Keywords

29.1 Paradigms of Modern Psychological Research

Interrelations of a human to the world are diverse: as a living being he relates to nature, as a part of people’s community – to the society and its history, as a subject of activity – to material objects, as a cognizing and producing subject – to the products of culture. This diversity determines the development of a complex furcate system of theoretical and practical knowledge that is becoming one of the major centers of scientific development in the modern world [1]. T.S. Kuhn, while giving the characteristics of science, describes its development as follows: “If we regard science as a combination of facts, theories, and methods… then the development of science is a gradual process in which facts, theories, and methods compose the growing bulk of achievements representing the scientific methodology and knowledge” [17, p. 5]. However, the complex furcate system of knowledge about a human can no longer exist as a simple set of facts collected on a definite stage of its development. The systematization and enlargement of basic fundamentals of research are needed. Paradigms of science arise as the achievements are approved by the whole scientific community giving to it (this community) generalized models of building up the research – universally approved instruction of organizing the research. Formation of paradigm in science according to T.S. Kuhn “is a sign of maturity of development of any academic subject” [17, p. 7].

The entire history of psychology is connected with the search and determination of its own scientific paradigm. From the XIX century the debates are going on between the adherents of scientific and humanitarian paradigms. The peculiar features of scientific paradigm are acceptance of human nature, and relying on the facts available from experiments. Humanitarians consider that psychology should study particular forms of demonstration of the psychic in humans, describe and understand them. The extreme presentations of scientific paradigms in psychological research led to reductionism, biologizing, reducing the psychic life to reflexes and physiology, and the absolute priority is given to the adherents of humanitarian paradigm – to idealism and absence of aspiration to explanation of their causes and genesis.

The search for “the code of rules and regulations creating the unified scheme for acquisition of scientific knowledge from the stage of goal setting to problem solving” [26, p. 10] that would be acknowledged by all the scientific community lasts up till now and is of a really intense nature. As an example we can give the discussion results of which are published in the journal “Problems of Philosophy”, [24]. The key idea of this discussion was criticism against the “scientific mind”, proof of the advantages of humanitarian paradigm (Golov, Puzyrey, Ogurtsov), proposition and grounding of transition from humanitarian to eschatological paradigm that would proceed from the idea of extreme, finite meanings of existence of a human” living within the Christian culture (B.S. Bratus), attempt to avoid confrontation and opposition of scientific and humanitarian paradigms, acceptance of scientific and logically correct paradigm (M.A. Rozov, N.I. Kuznetsova).

While characterizing the condition of fundamentals of modern psychology regulating the activity of cognizing psychologist V.A. Rybakov and A.L. Pokryshkin describe different suppositions of scientists on this issue. Some of them (T.C. Kuhn, N.I. Kuznetsova) consider that psychology is a pre-paradigm science, that in-spite of its history time span (especially regarding the part of its development within philosophy) psychology is now at the stage of collecting the factual material due to the complexity of its subject, and have not yet reached the necessity of determining the unified rules and axioms: “… psychology today is first of all a vast research zone, multiple programs and projects not correlating to one another. This is the serious cognitive difficulty that makes us talking about crisis again and again, consider this diagnosis to be objective in spite of the activity of the researchers working here and the visible growth of particular knowledge areas” [24, p. 5]. Pre-paradigm condition of psychology can be reasoned in terms of the absence of direct links of its results and creation of material basis of society life, with provision of technical and military force of the country, which is a priority right now for almost every state. As a result psychology remains a science not as supported by the government policy in as, for instance, physics or chemistry whose achievements are directly connected to the government force and safety. Shift of priorities on the governmental level would make the psychological community define the fundamentals of the research organization and overcome the diversity of research instructions.

Other scholars consider that psychology is a multi-paradigm science, including several paradigms that correlate with major scientific theories and schools firmed up with the course of time and possessing their own scientific communities (behaviorism, cognitive psychology, psychoanalysis, gestalt-psychology, etc.). Actually, the existence of many scientific areas in psychology does no influence there acute confrontation. Criticism of the fundamentals of a scientific school from the position of another school leads to neither of the three: the destruction of the existing school being criticized, the revolutionary “overthrow”, the significant loss of its adherents and clients. Moreover, some practicing psychologists efficiently use psycho-technics of different scientific schools in their work.

