Subjective Well-Being Achievement Profiles in Young People: Ethno-Regional and Gender Aspects

Cover Page

Cite item

Full Text

Abstract

The desire of young people to achieve subjective well-being as a life goal makes a significant contribution to the actualization of their resources, determining various forms of activity. The purpose of the study was to identify differential typological profiles of achieving subjective well-being among Russian young people and to determine the ethno-regional and gender-specific distribution of the resulting profiles. The study sample consisted of 1616 respondents (55% - female) aged 18-35 ( M age = 20.6 ± 3.4 years) from 5 regions, including Karachay-Cherkess Republic, Kabardino-Balkarian Republic, Republic of North Ossetia - Alania, Stavropol Territory, Moscow and the Moscow Region. Seven dominant ethno-regional groups with a total number of 1260 people were identified. Data were collected anonymously using Google-forms. The diagnostic complex included: Self-Regulation Profile Questionnaire, SRPQM-2020 (by V.I. Morosanova); Personal Subjective Well-Being Diagnostics Methodology (by R.M. Shamionov and T.V. Beskova); Tolerance/Intolerance to Uncertainty Questionnaire (by T.V. Kornilova and M.A. Chumakova); Perceived Stress Questionnaire (by T. Yang); The Mini-IPIP Scales by M.B. Donnellan et al. (Short Form of the Goldberg’ International Personality Item Pool-Five-Factor Model measure). To determine the relationship between the indicators of self-regulation, subjective well-being and personal dispositions, an exploratory factor analysis was conducted. Four factors were identified, namely: activity, openness, consistency, and stressority. Through a configuration-frequency analysis, differential typological profiles for achieving subjective well-being were identified: basic, operational, passive, harmonious and directive. It was found that the manifestation of the typological features of subjective well-being was based on certain structural and functional features of conscious self-regulation (planning, programming), as well as personal dispositions (activity, openness, stress resistance, formation of attitudes toward tolerance to uncertainty). The most common profile turned out to be the basic one. The most vulnerable profile, passive, was characterized by low levels of regulatory and personal resources. The young people of the operational profile were close to those of the basic profile in terms of their level of subjective well-being, but were statistically significantly superior to it in terms of the openness factor. For the harmonious and directive profiles, there were no significant differences between the average subjective well-being indicators. At the same time, the representatives of the harmonious profile were distinguished by pronounced openness and low stressority, while those of the directive profile had the lowest indicators of the openness and the highest regulatory indicators of planning and programming in relation to their actions. There was a significant asymmetry in the distribution of the identified profiles depending on the gender and ethno-regional affiliation of the respondents. The males were more likely to have the directive and basic profiles, while the females were more likely to have the harmonious and operational profiles, which appeared to be quite consistent with gender stereotypes. The predominant distribution of profiles in ethno-regional terms was as follows: the basic profile in relatively monocultural regions (Karachay-Cherkess Republic, Kabardino-Balkarian Republic); the operational profile in relatively multicultural regions (Republic of North Ossetia - Alania, Stavropol Territory and Moscow and the Moscow Region); the passive profile in Kabardino-Balkarian Republic; the harmonious profile of girls from the Stavropol Territory, Moscow and the Moscow Region, Republic of North Ossetia - Alania and Karachay-Cherkess Republic; and the directive profile in men from Republic of North Ossetia - Alania. The results of this empirical study clearly demonstrated the possibility of using a differential psychological approach to assessing the structure of the relationship between subjective well-being, personal dispositions and conscious self-regulation to identify the prerequisites for achieving subjective well-being by young people.

About the authors

Tatiana N. Banshchikova

North Caucasus Federal University

Author for correspondence.
Email: sevkav@mail.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-6694-6419
SPIN-code: 3432-4381

PhD in Psychology, Associate Professor, is Head of Scientific and Educational Center for Psychological Support of Personal and Professional Development, Faculty of Psychology and Pedagogy

1 Pushkina St, Stavropol, 355017, Russian Federation

Maksim L. Sokolovskii

North Caucasus Federal University

Email: msokolovskii@ncfu.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-2524-2500
SPIN-code: 5029-0254

PhD in Psychology, is Leading Research Fellow, Scientific and Educational Center for Psychological Support of Personal and Professional Development, Faculty of Psychology and Pedagogy

