With reference to the ideas of the dialogic (M. Buber), structural-dynamic (B.D. Parygin) and subjective-existentialistic (Z.I. Ryabikina) concepts, basing the research methodology on the principles of synergetics, we have developed the agentic-dynamic approach to personality studies, where emphasis is made on the role of personality positioning systems in the agency development processes. The development of the personality positioning systems self-organization follows four vector lines: Infantile, Aggressive, Sabotaging, Mighty. We have proposed to use the term “agentic activity type” for such ways of personality positioning self-organization, since these systems predetermine the typical nature and direction of the agent’s activity. The study became possible by virtue of the development of the Model of the Dispositional Structure of Agentic Activity and creation of the Personality’s Agentic Activity Profile inventory based on this model. The inventory tests the agentic activity profile as an individual dynamic system formation. The factorization of the data allows to identify sets of personality positions as pervasive organizing principles, or types. As system formations, the agentic activity types should be manifested in various personality characteristics, including the characteristics of coping behavior. The article presents the results of an empirical study of the correlation between the agentic activity types identified via factorization of the data obtained using the author's “Personality’s Agentic Activity (PAA) Profile” inventory and the scales of Lazarus’s WCQ (Ways of Coping Questionnaire). Regression models have been built, allowing to predict the coping behavior of an individual both specifically, that is, for selected personality positions, and globally, for an agentic activity type. It has been shown that the Infantile, Aggressive and Sabotaging types tend to choose coping strategies within an instinctive-protective paradigm: escape-avoidance, confrontation, distancing. The mighty type tends to use rational coping strategies aimed at practical resolution of the conflict and transformation of the situation, i.e. positive reassessment and decision planning. Notice has been given to similarity of the holistic styles of coping behavior of the Infantile, Aggressive and Sabotaging types with the styles of coping with basal anxiety according to K. Horney. The obtained results allow to consider the personality positioning systems of an agent as a source that forms “mature” or “immature” coping behavior.
subject-dynamic approach, types of agentic activity, personality positioning of an agent, coping-behavior
1. Ancyferova, L. I. (1994). Lichnost' v trudnyh zhiznennyh usloviyah: pereosmyslivanie, preobrazovanie situaciy i psihologicheskaya zaschita. Psihologicheskiy zhurnal, 15(1), 3-18.
2. Branskiy, V. P., i Pozharskiy, S. D. (red.). (2009). Sinergeticheskaya filosofiya istorii: kollektivnaya monografiya. Ryazan': Izd-vo «Kopi-Print».
3. Znakov, V. V. (2019). Dinamicheskiy podhod k issledovaniyu lichnosti i processual'nyy analiz v psihologii sub'ekta. Psihologicheskiy zhurnal, 40(5), 27-34, doi:https://doi.org/10.31857/S020595920006073-6
4. Znakov, V. V., i Ryabikina, Z. I. (2017). Psihologiya chelovecheskogo bytiya. Moskva: Smysl.
5. Knyazeva, E. N., i Kurdyumov, S. P. (1994). Zakony evolyucii i samoorganizacii slozhnyh sistem. Moskva: Nauka.
6. Knyazeva, E. N., Kurdyumov, S. P. (2002). Osnovaniya sinergetiki: Rezhimy s obostreniem, samoorganizaciya, tempomiry. Sankt-Peterburg: Aleteyya.
7. Kryukova, T. L. (2008). Chelovek kak sub'ekt sovladayuschego povedeniya. V A. L. Zhuravlev, T. L. Kryukova, E. L. Sergienko (red.), Sovladayuschee povedenie: Sovremennoe sostoyanie i perspektivy (s. 55-67). Moskva: IP RAN.
8. Kryukova, T. L. (2010). Metody izucheniya sovladayuschego povedeniya: tri koping-shkaly. (2-e izd., ispravlennoe, dopolnennoe). Kostroma: KGU im. N.A. Nekrasova.
9. Kryukova, T. L., Saporovskaya, M. V., Hazova, S. A. (2017). Sovladanie s trudnostyami i zhiznennyy stil' sovremennika. Vestnik KGU. Seriya: Pedagogika. Psihologiya. Sociokinetika, (1), 91-96.
10. Nartova-Bochaver, S. K. (1997). "Coping behavior" v sisteme ponyatiy psihologii lichnosti. Psihologicheskiy zhurnal, 8(5), 20-30.
11. Nasledov, A. D. (2012). Matematicheskie metody psihologicheskogo issledovaniya: analiz i interpretaciya dannyh: ucheb. posobie (4-e izd., ster.). SPb.: Rech'.
