employee from 01.01.2012 to 01.01.2019
Moskva, Moscow, Russian Federation
UDK 31 Статистика. Демография. Социология
GRNTI 15.81 Прикладная психология
OKSO 44.03.02 Психолого-педагогическое образование
BBK 88 Психология
TBK 80 Гуманитарные науки в целом
BISAC PSY003000 Applied Psychology
The article presents the results of the study of the component of hardiness, in the opinion of students of inclusive groups. Based on the data obtained on the components of hardiness, theoretical model of the formation of hardiness for persons with disability was compiled. In the well-known model of the hardiness of the American scientist Maddy S. and his colleagues added the volitional qualities - courage and resilience, as a "national" component of the construct of the viability of the individual, as well as the individual's overall psychological ability - responsibility. The study of hardiness, as the psychological quality of the individual, is currently the current direction in the psychology of disability. The developed theoretical model of the formation of hardiness includes the components of physical, social and personal components and can be used as the basis for the content of the adaptation discipline “Psychology of Hardiness” for people with disabilities.
model of hardiness, persons with disability, inclusive groups.
1. Aleksandrova L.A. K koncepcii zhiznestoykosti v psihologii. // Sibirskaya psihologiya segodnya. Sbornik nauchnyh trudov. 2004. vyp.2. S. 82-90
2. Bogomaz S.A., Balanev D.Yu. Zhiznestoykost' kak komponent innovacionnogo potenciala cheloveka. // Sibirskiy psihologicheskiy zhurnal. 2009. №32 .S. 23-28
3. Kratkiy psihologicheskiy slovar' / pod red. Petrovskogo A.V., Yaroshevskogo M.G. M., 1985. 530 s.
4. Leont'ev D. A. Fenomen otvetstvennosti: mezhdu nederzhaniem i giperkontrolem // Ekzistencial'noe izmerenie v konsul'tirovanii i psihoterapii. T. 2. Birshtonas; Vil'nyus: VEAET, 2005. S. 7-22.
5. Leont'ev D.A., Rasskazova E.I. Test zhiznestoykosti. M.: Smysl, 2006.
6. Loginova M.V. Zhiznestoykost' kak vnutrenniy klyuchevoy resurs lichnosti. // Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta MVD Rossii. 2009. №6. C. 19-22
7. Mardahaev L.V. Social'naya pedagogika. Slovar' (A-O). M.: UC Perspektiva, 2011. 236 s.
8. Pryadein V.P. Otvetstvennost' kak sistemnoe kachestvo lichnosti. Ekaterinburg: UrGPU, 2001. 209 s.
9. Rasskazova E.I. Dinamika smysla v processe sovladaniya s trevogoy. // Problem Problema smysla v naukah o cheloveke (k 100-letiyu Viktora Frankla): materialy mezhdunarodnoy konferencii / pod red. D.A. Leont'eva. M.: Smysl, 2005. S. 176-179.
10. Teplov B.M. Sovremennoe sostoyanie voprosa o tipah vysshey nervnoy deyatel'nosti cheloveka i metodika ih opredeleniya. Tipologicheskie svoystva nervnoy sistemy i ih znachenie dlya psihologii // Psihologiya individual'nyh razlichiy / pod red. Yu.B. Gippenreyter, V.Ya. Romanova. M., 2000. S. 163-178
11. Fominova A.N. Zhiznestoykost' lichnosti. M.: izd. Prometey, 2012. 13 s.
12. Maddi Salvatore R. The story of hardiness: twenty years of theorizing, research and practice. // Consulting Psychology Journal: practice and research. 2002. V. 54 (3). Pp. 175-185