1 Pushkina St, Stavropol, 355017, Russian Federation

References

  1. Alborova, A.V., Dreeva, S.V., & Starchenko, V.V. (2023). Interethnic trust issues in a multicultural society. SibScript, 25(2), 2. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.21603/sibscript-2023-25-2-240-246
  2. Allik, J., Realo, A., & McCrae, R.R. (2023). Conceptual and methodological issues in the study of the personality-and-culture relationship. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, 1077851. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1077851
  3. Banshchikova, T.N., & Sokolovskii, M. (2022). Age aspect of the subjective well-being of modern youth. Perspectives of Science and Education, 59(5), 430–445. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.32744/pse.2022.5.25
  4. Banshchikova, T.N., Sokolovskii, M.L., & Korosteleova, T.V. (2022). Self-regulation and tolerance for uncertainty as resources for the subjective well-being of modern youth: A cross-cultural aspect. RUDN Journal of Psychology and Pedagogics, 19(4), 717–743. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.22363/2313-1683-2022-19-4-717-743
  5. Banshchikova, T.N., Sokolovskii, M.L., & Tegetaeva, Z.R. (2023). Conscious self-regulation as resource for overcoming stress and achieving subjective well-being: Ethno-regional specificity. Theoretical and Experimental Psychology, 16(1), 19–42. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.11621/tep-23-02
  6. Belousova, A.K., Samarskaya, A.V., & Kryazhkova, E.V. (2021). The relationship between tolerance for uncertainty and creativity among high school students with a critical style of thinking. Vestnik of Samara State Technical University. Series: Psychological and Pedagogical Sciences, 18(2), 5–18. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17673/vsgtu-pps.2021.2.1
  7. Choi, H., Diener, E., Sim, J.H., & Oishi, S. (2023). Happiness is associated with successful living across cultures. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 18(6), 958–977. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2022.2155221
  8. Dekhtiarenko, A.A., Savchenko, N.L., & Shliagina, E.I. (2023). Various effects of personal traits on the components of subjective well-being. Lomonosov Psychology Journal, 46(3), 120–142. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.11621/LPJ-23-30
  9. Diggle, P.J., Gowers, T., Kelly, F., & Lawrence, N. (2020). Decision-making with uncertainty. Significance, 17(6), 12–12. https://doi.org/10.1111/1740-9713.01463
  10. Donnellan, M.B., Oswald, F.L., Baird, B.M., & Lucas, R.E. (2006). The Mini-IPIP Scales: Tiny-yet-effective measures of the Big Five Factors of Personality. Psychological Assessment, 18(2), 192–203. https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.18.2.192
  11. Ferrando, P.J., Lorenzo-Seva, U., & Bargalló-Escrivà, M.T. (2023). Gulliksen’s pool: A quick tool for preliminary detection of problematic items in item factor analysis. PLOS ONE, 18(8), e0290611. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0290611
  12. Grob, A. (2020). Adolescents’ subjective well-being in fourteen cultural contexts. Adolescents, Cultures, and Conflicts (pp. 21–41). Routledge. Retrieved December 16, 2023, from https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/edit/10.4324/9780203827734-3/adolescents-subjective-well-being-fourteen-cultural-contexts-alexander-grob
  13. Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (Eds.). (2000). Choices, values, and frames (1st ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  14. Kondratyuk, N.G. (2012). Differential psychological foundations of the reliability of conscious self-regulation under stress (Abstract of PhD in Psychology Thesis). Moscow: Psychological Institute of the Russian Academy of Education. (In Russ.)
  15. Kondratyuk, N.G., & Morosanova, V.I. (2021). Self-regulation’s reliability as resource of personal psychological safety under stressful conditions and uncertainty. Psychology of Self-Regulation in the Context of Actual Problems of Education (to the 90th Anniversary of the Birth of O.A. Konopkin): Proceedings of the Scientific Conference (pp. 156–161). Moscow: Psychological Institute of the Russian Academy of Education. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.24412/cl-36466-2021-1-156-161