12. Petros'yan, S. N., Ryabikina, Z. I., Gubanova, N. Yu., i Simavoryan, S. Zh. (2021). Standartizaciya metodiki «Lichnostnyy profil' sub'ektnoy aktivnosti». Nauchnye issledovaniya i razrabotki. Social'no-gumanitarnye issledovaniya i tehnologii, 10(3), 45-56. doi:https://doi.org/10.12737/2306-1731-2021-10-3-45-56
13. Petros'yan, S. N., Ryabikina, Z. I., i Gubanova, N. Yu. (2021). Strukturnaya validnost' metodiki «Lichnostnyy profil' sub'ektnoy aktivnosti». Gumanizaciya obrazovaniya, 1, 41-58. doi:https://doi.org/10.24411/1029-3388-2020-10148
14. Sergienko, E. A. (2013). Problema sootnosheniya ponyatiy sub'ekta i lichnosti. Psihologicheskiy zhurnal, 34(2), 5-16.
15. Band, E. B., & Weisz, J. R. (1988). How to feel better when it feels bad: children's perspectives on coping with everyday stress. Developmental Psychology, 24(2), 247-253. doi:https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.24.2.247
16. Brown, L. J., & Bond, M. J. (2019). Brown, L. J., & Bond, M. J. (2019). The pragmatic derivation and validation of measures of adaptive and maladaptive coping styles, Cogent Psychology, 6(1), 1568070, doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/23311908.2019.1568070
17. Carver, C. S., & Connor-Smith, J. (2009). Personality and Coping. Annual Review of Psychology, 61, 679-704.https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.093008.100352
18. Cohan, S. L., Jang, K. L., and Stein, M. B. (2006). Sonfirmatory factor analysis of a short form of the coping inventory for stressful situations. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 62(3): 273-283. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/jclp.20211
19. Cohen, F., & Lazarus, R. S. (1979). Coping with stresses of illness. In G. C. Stone, F. Cohen & N. E. Adler (Eds.), Health Psychology: A handbook. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass
20. Compas, B. E., Connor-Smith, J. K., Saltzman, H., Thomsen, A. H., and Wadsworth, M. E. (2001). Coping with stress during childhood and adolescence: problems, progress, and potential in theory and research. Psychological Bulletin, 127, 87-127. doi:https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.127.1.87
21. DeLongis, A., & Holtzman, S. (2006). Coping in context: The role of stress, social support, and personality in coping. Journal of Personality, Special Issue: Advances in Personality and Daily Experience, 73, 1633-1656. doihttps://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2005.00361.x
22. Folkman, S., & Lazarus, R. S. (1988). Manual for the ways of coping questionnaire. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
23. Frydenberg E., & Lewis R. (1991). Adolescent coping styles and strategies. Is there functional and dysfunctional coping? Australian Journal of Guidance and Counselling, 1, 1-8
24. Garland, E., Gaylord, S., & Park, J. (2009). The role of mindfulness in positive reappraisal. Explore, 5(1), 37-44. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.explore.2008.10.001
25. Garza Varela, J. P. De la Cruz-de la Cruz, C., Leija Guerrero, J, G., & Sanchez Rodríguez, K. E., & Valle, O. K. (2021). Positive reappraisal as a stress coping strategy during the COVID-19 pandemic. Salud Mental, 44(4), 177-184. doi:https://doi.org/10.17711/SM.0185-3325.2021.023
26. Horney, K. (1937). The neurotic personality of our time. New York: W.W. Norton & Co.
27. Lazarus R. S. (1993). Coping theory and research: past, present, and future. Psychosomatic Medicine, 55(3), 234-47. doi:https://doi.org/10.1097/00006842-199305000-00002. PMID: 8346332
28. Lazarus, R. S., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal, and coping. New York, NY: Springer.
29. Lee-Baggley, D., Preece, M., DeLongis, A. (2005). Coping with interpersonal stress: role of big five traits. Journal of Personality, 73(5). doi: 1141-80.https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2005.00345.x
30. McCrae, R. & Costa, P. (2006). Personality and coping effectiveness in an adult sample. Journal of Personality, 54, 385-404. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1986.tb00401.x
31. McGarigal, K., Cushman, S., & Stafford, S. (2000). Multivariate statistics for wildlife ecology research. New York, NY: Springer. doihttps://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-1288-1
32. McWilliams, L. A., Cox, B. J., & Enns, M. W. (2003). Use of the coping inventory for stressful situations in a clinically depressed sample: factor structure, personality correlates, and prediction of distress. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 59, 423-437. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/jclp.10080
33. Milnor, J. (1985). On the concept of attractor, Communications in Mathematical Physics, 99, 177-195.
34. Moos, Rudolf &Holahan, Charles. (2003). Dispositional and contextual perspectives on coping: Toward an integrative framework. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 59, 1387-403. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/jclp.10229
35. Stanisławski, K. (2019). The coping circumplex model: An integrative model of the structure of coping with stress. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 1-23. doi:https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00694
36. Sveinbjornsdottir, S., & Thorsteinsson, E. B. (2008). Adolescent coping scales: a critical psychometric review. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 49, 533-548. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9450.2008.00669.x
