home Health technologies The conversation method and its psychological features. Methods of observation, conversation, questioning and testing

The conversation method and its psychological features. Methods of observation, conversation, questioning and testing

Observation - the main empirical method of purposeful systematic study of a person. The observed does not know that he is the object of observation.

Observation is carried out using a special technique, which contains a description of the entire observation procedure:

a) selection of the object of observation and the situation in which it will be observed;

b) observation program: a list of those aspects, properties, features of the object that will be recorded;

c) a method of recording the information received.

When observing, a number of requirements must be met: the presence of an observation plan, a set of signs, indicators that must be recorded and assessed by the observer; preferably several expert observers whose assessments can be compared, building a hypothesis that explains the observed phenomena, testing the hypothesis in subsequent observations.

Based on observation, an expert assessment can be given. The results of observations are recorded in special protocols, certain indicators and signs are identified that should be identified during observation of the behavior of the subjects in accordance with the observation plan. Protocol data is subjected to qualitative and quantitative processing.

Observation has several options. External surveillance is a way of collecting data about a person’s psychology and behavior by directly observing him from the outside. Internal observation, or self-observation, is used when a research psychologist sets himself the task of studying a phenomenon of interest to him in the form in which it is directly presented in his mind.

Free observation does not have a pre-established framework, program, or procedure for its implementation. It can change the subject or object of observation, its nature during the Observation itself, depending on the wishes of the observer.

Distinguish the following types observations: cross-section (short-term observation), longitudinal (long, sometimes over a number of years), selective and continuous, and a special type - participant observation (when the observer becomes a member of the study group).

Advantages of the method:

1. The wealth of information collected;

2. The naturalness of the operating conditions has been preserved;

3. It is acceptable to use a variety of technical means;

4. It is not necessary to obtain the prior consent of the subjects.

Flaws:

1. Subjectivity;

2. Inability to control the situation;

3. Significant time investment.

Method of introspection (introspection). The subject carefully observes the dynamics of the states he experiences at each stage of executing the instructions. The subject, who has undergone special training, describes how he feels when he finds himself in a particular situation.

Introspection has two disadvantages:

1. Extreme subjectivity, since each subject describes his own impressions or experiences, which very rarely coincide with the impressions of another subject;

2. The sensations of the same subject change over time.

Psychodiagnostic conversation as a method of obtaining information based on verbal communication.

One type of survey is a conversation. Conversation as a psychological method involves direct or indirect, oral or written receipt from the subject of information about his activities, in which the psychological phenomena characteristic of him are objectified. Types of interviews: history taking, interviews, questionnaires and psychological questionnaires.

History ( lat. from memory) - information about the past of the person being studied, obtained from himself or - with an objective history - from people who know him well. An interview is a type of conversation in which the task is to obtain answers from the interviewee to certain (usually pre-prepared) questions. In this case, when questions and answers are presented in writing, a survey takes place.

Advantages and disadvantages of the conversation method.

Contents and plan of the conversation. A conversation is a widespread empirical method in psychology and pedagogical practice of obtaining information about a person in communication with him, as a result of his answers to targeted questions. Responses are recorded either by tape recording or shorthand. A conversation is a subjective psychodiagnostic method, since a teacher or researcher subjectively evaluates the student’s answers and behavior, while influencing the student with his behavior, facial expressions, gestures, and questions, determining one or another degree of openness and trust-mistrust of the subject.

Organizing the conversation. There are a number of requirements for conversation as a method. The first is ease. You can't turn the conversation into a question. A conversation brings the greatest results when the researcher establishes personal contact with the person being examined. It is important to carefully think through the conversation, present it in the form of a specific plan, tasks, problems to be clarified. The conversation method involves, along with answers, asking questions by the subjects. Such a two-way conversation provides more information on the problem under study than just the subjects’ answers to the questions posed.

Types of tests and types of tasks in tests. Test (from English - sample, test, check) is a standardized technique for psychological measurement and diagnosis of the severity of mental and behavioral properties and personality states. A test is a standardized, often time-limited, test designed to establish comparable quantitative and qualitative individual psychological differences.

By standardization we mean that these techniques must be applied in the same way at all times, from the situation and instructions given to the subject, to the way the data is calculated and interpreted. Comparability means that test scores can be compared with each other regardless of where, when, how, or by whom they were obtained. Of course, if the test was applied correctly. In psychodiagnostics, there are various classifications of tests.

They can be divided:

According to the characteristics of the test tasks used for verbal tests and non-verbal (practical) tests;

According to the forms of the examination procedure - group and individual tests;

By focus: intelligence tests, personality tests, special ability tests, achievement tests, creativity tests;

Depending on the presence or absence of time restrictions - speed tests and performance tests;

According to the method of implementation - blank, manipulative, hardware, computer, situational-behavioral;

On psychometric grounds, tests are divided into those based on individual difference scales and criterion-referenced tests;

According to the purpose of application, school readiness tests, clinical tests, vocational selection tests and others are distinguished. - by composition - monometric and complex (test batteries).

Criteria-Based Tests (KORT) are intended to determine the level of individual achievements relative to some criterion based on a logical-functional analysis of the content of tasks. Specific knowledge, skills, and abilities necessary for the successful completion of a particular task are usually considered as a criterion (or objective standard). The criterion is the presence or absence of knowledge. This is the main difference between CORT and traditional psychometric tests, in which assessment is carried out on the basis of correlating individual results with group results (orientation to the statistical norm). An essential feature of CORT is that in them individual differences are reduced to a minimum (individual differences affect the duration of assimilation, and not the final result).

Speed tests - a type of diagnostic techniques in which the main indicator of test subjects’ work productivity is the time to complete (volume) of test tasks. Typical speed tests usually include a large number of similar tasks (items). The volume of material is selected in such a way that in the allotted time (constant for all subjects) not one of the subjects has time to cope with all the tasks. Then the indicator of productivity will be the number of correctly completed tasks. Example: proofreading test, intelligence tests. An indicator of the effectiveness of performing speed tests can also be a direct measurement of the task completion time (Schulte table).

Performance tests are focused on measuring or ascertaining the result achieved by the test subject when performing a test task. The speed of work is not taken into account or is of secondary importance. A time limit may apply but serves the purpose of standardizing the study or to save time. These are most personality methods, questionnaires, projective tests, questionnaires.

Verbal tests . In them, the material of test tasks is presented in verbal form. It is understood that the main content of the subject’s work is operations with concepts, mental actions in verbal logical form. Verbal tests are often aimed at measuring the ability to understand verbal instructions, skills in operating grammatical language forms, and mastery of writing and reading.

Tests reflecting verbal factors of intelligence most closely correlate with the criteria of general culture, awareness, and academic performance. The results of verbal tests are very sensitive to differences in the linguistic culture of the subjects, level of education, and professional characteristics. Difficulties arise in adapting verbal tests to the conditions of examining subjects of a different nationality.

Nonverbal tests (practical). In them, the material of test tasks is represented by non-verbal tasks. Nonverbal tests reduce the influence of language and cultural differences on the examination result. Completing the task in a non-verbal form also distinguishes the examination procedure for subjects with speech and hearing impairments, as well as persons without education. Practical tasks turned out to be convenient when conducting mass test studies.

Blank tests (they used to be called "pencil and paper tests"). The use of forms is common in almost all types of test methods. The subject is offered a special survey form, brochure, questionnaire, etc., which contains instructions and examples of solutions, work assignments and a form for recording answers.

Advantages: simplicity of examination technique, no need for special equipment. In subject tests, the material of test tasks is presented in the form of real objects: cubes, cards, parts of geometric shapes, structures and assemblies of technical devices, etc. The most famous are Koos cubes, the test of complex figures from the Wechsler set, and the Vygotsky-Sakharov test. Subject tests are mostly administered individually. Hardware tests require the use of special equipment to conduct research and record the data obtained.

Used to assess psychophysiological properties, study reaction time, typological features nervous system, to study the characteristics of perception, memory, thinking. The advantages of hardware tests include higher accuracy and objectivity of examination results, and the ability to automate the collection of primary data. The disadvantages are the high cost of the necessary equipment and the complexity of technical support for a psychodiagnostic laboratory. In most cases, hardware tests are carried out individually.

Computer tests - an automated type of testing in the form of a dialogue between the subject and the computer. Test tasks are presented on the display screen, and the test subject enters answers from the keyboard; The examination protocol is immediately created as a data set on magnetic media. Standard statistical packages make it possible to very quickly carry out mathematical and statistical processing of the results obtained in different directions.

If desired, you can obtain information in the form of graphs, tables, diagrams, profiles. Using a computer, you can obtain an analysis of data that is almost impossible to obtain without it: the time it takes to complete test tasks, the time it takes to obtain correct answers, the number of refusals to make a decision and seeking help, the time spent by the test taker thinking about an answer when refusing a decision; time to enter the answer /if it is complex/, etc. These features of the test subjects are used for in-depth psychological analysis during the testing process.

Individual tests - interaction between the experimenter and the subject occurs one on one.

Advantages: the ability to observe the subject (facial expressions, involuntary reactions), hear and record statements not provided for in the instructions, record functional states.

