General characteristics of the “I-concept” in psychology. The concept of self-image in domestic and foreign psychology

General psychology, personality psychology, history of psychology

UDC 152.32 BBK Yu983.7

“IMAGE OF SELF” AS A SUBJECT OF RESEARCH IN FOREIGN AND DOMESTIC PSYCHOLOGY

A.G. Abdullin, E.R. Tumbasova

An analysis of the theoretical and methodological aspects of the study of “self-image” in domestic and foreign psychological science is given. Various approaches to defining the concepts of “self-image”, “self-awareness”, “self-concept” in various psychological theories are described.

Key words: self-image, self-awareness, self-concept, self, self-picture, ego-identity, self-system, self-knowledge, self-attitude.

In the scientific literature, the concept of “self-image” appeared in connection with the need to study and describe the deep psychological structures and processes of the individual. It is used together with such concepts as “self-awareness”, “self-esteem”, “I-concept”, “I”, “I-picture”, “self-image” and is inextricably linked with them.

W. James is considered to be the founder of the study of “self-image”. He considered the global personal “I” as a dual formation in which the I-conscious (I) and the I-as-object (Me) are combined. These are two sides of one integrity, always existing simultaneously. One of them represents pure experience, and the other represents the content of this experience (I-as-object).

In the first decades of the twentieth century in sociology, the “image of the self” was studied by C.H. Cooley and J.G. Mead. The authors developed the theory of the “mirror self” and based their position on the thesis that it is society that determines both the development and content of the “image of the self.” The development of the “self-image” occurs on the basis of two types of sensory signals: direct perception and consistent reactions of people with whom a person identifies himself. At the same time, the central

The function of the “I-concept” is identity as a generalized position in society, derived from the individual’s status in the groups of which he is a member.

The “I-image” is a cognitive-emotional complex with a fluctuating level of awareness and performs an adaptive function mainly in a new situation, and the condition for the development of the “I-image”, from the perspective of interactionist ideas, is identification with the position of a significant Other, with his status and his reference group. However, from these positions, it has not been studied with the help of what internal mechanisms a person’s awareness of his characteristics reflected by the external environment occurs and why the “image of the Self” appears to be social in origin and self-determination of behavior is denied.

Within the framework of cognitive psychology, “I-image” refers to the processes (“I-processes”) that characterize a person’s self-knowledge. The integrity of the “I-concept” is denied, since it is believed that a person has multiple concepts of “I” and self-control processes that can change at different points in time from situation to situation. In the structure of the “I”, representatives of this direction, in particular H. Marcus, highlight “I-schemas” - cognitive structures, generalizations about oneself, made on the basis of past experience, which guide and organize the process of processing information related to the “I”.

Another approach to the study of the “I” is proposed by the psychoanalytic school of foreign psychology. In particular, S. Freud considered the “image of the self” in close unity with bodily experiences and pointed to the importance of social connections and interaction with other people in the mental development of a person, while deducing all mental acts from the biological nature of the body.

Followers of classical psychoanalysis shifted the emphasis in the study of the problem of “Self-concept” to the study of the influence of the role of the biological on society - in the psychosocial concept of E. Erikson, in the school of interpersonal relations of G. Sullivan, K. Horney, in the theory of the “own self” of H. Kohut. In these concepts, the “image of the self” is considered within the framework of the analysis of the interaction of a person as a biological being and society in various planes. As a result, evolutionary, dynamic and structural theories of the formation of ideas about one’s “I” were formulated.

In K. Horney's concept, the “actual” or “empirical self” is separated from the “idealized self”, on the one hand, and from the “real self”, on the other. “Actual Self” was defined by K. Horney as a concept that embraces everything that a person is at a given time (body, soul). The “idealized self” is described by her through the “irrational imagination.” The force acting “originally” in the direction of individual growth and self-realization, complete identification and freedom from neurosis, K. Horney called the “real I” - as opposed to the “idealized I”, which cannot be achieved.

J. Lichtenberg considers the “Image of the Self” as a four-stage development scheme in the awareness of one’s own “I”. The first element is development to the level of self-differentiation (formation of primary experience), the second element is represented by the unification of ordered groups of ideas about oneself, the third - by the integration into the “coherent Self” of all bodily ideas about oneself and grandiose “images of the Self”, and the fourth - by the ordering of “ coherent “I” in mental life and its influence on the ego.

In turn, H. Hartmann tried to determine the differences between the concepts of “ego” and “I”. He divided the ego into the "perceived self" (the narcissistic ego that promotes a clear sense of self) and

"unperceived ego". This division led to a shift in the emphasis of structural theory from the ego to consciousness and, ultimately, to the structure of the self.

