PREDICTORS AND DIMENSIONS OF SOCIAL PROXIMITY
Oleksii Zimovin
V. N. Karazin National University in Kharkiv
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1571-6020
PDF 309-328 (Українська)

Keywords

social proximity
social distance
achievement of understanding
ideal of personality
predictors of social proximity
dimensions of social proximity

How to Cite

Zimovin, O. (2019). PREDICTORS AND DIMENSIONS OF SOCIAL PROXIMITY. PSYCHOLOGICAL JOURNAL, 5(11), 309-328. https://doi.org/10.31108/1.2019.5.11.21

Abstract

The article purpose is to determine the key predictors and dimensions of social proximity. Social proximity is regarded as the basic measure of a person’s psyche; it is reflected in understanding of other people, trust them and perception of their beliefs. The study was conducted with 120 participants, aged 17-59 (average 31.8), 56.7% were women; 43.3% were men. The next psychodiagnostics methods were used: Interview; Social Distance Scale (E. Bogardus); Tolerance Index Questionnaire (G. Soldatova, etc.); Diagnostic Test of Relations (G. Soldatova, etc.); questionnaire “Differential Reflection Test” (D. Leontiev); Questionnaire Measure of Emotional Empathy (A. Mehrabian and N. Epstein). Statistical methods: measures of central tendency, multiple linear regression analysis with stepwise inclusion of variables, multidimensional scaling (PROXSCAL).   

The following research results were obtained. The predictors of social proximity are identified, they all relates to a personal ideal. There are two groups of such predictors: the perceived conformity of another person to an ideal and the perceived conformity of an individual to his or her own ideal. That is the more the image of others and oneself agrees with a personal ideal, the greater the social proximity. A self-accepting personal is capable of accepting other people as well. Thus, an ideal is interpreted as a meta-factor of social proximity, because social perception will depend on its characteristics. There are two types of ideals. The first type is ideals as dynamic generalizations, describing personal awareness on interests in oneself, in others, in the whole world. The second is rigid ideals-models. Only the first type of ideals provides an opportunity to achieve social proximity. The socio-psychological phenomenon of the paradox of tolerance was also described. It is that increasing of tolerance for other social groups leads to an increased social distance to one’s own group.

Social proximity can be represented in two basic dimensions: Knowledge-Unknown and Similarity-Otherness. People perceive a person about whom they have information and similar to themselves as socially close. The identified dimensions are consistent with the model of an ideal as a meta-factor of social proximity, and emphasize the importance of socio-psychological technologies of providing information about others and finding common points as a productive way to achieve social unity and understanding.

 

PDF 309-328 (Українська)

References

Bart, R. (2016). Kak zhit vmeste: romanicheskie simulyatsii nekotoryih prostranstv povsednevnosti [How to Live Together: Romance Simulations of some Spaces of Everyday Life]. Moscow: Ad Marginem Press.

Bogardus, E. (1926). Social Distance in the City. Proceedings and Publications of the American Sociological Society, 20, 40-46.

Dusavitskiy, A. K. (2008). Razvitie lichnosti v uchebnoy deyatelnosti [Personality Development in Learning Activities]. Harkov.

Grace, H. A., Neuhaus, J. O. (1952). Information and Social Distance as Predictors of Hostility Toward Nations. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 47(2), 540-545.

Griffiths, K. M., Christensen, H. & Jorm, A. F. (2008). Predictors of Depression Stigma. BMC Psychiatry, 8 (25), doi:10.1186/1471-244X-8-25

Hall, E. (1969). The Hidden Dimension. New York: Anchor Books.

Helfgott, J. B., Gunnison, E. (2008). The Influence of Social Distance on Community Corrections Officer Perceptions of Offender Reentry Needs. Federal Probation, 72(1), 2-12.

Kapidinova, S. B. (2015). Stavlennya i sotsialna distantsiya yak pokazniki mizhetnichnoyi tolerantnosti studentiv [Attitude and Social Distance as Indicators of Students' Interethnic Tolerance]. Pedagogichniy protses: teoriya i praktika, 3-4, 25-29.

Lakoff, G., Johnson, M. (2003). Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Marsova, V. V. (2015). Kontsept «Sotsialnaya distantsiya» v sotsialno-gumanitarnyih naukah: istoriya razvitiya i perspektivyi izucheniya [The Concept of “Social Distance” in the Social Sciences and Humanities: a History of Development and Prospects for Studying]. Vestnik Krasnoyarskogo gosudarstvennogo pedagogicheskogo universiteta im. V.P. Astafeva, 2 (32), 175-179.

Panina, N. V. (2004). Social Distance, Ethnic Installation and National Tolerance in Ukraine. Individual and Society, 7 (2), 17-26.

Park, R. E. (1924). The Concept of Social Distance as Applied to the Study of Racial Attitudes and Racial Relations. Journal of Applied Sociology, 8, 339-344.

Perlz F. (1998) Geshtalt seminary. Geshtalt-terapiya doslovno. [Gestalt Workshops. Gestalt Therapy Verbatim]. Moskva: Institut obschegumanitarnyih issledovaniy.

Watzlawick, P., Helmick Beavin, J., & Jackson, D. (1967). Pragmatics of Human Communication : a Study of Interactional Patterns, Pathologies, and Paradoxes. New York: Norton.

Zіmovіn, O. I. (2016). Refleksiya ta kreativnist yak chinniki samorozvitku osobistosti [Reflection and Creativity as the Factors of Personality Self-Development]. Problemi suchasnoyi psihologiyi, 32, 138-153.

Creative Commons License

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

Copyright Notice

Articles in the Psychological Journal are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License International CC-BY that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal. For more detailed information, please, fallow the link - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/