Used in working with infants and children preschool age, in clinical psychology - testing of persons with somatic or neuropsychic disorders, people with physical disabilities, etc. As a rule, it requires a lot of time and a high level of qualification of the experimenter. Group tests allow you to simultaneously examine a group of subjects (up to several hundred people). (This is not a socio-psychological diagnosis.)

Advantages:

Mass character;

Speed of data collection;

The instructions and procedure are quite simple and the experimenter does not require high qualifications;

The uniformity of the experimental conditions is observed to a greater extent; - processing of results is usually more objective, often on a computer.

Flaws:

Limiting the possibility of observation;

There is less opportunity to achieve mutual understanding with the subject, to interest him, to secure cooperation - undetected illnesses, fatigue, anxiety, anxiety can affect the completion of the task.

Intelligence tests. Refers to general ability tests. Designed for level measurement intellectual development(mental potential). Manifestations of intelligence are diverse, but they have something in common that allows them to be distinguished from other behavioral features. This commonality is the activation in any intellectual act of thinking, memory, imagination, all those mental functions that provide knowledge of the surrounding world. Accordingly, intelligence as an object of measurement is understood as those human characteristics that are related to cognitive properties.

This is reflected in numerous tests to assess various intellectual functions (tests of logical thinking, semantic and associative memory, arithmetic, spatial visualization, etc.). These tests are quite clearly separated from other methods for measuring individual psychological characteristics - personality tests aimed at measuring behavior in certain social situations, interests and emotions of an individual.

In most intelligence tests, the test taker is asked on a special form to establish the logical relationships of classification, analogy, generalization, and others specified by the instructions between the terms and concepts from which the test tasks are composed. He communicates his decisions either in writing or by marking one of several options available on the form. The success of the test subject is determined by the number of correctly completed tasks, and the IQ is derived from this number.

The success of the test subject is related to the fact (by G. Eysenck ):

To what extent in his previous experience has he mastered the terms and concepts from which the test tasks are constructed;

To what extent have they mastered exactly those mental actions that are necessary to solve test problems;

And can he arbitrarily actualize these actions;

To what extent are the mental stereotypes developed by the subject in his past experience suitable for solving test problems?

Thus, the test results reveal not the mental potential of the test subject, but rather those features of his past experience and training that inevitably affect his work on the test. This circumstance served as the basis for calling the results obtained when using intelligence tests “test” or “psychometric” intelligence.

Tests of special abilities, creativity, personality.

Achievement Tests - assessment of the achieved level of development of abilities, skills and knowledge. Unlike intelligence tests, which measure the influence of experience and general ability, achievement tests measure the influence of special programs education, professional and other training on the effectiveness of teaching a particular set of knowledge, the formation of various special skills. Thus, achievement tests are aimed at assessing a person's achievements after completion of training. Achievement tests used in school psychodiagnostics have noticeable advantages compared to the existing assessment of student performance.

Their indicators focus on measuring mastery of key concepts, topics and elements of the curriculum, rather than a specific body of knowledge, as is the case in traditional school assessments. Achievement tests, thanks to a standardized form of assessment, make it possible to correlate the student’s level of achievement in the subject as a whole and in its individual essential elements with similar indicators in the class or in any other sample of subjects. This assessment is more objective and less time consuming (as it is often a group test) than traditional school assessments.

They cover a larger number of topics. Tests provide an opportunity for an unambiguous objective assessment of the student, while exams do not provide such an assessment. For example, in 1994 in Moscow, out of 50,000 graduates, 110 received gold medals, and in Novosibirsk, out of 8,000, 55 graduates received gold medals. Ratio 1:4.

Creativity test - techniques designed to study and evaluate the creative abilities of an individual. Creativity is the ability to produce new ideas and find unconventional ways to solve problematic problems. Factors of creativity - fluency, clarity, flexibility of thinking, sensitivity to problems, originality, inventiveness, constructiveness in solving them, etc. If solving creativity tests can be taken as one of the evidence of the presence of creative abilities in a person, then not solving them is not proof of the absence such.

The most famous tests for measuring the cognitive aspect of creativity were developed by Joe Guilford and his colleagues (1959) and Paul Torrance (1962). In domestic research, based on identifying a unit of measurement of creative abilities called “intellectual initiative,” an original “creative field” methodology has been developed. D.B. Epiphany (1983).

Special ability tests - techniques designed to measure the level of development of certain aspects of intelligence and psychomotor functions, primarily ensuring effectiveness in specific, fairly narrow areas of activity. Unlike intelligence tests, which are aimed at broad areas of activity, special ability tests are aimed at specific areas of activity and often serve as a supplement to intelligence tests.

They emerged for the purpose of professional selection and career guidance abroad. In foreign psychodiagnostics, the following groups of ability tests are distinguished: sensory, motor, technical (mechanical) and professional (counting, musical, reading speed and reading comprehension, etc.). Complex batteries of abilities are most widespread abroad.

Advantages and disadvantages of the test method.

The tests consist of a series of tasks with a choice of ready-made answer options. When calculating test scores, the selected answers receive an unambiguous quantitative interpretation and are summed up. The total score is compared with quantitative test norms, and after this comparison, standard diagnostic conclusions are formulated.

The popularity of the test method is explained by the following main advantages (below, traditional oral and written exams are taken as a comparison):

1. Standardization of conditions and results. Test methods are relatively independent of the qualifications of the user (performer), for whose role even a laboratory assistant with secondary education can be trained. This, however, does not mean that in order to prepare a comprehensive conclusion on a battery of tests, it is not necessary to involve a qualified specialist with a full-fledged higher psychological education.

2. Efficiency and efficiency. A typical test consists of a series short assignments each of which usually takes no more than half a minute to complete, and the entire test usually takes no more than an hour (in school practice this is one lesson); A group of subjects is tested simultaneously, thus saving significant time (man-hours) on data collection.

3. Quantitative differentiated nature of the assessment. The granularity of the scale and the standardization of the test allows us to consider it as a “measuring instrument” that gives a quantitative assessment of the properties being measured (knowledge, skills in a given area). In addition, the quantitative nature of the test results makes it possible to apply in the case of tests a well-developed psychometric apparatus, which makes it possible to assess how well a given test works on a given sample of subjects under given conditions.

4. Optimal difficulty. A professionally done test consists of tasks of optimal difficulty. In this case, the average test taker scores approximately 50 percent of the maximum possible number of points. This is achieved through preliminary tests - a psychometric experiment. If during the test it becomes known that approximately half of the examined contingent can cope with the task, then such a task is considered successful and is left in the test.

5. Reliability. This is perhaps the most important advantage of the tests. The “lottery” nature of modern exams with the drawing of “lucky” or “unlucky” tickets is known to everyone. The lottery for the examinee here results in low reliability for the examiner - the answer to one fragment of the curriculum, as a rule, is not indicative of the level of mastery of the entire material. In contrast, any well-constructed test covers the main sections of the curriculum (the area of knowledge being tested or the manifestations of some skill or ability). As a result, the opportunity for “tail-leaders” to become excellent students, and for an excellent student to suddenly “fail,” is sharply reduced.

6. The most important social consequence of the above advantages of the test method is fairness. It should be understood as protection from examiner bias. Good test puts all subjects on equal terms.

7. Possibility of computerization. In this case, this is not just an additional convenience that reduces the human labor of qualified performers during a mass examination. As a result of computerization, all testing parameters are increased. It is possible to ensure information security. It is possible to create a “bank of test tasks”, which can technically prevent abuse by unscrupulous examiners. The selection of tasks offered to a particular subject can be made from such a bank by the computer program itself directly during testing, and the presentation of a particular task to a given subject in this case is as much a surprise for the examiner as for the subject.

8. Psychological adequacy. This is the most important psychological consequence of optimal complexity. The presence in the test (compared to traditional exam options) of a larger number of short tasks of average difficulty gives many test takers (especially anxious, unconfident ones) a chance to believe in themselves and activate a psychologically optimal “to overcome” attitude. When such a subject remains face to face with one or two very complex and large tasks and does not see how he can cope with them at all, then he loses heart and does not reveal all his capabilities.

And if there are a lot of tasks and some of them clearly begin to “give in” (the test subject is confident that he can cope with them), the person during the testing process becomes encouraged and begins to “fight” for the maximum result. The property of optimal complexity not only ensures the measuring (discriminating) power of the test, but also ensures the optimal psychological mood of the subjects. A test situation of optimal complexity is an optimal stimulus - people experience normal level stress (tension) necessary in order to show the highest result. A lack of stress (in the case of an easy test), and even more so an excess (in the case of a difficult one), distort the measurement results.

Disadvantages of testing:

1. The danger of “blind”, automatic errors. The blind faith of unqualified performers that the test should work correctly automatically sometimes gives rise to errors and incidents: the test subject did not understand the instructions and began to answer in a completely different way than required by the standards of the instructions, the test subject for some reason used distorting tactics, a “shift” occurred in the application stencils-key to the answer form (for manual, non-computer scoring), etc.

2. The danger of profanity. The apparent ease of conducting tests attracts people who do not want to get seriously acquainted with psychodiagnostics.