Based on the views of S. Freud, E. Erikson also considers the “image of the self” through the prism of ego-identity. In his opinion, the nature of self-identity is associated with the characteristics of the cultural environment surrounding the individual and his capabilities. His theory describes eight stages of personality development, directly related to changes in self-identity, and lists the crises that arise on the path to resolving internal conflicts characteristic of various age stages of development. Unlike representatives of the theory of symbolic interactionism,

E. Erikson writes about the mechanism of formation of the “Image of Self” as an unconscious process.

Later, J. Marcia clarified that in the process of identity formation (“self-image”), four of its statuses are distinguished, determined depending on the degree of self-knowledge of the individual:

Achieved identity (established after searching and studying oneself);

Identification moratorium (during the period of identity crisis);

Unpaid identity (accepting the identity of another without a process of self-discovery);

Diffuse identity (devoid of any identity or obligations to anyone).

In classical psychoanalysis, consciousness and self-awareness are considered as phenomena located on the same plane and influenced by unconscious drives and impulses. Self-consciousness is, on the one hand, under continuous pressure from unconscious sexual desires and, on the other hand, under pressure from the demands of reality. Self-consciousness acts as a “buffer” between these two planes, maintaining its function with the help of special psychological defense mechanisms (repression, projection, sublimation, etc.). Within the framework of the psychodynamic approach, the structural concepts of the “I-image” of the individual are revealed - such as “I-construct”, “I-object”, “real I”, the content of intrapersonal conflict in the structure of the “I” is described, and the classification of psychological defense mechanisms is outlined , constituting the most important

elements of modern ideas about the “image of the self”. However, the psychodynamic approach does not reveal the dynamics and structure of all meanings and personal meanings of the subject; only the mechanisms indirectly involved in their transformation are described.

Representatives of the humanistic trend in psychology consider the “image of the self” as a system of self-perceptions and connect the development of ideas about oneself with the direct experience of the individual. At the same time, a thesis is put forward about the integrity of the organism, the relationship of internal functioning and interaction with the environment within the framework of a single field of activity. A distinctive characteristic of this approach is the development of provisions about the individuality of a person’s experience and his desire for self-actualization. It was in humanistic psychology that the concept of “Self-concept” was first introduced and the modalities of its “Images of the Self” were defined. The concept of “I-concept” is defined as a structured image consisting of representations of the properties of “I” as a subject and “I” as an object, as well as the perception of the relationship of these properties to other people. The functions of the “I-concept”, according to K. Rogers, are the control and interpretation of behavior, its influence on a person’s choice of activity, which can determine the characteristics of the development of positive and negative “I-concept”. Psychological maladaptation can occur as a result of a mismatch between the “image of the self” and real experience. Psychological defense mechanisms in such a situation are used to overcome the dissonance between direct experience and self-image. In general, the behavior of an individual was interpreted by K. Rogers as an attempt to achieve consistency in the “image of the self,” and its development as a process of expanding zones of self-awareness as a result of cognitive self-esteem. Let us note that it was the humanistic approach that outlined the connection between human behavior, the nature of self-perception and various components of the “I-concept”.

Associated with the study of the “I” as a system of experience is J. Kelly’s theory of personal constructs, which operates with the concept of a construct as a unit of experience, as a way of interpreting reality invented by man. Human experience is thus shaped by a system of personal constructs. In a more specific sense, under

Personal constructs are understood as a system of binary oppositions used by the subject to categorize himself and other people. The content of such oppositions is determined not by linguistic norms, but by the ideas of the subject himself, his “implicit theory of personality.” Personal constructs, in turn, determine the system of subjective categories through the prism of which the subject carries out interpersonal perception.

A separate area of ​​research is represented by the study of the influence of the “image of the Self” on various characteristics of cognitive processes - memory organization, cognitive complexity, as well as on the structure of the image of the Other, personal characteristics. In the theory of cognitive dissonance by L. Festinger, a person in the process of self-knowledge, exploring himself, achieves internal cognitive consistency. In congruence theory

C. Osgood and P. Tannenbaum explore the relationship that arises when comparing two objects within the cognitive structure of personality - information and a communicator.

Among the researchers of “self-image” one cannot fail to mention R. Burns. His understanding of the “image of the self” is associated with the idea of ​​self-esteem as a set of attitudes “about oneself” and as the sum of all an individual’s ideas about himself. This, according to R. Burns, follows from the identification of the descriptive and evaluative components of the “image of the self.” The descriptive component corresponds to the term “picture of the Self”, and the component associated with the attitude towards oneself or to one’s individual qualities - the term “self-esteem”, or “self-acceptance”. According to R. Bern, the “image of the self” determines not just what an individual is, but also what he thinks about himself, how he looks at his active beginning and the possibilities of development in the future. Considering the structure of the “I-concept”, R. Burns notes that the “I-image” and self-esteem lend themselves only to conditional conceptual distinction, since psychologically they are inextricably interconnected.

In R. Assagioli's concept of self-awareness, a process is distinguished - “personalization” and a structure - a set of “subpersons”, or “subpersonalities”. At the same time, structural changes in the “I-concept” of an individual are considered a consequence of the processes of “personification” and “personalization.” Such changes, in turn, are associated with the characteristics of self-identification

perception and self-acceptance of a person. “Subpersonality” is a dynamic substructure of the personality, which has a relatively independent existence. The most typical “subpersonalities” of a person are psychological formations associated with other (family or professional) roles.