  16. Kornilova, T.V., & Chumakova, M.A. (2014). Tolerance and intolerance of ambiguity in the modification of Budner’s questionnaire. Eksperimentalnaya Psihologiya, 7(1), 92–110. (In Russ.) Retrieved December 9, 2023, from https://psyjournals.ru/en/journals/exppsy/archive/2014_n1/68181
  17. Kornilova, T.V., Chumakova, M.A., & Kornilov, S.A. (2018). Tolerance and intolerance for uncertainty as predictors of decision making and risk acceptance in gaming strategies of the Iowa gambling task. Psychology in Russia: State of the Art, 11(3), 86–95. https://doi.org/10.11621/pir.2018.0306
  18. Krys, K., Haas, B.W., Igou, E.R., Kosiarczyk, A., Kocimska-Bortnowska, A., Kwiatkowska, A., Lun, V.M.-C., Maricchiolo, F., Park, J., Poláčková Šolcová, I., Sirlopú, D., Uchida, Y., Vauclair, C.-M., Vignoles, V.L., Zelenski, J.M., Adamovic, M., Akotia, C.S., Albert, I., Appoh, L., Arévalo, M.D.M., Baltin, A., Denoux, P., Domínguez-Espinosa, A., Es-teves, C.S., Gamsakhurdia, V., Fülöp, M., Garðarsdóttir, R.B., Gavreliuc, A., Boer, D., Igbokwe, D.O., Işık, İ., Kascakova, N., Klůzová Kráčmarová, L., Kosakowska-Berezecka, N., Kostoula, O., Kronberger, N., Lee, J.H., Liu, X., Łużniak-Piecha, M., Malyonova, A., Barrientos, P.E., Mohorić, T., Mosca, O., Murdock, E., Mustaffa, N.F., Nader, M., Nadi, A., Okvitawanli, A., van Osch, Y., Pavlopoulos, V., Pavlović, Z., Rizwan, M., Romashov, V., Røysamb, E., Sargautyte, R., Schwarz, B., Selim, H.A., Serdarevich, U., Stogianni, M., Sun, C.-R., Teyssier, J., van Tilburg, W.A.P., Torres, C., Xing, C., & Bond, M.H. (2023). Introduction to a culturally sensitive measure of well-being: Combining life satisfaction and interdependent happiness across 49 different cultures. Journal of Happiness Studies, 24(2), 607–627. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-022-00588-1
  19. Krysko, V.G. (2020). Ethnic psychology (10th ed.). Moscow: Yurayt Publ. (In Russ.)
  20. Kubzansky, L.D., Kim, E.S., Boehm, J.K., Davidson, R.J., Huffman, J.C., Loucks, E.B., Lyubomirsky, S., Picard, R.W., Schueller, S.M., Trudel-Fitzgerald, C., VanderWeele, T.J., Warran, K., Yeager, D.S., Yeh, C.S., & Moskowitz, J.T. (2023). Interventions to modify psychological well-being: Progress, promises, and an agenda for future research. Affective Science, 4(1), 174–184. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42761-022-00167-w
  21. Leontiev, D.A. (2009). Towards an operational definition of tolerance. Voprosy psihologii, 5, 3–16.
  22. Margolis, S., Schwitzgebel, E., Ozer, D., Martinez, R.L., & Lyubomirsky, S. (2022). Measuring eudaimonic and non-eudaimonic goods in the pursuit of the good life: The Riverside Eudaimonia Scale and the Rich & Sexy Well-Being Scale. International Journal of Wellbeing, 12(1), 1. https://doi.org/10.5502/ijw.v12i1.1575
  23. Margolis, S., Stapley, A.L., & Lyubomirsky, S. (2020). The association between extraversion and well-being is limited to one facet. Journal of Personality, 88(3), 478–484. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12504
  24. Merlin, V.S. (1986). An essay on the integral study of individuality. Moscow: Pedagogika Publ.
  25. Morosanova, V.I. (2014). Conscious self-regulation of a person’s voluntary activity as a psychological resource for achieving goals. Theoretical and Experimental Psychology, 7(4), 62–78. (In Russ.)
  26. Morosanova, V.I., & Kondratyuk, N.G. (2020). V.I. Morosanova’s ‘Self-regulation Profile Questionnaire – SRPQM 2020’. Voprosy Psikhologii, 66(4), 155–167. (In Russ.)
  27. Morosanova, V.I., Fomina, T.G., & Bondarenko, I.N. (2021). The dynamics of the interrelationships between conscious self-regulation, psychological well-being and school-related subjective well-being in adolescents: A three-year cross-lagged panel study. Psychology in Russia – State of the Art, 14(3), 3. https://doi.org/10.11621/pir.2021.0303
  28. Orkibi, H., & Ronen, T. (2017). Basic psychological needs satisfaction mediates the association between self-control skills and subjective well-being. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 936. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00936
  29. Osin, E.N., & Leontiev, D.A. (2020). Brief Russian-language instruments to measure subjective well-being: Psychometric properties and comparative analysis. The Monitoring of Public Opinion: Economic and Social Changes Journal, (1), 117–142. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.14515/monitoring.2020.1.06
  30. Platonov, Yu.P. (2014). Ethnopsychology (2nd ed.). Moscow: Academiya Publ.
