokolenii. Teoreticheskie problemy etnicheskoi i kross-kul'turnoi psikhologii: Conference Proseedings (pp. 222–225). Smolensk: Universum Publ. (In Russ.)
  26. Popova, S. (2017). Teaching Generation Z: Methodological problems and their possible solutions. Training Language and Culture, 1(4), 25–38.
  27. Prensky, M. (2001) Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants. Part 1. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1‒6.
  28. Rikel, A.M. (2020). Perception of Social Maturity Criteria, Self-perception and Value Orientations among Russian Millennials. RUDN Journal of Psychology and Pedagogics, 17(3), 491–503.
  29. Rikiel, A.M., & Dorenskaya, S.V. (2014). Social and psychological model of company personnel value dynamics. National Psychological Journal, 4(16), 93–101. (In Russ.)
  30. Rudolph, C.W., Rauvola, R.S., & Zacher, H. (2018). Leadership and generations at work: A critical review. The Leadership Quarterly, 29(1), 44–57.
  31. Saporovskaya, M.V. (2010). Methodology, theory and practice of studying intergenerational relation in family context. Psikhologicheskie Issledovaniya, (1), 4. (In Russ.)
  32. Schenarts, P.J. (2020). Now Arriving: Surgical Trainees from Generation Z. Journal of Surgical Education, 77(2), 246–253.
  33. Soldatova, G.U., Nestik, T.A., Rasskazova, E.I., & Zotova, E.Yu. (2013). Tsifrovaya kompetentnost' podrostkov i roditelei. Rezul'taty vserossiiskogo issledovaniya. Moscow: Fond Razvitiya Internet. (In Russ.)
  34. Tang, F. (2019). A critical review of research on the work-related attitudes of Generation Z in China. Social Psychology and Society, 10(2), 19–28. (In Russ.)
  35. Tapscott, D. (1998) Growing up Digital: The Rise of the Net Generation. NY: McGraw-Hill Companies.
  36. Tapscott, D. (2008). Grown Up Digital: How the Net Generation is Changing Your World. NY: McGraw-Hill.
  37. Tatarko, A.N., & Lebedeva, N.M. (2020). Developing and Testing a Short Version of the Social Axioms Questionnaire by M. Bond and K. Leung. Cultural-Historical Psychology, 16(1), 96–110. 10.17759/chp.2020160110 (In Russ.)
  38. Twenge, J.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, NY: Atria Books.
  39. Vasanthi, S. (2012) Multi generations in the workforce: Building collaboration. IIMB Management Review, 24(1), 48–66.
  40. White, D. (2008, July 23). Not “Natives” and “Immigrants” but “Visitors” and “Residents”. TALL blog. Retrieved June 10, 2020, from

Copyright (c) 2021 Pishchik V.I.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies