UDC: 
159.96+159.92
Gladyshev Yuri Vladimirovich
Доктор медицинских наук, Prof. of the Department of psychology, pedagogics and law Staff, Novosibirsk State University of Economics and Management, sir.yu-oskar2012@yandex.ru, Novosibirsk

THE RELATIONSHIP OF PSYCHOLOGICAL DEFENSE AND LEVEL SUBJECTIVE CONTROL OF STUDENTS NSUEM

Abstract: 
The article presents the results of studying the peculiarities of psychological protection and locus of control of students NSUEM. The theoretical basis of the article is the views of American psychologists J. Rotter and S. Freud. Psychological protection is a system of personal response to any threatening situations used by a person at an unconscious level. One of the most important integral characteristics of personality is locus of control. The appearance of this concept is associated with the works of J. Rotter, who suggested that there are individual differences that depend on whom people hold responsible for what is happening to them. A study of psychological protection showed that the first three places are: projection, rationalization and regression. On this basis, it should be concluded that along with Mature protection in the form of “rationalization” students often use such primitive types of protections as “projection” and “regression”. In the study of the correlation matrix, it was revealed that the control locus of external students forms a significant positive relationship with “regression” and “displacement” and negative with “rationalization”. Have students internals locus of control has a negative relationship with all types of protection. Thus, students with external locus of control will be characterized by unproductive methods of conflict resolution.
Keywords: 
psychological defense, locus of control, internality, externalhost, the questionnaire Pluchek, correlation analysis
Please register
References: 

1. Andreeva, E. N., 2005. Self-attitude of adolescents. St. Petersburg, Rech’ Publ., 400 p. (In Russ.)
2. Berezin, F. B., 1988. Mental and psychophysiological adaptation of man. St. Petersburg: Nauka Publ., 270 p. (In Russ.)
3. Gladyshev, Ju. V., 2016. The relationship between the scales of temperament and mechanisms for the protection of students NSUEM. Siberian pedagogical journal, 2, pp. 100–105. (In Russ., abstract in Eng.)
4. Golovin, S. Ju., 2003. The dictionary of the psychologist-practice. Minsk: Harvest Publ., 144 p. (In Russ.)
5. Granovskaja, R. M., 2007. Psychological defense. St. Petersburg: Rech’ Publ., 476 p. (In Russ.)
6. Eliseev, O. P., 2003. Workshop on psychology of personality. St. Petersburg, pp. 423–430. (In Russ.)
7. Kobzev, M. V., 2009. The link between the resilience of future water transport professionals and coping strategies and protective mechanisms of the individual. Siberian pedagogical journal, 5, pp. 291–298. (In Russ.)
8. Nosov, S. S., 2011. Diagnostics of protective mechanisms: the approach Phoebe Kramer. Moscow: Nauka Publ., Flinta Publ., 113 p. (In Russ.)
9. Nikol’skaja, I. M., Granovskaja, R. M., 2000. Psychological defense. St. Petersburg: Rech’ Publ., 507 p. (In Russ.)
10. Chilikina, I. A., 2010. Locus of control as a socio-psychological determinants of perceptions of leadership qualities. Cand. Sci. (Psihol.). Moscow, 25 p. (In Russ.)
11. Plutchik, R., 1989. Measuring emotions and their derivatives. Plutchik, R., Kellerman, H., eds. Emotion: Theory, research, and experience. San Diego, CA: Academic Press, pp. 1–35.
12. Rotter, J. В., 1990. Internal versus external control of reinforcement: A case history of a variable. American Psychologist, 45, pp. 489–493.