3. Loss individual approach, "stressogenicity". The test is for everyone. It is quite possible to miss the unique individuality of a non-standard person (especially a child). The test subjects themselves feel this, and it makes them nervous - especially in the situation of certification testing. People with reduced resistance to stress even experience a certain violation of self-regulation - they begin to worry and make mistakes in basic questions for themselves.

4. Loss of an individual approach, “reproduction”. Knowledge tests are designed to identify ready-made, standard knowledge. Most tests are not aimed at creative, constructive activities.

5. Lack of trust. The testing procedure can give the test subject the impression that the psychologist has little interest in him personally, in his problems and difficulties. Dialogical methods in this regard have an undoubted advantage.

6. Inadequate complexity. Sometimes unskilled “testologists” impose tests on a child that are too difficult for his or her age. He has not yet developed the necessary concepts and conceptual skills to adequately comprehend how general instructions to the test, and the meaning of individual questions.

Tests cannot be made the only comprehensive method of any diagnosis; they require the parallel use of other diagnostic methods. The best guarantee against profanity and profanity is a serious and qualified interest in what experimental and scientific work the test developers have done, how fully this work and its results are reflected in the accompanying documentation. These are, first of all, issues of reliability, validity and representativeness.

Questionnaires as a standardized self-report.

Questionnaires are a large group of techniques, the tasks of which are presented in the form of questions or statements, and the task of the subject is to independently report some information about himself in the form of answers. Theoretical basis This method can be considered introspectionism - the psychology of introspection. The questionnaire method was initially considered as a type of self-observation. But given the given answer options, this self-observation, which is given a standardized character, in many formal characteristics comes close to objective testing.

A research instrument that asks respondents to answer a variety of written questions. A group of psychodiagnostic techniques in which tasks are presented in the form of questions and statements. Designed to obtain data from the words of the subject (standardized self-report).

Types of questionnaires.

A survey is a method in which a person answers a series of questions asked of him. Oral questioning is used in cases where it is desirable to observe the behavior and reactions of the person answering the questions. This type of survey allows you to penetrate deeper into human psychology than a written survey, but requires special preparation, training and, as a rule, a lot of time to conduct the research. The answers of the subjects obtained during an oral interview significantly depend on the personality of the person conducting the interview, and on the individual characteristics of the person answering the questions, and on the behavior of both persons in the interview situation.

A written survey allows you to reach a larger number of people. Its most common form is a questionnaire. But its disadvantage is that when using a questionnaire, it is impossible to take into account in advance the reactions of the respondent to the content of its questions and, based on this, change them. A free survey is a type of oral or written survey in which the list of questions asked and possible answers to them is not limited in advance to a certain framework. A survey of this type allows you to flexibly change research tactics, the content of the questions asked, and receive non-standard answers to them.

Personality questionnaires.

Standardized questionnaires, with the help of which the degree of expression of the subjects’ personality traits or other personality characteristics is clearly and quantitatively assessed. As a rule, there are no “right” or “wrong” answers in personality questionnaires. They only reflect the degree of agreement or disagreement of the subject with a particular statement. Based on the nature of the answers to the questions, they are divided into questionnaires with prescribed answers (closed questionnaires) and with free answers (open questionnaires).

In closed questionnaires, options for answering the question are provided in advance. The test taker must choose one of them. The most common is a two- or three-alternative answer choice (for example: “yes, no”; “yes, no, I find it difficult to answer”). Dignity closed questions is the simplicity of the registration and data processing procedure, the clear formalization of assessment, which is important for mass surveys. At the same time, this form of response “coarsens” the information. Often, subjects have difficulties when it is necessary to make a categorical decision.

Open questionnaires allow for free responses without any special restrictions. Subjects give answers at their own discretion. Standardization of processing is achieved by assigning random responses to standard categories. Advantages: obtaining detailed information about the subject; conducting a qualitative analysis of responses. Disadvantages: difficulty in formalizing answers and their assessments; difficulties in interpreting the results; the procedure is cumbersome and time consuming.

Personality Trait Questionnaires - a group of personality questionnaires developed on the basis of identifying personality traits. Directly observable personality traits act as the source material for constructing questionnaires. In contrast to the construction of typological questionnaires, this approach requires the grouping of personality traits and those not surveyed. In personality trait questionnaires, diagnosis is carried out gradually in the severity of traits. Example: (16 personality factors) - Cattell questionnaire, USC.

Typological questionnaires - a group of personality questionnaires developed on the basis of identifying personality types as integral entities that cannot be reduced to a set of traits (or factors). This approach requires grouping the subjects themselves, and not their personal characteristics. In typological questionnaires, diagnosis is carried out on the basis of comparison with the corresponding /average/ personality type. Example: G. Eysenck, MMPI.

Motive Questionnaires - a group of personality questionnaires designed to diagnose the motivational-need sphere of the individual, which makes it possible to establish what a person’s activity is aimed at (motives as the reasons that determine the choice of direction of behavior) and how the dynamics of behavior are regulated.

Interest Questionnaires - a group of questionnaires designed to measure interests and choices professional activity Interest questionnaires, depending on the saturation of personal indicators, can be classified as both personal questionnaires and questionnaires.

Values Questionnaires - a group of personality questionnaires designed to measure values and value orientations personality. Values are formed in the process of assimilation social experience and are found in interests, attitudes and other manifestations of personality.

Attitude Questionnaires - a group of questionnaires designed to measure a person’s relative orientation in a one-dimensional continuum of attitudes.

Biographical questionnaires - a group of questionnaires to obtain data about a person’s life history. Most often, questions relate to age, health status, marital status, level and nature of education, special skills, career advancement and other relatively objective indicators. They help gather the information needed to reliably interpret test scores.

Question forms: open and closed (dichotomous and alternative). Forms for presenting results. Ways to increase the reliability of questionnaires (multiple duplication of questions, introduction of a “lie scale”, abandonment of direct questions, etc.).

Specifics of the questionnaire survey. Questioning is an empirical method of obtaining information based on answers to specially prepared questions that make up a questionnaire. Preparing the questionnaire requires professionalism. Questioning can be oral, written, individual, or group. The survey material is subjected to quantitative and qualitative processing.

Questionnaires are used to obtain any information about a person that is not directly related to his psychological and personal characteristics. They require a strictly fixed order, content and form of questions, and a clear indication of the form of answers. Questionnaire surveys are classified according to the content and design of questions (open, closed, semi-open). Respondent is a person answering questions in a questionnaire or interview.

Features of interviewing. An interview is a type of conversation in which the task is to obtain answers from the interviewee to certain (usually pre-prepared) questions.

Individual conversation– a diagnostic method that allows you to establish direct contact with the subject, obtain information about his subjective world, the motives of his activities and behavior.

The conversation method is used with other methods such as questionnaires, observation and experiments. However, in the practical work of a number of the world's leading psychologists, conversation was used as an independent research method (“clinical conversation” by J. Piaget, “psychoanalytic conversation” by Z. Freud). The opportunities that this method provides, in terms of the depth of penetration into the essence of the issue under study, have not yet been fully exploited in research. In contrast to the survey method, this method is still used relatively little.

A conversation is a method of obtaining information based on the interlocutor’s answers to questions posed by a psychologist during direct contact. During the conversation, the researcher identifies the characteristics of the behavior and mental state of the interlocutor. The condition for the success of the conversation is the subject’s trust in the researcher and the creation of a favorable psychological atmosphere. Provides useful information during a conversation external behavior subjects, their facial expressions, gestures, intonation of speech.

The purpose of the conversation method Usually, a number of questions that are incomprehensible to the psychologist that arose during the study of the socio-psychological and individual psychological qualities of his personality are checked and clarified in direct communication with the interlocutor. In addition, the purpose of the conversation is to clarify the structure of the motivational sphere, since behavior and activity are usually determined not by one, but by several motives, which can most likely be identified in communication with the interlocutor. The conversation allows you to mentally simulate any situation the psychologist needs. It is undeniable that intentions are best judged by actions, not by words. However, the subjective states of the interlocutor may not find expression in his behavior in given circumstances, but appear in other conditions and situations. The successful use of conversation as a research method is possible with the appropriate qualifications of the psychologist, which presupposes the ability to establish contact with the subject and give him the opportunity to express his opinion as freely as possible. The art of using the conversation method is knowing what to ask and how to ask. Subject to compliance with the requirements and appropriate precautions, a conversation allows you to obtain information about events of the past, present or planned future that is no less reliable than in observation or in the psychological analysis of documents. However, during a conversation it is necessary to separate personal relationships from the content of the conversation.

The advantage of the conversation method is that it is based on personal communication, which eliminates some of the negative aspects that arise when using a questionnaire. The conversation also gives greater confidence in the correct understanding of the issues, since the researcher has the opportunity to explain the issue in detail. Greater reliability of the answers is also assumed, since the oral form of the conversation, which is conducted by only two people, creates the preconditions that the answers to the questions will not be made public.

Disadvantage of the conversation method Compared to a questionnaire, it is drawn out and the accumulation of data is rather slow in mass surveys. That is why in practice they are more willing to resort to a questionnaire, since it saves time.