The “personal self” includes many dynamic “images of the self” (subpersonalities), formed as a result of identifying oneself with the roles that a person plays in life. An important contribution of psychosynthesis as one of the areas of psychology in the development of the concept of “I-image” was statements about the correspondence of individual identified “I-images” to the “personal I”, as well as the inadmissibility of domination over it by any of the subpersonalities.

G. Hermans considers the “I” in the context of dialogue, where he calls the main “I” dialogical, breaking up into several submodalities that represent the voices of the “I” and influence each other. In this case, the “I” looks like a set of autonomous positions represented by the submodalities of the “I”. During the dialogue, the submodalities of “I” are in different positions, shifting from submodality to submodality, just as a physical body moves in space. In other words, the structure of the “I” changes depending on the voices (submodalities) entering into dialogue.

V. Michel and S. Morf proposed to consider the “I” as a unique device for dynamic information processing, considering the “I” to be a system-device for processing information, which is based on the idea of ​​similar functioning of the “I-system” and other cognitive processes. This “I-system” is based on connectionist models, in which information processing is considered as a parallel, simultaneous, multiple process. The key question is not to determine the characteristic that unites the “I”, but to search for many related units that provide multiple and simultaneous processing of information. At the same time, V. Michel and S. Morf distinguish two subsystems in the “I-system”:

1) “I” as a dynamically organized cognitive-affective-executive subsystem;

2) “I” as a subsystem in which interpersonal relationships are mentally represented.

The cognitive concept, while having certain advantages over behaviorism in explaining experimental data, itself reveals certain limitations. In general, it can be reduced to the lack of theoretical tools capable of explaining the expedient nature of the dynamics of categorical systems, the multiplicity and variability of spaces of cognitive features.

The structural-dynamic approach is dominated by the idea that the “image of the self” is formed under the influence of the evaluative relationship of one’s own motives, goals and results of one’s actions with other people, with the canons and social norms of behavior accepted in society. In line with the structural-dynamic approach to the study of “self-image”, there is a correlation between stable and dynamic characteristics, self-awareness and “self-image”. “I-Image” is a structural formation, and self-awareness is its dynamic characteristic. Through the concept of self-awareness, the sources, stages, levels and dynamics of its formation in various situations are considered. The principles of the unity of consciousness and activity, historicism, development, etc. are taken as the basis. The development of self-awareness and professional “self-image” is considered as a result of the formation of a person as an individual and his professionalization.

In Russian psychology, the “image of the self” was considered mainly in the context of the study of self-consciousness. This issue is reflected in the monographic studies of V.V. Stolin, T. Shibutani, E.T. Sokolova, S.R. Panteleeva, N.I. Sarjveladze.

“I-image” is a set of characteristics with the help of which each person describes himself as an individual, as a being with psychological properties: character, personality traits, abilities, habits, oddities and inclinations. However, changes in local, specialized “I-images”, as well as private self-esteem, do not change the “I-concept”, which forms the core of personality.

So, E.T. Sokolova, F. Pataki interpret the “image of the self” as an integrative

installation education, including components:

1) cognitive - an image of one’s qualities, abilities, capabilities, social significance, appearance, etc.;

2) affective - attitude towards oneself (self-respect, selfishness, self-abasement, etc.), including as the owner of these qualities;

3) behavioral - implementation in practice of motives and goals in relevant behavioral acts.

Revealing the concept of “I” as an actively creative, integrative principle that allows an individual not only to be aware of himself, but also to consciously direct and regulate his activities, I.S. Cohn notes the duality of this concept, based on the fact that consciousness of oneself contains a dual “I”:

1) “I” as a subject of thinking, a reflexive “I” (active, acting, subjective, existential “I”, or ego);

2) “I” as an object of perception and internal feeling (objective, reflective, phenomenal, categorical “I”, or “image of I”, “concept of I”, “I-concept”).

At the same time, S. Kon emphasizes that the “image of the self” is not just a mental reflection in the form of ideas or concepts, but also a social attitude that is resolved through the individual’s attitude towards himself.

In turn, V.V. Stolin in “I-concept” distinguishes three levels:

1) the physical “image of the Self” (body diagram), determined by the need for the physical well-being of the body;

2) social identity, associated with a person’s need to belong to a community and determined by the desire to be in this community;

3) a differentiating “image of the Self”, characterizing knowledge about oneself in comparison with other people, giving the individual a sense of his own uniqueness and providing for the needs for self-determination and self-realization.

At the same time, V.V. Stolin notes that the analysis of the final products of self-consciousness, which are expressed in the structure of ideas about oneself, the “Image of the Self” or the “Self-concept”, is carried out either as a search for types and classifications of “Images of the Self”, or as a search for “dimensions”, i.e. i.e. the content parameters of this image.

YES. Oshanin distinguishes cognitive and operational functions in the “image of the self.” The “cognitive image of the self” is a “repository” of information about an object. With the help of a cognitive image, potentially useful properties of an object are identified. An “operational image” is an ideal specialized reflection of the object being transformed, which develops during the execution of a specific process of control and subordination to the task of action. It is involved in converting information coming from an object into appropriate impacts on the object. In “operative images” there is always a “cognitive background”, which, constituting more or less useful information about the object, can be directly used in action. In this case, the entire structure becomes operational. In this case, the distinction between “operational” and “cognitive image” ceases to exist.

According to D.A. Oshanin, one of the main features of the “Image of the Self” is the duality of its purpose:

1) an instrument of cognition - an image, designed to reflect an object in all the richness and variety of properties available to its reflection;

2) action regulator - a specialized information complex, the content and structural organization of which are subordinated to the tasks of a specific, purposeful influence on the object.

Self-awareness in Russian psychology is considered as a set of mental processes through which an individual recognizes himself as a subject of activity, as a result of which an idea of ​​himself as a subject of actions and experiences is formed, and the individual’s ideas about himself are formed into a mental “image of Self.” However, researchers often differ on the content and functions of self-awareness. In general terms, we can assume that in Russian psychology there are two components in self-awareness: cognitive and emotional. In the cognitive component, the result of self-knowledge is the individual’s system of knowledge about himself, and in the emotional component, the result of self-attitude is a stable generalized attitude of the individual towards himself. Some studies add self-regulation to the cognitive and emotional components. So, I.I. Chesnokov in the structure of self-consciousness

niya highlights self-knowledge, emotional and value-based attitude towards oneself and self-regulation of individual behavior.

Self-awareness, according to A.G. Spirkin, is defined as “a person’s awareness and assessment of his actions, their results, thoughts, feelings, moral character and interests, ideals and motives of behavior, a holistic assessment of himself and his place in life.”

In the structure of self-awareness, according to V.S. Merlin identifies four main components, which are proposed to be considered as phases of development: consciousness of identity, consciousness of “I” as an active principle, as a subject of activity, awareness of one’s mental properties, social and moral self-esteem. In turn, V.S. Mukhina considers the structural units of self-awareness to be a set of value orientations that fill the structural units of self-knowledge:

1) orientation towards recognizing one’s inner mental essence and external physical data;

2) orientation towards recognition of one’s name;

3) orientation towards social recognition;

4) orientation towards physical, mental and social characteristics of a certain gender;

5) orientation towards significant values ​​in the past, present, future;

6) orientation based on law in society;

7) orientation towards duty to people.

Self-awareness looks like this:

psychological structure, which is a unity of links developing according to certain patterns.

Self-knowledge and self-attitude, previously identified by other authors in the structure of self-awareness, V.V. Stolin refers to the “horizontal structure of self-consciousness” and introduces the concept of the “vertical structure of self-consciousness.” In accordance with three types of activity, he identified three levels in the development of self-awareness: organismic, individual, personal.

In Russian psychology, in development of the theory of cultural-historical determination of the human psyche, its own traditions of studying the problem of individual self-awareness have developed. In this kind of research, self-awareness is considered as a stage in the development of consciousness, prepared by the development of speech and the growth of independent

ness and changes in relationships with others. The fundamental principle for understanding the nature of self-awareness (consciousness) of an individual is the principle of its social determination. This position is reflected in the cultural-historical concept of mental development by L.S. Vygotsky, in the theory of activity of A.N. Leontiev and the works of S. L. Rubinstein.

It is believed that personality formation occurs under the influence of other people and objective activities. In this case, the assessments of other people are included in the system of self-assessments of the individual. Further, self-consciousness includes the separation of subject from object, “I” from “not-I”; the next element is to ensure goal setting and then - an attitude based on comparison, connections of objects and phenomena, understanding and emotional assessments - as another element. Through human activity, consciousness (self-awareness) is formed, which subsequently influences and regulates it. Self-awareness also “straightens” the cognitive components of the “self-image”, adjusting them to the level of the individual’s highest value orientations. In his actual conduct a man is influenced not only by these higher considerations, but also by factors of a lower order; features of the situation, spontaneous emotional impulses, etc. This makes it very difficult to predict the behavior of an individual based on his self-awareness, causing in some cases a skeptical attitude towards the regulatory function of the “I”.

Self-concept categories are based, like any categorization system, on the perception of intragroup similarity and intergroup difference. They are organized into a hierarchically classified system and exist at different levels of abstraction: the greater the volume of meanings a category covers, the higher the level of abstraction, and each category is included in some other (highest) category if it is not the highest. “I-concept” and self-awareness are identical to each other, defining one phenomenon that guides the process of identification and is referred to in psychology as personality.

Based on the above, the “I-image” can be presented as a structure that performs the function of regulating behavior in appropriate conditions, including the following components:

1) leading life meanings;

2) cognitive;

3) affective;

4) conative.

Life meanings determine personal bias in the choice of direction in the development and implementation of “ultimate life meanings” that determine the development and self-realization of the individual and are structurally, in terms of J. Kelly’s construct theory, a “superordinate construct” relative to other elements included in the “self-image.” " The cognitive component refers to self-definition in terms of physical, intellectual and moral personality traits. The affective component includes the current mental state of the individual. The conative component consists of behavioral characteristics, which are an important regulator of self-awareness and social behavior, and is determined by the leading style of the individual’s activity.

Thus, the results of the analysis of scientific literature presented above show that there are many approaches to the study of “I-concept”, “I-image”, which consider the problem in close connection with the self-awareness of the individual, from various theoretical positions, sometimes interrelated, and sometimes contradictory. another.

Literature

1. Assagioli, R. Psychosynthesis / R. Assagioli. - M.: Refl-book, 1997. - 316 p.

2. Bern, E. Games that people play. Psychology of human relationships / E. Bern. - M.: Directmedia Publishing, 2008. - 302 p.

3. Burns, R. Development of self-concept and education / R. Burns. - M.: Progress, 1986. -422 p.

4. Vygotsky, L.S. Collected works: in 6 volumes / L.S. Vygotsky. - M.: Pedagogy, 1987.

5. Integral individuality, Self-concept, personality / ed. L.Ya. Dorfman. - M.: Smysl, 2004. - 319 p.

6. Kon, I.S. In search of oneself: personality and its self-awareness / I. S. Kon. - M.: Politizdat, 1984. - 335 p.

7. Kohut, H. Restoration of selfhood / H. Kohut. - M.: Kogito-Center, 2002. -320 p.

8. Cooley, C.H. Human nature and social order / Ch.Kh. Coolie. - M.: Idea-Press: House of Intellectual Books, 2000. -312 p.

9. Leontyev, A.N. Activity. Consciousness. Personality / A.N. Leontyev. - M.: Meaning; Academy, 2005. - 352 p.

10. Lichtenberg, J.D. Clinical interaction: Theoretical and practical aspects of the concept of motivational systems / J.D. Lichtenberg, F.M. Lachmann, J.L. Fossage; lane from English A.M. Bokovikov.

M.: Kogito-Center, 2003. - 368 p.

11. Merlin, V. S. Psychology of individuality / V. S. Merlin. - M.: MODEK: MSSI, 2009. - 544 p.

12. Mead, J. G. Selected / J. G. Mead; lane V.G. Nikolaev. - M., 2009. - 290 p.

13. Mukhina, V.S. Age-related psychology. Phenomenology of development / V. S. Mukhina. - M.: Academy, 2009. - 640 p.

14. Oshanin, D.A. Subjective action and operational image: author's abstract. dis. ... Dr. Psy. Sciences/D.A. Oshanin. - M., 1973. - 42 p.

15. Pataki, F. Some cognitive processes of Self-Image / F. Pataki // Psychological studies of cognitive processes and personality / resp. ed.: D. Kovach, B.F. Lomov. - M.: Nauka, 1983. - P. 45-51.

16. Pervin, L. Personality psychology: Theory and research / L. Pervin, O. John; lane from English V. S. Maguna. - M.: Aspect Press, 2000. - 607 p.

17. Psychology of self-awareness: Reader /ed.-comp. D.Ya. Raigorodsky. - Samara: Publishing House “Bakhrakh-M”, 2003. -303 p.

18. Rogers, K.R. Formation of personality: A look at psychotherapy / K.R. Rogers. - M.: Eksmo-Press, 2001. - 416 p.

19. Rubinstein, S.L. Fundamentals of general psychology / S.L. Rubinstein. - St. Petersburg: Peter, 2008. - 712 p.

20. Sullivan, G.S. Interpersonal theory in psychiatry / G.S. Sullivan. - St. Petersburg: Yuventa, 1999. - 352 p.

21. Sokolova, E.T. Psychotherapy. Theory and practice / E. T. Sokolova. - M.: Academy,

22. Spirkin, A.G. Philosophy / A.G. Spear-kin. - Ed. 3rd, revised and additional - M.: Yurayt,

23. Stolin, V.V. Personal self-awareness / V.V. Stolin. - M.: Education, 1983. -288 p.

24. Festinger, L. Theory of cognitive dissonance / L. Festinger. - St. Petersburg: Rech, 2000. - 320 p.

25. Freud, Z. Introduction to psychoanalysis: Lectures / Z. Freud; lane with him. G.V. Baryshnikova; edited by HER. Sokolova, T.V. Rodionova.

M.: Azbuka-Atticus, 2011. - 480 p.

26. Hartmann, H. Ego psychology and the problem of adaptation / H. Hartmann; lane from English V.V. Starovoitova; edited by M.V. Chamomile-

HIV. - M.: Institute of General Humanitarian Research, 2002. - 160 p.

27. Kjell, L. Theories of personality / L. Kjell, D. Ziegler; lane from English S. Melenevskaya, D. Viktorova. - St. Petersburg: Peter Press, 1997. - 608 p.

28. Erickson, E. Identity: youth and crisis / E. Erickson; lane from English HELL. Andreeva, A.M. Prikhozhana, V.I. Rivosh. - M.: Progress, 1996. - 344 p.

Received by the editor on May 18, 2011.

Abdullin Asat Giniatovich. Doctor of Psychological Sciences, Professor of the Department of Psychodiagnostics and Consulting, South Ural State University, Chelyabinsk. Email: [email protected]

Asat G. Abdullin. PsyD, professor, Faculty of psychology “Psychological diagnostics and Counseling”, South Ural State University. E-mail: [email protected]

Tumbasova Ekaterina Rakhmatullaevna. Senior Lecturer, Department of General Psychology, Magnitogorsk State University, Magnitogorsk. Email: [email protected]

Ekaterina R. Tumbasova. The teacher senior of chair of the general psychology, Magnitogorsk state university. Email: [email protected]

Introduction

From the moment of its inception, the “I” concept becomes an active principle, an important factor in the interpretation of experience. The self-concept contributes to the achievement of internal consistency of the individual, determines the interpretation of experience and is a source of expectations, that is, ideas about what should happen.

The self-concept is formed under the influence of various external influences that an individual experiences. Particularly important for him are contacts with significant others, who, in essence, determine the individual’s ideas about himself. But at first, almost any social contacts have a formative effect on him. However, from the moment of its inception, the self-concept itself becomes an active principle, an important factor in the interpretation of experience. Thus, the self-concept plays an essentially threefold role: it contributes to the achievement of internal consistency of the personality, determines the interpretation of experience, and is a source of expectations.

Therefore, research in the field of self-awareness is of great importance for each individual, since it allows one to most deeply study the characteristics of one’s own psyche, and, possibly, solve any significant problems.

The relevance of this problem lies in the fact that the phenomenon of self-concept has not been fully studied to this day and requires a more in-depth consideration, since from time immemorial people have asked the question “who am I?” and still haven't found the answer.

Purpose of the study: analysis of theoretical approaches to understanding the self-concept and its structure in psychological science.

The object of research is the Self - concept of personality, and the subject is theories that study the Self - concept of personality.

The goal is revealed through the following tasks:

1. Analyze the scientific literature on the problem under study

2. Identify the views of domestic and foreign authors on the essence of the self-concept.

3. Determine the specifics of the structure of the self-concept.

The founder of the study of “I-concept” is considered to be W. James, who in his model divided personality into two components: “I” – the cognizable and “I” – the cognizing, emphasizing that such a division is conditional and it is possible to separate one from the other only in a purely theoretical constructions.

Also, many different scientists have contributed to the study of the phenomenon of self-concept, one way or another dealing with issues of personal self-awareness, and studying it from various positions, such as: W. James, C.H. Cooley, J.G. Mead, L.S. Vygotsky, I.S. Kon, V.V. Stolin, S.R. Pantileev, T. Shibutani, R. Burns, K. Rogers, K. Horney, E. Erickson...

Finally, a person, being a social being, simply cannot avoid accepting many social and cultural roles, standards and assessments determined by the very conditions of his life in society. He becomes the object not only of his own assessments and judgments, but also of the assessments and judgments of other people whom he encounters in the course of social interactions.

Chapter 1 Theoretical approaches to the study of self-concepts in psychological science

At this stage of development of psychology, the problematic of the self-concept attracts the attention of many domestic and foreign researchers. Not all authors use the term “I am a concept”; the terms “I-image”, “cognitive component of self-awareness”, “self-perception”, “self-attitude”, etc. are also used to designate this content area.

I - concept - is the totality of all an individual’s ideas about himself, associated with their assessment. The descriptive component of the Self is the concept – the image of the Self or the picture of the Self; a component associated with the attitude towards oneself or towards one’s individual qualities - self-esteem or self-acceptance. The self-concept determines not just what an individual is, but also what he thinks about himself, how he looks at his activity and possibilities for development in the future.

As Burns notes, the separation of descriptive and evaluative components allows us to consider the “I” concept as a set of attitudes aimed at oneself. In relation to the I-concept, the three main elements of the attitude can be specified as follows:

1. The cognitive component of the attitude is the self-image - the individual’s idea of ​​himself.

2. Emotionally - the evaluative component - self-esteem - an affective assessment of this idea, which can have varying intensity, since specific features of the self-image can cause more or less strong emotions associated with their acceptance or condemnation.

3. Potential behavioral response, that is, those specific actions that can be caused by self-image and self-esteem. .

I - the concept of personality can be presented as a cognitive system that performs the function of regulating behavior in appropriate conditions. It includes two large subsystems: personal identity and social identity. Personal identity refers to self-definition in terms of physical, intellectual and moral personality traits. Social identity consists of individual identifications and is determined by a person’s belonging to various social categories: race, nationality, class, gender, etc. Along with personal identity, social identity turns out to be an important regulator of self-awareness and social behavior.

Self-concept categories are based, like any categorization, on the perception of intragroup similarity and intergroup difference. They are organized into a hierarchically classified system and exist at different levels of abstraction: the greater the volume of meanings a category covers, the higher the level of abstraction, and each category is included in some other category unless it is the highest.

I.S. Kon, revealing the concept of “I” as an actively creative, integrative principle that allows an individual not only to be aware of himself, but also to consciously direct and regulate his activities, notes the duality of this concept; self-consciousness contains a dual “I”:

1) “I” as a subject of thinking, reflexive “I” - active, acting, subjective, existential “I” or “Ego”;

2) “I” as an object of perception and internal feeling – objective, reflective, phenomenal, categorical “I” or image of “I”, “concept of I”, “I am a concept”.

The reflective “I” is a kind of cognitive scheme that underlies the implicit theory of personality, in the light of which the individual structures his social perception and ideas about other people. In the psychological orderliness of the subject’s idea of ​​himself and his dispositions, the leading role is played by higher dispositional formations - the system of value orientations in particular.

I.S. Cohn raises the question of whether an individual can adequately perceive and evaluate himself, in connection with the problem of the relationship between the main functions of self-consciousness - regulatory-organizing and ego-protective. In order to successfully direct his behavior, the subject must have adequate information both about the environment and about the states and properties of his personality. On the contrary, the ego-protective function is focused primarily on maintaining self-esteem and stability of the “I” image, even at the cost of distorting information. Depending on this, the same subject can give both adequate and false self-assessments. The low self-esteem of a neurotic is a motive and at the same time a self-justification for leaving activities, while self-criticism of a creative person is an incentive for self-improvement and overcoming new boundaries.

The structure of the phenomenal “I” depends on the nature of the processes of self-knowledge of which it is the result. In turn, the processes of self-knowledge are included in the more comprehensive processes of communication between a person and other people, in the processes of the subject’s activity. The results of the analysis of the structure of his ideas about himself, his “I-images,” and his relationship to himself depend on how these processes are understood and how, consequently, the subject himself, the bearer of self-consciousness, appears in the study. .

Recognition and acceptance of all aspects of one’s authentic Self, as opposed to “conditional self-acceptance,” ensures the integration of the Self - the concept that the Self asserts as a measure of itself and its position in life space. Internal dialogue here will perform the functions of clarifying and affirming self-identity, and its specific forms, reasons for its occurrence and motives indicate the degree of harmony - inconsistency, maturity of self-awareness. Psychological conflicts then become an obstacle to personal growth and self-actualization when the interaction and dialogue of I-images is interrupted, “split,” each of which, being an essential part of the I-concept, strives to “declare itself,” “speak,” “be heard,” but is not accepted as one’s own, rejected or transformed defensively. A conflict may arise between any personality aspects resulting from dichotomous opposition.

The attitude of the individual towards himself, arising as a result of the activity of self-consciousness, is at the same time one of its fundamental properties, significantly influencing the formation of the meaningful structure and form of manifestation of a whole system of other mental characteristics of the individual. An adequately conscious and consistent emotional-value attitude of an individual towards himself is the central link of his internal mental world, creating its unity and integrity, coordinating and ordering the internal values ​​of the individual, accepted by him in relation to himself.

Last update: 04/18/2015

Self-concept is the image of ourselves that each of us develops. How exactly is it formed and does it change over time? We will try to answer these questions today.

The self-concept is formed through a combination of a number of factors; Above all, how we interact with the important people in our lives plays a role.

What definitions do scientists give to the self-concept?

“The self-concept is our perception, the image of our abilities and our uniqueness. At first, each of us has a very general and variable self-concept... As we get older, this concept becomes much more organized, detailed and specific.”

Pastorino & Doyle-Portillot (2013)

“The self-concept is a set of ideas about one’s own nature, unique qualities and typical behavior. Your self-concept is your mental image of yourself. This is a whole set of sensations. It may include, for example, statements such as “I am easy-going,” “I am nice,” or “I am a hard worker.”

Weiten, Dunn and Hammer (2012)

“The individual self consists of attributions and personality traits that distinguish us from others (for example, “introvert”). The relative self is determined by our relationships with close people (for example, “sister”). Finally, the collective self reflects our membership in social groups (for example, “English”).”

R.J. Crisp & R. N. Thener (2007)

Components of self-concept

As with other concepts within psychology, different theorists offer different perspectives on self-concept.

According to a theory known as social identity theory, self-concept consists of two main aspects: personal and social identity. Our personal identity includes the personality traits and other characteristics that make each person unique. Social identity includes the groups to which we belong - including our religious affiliation, etc.

Bracken (1992) suggested that there are six specific aspects of self-concept:

• social (ability to interact with others);
• competence (ability to satisfy basic needs);
• affective (awareness of emotional states);
• physical (feeling of appearance, health, physical condition and general appearance);
• academic (success in learning);
• family (functioning within the family).

Humanistic psychologist Carl Rogers believed that there are three components of the self-concept:

• Self-image, or how you see yourself. It is important to understand that this image does not necessarily coincide with reality. People may think they are better than they really are. On the other hand, people also tend to form a negative image; very often they perceive only or exaggerate their own shortcomings and weaknesses. For example, a teenager may believe that he is clumsy and awkward when in fact he is quite charming and likeable. A girl may believe that she is overweight when in reality she is slim. Each person's self-image appears to be the result of a combination of factors, including physical characteristics, personality traits, and social roles.
• Self-esteem, or how much you value yourself. A variety of factors can affect self-esteem, including how we compare ourselves to others and how others react to us. When people respond positively to our behavior, we are more likely to develop positive self-esteem. When we compare ourselves to others and find fault with ourselves, it can have a negative impact on our self-esteem.
• Ideal Self, or what you would like to be. In many cases, how we see ourselves and how we would like to be are not exactly the same.

Conformity and nonconformity

As mentioned earlier, our self-perception does not always coincide with reality. Some students may think they are doing great in the curriculum, but their grades may indicate otherwise. According to Carl Rogers, the extent to which a person's self-concept coincides with reality should be called congruence/correspondence. We all tend to distort reality to a certain extent; conformity occurs when our self-concept is fairly consistent with reality.

In psychology, the meaning of which is that a person is a living being who has the ability to speak clearly, create something and use the results of his work. A person has consciousness, and consciousness directed at oneself is the self-concept of the individual. This is a moving system of assessing one’s intellectual, physical and other qualities within oneself, that is, self-esteem under the influence of certain factors throughout one’s life. A person’s personality is subject to internal fluctuations and affects all manifestations of life from early childhood to old age.

Today, Rogers' personality theory is taken as the basis for examining the system. The essence of this theory can be considered as a mechanism of consciousness, reflexively working under the influence of culture, one’s own and others’ behavior. That is, simply put, a person gives an assessment of a particular situation, to other people and to himself. Self-evaluation encourages him to behave in a certain way and forms the self-concept.

One of the central concepts in psychology is the self-concept of personality, although there is still no single terminology and definition. Carl Ransom Rogers himself believed that his method was effective in working with a wide variety of psychotypes and was suitable for working with people of different cultures, professions, and religions. Rogers has formed his views based on his own experience working with his clients who have any

The self-concept of a person is a certain structure, the apex of which is Global Self, representing a sense of continuity of oneself and awareness of one’s own uniqueness. Parallel Global Self coming Self image, which is divided into modalities:

1. Real Me- this is a person’s awareness of what he really is, that is, an understanding of his status and role.
2. Mirror Self- this is a person’s awareness of how others see him.
3. Ideal Self- a person’s idea of ​​what he would like to be.

This structure is applicable only in theory, but in practice everything is much more complicated, because all the components are intertwined. In essence, the self-concept of a person is a mobile system of self-installation, which, in turn, has its own structure:

1. Cognitive - cognitive processes of human consciousness.
2. Affective is a short-term emotional process that is intense and manifested physically.
3. Activity - any meaningful human activity.

Cognitive and affective attitudes include three modalities, such as awareness of the present self, awareness of the desired self, and self-image through the eyes of others, and each of these three modalities contains mental, emotional, social and physical components.

Development The self-concept is developed on the basis of the individual’s personal characteristics, as well as under the influence of communication with other individuals. In essence, the self-concept plays a role in achieving internal coherence of the individual, interprets experience and is a factor of expectations. The functionality of this structure is human self-awareness.

The problem of "I" in psychology

Self-awareness arises ontogenetically somewhat later than consciousness. Both of these phenomena are quite complex in themselves and each of them represents a multi-level system.

From a psychological point of view, human "I" – this is the highest and most complex integral formation in the spiritual world of man, this is a dynamic system of all consciously carried out mental processes. “I” is both consciousness and self-awareness as a whole. This is a certain moral, psychological, characterological and ideological core of the personality.

The “I” is directly dependent on individual mental functions. The weakening of sensations and feelings immediately affects our “I”, which is expressed by the feeling of our being in the world, by our self-affirmation. “I” acts, first of all, as a subject of consciousness, a subject of mental phenomena in their integral integrity. By “I” we mean the person as she perceives, knows and feels herself . “I” is the regulative principle of mental life, the self-controlling power of the spirit; this is what we are both for the world and for other people in our essence and, above all, for ourselves in our self-awareness, self-esteem and self-knowledge.

Self-awareness- this is the activity of the “I” as a subject for cognition or creation of the image of “I”.

According to D.A. Leonetyev, “I” is a form of a person’s experience of his personality, the form in which the personality reveals itself. “I” has several facets.

1. The first facet of “I”- this is the so-called bodily, or physical"I", the experience of one's body as an embodiment of the "I", body image, the experience of physical defects, consciousness of health or illness. In the form of the bodily, or physical “I,” we feel not so much the personality as its material substrate—the body. The bodily “I” acquires especially great importance in adolescence, when one’s own “I” begins to come to the fore for a person, while other sides of the “I” are still lagging behind in their development.

2. The second facet of “I”- This social-role“I”, expressed in the feeling of being a bearer of certain social roles and functions.

3. The third facet of “I” – psychological"I". It includes the perception of one’s own traits, dispositions, motives, needs and abilities and answers the question “what am I?” The psychological “I” forms the basis of what in psychology is called the “Image of the Self” or the “I-concept,” although the bodily and social-role “I” are also included in it.

4. The fourth facet of “I”- this feeling of being source of activity or, conversely, a passive object of influence, the experience of one’s freedom or lack of freedom, responsibility or outsiderness. D.A. Leontiev called this facet “ existential"I".

5. The fifth facet of “I”- This self-attitude, or meaning"I". The most superficial manifestation of self-attitude is self-esteem - a general positive or negative attitude towards oneself. Next we should note self-respect and self-acceptance.

	|	next lecture ==>