  31. Regan, A., Radošić, N., & Lyubomirsky, S. (2022). Experimental effects of social behavior on well-being. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 26(11), 987–998. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2022.08.006
  32. Rodionova, E.V., & Konyukhova, T.V. (2023). Emotional and personal well-being of students: Dynamic assessment in the conditions of unstable external environment. Perspectives of Science and Education, (1), 356–370. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.32744/pse.2023.1.21
  33. Shamionov, R.M. (2019). The ratio of envy, subjective well-being and social skills. Izvestiya of Saratov University. Philosophy. Psychology. Pedagogy, 19(4), 422–431. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.18500/1819-7671-2019-19-4-422-431
  34. Shamionov, R.M., & Beskova, T.V. (2018). Methods of diagnostics of subjective well-being of the person. Psychological Studies, 11(60), 8. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.54359/ps.v11i60.277
  35. Shestova, M.A. (2021). Relationship between emotional sphere, tolerance of uncertainty and productive decision-making strategies. Vestnik of Samara State Technical University. Series: Psychological and Pedagogical Sciences, 18(3), 145–156. https://doi.org/10.17673/vsgtu-pps.2021.3.10
  36. Soares, M.E., Mosquera, P., da Silva, F.P., & Santos, M.J. (2023). Sustaining the well-being of university students: The role of expectations on the usefulness of education. In C. Machado, J.P. Davim (Eds.), Higher Education for Sustainability: The Portuguese Case (pp. 123–147). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-28793-0_6
  37. Tao, V.Y.K., Kam, C.C.S., Li, Y., & Wu, A.M.S. (2023). Differential prospective relationships of social-oriented and individual-oriented achievement motivations with achievement goals and affective wellbeing: A 1-year follow-up study. Learning and Instruction, 85, e101734. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2023.101734
  38. Tatarko, A.N., & Mukha, V.N. (2023). The value basis of institutional and social trust in the Krasnodar region. Theoretical Economics, (1), 83–99. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.52342/2587-7666VTE_2022_4_83_99
  39. Tikhomirova, M.A., Bordovskaia, N.V., & Koshkina, E.A. (2022). Psychological wellbeing of teachers. Education and Self-Development, 17(2), 188–202. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.26907/esd.17.2.15
  40. Tov, W., & Nai, Z.L.S. (2017). Cultural differences in subjective well-being: How and why. In Subjective Well-Being and Life Satisfaction (p. 24). Routledge. Retrieved December 23, 2023, from https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/edit/10.4324/9781351231879-3/cultural-differences-subjective-well-being-william-tov-ze-ling-serene-nai
  41. VanderWeele, T.J., Trudel-Fitzgerald, C., Allin, P., Farrelly, C., Fletcher, G., Frederick, D.E., Hall, J., Helliwell, J.F., Kim, E.S., Lauinger, W.A., Lee, M.T., Lyubomirsky, S., Margolis, S., McNeely, E., Messer, N., Tay, L., Viswanath, V., Węziak-Białowolska, D., & Kubzansky, L.D. (2020). Current recommendations on the selection of measures for well-being. Preventive Medicine, 133, e106004. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2020.106004
  42. Wagner, L., & Ruch, W. (2023). Displaying character strengths in behavior is related to well-being and achievement at school: Evidence from betweenand within-person analyses. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 18(3), 460–480. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2022.2109196
  43. Yang, T., Yang, X.Y., Yu, L., Cottrell, R.R., & Jiang, S. (2017). Individual and regional association between socioeconomic status and uncertainty stress, and life stress: A representative nationwide study of China. International Journal for Equity in Health, 16(1), 118. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12939-017-0618-7
  44. Zhang, L., Zhu, N., Li, W., Li, C., & Kong, F. (2022). Cognitive-affective structure of gratitude and its relationships with subjective well-being. Personality and Individual Differences, 196, 111758. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2022.111758

Copyright (c) 2023 Banshchikova T.N., Sokolovskii M.L.

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

This website uses cookies

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

About Cookies