In psychology, the conversation method is widespread, although most often it is used in a complex of research methods (for example, to obtain indicative data in socio-psychological research or psychological examination, etc.). It should be borne in mind that not any conversation is special scientific method. A conversation conducted by a specialist differs from ordinary communication and conversation in its focus, planning, and precision of formulation. The conversation can be conducted on free topics and on a specific topic, purposefully in compliance with certain rules and without rules. The difference between them is that a targeted, so-called guided conversation is built in strict accordance with given conditions that must be strictly observed. Such conditions include, for example, the formulation of questions, their order, and the duration of the conversation. A conversation as a method for a psychologist to obtain data directly from a subject requires compliance with a number of requirements and conditions, and also imposes special responsibility on the psychologist. It’s not only about preparing to conduct a conversation at a good level, knowing the essence of the matter, but also about the ability to establish contacts with representatives of different social and age groups, nationalities, beliefs, etc. Equally important is the ability to classify and realistically evaluate facts, to penetrate to the essence of the problem. Since the conversation is being conducted to gather specific information, it is important to write down the answers. In many studies, it is necessary to take notes directly during the conversation, which requires the presence of pre-prepared sheets and diagrams. However, during individual conversations, when a psychologist is asked for advice on a particular issue, it is not recommended to take notes during the conversation. It is better to record the progress of the conversation after it ends. And although in this case the accuracy of the information may deteriorate, the very fact of taking notes during an intimate conversation can cause a negative reaction in the person being studied and a reluctance to give truthful answers. This is precisely what determines the complexity of the conversation method for a psychologist, who must thoroughly analyze the answers in order to discard unreliable and insignificant ones, but focus on the facts, which in this case are carriers of the necessary information.

Obtaining information in a conversation is based on verbal communication between the researcher and the subject, on direct social interaction, which determines the great possibilities of this method. Personal contact helps to better understand the motives of the interlocutor and his position. The flexibility of this method ensures good adaptation to various situations, promotes an in-depth understanding of the entire context, as well as the motives of the interlocutor’s individual responses. The researcher not only receives information, as when using other methods, but, taking into account the response of the respondent, can, in accordance with it, direct the conversation in the necessary direction. Direct contact between the subject and the researcher requires certain personality traits, such as mental flexibility, sociability, the ability to gain the trust of the person with whom he is talking. Flexibility of mind– the ability to navigate the situation well and quickly make optimal decisions. Sociability– the ability to make contact, overcome prejudices, gain the trust and favor of the interlocutor.

An individual conversation takes place in the conditions of direct communication, which increases the role of psychological skill, versatility of knowledge, quick thinking, and observation skills of the psychologist. Observation– the ability to identify and evaluate individual signs of events.

If the psychologist manages to create an atmosphere of trust and sincerity, the conversation method will allow him to obtain information that cannot be obtained by any other method. At the same time, it is necessary to strictly ensure that the interlocutor’s answers are free from the influence of personal relationships established between the respondent and the interviewer, and from the way the question is posed.

According to how many people take part in the conversation, conversations are distinguished individual(the researcher talks to one person) and group(simultaneous work of a researcher with several people).

Based on the structure of the questions, a distinction is made between standardized (structured, formalized), non-standardized (unstructured, unformalized) and partially standardized conversations.

involves the preliminary formulation of questions and determination of their order. The information obtained in this case can be processed relatively easily, but the depth of knowledge decreases. With this form of conversation, the danger of obtaining inaccurate and incomplete data cannot be excluded. A standardized conversation is used most often when it is necessary to find out certain trends in the phenomena being studied, while covering a large number of people.

Non-standardized (unstructured, unformalized) conversation passes focused or freely. Of course, the researcher prepares in advance the questions that will be asked, but their content, order and wording are determined by the situation of the conversation and depend on the person asking the questions, who adheres to a predetermined scheme. The disadvantage of this form of work is the difficulty of processing the information received. A non-standardized conversation is often used in cases where the researcher is first becoming acquainted with the problem being studied.

However, it is usually considered most convenient partially standardized conversation. Just like other methods, the conversation method can have various transitional options that correspond to the subject and objectives of the study. In cases where the researcher is already aware of existing relationships and is studying a certain aspect of the problem, he can successfully use the method of partially standardized conversation. The main condition for effectiveness in this case is clearly defined goals and a detailed development of the research plan.

According to organizational form The following types of conversation are distinguished: conversation at the place of work, conversation at the place of residence, conversation in the psychologist’s office. Depending on the organizational form The features of the conversation manifest themselves in different ways.

Conversation at the place of work or classes It is usually carried out at the workplace or in an office building. It is most appropriate when production or educational teams are studied, and the subject of research is related to production or educational problems. For example, if a conversation with a subject takes place in familiar conditions, where he usually works or studies, then all the circumstances related to the subject of the conversation are more quickly updated in his mind.

Conversation at your place of residence carried out in a home environment, where a person has more time and freedom. It becomes preferable if the subject of the conversation concerns problems that are more convenient to talk about in an informal setting, free from the influence of official or educational relationships. Under normal conditions, the interlocutor is more willing to answer questions that require confidential information.

Conversation in a psychologist's office, as a rule, completes a comprehensive examination of the psychological qualities of an individual and allows one to obtain information that is difficult to provide in questionnaires and tests. The conversation becomes less formal than in an office setting.

Regardless of the location of the conversation, it is worth taking care to eliminate or at least reduce the influence of “third” parties. Experience shows that even the silent presence of a “third” person (colleague, family member, guest, neighbor) during a conversation influences the psychological context of the conversation and can cause a bias in the content of the subject’s answers.

Standardized (structured, formalized) conversation- a type of conversation in which communication between the researcher and the subject is strictly regulated by a detailed questionnaire and instructions. Standardized conversation is usually dominated by closed questions. When using this type of conversation, the researcher must strictly adhere to the wording of the questions and their sequence.

The wording of questions should be designed not for reading, but for the situation of the conversation. The conversation plan is developed not in “written”, but in a conversational, oral style. For example, a question might be formulated like this: “I will list you different types of activities in your free time. Please tell me which of them you usually do when you have free time?”.

The subject must listen carefully to the question and choose the most suitable answer option from a pre-thought-out set. If during a conversation there is a need to explain to the subject an unclear word or the meaning of a question, the researcher should not allow arbitrary interpretation or deviation from the meaning of the original wording of the question.

The advantages of this type of conversation are that the maximum amount of information will be received. Full description facts, since the researcher “rigidly” guides the subject according to the plan of the conversation, without missing a single important detail. At the same time, it is precisely this circumstance that is associated with the possible influence of the prestige factor: the desire of the subject to comply in his answers with normative requirements, regardless of the actual state of affairs.

Thus, in a situation of a standardized (formalized) conversation, the researcher is assigned primarily a performing role. In this form of conversation, the researcher's influence on the quality of the data can be minimized.

Partially standardized conversation- a type of conversation in which communication between the researcher and the subject occurs using open questions and provides for a lesser degree of standardization of the behavior of the researcher and the subject. Researcher develops detailed plan conversations, providing for a strictly mandatory sequence of questions and their formulation in an open form, that is, without answer options. The researcher reproduces the questions without any deviations from the given wording, and the subject gives answers in free form. The researcher’s task is to record them completely and clearly. The method of recording answers is also standard and provided for in the instructions. This may be a verbatim recording that preserves the subject's vocabulary (including shorthand or tape recording). Sometimes direct coding of responses during a conversation is used. In this case, after each question, a classification scheme for answers is provided, in which the researcher notes the necessary positions. For example, after the question: “What newspapers do you read?” - the questionnaire provides a list of newspapers of interest to the researcher, and also provides a position - “other newspapers”.

This type of conversation requires somewhat more time and labor: the subject takes longer to think and formulate answers, and the researcher spends more time recording them. The time spent on coding and subsequent analysis of the content of responses increases. It is for these reasons that a partially standardized conversation with open-ended questions is used less often than a standardized conversation. At the same time, not all tasks require formalized, unified information. In some cases, it is of particular value to take into account the widest possible range of differences in the behavior, opinions, and assessments of the subjects, and such information can be obtained only by reducing the standardization of the conversation, giving the researcher greater freedom in recording the statements of the subjects.

The test subjects' statements can vary significantly in form, content, volume, composition, completeness, level of awareness, and analytical insight into the essence of the proposed issue. All these features of the responses received become the subject of analysis. A kind of “payment” for this clarification of information is additional time spent on collecting and processing data. Similar interdependencies of research tasks, quality and content of information, as well as time and labor costs are characteristic of other types of conversation.

Focused conversation is the next step leading to a decrease in the standardization of the behavior of the researcher and interlocutor. Its purpose is to collect opinions and assessments about a specific situation, phenomenon, its consequences or causes. The subjects in this type of conversation are introduced in advance to the subject of the conversation: they read a book or article, participate in a seminar, the methodology and content of which will then be discussed, etc. Questions for such a conversation are also prepared in advance, and a list of them is mandatory for the researcher: he can change their sequence and wording, but must obtain information on each issue.

