Safety culture of young people: phenomenology, assessment methods, typology

Abstract

Background. The relevance of studying the youth safety culture (SC) in various spheres of life is due to a significant change in the structure of risks coming along with the development of Internet and digital technologies.

Objective. The empirical study had its purpose to reveal the intrapersonal and subjective determinants of the youth SC taking into consideration its gender specificity, as well as to describe the types of youth SC as per the attitude to different safety components.

Methods. The study implemented the standardized questionnaires TIPI-RU, Brief- Cope, PIL, RFQ, assessments of self-confirmation patterns as well as ad hoc developed technique for evaluating the youth SC and its components (public, personal, financial, and data security). Data analysis was carried out using multivariate statistical methods (ANOVA (Analysis of Variance), factor analysis, cluster analysis, correlation analysis), Student’s t-test and Fisher’s F-test.

Sample. The study involved 1469 university students (545 boys, 924 girls, mean age 20.34 years).

Results. of the study revealed certain gender differences in the youth SC: young women have a significantly higher indicator of personal safety, while young men dominate in all other components and the integral indicator of SC. Cluster analysis allowed for identifying 4 types of SC according to the rates of different SC components. The revealed types of SC differ in the personality characteristics, meaningfulness of life, preferred coping strategies, focus of regulation, and self-confirmation patterns.

Conclusion. It was established that youth security culture is more a consequence of comprehension (as well as learning) than a personality conditioned phenomenon. The study substantiated the expediency of individually oriented proactive approach to the formation of the students’ SC.

References

Abramova, V.N. (2009). Organizational psychology, organizational culture and safety culture in the nuclear industry. Part I. Psychology and methods for assessing organizational culture and safety culture at nuclear power plants. Obninsk: IG-SOTsIN. (In Russ.).

Basic Principles for the Safety of Nuclear Power Plants. Report of the International Nuclear Safety Advisory Group. Safety Series, № 75-INSAG-3. (1989). Vena: IAEA. (In Russ.).

Beck, U. (1999). World Risk Society (1st ed.). Cambridge: Polity.

Carver, C.S. (1997). You want to measure coping but your protocol’ too long: Consider the brief cope. International Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 4, 92–100.

Douglas, M., Wildavsky, A. (1983). Risk and culture: An essay on the selection of technological and environmental dangers. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Dyatlov, A.S. (2003). Chernobyl. How it was? M.: Nauchtekhlitizdat. (In Russ.).

Foucault, M. (1978). The History of Sexuality: The Will to Knowledge: Volume I: An Introduction. New York: Pantheon Books.

Gershkovich, V.A., Moroshkina, N.V., Kulieva, A.K., Nasledov, A.D. (2019). Adaptation of the E.T. Higgins questionnaire for diagnosing regulatory focus in a Russian-speaking sample. Psikhologiya. Zhurnal Vysshei shkoly ekonomiki (Psychology. Journal of the Higher School of Economics), 16 (2), 318–340. (In Russ.).

Giddens, A. (1991). Modernity and Self-Identity: Self and Society in the Late Modern Age. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

Karpan, N.V. (2006). Chernobyl. Revenge of the peaceful atom. Dnepropetrovsk: IKK “Balans-Klub”. (In Russ.).

Kharlamenkova, N.E. (2019a). The concept of psychological security and its scientific definitions. Development of concepts in modern psychology (2nd ed.). M.: IP RAN. (In Russ.). Kharlamenkova, N.E. (2019b). The concept of psychological safety and its justification from different scientific positions. Psikhologicheskii zhurnal (Psychological Journal), 40 (1), 28–37. (In Russ.).

Kharlamenkova, N.E., Tarabrina, N.V., Bykhovets, Yu.V., Vorona, O.A., Kazymova, N.N., Dymova, E.N., Shatalova, N.E. (2017). Psychological Security of Personality: Implicit and Explicit Concepts (Proceedings of the Institute of Psychology, Russian Academy of Sciences). M.: IP RAN. (In Russ.).

Kireeva, E.A., Dubovitskaya, T.D. (2011). Methodology for studying the features of self- affirmation in adolescence. Eksperimental’naya psikhologiya (Experimental Psychology), 4 (2), 115–124. (In Russ.).

Kirillova, E.B. (2017). Age differences in personality traits of adolescents with deviant behavior. Vestnik instituta: prestuplenie, nakazanie, ispravlenie (Bulletin of the Institute: crime, punishment, correction), 1 (37), 76–81. (In Russ.).

Kryukova, T.L., Ekimchik, O.A., Opekina, T.P. (2019). Psychology of coping with difficulties in close (interpersonal) relationships. Kostroma: Izd-vo Kostrom. gos. un-ta. (In Russ.).

Leonova, E.V. (2016). Formation of subjectivity in normative age and educational crises: Abstract of the thesis: Avtoref. diss. dokt. psikhol. nauk. (Formation of subjectivity in normative age and educational crises: dissertation) Ph.D. (Psychology). Moscow. (In Russ.).

Leont’ev, D.A. (1992). Life Meaning Orientation Test (SJO). M.: Smysl. (In Russ.).

Lupton, D. (2006). Sociology and risk, in: beyond the risk society: Critical reflections on risk and human security. In G. Mythen, S. Walklate (Eds.). Berkshire: McGraw-Hill Education. Open University Press.

Morosanova, V.I. (2022). Resource role of self-regulation in professional training and self- education of students. In Proceedings of the International Scientific and Practical Conference “Prospects of Development of Research in Education Sciences”. M.: Rossiiskaya akademiya obrazovaniya. (In Russ.).

Osin, E.N., Kosheleva, N.V. (2010). The Meaning-Life Orientations Test: New data on structure and validity. Voprosy psikhologii (Psychology Issues), 66 (6), 150–163. (In Russ.).

Sergeeva, A.S., Kirillov, B.A., Dzhumagulova A.F. (2016). Translation and adaptation of the short five-factor personality questionnaire (TIPI-RU): Assessment of convergent validity, internal consistency, and test-retest reliability. Eksperimental’naya psikhologiya (Experimental Psychology), 9 (3), 138–154. (In Russ.).

Sidorina, N.A., Kuznetsova, A.S., Khavylo, A.V. (2019). Proactive approach to the problem of forming a culture of personal safety. Uchenye zapiski universiteta imeni P.F. Lesgafta (Scientific Notes of P.F. Lesgaft University), 12 (178), 432–436. (In Russ.).

Slobodchikov, V.I. (1991). The category of age in developmental psychology and pedagogy. Voprosy psikhologii (Psychology Issues), 2, 37–49. (In Russ.).

Tolmacheva, L.V. (2022). Pedagogical design of life safety culture in a technical university: monograph. Taganrog: El’Direkt — IP Shkurkin D.V. (DirektSains). (In Russ.).

Tseiko, V.A. (2015). Life safety culture of high school students: essence, formation process and results. Vestnik Bryanskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta (The Bryansk State University Herald), 1, 65–70. (In Russ.).

Wanke, M., Piejko-Płonka, M., Deutschmann, M. (2020). Risk behavior of youth — social definition of risk. Zeszyty Pracy Socjalnej, 25 (4), 269–282.

Zhuravlev, A.L., Yurevich, A.V., Tarabrina, N.V., & Kol’tsova, V.A. (2012). Problems of psychological security. M.: IP RAN. (In Russ.).