There is also the third group of psychologists. They are putting their effort into proving the extra-paradigm in the nature of psychology basing their reasons on the ideas of subjective nature both of its object – psychic, and the means of cognition. Psychic of a human is like an inimitable, strictly individual reality closed to the thorough objective study; its cognition can be more or less objective depending on the object and method of research. Special techniques for measuring the external demonstrations of psychic activity, the use of statistical and mathematical apparatus for data processing, standardization of the research procedure add to the objectivity of the results of the research process. Impossibility to register and standardize all the factors affecting the process and the results of the research decreases the objectivity of the results and in some cases leads to the only possibility of their description and explanation. This especially relates to the study of deeper personality structures (values, meanings, senses, etc.) that are influenced by the peculiarities of the personality’s whole life path. Besides, the results of any psychological research are influenced by the factor of the cognizer’s personality because the key instrument for cognition of psychic is the subjective and truly individual reality – the psychic of the researcher. In any case, as the representatives of the third group of scientists believe that more or less objective or subjective (meaning the absence of objectivity) psychological research gives the abundant material for detecting the regular patterns (in the first case) and for interpretation, explanation (in the second case). If this is correct then there is no need to define the paradigm strictly; psychologists should just follow the scientific principles laying in aspiration to the truth that is defined by the objectives of the research and the absence of objectives for any kind of manipulation.

While analyzing the scientific and humanitarian paradigms strength and weaknesses, V.A. Rybakova and A.L. Pokryshkin enumerate the following among the advantages: “scientific system of building up and verification of the scientific knowledge is the most strict, correct, and simple from the point of view of mastering and application in acquiring the new knowledge”, humanitarian instructions allow “understanding the goals and intentions of the other person, recover the meaning put into a symbol, attributed to a phenomenon” [26, p. 20]. The authors regard the following as disadvantages: danger of losing one’s own object of the research – psychic in the first case, and non-structured amorphous knowledge of meanings whose sum total equals the sum total of the adherents of humanitarian paradigm in the second case.

Studying the paradigms of modern pedagogical and developmental psychology L.F. Obukhova points out two paradigms, absolutely different and nonintersecting, from her point of view: scientific (connected with J. Piaget’s name) and cultural-historical (connected with L.S. Vygotsky’s name) [22]. The major ideas of the first are characterized above. The second one is nothing but humanitarian paradigm accepting the fact that the superior psychic functions initially develop as a form of collective behavior, as a form of cooperation with other people, i.e. as a product of culture; and as a consequence only they become individual functions of the child him-/herself.

The core problem, criterion of an absolute division of the mentioned paradigms is the question of the direction of internal changes of the child, his/her development. According to scientific paradigm of the research on psychic development it happens in the process of natural psychic maturation in definite environmental conditions. According to cultural-historical paradigm this is the track from the social to the individual during which the individual acquires social experience.

While criticizing core ideas of the scientific paradigm and considering cultural-historical paradigm to be more deep and complicated from a theoretical point of view, L.F. Obukhova analyses their differences in how they define the conditions of development: according to the scientific paradigm, conditions of development are genetic background and environment, and according to cultural-historical paradigm they are morpho-physiological peculiarities of the brain and communication [22]. However, when we compare the content of the concepts unpacking the conditions of development it can be noticed that “genetic background” and “morpho-physiological peculiarities of the brain” are the terms of the same area (natural area connecting a human to the world of organic nature): we also include social environment which major means and forms of existence are communication to the notion “environment” in modern scientific and psychological research.

N.I. Kuznetsova believes that the strategic line of the development of knowledge is the unity of the scientific and humanitarian instructions, and “separation of humanitarian sciences from the natural ones, their artificial isolation only leads to provincialism”; there is “unity of norms and ideals of scientific character” in any science, whether it is natural or humanitarian [24, p. 9].

Traditionally and historically scientific paradigm has been used for longer time in psychology to organize research and explain its results. However, the psychological knowledge based on empiric facts cannot transform into explanatory scheme, structure, conception, theory in the same empiric way. “The moment of psycho-technical change of the psychic under study by the research procedures themselves” prevent the full realization of the scientific paradigm [24, p. 15]. The requirement of experimental verification of the potential theory also turns out to be difficult for accomplishment and depends on the professional skills of the researcher.

V.A. Rybakov and A.L. Pokryshkin suggest the following ways out of this situation being accepted in the present research: “…preliminary facts gathering, their systematization, initial generalization, detection of empirical pattern, introduction of observation terms – all this preparatory work before building up a theory gives to the researcher the basis that will allow to him running “as if” experiments with theoretical reasoning, and will increase the possibility of creating a good theory” [26, p. 24].

The question of the choice of the research paradigm is considered to be crucial because the answer to it gives the guidelines to the researcher, defines directions and means of the research organization, i.e. determines its methodology and methods. If the psychologist-researcher has scientific instructions he will aspire to detect recurrent phenomena from which it is possible to point out the patterns predicting the evolution of the phenomenon. This calls for a method of research that would provide the quantitative data generalized consequentially. This nomothemic approach allows organization of facts into conceptions and theories, and pointing out general patterns of the functioning of the psychic. A psychologist having humanitarian instructions aspires to describe the psychic phenomenon observed, interpreting it, giving meaning to it, i.e. using the ideographic approach.

While nomothemic approach allows detecting general features of phenomena, ideographic approach is aimed at particular and unique features. Categories of the “universal” and “particular” are equally necessary in psychological science. Without defining the general principles of the functioning of psychic, psychology will hardly become the in-demand science within the society. Besides, any normative science (not para-science) puts precisely this goal: to define the general rules and principles of the existence and evolution of the phenomenon under study. At the same time, it is impossible to study any psychic phenomenon in accordance with the realities without consideration of the uniqueness of the individual psychic. The research becomes meaningless in its practical significance (because it is unclear how to apply the universal rules to the particular case) and in terms of the absence of meaning and explanation of the psychologist researcher directed both towards his/her own reflective thinking and the colleagues-psychologists, if there is no quantitative analysis of the qualitative data or interpretation of numeric patterns. Absolutization of ideographic approach is similarly useless as it leads to cognition of a psychic phenomenon as a single demonstration each time demanding on the new interpretation.

In this case psychology ceases its existence as a science and acts as a form of art. According to I.M. Kondakov, modern psychology possesses methodological means allowing efficient use of both nomothemic and ideographic approaches. This is the Activity theory by A.N. Leontiev and S. L. Rubinstein and cultural-historical psychology of L.S. Vygotsky. Activity theories bring to light the mechanism of representation of the internal in the external through the concept of “interiorization”, and cultural-historical psychology allows understanding representation of the external in the internal and using the principle of historic development of the phenomenon in the process of study, education, and development of the child’s personality. As the author of the theory A.A. Leontiev pointed out, in spite of the differences in denomination of the representation directions there are no principal distinctions in detecting the sources of development, determination of psychic phenomena in these theories [18].

Analyzing the opportunities of the paradigms for cognition of the psychic I.M. Kondakov gives the following conclusion: “… both nomothemic (with its repeatability principle) and ideographic (with its principle of feeling-in) approaches have equal rights to exist in modern psychology; here we do not talk about the choice between the two but about their integration in the context of problem solving” [16, p. 88].

29.2 Synergetic Approach to Research of Psychological Personality Adaptation

In the recent years a new line of research, synergetic approach [23, 27, 30] has been forming. Some scientists (I.V. Prangishvily, V.V. Vagurin, N.I. Sardzhveladze and others) picture it as a regular prospect for further development of a systematic approach. Researchers working in this direction study mental phenomena determination taking into account not causality, but probabilistic nature of world events happening and give a lot of significance to casual events in open system functioning. Unlike classic research paradigms, synergetic paradigm focuses on the study of “the human being in the process of becoming, rather than human being that has already become”. It focuses on “dynamics of evolution processes rather than being” [30, pp. 6–7]. The categorical exception and substitution of causal determination with casualty acceptance as the only ground and scenario of a course of events, undoubtedly cannot be productive and valid for such a complex phenomenon as human psyche. The possibility (sometimes actuality) of such substitution causes fair criticism of the synergetic paradigm on the part of some philosophers and psychologists.