Free conversation characterized by minimal standardization of behavior between the researcher and the subject. This type of conversation is used in cases where the researcher is just beginning to define the research problem and clarifies its specific content in specific conditions.

A free conversation is carried out without a pre-prepared questionnaire or a developed conversation plan. Only the topic of the conversation is determined, which is offered to the interlocutor for discussion. The direction of the conversation, its logical structure, the sequence of questions, their wording - everything depends on the individual characteristics of the person conducting the conversation, on his ideas about the subject of discussion, on the specific situation.

The information obtained in this case does not need to be unified for statistical processing. It is valuable and interesting precisely for its uniqueness, breadth of associations, and analysis of the specifics of the problem under study in specific conditions. Answers are recorded as accurately as possible (preferably shorthand or tape recorder). To summarize the answers, traditional methods of content analysis of texts are used.

List of used literature

1. Gusev A., Izmailov Ch., Mikhalevskaya M. Measurement in psychology. General psychological workshop. – M.: UMK Psychology, 2005 (Study stamp of the Educational and Methodological Association of the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation).

2. Ramendik D.M. Psychological workshop. Series: higher professional education. – M.: Academia, 2006 (State mark of the Educational and Methodological Association of the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation).

Conversation is one of the main methods of psychology and pedagogy, which involves obtaining information about the phenomenon being studied in a logical form both from the individual being studied, members of the group being studied, and from surrounding people. In the latter case, the conversation acts as an element of the method of generalizing independent characteristics. The scientific value of the method lies in establishing personal contact with the object of research, the ability to obtain data promptly, and clarify it in the form of an interview.

The conversation can be formalized or informal. Formal conversation involves standardized formulation of questions and registration of answers to them, which allows you to quickly group and analyze the information received. Informal conversation is carried out on loosely standardized questions, which makes it possible to consistently pose additional questions based on the current situation. During a conversation of this type, as a rule, closer contact is achieved between the researcher and the respondent, which contributes to obtaining the most complete and in-depth information.

In the practice of psychological and pedagogical research, certain rules application of the conversation method:

♦ talk only on issues directly related to the problem under study;

♦ formulate questions clearly and clearly, taking into account the degree of competence of the interlocutor in them;

♦ select and pose questions in an understandable form that encourages respondents to give detailed answers;

♦ avoid incorrect questions, take into account the mood and subjective state of the interlocutor;

♦ conduct a conversation so that the interlocutor sees in the researcher not a leader, but a comrade who shows genuine interest in his life, thoughts, and aspirations;

♦ do not conduct a conversation in a hurry, in an excited state;

♦ choose a place and time for the conversation so that no one interferes with its progress, and maintain a friendly attitude.

Usually the conversation process is not accompanied by recording. However, the researcher can, if necessary, make some notes for himself that will allow him, after finishing his work, to completely reconstruct the entire course of the conversation. A protocol or diary as a form of recording research results is best filled out after the end of the conversation. In some cases they can be used technical means its registration is a tape recorder or voice recorder. But at the same time, the respondent must be informed that the conversation will be recorded using appropriate technology. If it fails, the use of these funds is not recommended.

Currently, in the scientific literature, clearly insufficient attention is paid to the analysis of this research method. At the same time, it is recognized that through conversation one can obtain very valuable information, which sometimes cannot be obtained by other methods. The form of conversation, like no other method, must be mobile and dynamic. In one case, the purpose of the conversation - to obtain this or that important information - may be hidden, since this achieves greater reliability of the data. In another case, on the contrary, an attempt to obtain objective information using indirect questions can cause a negative, skeptical reaction from the participants in the conversation (such as “He’s pretending to be smart”). The likelihood of such a reaction is especially high in people with high self-esteem. In such situations, the researcher will receive more reliable information if he takes the following position, for example: “You know a lot, help us.” This position is usually supported by an increased interest in obtaining information. This tends to encourage people to be more open and sincere. Calling a person to be frank and listening to him is a great art. Naturally, people’s frankness must be valued and the information received must be handled carefully and ethically. The frankness of the conversation increases when the researcher does not take any notes.

In a conversation, the researcher communicates with a specialist. In the process of this communication, certain relationships between two individuals are formed. They are made up of small touches, nuances that bring two people together or separate them as individuals. In most cases, the researcher strives for rapprochement in communication with the respondent’s personality. However, there are times when the rapprochement and achieved frankness need to be “curtailed” and returned to a certain distance in communication. For example, sometimes a respondent, having perceived the sincere interest of the researcher (and interest in most cases is psychologically regarded as internal agreement with what the interviewee is telling him), begins to impose his, as a rule, subjective point of view, strives to eliminate the distance in communication, etc. In this situation, it is unwise to go for further rapprochement, since ending the conversation with complete harmony in communication, even if purely external, can lead to negative consequences. Therefore, it is psychologically advisable for the researcher to end the conversation with such people by setting a certain boundary or disagreeing with something. This will protect him from an excessive negative reaction from his interlocutor in the future. Creating these subtle facets of communication is a real art, which should be based on the researcher’s knowledge of human psychology.

Survey methods in the structure of psychological and pedagogical research

Survey methods of psychological and pedagogical research represent written or oral, direct or indirect requests from the researcher to respondents with questions, the content of the answers to which reveals individual aspects of the problem being studied. These methods are used in cases where the source of the necessary information is people - direct participants in the processes and phenomena being studied. Using survey methods, you can obtain information both about events and facts, as well as about the opinions, assessments, and preferences of respondents.

The importance of survey methods in psychology and pedagogy is greater, the weaker the provision of the area under study (psychological and pedagogical processes and phenomena) with research information and the less accessible this area is to direct observation. However, survey methods are not universal. They are used most fruitfully in combination with other methods of psychological and pedagogical research.

The widespread use of survey methods is explained by the fact that the information obtained from respondents is often richer and more detailed than that which can be obtained using other methods. It is easy to process and can be obtained relatively quickly and cheaply.

Disadvantages of survey methods include the following:

♦ subjectivity of the information received: respondents often tend to overestimate the significance of certain facts or phenomena and their role in them;

♦ distortion of information, which can occur due to methodological errors in compiling research instruments, determining the sample population (“sample”), and interpreting data;

♦ unknown information to the respondents.

Survey methods in psychological and pedagogical research are used in the following forms: interviews (oral surveys), questionnaires (written surveys), expert surveys, testing (with standardized forms for assessing survey results), as well as using sociometry, which allows

demonstrate interpersonal relationships in a group of people. Let us briefly describe each of these methods.

Questionnaire- method empirical research, based on a survey of a significant number of respondents and used to obtain information about the typicality of certain psychological and pedagogical phenomena.

This method makes it possible to establish common views and opinions of people on certain issues; identify the motivation of their activities, the system of relationships.

The following survey options are available: personal(with direct contact between the researcher and the respondent) or indirect(questionnaires are distributed by handout, and respondents answer them at a convenient time); individual or group; continuous or selective.

As in a conversation, the questionnaire is based on a special questionnaire - a questionnaire. Based on the fact that a questionnaire is a research document developed in accordance with established rules, containing a series of questions and statements ordered in content and form, often with possible answers to them, its development requires special attention and thoughtfulness."

The questionnaire should include three semantic parts:

♦ introductory which contains the purpose and motivation of the questionnaire, emphasizes the importance of the respondent’s participation in it, guarantees the secrecy of answers and clearly sets out the rules for filling out the questionnaire;

♦ main, consisting of a list of questions to be answered;

♦ socio-demographic, designed to identify basic biographical information and social status interviewee.

Practice shows that when development In the research questionnaire, it is advisable to take into account the following basic requirements:

♦ conduct testing (piloting) of the questionnaire in order to check and evaluate its validity (validity), search optimal option and volume of questions;

♦ explain before starting the survey its purpose and significance for the research results;

♦ ask questions correctly, as this presupposes a respectful attitude towards respondents;

♦ leave the possibility of anonymous answers;

♦ exclude the possibility of ambiguous interpretation of questions and the use of special terms and foreign words that may not be clear to respondents;

♦ make sure that the question does not ask you to evaluate several facts at once or express an opinion about several events at the same time;

♦ build a questionnaire according to the principle: from simpler questions to more complex ones;

♦ do not get carried away with verbose, long questions and the proposed answers to them, as this complicates perception and increases the time for filling them out;

♦ pose questions in linear (each subsequent question develops and specifies the previous one) and cross-sectional (the answer to one question checks the reliability of the answer to another question) in ways that create in the respondents a favorable psychological attitude and a desire to give sincere answers;

♦ provide for the possibility fast processing large quantity answers using mathematical statistics methods.

Experience in conducting surveys shows that the respondent gives more complete and meaningful answers when the questionnaire includes a small number of questions (no more than 7-10).

When compiling a questionnaire, several options for constructing questions are used. These are open, closed and semi-closed questions, as well as filter questions and ranking questions.

Open name questions to which respondents must independently give answers and enter them in specially designated spaces in the questionnaire or on a special form. Such questions are used in cases where the researcher seeks to involve the respondent in active work on the formation of proposals, advice on any problem, or when the set of alternatives on the question being asked is not entirely clear.

