1 Moscow State University of Psychology and Education (RUSSIAN FEDERATION)
2 V.I. Vernadsky Crimean Federal University (RUSSIAN FEDERATION)
About this paper:
Appears in: INTED2019 Proceedings
Publication year: 2019
Pages: 8088-8091
ISBN: 978-84-09-08619-1
ISSN: 2340-1079
doi: 10.21125/inted.2019.2005
Conference name: 13th International Technology, Education and Development Conference
Dates: 11-13 March, 2019
Location: Valencia, Spain
The phenomenon we investigate is the interconnections between interpersonal relations and estimation of psychological safety in the middle school. This topic is of great value in modern society because well-being and psychological conditions at school are important factors that influence the development of students, their academic success and their future as a person and a professional. The main questions of this study were: How do different types of relations predict the estimation of school environment by students? What types of relations will be predictors of psychological safety in the school environment? So we studied interpersonal relations as predictors of psychological safety of the school environment. In our study, we used the following methods: Diagnosis of interpersonal relations (Leary, adopted by Sobchik), Estimation of safety in interpersonal interaction (Kozhukhar) and the method Psychological safety of the school environment (Baeva). The sample included 624 students (7th and 8th grades), aged from 12 to 14. Among them, there were 42.3% of girls and 57.7% of boys. For statistical analysis we used the program SPSS, v. 23 (descriptive statistics, correlation, and linear regression analysis). We found out many correlations between different types of interpersonal relations, evaluation of interpersonal communication and characteristics of psychological atmosphere in the middle school. We discovered the specific predicting role of types of interpersonal relations for these characteristics. There were five main predictors of the overall index of the assessment of communication safety in interpersonal interactions, which were included in the regression model: dominance (β=0.212, ρ=0.000), friendliness index (β=0.101, ρ=0.023), aggression (β=0.207, ρ=0.000), suspicion (β=-0.119, ρ=0.035) and egoism (β=-0.112, ρ=0.040). The significance of educational environment was predicted by suspicion (β=-0.325, ρ=0.000), aggression (β=0.157, ρ=0.003), authoritativeness (β=0.134, ρ=0.006) and egoism (β=-0.104, ρ=0.038). There were two predictors of psychological satisfaction: suspicion (β=-0.178, ρ=0.000) and authoritativeness (β=0.143, ρ=0.001). The predictor of psychological self-protection in students was friendliness index (β=0.109, ρ=0.007). The index of the psychological safety had the following predictors: suspicion (β=-0.217, ρ=0.000), authoritativeness (β=0.135, ρ=0.001) and friendliness index (β=0.104, ρ=0.013). There are limits of our study. We didn’t compare interpersonal relations of students with different levels of estimation of psychological safety at school. Besides, we didn’t make comparative analysis of students by the criteria of sex, age and grade. Thus, in our study positive estimation of educational environment as safe by teenagers was possible when they gave the constructive evaluation of interpersonal communication. At the same time, their level of aggression and authoritativeness got higher. Their friendliness index rose, but their level of suspicion and egoismbecame lower. For discussion, we would like to emphasize the role of aggression and authoritativeness,which can be psychological resource for teenagers to experience and evaluate their school environment as safe. However, we suppose it can make a negative effect on their future development. So we consider our study to give birth to new hypotheses.
Interpersonal relations, estimation of psychological safety, middle school students.