However B.F. Lomov pointed out that “connection between cause and consequence is not complex and straightforward”, “we are forced to deal with causal connections alongside with connections determined by such concepts as “condition”, “factor”, “ground”, “premise”, “mediation” and others.” [20, p. 100]. Complexity and ambiguity of the determination process lead to system instability upon certain circumstances and its development process is “blurred”. Investigating the problem of mental phenomenon determination, B.F. Lomov means not only determination of evolution, but also “the evolution of determination” (Ibidem). In other words, in order to adequately describe the psychic reality, determiner of its evolution and search for new grounds are necessary. One of the ways could be applying of self-organization of open psychic system laws interacting with probabilistic, eventful world.

Synergetic approach to the defined problem research does not exclude activity and free human will, because internal subject of interaction force, alongside external causes, are admitted and taken into account as important factors (synergetic term “attractors”) and non-linear disproportional influence upon the weak reasons system is only possible when it corresponds with internal tendencies of a system development. Such approach to the study of human-environment interrelation gives an opportunity to raise a heuristic research potential. It can be expressed, according to V.A. Vagurin, “in break with old paradigms …, emancipation of consciousness and creative imagination by a principally new self-organizational paradigm, in creative application of not only its categories, but also patterns and concepts with their following rationalization” [30, p. 9]. Contemporary psychology is at the starting point of interdisciplinary psychological and synergetic research. Its successful realization in sociological and socio-psychological study of large groups and communities gives hope for its perspective application in other fields of psychology and in psychological studies of personality adaptation in particular.

29.3 Diachronic Approach to Research of Sociological and Psychological Adaptation of Personality

Under the conditions of a contemporary and rapidly developing society, a social order is given to psychology. This order is connected to the problem of active reflection of changes in different sectors of social cooperation and relationship, and adequate effective response to them in the psyche. Psychic new formations appearing in an individual psyche under the influence of a complicated and unstable reality, acquire multidimensionality, and temporality of their functioning increases, new features appear integrating individual and society existence history, actual state of this existence and focus on the future [12]. At the same time, active and adequate influence of a subject on the environment (natural, objective, social, educational, professional etc.) is determined by the actual situation pattern, which contains all the above mentioned features integrated.

Certain contexts of a subject-environment interaction situation appear. The context of a specific subject-environment situation of interaction also depends on a subject’s attitude towards different sides of this situation, and on his/her previous experience with the sides of this situation, and on the role this situation plays in his/her future life and activity. Therefore the interaction situation is paradoxical: “while including the subject, … it stands against the subject at the same time; one … side of the situation is living conditions, the other one is their representation by the person included in the situation” [2, p. 35].

Earlier, in our studies it was shown that the inclusion of the historical development of the situation of the subject-environment interaction requires psychological research of new methodological basis, which would allow considering the phenomenon in its development, revealing the psychological mechanisms that promote not just a statement of the past and the current state of mental phenomenon and situations of its functioning, but anticipation of their development in the future, in other words, promote scientific understanding of the origin, development, and predicting the possible dynamics of interaction between the personality and the environment in the course of time [12].

In modern psychology, there are scientific approaches to observing mental phenomenon in dynamics. They are systemic-genetic approach, functional system approach, synergetic approach, etc. All of them focus a researcher’s attention to the procedural aspects of the phenomena under study. Based on the procedural aspect, socialization and adaptation studies [8, 9, 13, 28, 29] not only provide scientific data on the actual attributes of these processes, but also focus on the analysis of the historical development of a phenomenon at a certain time interval.

However, it is difficult to distinguish a scientific approach that promotes the study of psychic phenomena based on the past, the present, and the future in its development, which would allow to survey specific phenomenon in the real time period, at the appropriate level of psychological analysis and taking into account the complex system of determinants. Complexity and ambiguity of the determination process of the human psyche functioning in the “person-environment” system leads to the fact that under certain circumstances, the system becomes unstable, and the process of its development is “blurred”. Investigating the problem of mental phenomenon determination, B.F. Lomov means not only determination of evolution, but also “the evolution of determination” [20, p. 100].