Closed names the questions to which the questionnaire proposes possible options answers. They are used in cases where the researcher clearly understands what the answers to a question might be, or when it is necessary to evaluate something according to certain characteristics that are important for study, etc. The advantages of closed questions are: the ability to eliminate misunderstandings of the question, compare responses from various groups of respondents, as well as the ease of filling out the questionnaire and processing the data received. Half-closed question differs from a closed one in that, in addition to the proposed answer options, there is a kind of line on which the respondent can reflect his personal opinion on the substance of the question. This is done in cases where the researcher is not sure that a list of possible alternatives will be enough for the respondent to express his opinion.

The number of answer options in closed and semi-closed questions should not be too large - a maximum of 15. In addition, in any question of a closed or semi-closed type, an alternative should be given: “I don’t know.” This is necessary so that respondents who do not know how to answer the question, or do not have a definite opinion on the issue raised in it, can reflect their position.

Quite often used in questionnaires filter questions. They consist simultaneously of two questions: first, it is determined whether the respondent belongs to a certain group or whether he knows the fact (phenomenon), which will be discussed further. Then respondents who answered in the affirmative are asked to express their opinion or assessment of a fact, event, or property.

There is another type of questionnaire used in psychological and pedagogical research - ranking questions. They are used when, among many answer options, it is necessary to identify the most important and significant for the respondent. In this case, the respondent assigns each answer a corresponding number depending on the degree of its significance.

It is essential preliminary testing of the questionnaire. External signs of answers (stereotyping, monosyllabicity, alternativeness, a significant number of answers like “I don’t know”, “I find it difficult to answer” or gaps, white stripes; “guessing” the answer desired by the researcher, etc.) indicate that the wording The questions are complex, inaccurate, to a certain extent duplicate one another, similar in content, so that the respondents did not realize the significance of the survey being conducted, the importance for the researcher of truthful answers.

A questionnaire survey is an accessible, but also more vulnerable to all kinds of subjectivist “reefs” research method. It cannot be absolutized or carried away by “questioning mania.” It is advisable for a researcher to resort to it only in cases where there is a need to identify the opinions of a large number of people unfamiliar to him. In other words, studying cannot be substituted real facts studying opinions about them. When used correctly, questionnaires can provide reliable and objective information.

Interview- a type of survey method, a special type of targeted communication with a person or group of people.

The interview is based on casual conversation. However, in contrast to it, the roles of the interlocutors are fixed, standardized, and the goals are determined by the design and objectives of the research being conducted.

Specifics The interview consists of the fact that the researcher determines in advance only the topic of the upcoming conversation and the main questions to which he would like to receive answers. All necessary information, as a rule, is drawn from information obtained in the process of communication between the person taking the interview (interviewer) and the person giving it. The success of the interview and the completeness and quality of the information received largely depend on the nature of this communication, the closeness of contact and the degree of mutual understanding of the parties.

An interview has its advantages and disadvantages compared to a questionnaire. The main difference between them is in the form of contact. When surveying, communication between the researcher and the respondent is mediated by a questionnaire. The respondents interpret the questions contained therein and their meaning independently within the limits of their existing knowledge. He forms the answer and records it in the questionnaire in the manner indicated in the text of the questionnaire or announced by the person conducting the survey. When conducting an interview, contact between the researcher and the person who is the source of information is carried out with the help of a specialist (interviewer), who asks questions provided for in the research program, organizes and directs the conversation with respondents, and also records the answers received according to the instructions.

In this case, the following are clearly revealed: advantages of the interview: firstly, in the course of working with respondents, it is possible to take into account their level of training, determine their attitude to the topic of the survey, individual problems, and record intonation and facial expressions. Secondly, it becomes possible to flexibly change the wording of questions, taking into account the personality of the respondent and the content of previous answers. Thirdly, you can ask additional (clarifying, control, guiding, explanatory, etc.) questions. Fourthly, the proximity of the interview to everyday conversation contributes to the emergence of a relaxed atmosphere of communication and sincerity of answers. Fifthly, the interviewer can monitor the psychological reactions of the interlocutor and, if necessary, adjust the conversation.

As main drawback This method should highlight the high labor intensity of the work with a small number of respondents surveyed.

According to the goal that the researcher seeks to achieve, they distinguish opinion interview, elucidating assessments of phenomena, events, and documentary interview, related to the establishment of facts 1 .

One of the most effective methods collecting information in psychological and pedagogical research is expert survey, involving the acquisition of data using the knowledge of competent persons.

They do not mean ordinary respondents, but highly qualified, experienced specialists who give an opinion when considering any issue. Survey results based on expert judgment are called expert assessments. Therefore, this method is often called the method of expert assessments.

The expert survey method in psychological and pedagogical research is used to solve the following problems:

♦ clarifying the main provisions of the research methodology, identifying procedural issues, choosing methods and techniques for collecting and processing information;

♦ assessing the reliability and clarification of data from mass surveys, especially when there is a danger of their distortion;

♦ deeper analysis of the research results and prediction of the nature of changes in the studied psychological and pedagogical phenomenon;

♦ confirmation and clarification of information obtained using other methods;

♦ analysis of research results, especially if they allow different interpretations.

In each of the mentioned cases, an expert survey is subordinated to the goals and objectives of a specific study and is one of the tools for collecting information about the object being studied. Increasing the reliability of the results of an expert survey is achieved using logical and statistical procedures, selection of specialists, organization of the survey, and processing of the data obtained.

Practice shows that the more experts are involved in the assessment, the more accurate overall result, the more accurately the level of development of a person’s personality and a group of respondents is diagnosed. Taking into account the opinions of all experts on all parameters being assessed is a difficult task. In order to optimize the generalization of expert opinions, quantitative assessments are usually used. Experts are asked to express their opinion on a five-point (sometimes three- or four-point) discrete scale. To assess personality quality, the following scale is usually used:

5 - a very high level of development of this personality quality, it has become a character trait, manifested in various types of activities; 4 - a high level of development of this personality quality, but it is not yet manifested in all types of activities;

3 - the assessed and the opposite personality quality are not clearly expressed and generally balance each other out;

2 - the personality quality opposite to the one being assessed is noticeably more pronounced and more often manifested

1 - the opposite quality to the one being assessed is clearly expressed and manifests itself in various types of activities, and has become a personality trait.

These are the most general criteria for formalizing expert opinions. In each specific case, when assessing certain parameters, more specific and meaningful criteria are determined.

In the case where expert opinion is expressed quantitatively, the research method in question is often called using the polar point method.

Formalization of expert opinions makes it possible to use mathematical and statistical methods 1 and modern computer technology when processing research results. It can be carried out not only on an order scale, but also by ranking individuals (groups or microgroups), that is, by arranging them in ascending (or descending) order of one or another of their characteristics.

Let's say you can make a list of respondents according to their degree of discipline. If the first on the list is the most disciplined of them, the second is the one closest in terms of the degree of development of this personality quality, etc. The most undisciplined will close the list. Naturally, each expert will have a strictly individual list. The degree of consistency of expert opinion can be measured using various correlation coefficients, for example, the Spearman correlation coefficient. For example, two experts ranked specialists according to their degree of discipline in this order.

	Iexpert	II expert	d	d 2
A
B			-2
IN			-1
G
D

Sum d n= 6.

The Spearman correlation coefficient is found using the following formula:

Where R s- rank correlation coefficient (it can range from +1 to -1), D 2 i- square of rank differences, N- number of individuals being compared.

Let us substitute the results obtained into the proposed formula

This is a fairly high level of agreement among experts. In practice, there are cases when the unity of expert opinions is also assessed by the negative value of the Spearman correlation coefficient. At R s= -1 - there is a complete opposite of expert opinions. At R s = + 1 - their complete coincidence. However, in most cases R s ranges from 0.5 to 0.9. This is usually the actual degree of agreement between expert opinions. The degree of accuracy of expert assessments depends on the level of qualification of experts, their number and the number of ranking objects. It is important that experts have observation skills, life experience, and practice of working with people; their opinion is not deformed by conflictual relationships with the individuals being assessed or relationships of extra-work dependence. Team leaders best meet these requirements. However, the assessments of the respondents' fellow students are very important and useful. A strong difference in assessments “from below” and “from above” may be a sign of ignorance of the essential features of the person being assessed.

It is believed that the accuracy of expert assessments depends on the number of experts. In some cases, the opinion of 15-20 experts is used. This is explained by the fact that the relationships between respondents are in most cases multifaceted. Number of ranked personal qualities or other signs, as a rule, there should not be more than 20, and this procedure is most reliable when their number is less than 10.

The expert assessment method is also called GOL method(group personality assessment). Abroad, it is often called the “method of competent judges”, or “rating”. When each member of the group acts as an expert when assessing the relationship between themselves and other respondents (according to a certain criterion), then the method of expert assessments turns into a sociometric procedure - one of the main methods of research in social psychology and pedagogy.

Sociometric method(sociometry method) allows you to identify interpersonal relationships in a group of people using their preliminary survey.

The relationships between people are predetermined by the objective need for joint activity (it gives rise to the official structure of groups) and the emotional factor - likes and dislikes (this factor gives rise to informal relationships in the group). You can find out the informal relationships of people, the structure of their relationships, likes and dislikes using simple questions like: “Who would you like to spend your free time with?”, “Who would you like to work with?” etc. These questions are the criteria for sociometric choice. They can be very diverse.

To study the structure of relationships in a group, sociometry is used in two versions: parametric and non-parametric. Parametric sociometry consists in the fact that subjects are asked to make a strictly defined number of choices according to a given criterion. For example, name five friends with whom he would like to spend his free time. Nonparametric sociometry allows you to select and reject any number of individuals, provided that the subjects have a positive attitude towards the study. Otherwise, there may be answers: “I choose all” or “I reject all,” which significantly distort the survey results.

It is important that the sociometric choice occurs according to significant criteria. This is due to the fact that the structure of interpersonal relationships, revealed according to different criteria, will not be the same. And by selecting some question - a criterion for sociometric choice, the researcher, as it were, predicts what kind of group structure he would like to reveal: the one that manifests itself in the process of rest or in the process of joint educational activities. If a sociometric procedure is carried out according to two or more criteria, then a separate matrix is compiled for each criterion. Below is an example of compiling one of these matrices.

Selection Matrix

Who chooses				Who is chosen		Total

		+							+
	+			+		+
		+		+			+	+
		+
			+				+
				+					+
		+		+					+
				+
					+
	+			+
Total

In the matrix, each number in order corresponds to a specific surname. The results of the sociometric survey serve as the basis for analyzing student relationships. By simple calculations based on the number of positive or negative choices and mutual choices made, the following sociometric indices can be determined: the need for communication, the sociometric status of a group member, psychological compatibility, group unity, group disunity, group cohesion. In addition, it is possible to identify the leaders of the group, the presence of microgroups in it, as well as members of the group who do not enjoy authority in it.

For a more visual representation of the system of likes and dislikes of the subjects, a sociogram is used. To compile sociograms, certain symbolism is adopted. Using it, the sociogram (Fig. 4.1) reflects the results of the sociometric measurement given in the selection matrix.

Rice. 4.1. Sociogram

The arrows on the sociogram indicate who chooses whom. If the arrow is bidirectional, then the choice is mutual. Sometimes the dotted line on the sociogram also shows the negative attitude of the subjects towards each other.

When conducting a sociometric survey, it is advisable to ensure the confidentiality of the information received in order to increase the objectivity of the study. The study results should be interpreted with caution.

Advantages sociometry are considered:

♦ opportunity for a short time collect significant material that is amenable to statistical processing and can be presented visually;

♦ the ability to register relationships between all group members.

TO shortcomings sociometry include:

♦ fixation predominantly emotional relationships expressed in likes and dislikes;

♦ inability to identify the true motives of the elections;

♦ the fact that the number of mutual elections may reflect not so much the cohesion of the group as the friendly ties of individual microgroups.

Thus, sociometry allows the shortest possible time open the structure interpersonal relationships in a group, a system of likes and dislikes, but it does not always allow one to reliably diagnose the substantive characteristics of communication and relationships.

The individual and the group are specific objects of psychological and pedagogical research that have significant features, which predetermine the use of a number of special methods for studying the productivity of the system of influence on these objects. One of them is the testing method.

Test method- the test subject performs tasks of a certain kind with precise methods for assessing the results and their numerical expression.

This method makes it possible to identify the level of knowledge, skills, abilities and other personality qualities, as well as their compliance with certain standards by analyzing the way the subject performs a number of special tasks. Such tasks are usually called tests.

“A test is a standardized task or tasks related in a special way that allow the researcher to diagnose the degree of expression of the property being studied in the subject, his psychological characteristics, as well as relationships to certain objects. As a result of testing, they usually obtain some characteristic that shows the degree of severity of the trait under study in the individual. It must be correlated with the standards established for this category of subjects” 1.

Consequently, with the help of testing, it is possible to determine the current level of development of a certain property in the object of study and compare it with the standard or with the development of this quality in the subject in an earlier period.

The tests are characterized by the following features: objectivity(excluding the influence random factors per subject), model-like(expressed in the specification of any complex, complex whole phenomenon), standardization(by establishing identical requirements and standards when analyzing the properties of subjects, or processes and results).

By direction tests are divided into achievement tests, aptitude tests and personality tests.

Achievement Tests mainly didactic, determining the level of mastery of educational material, the formation of students' knowledge, skills and abilities. Didactic test should be understood as a system of tasks of a specific form and specific content, arranged in order of increasing difficulty, created for the purpose of objectively assessing the structure and measuring the level of preparedness of students. Thus, it is advisable to consider a didactic test not as an ordinary set or set of tasks, but as a system that has two main system factors: the content composition of test tasks that form the best integrity, and the increase in difficulty from task to task. The principle of increasing difficulty allows you to determine the level of knowledge and skills in the controlled discipline, and the mandatory limitation of testing time allows you to identify the presence of skills and abilities. Difficulty of the task As a subjective concept, it is determined empirically, by the size of the proportion of incorrect answers. This is how difficulty differs from an objective indicator - difficulties, which is understood as the totality of the number of concepts included in the task, the number of logical connections between them and the number of operations necessary to complete the task. Note that the test items are not questions or tasks, but statements that, depending on the test takers’ answers, turn into true or false.

Aptitude tests most often associated with the diagnosis of the cognitive sphere of the individual, the characteristics of thinking and are usually called intellectual. They allow us to judge not only the results in mastering a certain educational material, but also about the respondent’s prerequisites for completing tasks of a given type or class. These include, for example, the Raven test, the Amthauer test, Wechsler subtests, etc.

Personality tests make it possible to judge, by reaction to test tasks, the characteristics of personality traits - orientation, temperament, character traits. Manifestations of personality traits are evoked through the presentation of projective material (unfinished sentences, images that stimulate associative reactions of respondents).

The testing method is the most controversial and at the same time widespread in personality research. What is controversial about this method? What difficulties have become recognized in testing? What is stopping its spread?

Firstly, Successful completion of a test under normal conditions does not mean success in similar mental efforts in a difficult environment. A respondent who receives a high score based on test results under normal conditions may turn out to be emotionally unstable to stress and get lost in a dangerous situation. Of course, in order to bring the conditions for solving a test closer to real social conditions, one can create tension among test takers during the testing process, reduce the time for solving the test, introduce elements of simulating these conditions, etc., until this significantly complicates the use of test methods.

Conversation is a method of orally obtaining information from a person of interest to the researcher by conducting a thematically focused conversation with him.

In principle, conversation as a means of communication can be conducted not only orally, but also in writing. Let's say, a conversation with other people in the form of correspondence, a conversation with oneself in the form of a diary. But conversation as an empirical method involves oral communication. Moreover, this is communication of the person being studied, firstly, not with any other person, but with the researcher and, secondly, this is communication at the moment of research, i.e., actual communication, and not delayed in time. A written conversation does not satisfy both of these conditions at the same time. Even if the “written interlocutor” of the subject is the researcher, which is an extremely rare phenomenon in scientific practice, then the “interview” itself in the form of correspondence inevitably drags on in time and space and is interrupted by significant pauses. Theoretically, one can imagine conducting such a conversation (at least for psychotherapeutic purposes), but in the practical work of a researcher, such correspondence conversations are very problematic. Therefore, it is generally accepted to understand conversation as a method in the form of oral communication, and to study the written version of conversation as a method of communication using the methods of studying documents or products of activity. It is in this interpretation that we will consider the conversation method.

Conversation is widely used in social, medical, developmental (especially children's), legal, and political psychology. As an independent method, conversation is especially intensively used in advisory, diagnostic and psychocorrectional work. In the activities of a practical psychologist, conversation often plays the role of not only a professional method of collecting psychological data, but also a means of informing, persuasion, and education.

Conversation as a method is inseparable from conversation as a way of human communication. Therefore, the qualified use of conversation is unthinkable without fundamental general and socio-psychological knowledge, communication skills, and communicative competence. Since any communication is impossible without people’s perception of each other and without their awareness of their “I”, the method of conversation is closely related to the method of observation (both external and internal). Perceptual information obtained during an interview is often no less important and abundant than communicative information. The indissoluble connection between conversation and observation is one of its most characteristic features. Wherein psychological conversation, i.e., a conversation aimed at obtaining psychological information and having a psychological impact on the individual, perhaps, can be classified along with introspection to the most psychology-specific methods.

The researcher usually tries to conduct a conversation in a free, relaxed manner, trying to “reveal” the interlocutor, liberate him, and win him over. Then the likelihood of the interlocutor’s sincerity increases significantly. And the more sincere it is, the higher the adequacy of the data obtained in conversations and surveys to the problem under study. The most common reasons for insincerity can be: fear of showing oneself in a bad or funny way; reluctance to mention other persons, much less give them characteristics; refusal to disclose those aspects of life that the respondent perceives (correctly or incorrectly) as intimate; fears that unfavorable conclusions will be drawn from the conversation; “unsympathetic” person conducting the conversation; misunderstanding the purpose of the conversation.

