INDIVIDUALIST AND COLLECTIVIST PRIORITIES OF UKRAINIAN CULTURE IN EMPIRICAL STUDIES

Abstract

The article analyzes the quantitative study of Ukrainian culture values given cluster collectivist individualpriorities. On this basis, concluded that the inability to establish the level of dominance in modern Ukrainian culture ofindividualism and/or collectivism that indirectly value-mental and socio-political factors of transformation.

The research we have grouped (as far as possible) by chronology: a study Colamborative International Study ofManagerial Stress (CISMS) (P. Spectrum, K. Cooper, K. Sparks (1996)), a survey D. Maitri and T. Bradley (1997), tostudy business School dean of Kyiv-Mohyla Academy, Mr. Sheremet (1999), data on students with Ukrainian citiesreceived by Russian researchers Latov N. and J. Latov (2006 ), the research staff of the Department of Nature andPsychology research Institute of ethnicity, S. and A. Novosad Cheshkova who interviewed 15- 17-year-old Ukrainian teenon basic psycho signs (spring 2006), S. Novosad independent research conducted by in two phases (2006 and 2009),which involved interviewing young Ukraine aged 18 to 30 years and adults-aged 31 to 45 years of research within thethird wave of the international project "European Social Survey" (EUROPEAN SOCIAL SURVEY (ESS) by the method ofS. Schwartz (December 2006 – January 2007), a survey initiated by N. Litvinenko and G. Pylypenko conducted basedtechniques G. Hofstede, 2008 (2012), to study L. Pochebut and I. Meyzhys, the author studies within the project mentprofessor of Warsaw University of Levitsky, reflected in Article VI Semkiva Ukrainian researchers. Unfortunately the timeof the last study we were unable to install.

Also in the scientific literature can be found information on research, which is mentioned in the works of Lime"World economy: structural foundations of civilization" (Kharkov, 2007). It individualism level in Ukraine is set at 18 points(rather low figure). A distance of power – is very high (92 points). Russian researchers Latov N. and J. Latov emphasizethe impossibility to establish the representativeness of the sample, since there is no way to verify it. However, it was herthey used in their research, in particular to check the level of Westernization mentality of students who modernized.

In our opinion, the more important operating time can be considered a thesis B. Linden, the conclusions whichthe author notes the ambivalence of socially-oriented value system of our country.

Overall analysis available for our review and our review of the proposed eleven quantitative research allows tostate the following.

As a culture, dominated by collectivist Ukrainian determine priorities: 1) B. Lipov (individualism – low powerdistance – high ) 2) Mr. Sheremet (collectivism – high power distance – large), 3) J. Latov, H. Latov (individualism –rather low power distance – low), 4) A. Cheshkov, S. Novosad (collectivism – high), 5) N. Litvinenko and G. Pylypenko(individualism – low power distance – low ), 6) I. Semkiv, M. Levitsky (collectivism – high), 7) European Social Survey(collectivism-high).

Among the studies , as evidenced by the dominance of individualistic priorities , we can identify the following:1) The range of K. Cooper, K. Sparks (individualism – high power distance – low), 2) T. Bradley, D. Maitri (individualismrather high power distance – low), 3) Pochebut L., I. Meyzhys (high individualism), 4) S. Novosad collectivism andindividualism take almost flat position).

Here, we believe that you should pay attention to some inconsistencies.First, most studies Ukraine demonstrates a fairly high rate of power distance, which according to the theory ofG. Hofstede, which is supported by most of his followers, should indicate a predominance of individualistic tendencies.

Second, as is clear from the analysis within the studies conducted by western experts, the Ukrainian cultureshows not only an individualistic orientation. Even indicators that are working authors somewhat in their methods (although are quantified in the same dimensions as in our research) as a result get different conclusions. You may workin favor of individualism in fact belong to the authors project individualistic cultures and testing techniques mainly withinthe western individualistic cultures, which warned D. Matsumoto.

Thirdly, we should also note that research results are still somewhat indirect. Settings for safety and conformity,for example, in our opinion, can only indicate a situational socio-economic and political problems that appear in individualwell-being and accordingly affect the internal psychological priorities, but do not demonstrate the benefits collectivistmentality nature and value Ukrainian culture.

In addition, theoretical analysis indicates collections by the inability to determine what type of Ukrainian culturecan be attributed, at least today. Therefore, at present we can only say with certainty unless the ambivalence ofUkrainian culture, although this claim is partly mediated by objective factors forming Ukraine as a country going throughand going through hard times.