Usually, the most important thing for the successful development of a conversation is starting a conversation. His first phrases can arouse either interest and a desire to enter into a dialogue with the researcher, or, conversely, a desire to evade him. To maintain good contact with the interlocutor, the researcher is recommended to demonstrate his interest in his personality, his problems, and his opinions. But one should refrain from open agreement, much less disagreement, with the respondent’s opinion. The researcher can express his active participation in the conversation and interest in it through facial expressions, postures, gestures, intonation, additional questions, and specific remarks such as “this is very interesting!” . The conversation is always, to one degree or another, accompanied by observation of the appearance and behavior of the person being studied. This observation provides additional, and sometimes basic information about the interlocutor, about his attitude to the subject of conversation, to the researcher and the surrounding environment, about his responsibility and sincerity.

The specificity of psychological conversation, in contrast to everyday conversation, is inequality of interlocutors' positions. The psychologist here usually acts as the proactive party; it is he who directs the topic of the conversation and asks questions. His partner usually acts as the answerer to these questions. Such asymmetry of functions is fraught with a decrease in the confidence of the conversation. And emphasizing these differences can completely destroy the balance in the interaction between the researcher and the subject. The latter begins to “close himself off,” deliberately distort the information he communicates, simplify and schematize answers down to monosyllabic statements like “yes-no,” or even avoid contact altogether. “Therefore, it is very important that the conversation does not turn into an interrogation, since this makes its effectiveness equal to zero.”

Another one important feature psychological conversation is due to the fact that society has developed attitude towards a psychologist as a specialist in human soul and human relations. His conversation partners are often determined to receive immediate solutions to their problems and expect advice on how to behave in Everyday life and unambiguous answers to questions of spiritual life, including questions from the “eternal” category. And the psychologist leading the conversation must correspond to this system of expectations. He must be sociable, tactful, tolerant, emotionally sensitive and responsive, observant and reflexive, well erudite on a wide range of issues and, of course, must have deep psychological knowledge.

But the so-called guided conversation is not always effective, that is, a conversation in which the initiative is on the side of the researcher. Sometimes an unguided form of conversation is more productive. Here the initiative passes to the respondent, and the conversation takes on the character of a confession. This type of conversation is typical for psychotherapeutic practice, when a person needs to “talk it out.” Then such a specific quality of a psychologist as the ability to listen takes on special importance. This quality is generally one of the basic ones for fruitful and pleasant communication, but in this case it acts as a necessary and essential element professional activity of a psychologist. It is not for nothing that psychologists from time to time recall the saying of the founder of Stoicism, Zeno of Kition (336-264 BC): “We have been given two ears and one tongue in order to listen more and speak less.”

Listen in conversation– this does not mean simply not speaking or waiting for your turn to speak. This is an active process that requires increased attention to what is being said and to whom one is speaking. Listening skills have two aspects. The first one is external, organizational. We are talking about the ability to focus on the topic of conversation, actively participate in it, maintaining interest in the conversation on the part of the partner, and then, as I. Atwater says, “listening is more than hearing.” “Hearing” is understood as the perception of sounds, and “listening” is understood as the perception of the meaning and meaning of these sounds. The first is a physiological process (according to Atwater, physical). The second is a psychological process, “ act of will, which also includes higher mental processes. To listen, you need desire." This level of listening provides correct perception and intellectual understanding of the interlocutor’s speech, but not sufficient for emotional understanding of the interlocutor himself.

The second aspect of listening is internal, empathetic. Even the most passionate desire to talk to another person does not guarantee that he will “get through” to us, and we will “hear” him, that is, we will delve into his problems, feel his pain or resentment, and truly rejoice at his success. Such empathy can vary from mild sympathy to strong empathy and even identification with a communication partner. In this case, perhaps, “hearing is more than listening.” We, listening carefully to the interlocutor, hear him inner world. The author of the famous client-centered psychotherapy, K. Rogers, especially paid attention to this moment in the conversation: “I experience pleasure when I truly hear a person... When I am able to really hear another person, I come into contact with him, and this enriches my life. .. I like to be heard... I can attest that when you are upset about something and someone truly hears you without judging you, without taking responsibility for you, without trying to change you, that feeling this makes it damn good! When I was listened to and when I was heard, I am able to perceive my world in a new way and continue on my way... The person who was heard first of all responds to you with a grateful look. If you have heard a person, and not just his words, then his eyes almost always become moist - these are tears of joy. He feels relieved and wants to tell you more about his world. He rises with a new sense of freedom. He becomes more open to the process of change... I also know how difficult it is when you are mistaken for a person you are not, or when people hear something you did not say. This causes anger, a sense of futility and frustration. I get terribly upset and withdraw into myself if I try to express something deeply personal, some part of my own inner world, and the other person does not understand me. I have come to believe that such experiences make some people psychotic. When they lose hope that someone can hear them, then their own inner world, which becomes more and more bizarre, begins to be their only refuge.”

Thus, the relationship between the concepts of “listening” and “hearing” is not unambiguous and dynamic. This dialectic must be taken into account professional psychologist when conducting a conversation. In some cases, the first level of communication is quite enough, and it may even be undesirable to “slide” to the level of empathy (for example, in order to maintain social distance). In other cases, you cannot do without emotional complicity; you cannot extract the necessary information from your partner. This or that level of listening is determined by the objectives of the study, the current situation, and the personal characteristics of the interlocutor.

Whatever the form of conversation, it always exists exchange of remarks. These remarks can be both narrative and interrogative in nature. It is clear that it is the researcher’s remarks that direct the conversation, determine its strategy, and the respondent’s remarks provide the required information. And then the presenter’s remarks can be considered questions, even if they are not expressed in interrogative form, and his partner’s remarks are answers, even if they are expressed in interrogative form. Experts believe that the overwhelming number of answers (up to 80%) in verbal communication reflects such reactions to the speech and behavior of the interlocutor as evaluation, interpretation, support, clarification and understanding. True, these observations relate mainly to “free” conversation, that is, to conversations in a natural setting with equal positions of partners, and not to research situations with asymmetry of the interlocutors’ functions. Nevertheless, in psychological discourse these tendencies appear to persist.

When selecting (or assigning) people to the role of interlocutors in a study, information about gender characteristics in speech communication.“Analysis of tape recordings of conversations made it possible to establish significant differences in the behavior of men and women. When two men or two women talk, they interrupt each other approximately equally often. But when a man and a woman are talking, the man interrupts the woman almost twice as often. For approximately one third of the conversation, the woman collects her thoughts and tries to restore the direction of the conversation that was at the moment when she was interrupted. Apparently, men tend to focus more on the content of the conversation, while women pay more attention to the process of communication itself. A man usually listens attentively for only 10–15 seconds. Then he begins to listen to himself and look for what to add to the subject of the conversation. Psychologists believe that listening to oneself is a purely male habit, which is reinforced through training in clarifying the essence of the conversation and acquiring problem-solving skills. Therefore, the man stops listening and focuses on how to interrupt the conversation. As a result, men tend to give ready-made answers too quickly. They don't listen to the other person fully and don't ask questions to get more information before jumping to conclusions. Men tend to notice mistakes in the essence of a conversation and, instead of waiting for good statements as well, they jump at the mistake. A woman, listening to her interlocutor, is more likely to see him as a person and understand the feelings of the speaker. Women are less likely to interrupt their interlocutor, and when they themselves are interrupted, they return to the questions on which they were stopped. But this does not mean at all that all men are unresponsive and incorrect listeners, just as it does not mean that all women are sincere and responsive listeners.”

It is very important both when conducting a conversation and when interpreting it to take into account that certain types of remarks, behind which, naturally, there are certain mental characteristics of a person and his attitude towards the interlocutor, can disrupt the flow of communication until it ends. Sometimes such remarks are called communication barriers. These include: 1) order, instruction (for example, “speak more clearly!”, “Repeat!”); 2) warning, threat (“you will regret this”); 3) promise – trade (“calm down, I’ll listen to you”); 4) teaching, moralizing (“this is wrong”, “you should do this”, “in our time they did this”); 5) advice, recommendation (“I suggest you do this”, “try to do this”); 6) disagreement, condemnation, accusation (“you acted stupidly,” “you are mistaken,” “I can’t argue with you anymore”); 7) agreement, praise (“I think you’re right”, “I’m proud of you”); 8) humiliation (“oh, you’re all the same,” “well, Mr. Know-It-All?”); 9) abuse (“scoundrel, you ruined everything!”); 10) interpretation (“you yourself don’t believe in what you say”, “now it’s clear why you did this”); 11) reassurance, consolation (“everyone is wrong”, “I’m upset about this too”); 12) interrogation (“what do you intend to do?”, “Who told you this?”); 13) avoiding the problem, distraction, laughing it off (“let’s talk about something else,” “get it out of your head,” “ha-ha, it’s not serious!”).

Such remarks often disrupt the interlocutor’s train of thought, confuse him, force him to resort to defense, and can cause irritation and even indignation. Of course, reactions to these “barriers” are situational, and advice should not necessarily cause irritation, much less praise – indignation. But such negative reactions for communication are possible, and it is the responsibility of the psychologist to reduce the likelihood of their occurrence in a conversation to a minimum.

Diagnostics and diseases. Medicines from A to Z