In other words, a determiner of psychic reality evolution and search for the new grounds are necessary for adequate describing of the psychic reality. One of the ways could be applying of the diachronic approach in psychological research. The term “diachrony” initially became popular among the historical linguistics. The literal translation of the word “diachrony” from the Greek is flowing through time, and it means the historical development of different phenomena and systems. Introduced into science by the Swiss linguist Ferdinand de Saussure, the term “diachrony” in linguistics means relations and connections of the elements (language units) in the historical sequence of their occurrence [3].

Diachrony, according to F. de Saussure, is complemented by synchrony – the existence of a current language system. Diachrony and synchrony complement each other as methods of cognition of system evolving into another system in the first case, and study of a real-time currently functioning system in the second case. Thus the basic criteria of evolution phenomena is their consistency over time (before – now, past – present, present – future, etc.) and their qualitative difference, which does not allow to combine phenomena consecutive in time in the system (ibidem). According to O.S. Razumovsky “diachrony – is the most important feature of form and architectonic of the main process which contains all the being and thought. Dynamic being without diachrony is impossible” (ibidem).

In relation to the psychological phenomenon, diachronic approach requires, firstly, defining the unit of analysis, i.e. the system, overgrowing itself in its development and turning into another system, and secondly, specifying determinants of this transition [12]. It is necessary to choose structurally complex, dynamic functioning systems complying with vital goals and combining the opportunity to account of multiple determination by a real education, for a system as a unit of psychological analysis in the diachronic approach. Such can be, for instance, the students-educational environment interaction system, the school adaptation system, the system of social interactions of personality in the process of socialization, etc. In any case, a system-forming category will be the category of interaction, as it combines features such as the activity of the personality in the process of entering the social environment, adapting to it with further integration; the possibility of realization of the personality-environment interaction idea, sequence of initiative, reactive personal and environmental influences.

Analysis of the historical development of interaction categories allows concluding its importance for the psychological research [7]. Due to personality-environment interaction every studied system that includes this interaction acquires functionality, consistency, efficiency or deteriorates because of the appearing of a whole new interaction system, functioning in the following time interval. We have shown that the personality-environment interaction category meets the basic requirement of the diachronic approach, which is organization of the research of the sequential system development process of a system development into a whole new system. The interaction category also allows integrating into a single holistic knowledge of the various and diverse factors and phenomena, which are joining in a complicated way into a system of mental functioning of a socializing and developing personality [12].

The most common determiner of a system is the inconsistency of its elements’ functioning. Thus the model of adaptive interactions between personality and educational environment developed by the author [10], the development of the adaptive interactions system begins in conditions of imbalance, inconsistency, disagreement between requirements (capabilities) of the environment and capabilities (requirements) of the personality. Disagreement in the interactions with the environment system can be realized and not realized by the personality. In the first case, the dynamics of changes in the “personality – environment” system may be initiated by the personality. Mechanisms, allowing the personality to realize the disagreement with the environment can be cognitive mechanisms for distinguishing minimal changes, emotional mechanism of alarm, motivational mechanisms of striving to balance with the environment requirements, etc. If a disagreement in the “personality-environment” system is not realized by the personality, the dynamics of interactions in a given system can be initiated by the social environment with social and psychological mechanisms.

Function of the adaptive interactions system is to achieve the dynamic balance between the personality and environment requirements. In this case the achievement of dynamic balance between the personality and the environment is determined by numerous internal and external (for the personality) factors. The final result of the work of personality interactions system is readiness for changes, adaptation is expressed by the human ability to carry out top-priority activity for the given age successfully and / or personality activity in these changing conditions.

In the course of interacting with the environment the subject reaches or does not reach the objectives, which are optimal interactions. In the first case, there is an agreement with the requirements of the environment performed through internal changes or active changes of the environment, or a combination of both. From the perspective of leading activity and personal development, an agreement may be optimal or non-optimal (weak or static over time). As a result of optimal agreement, there is a successful psychological or socio-psychological adaptation in the “personality-environment” system, and new formations of the personality appear influencing the subsequent adaptation processes. Weak agreement, insufficient for successful performing the activity, as well as weak disagreement, can be considered a positive result of the adaptation process, if it gives at least a minimal or temporary opportunity to perform educational activities or personal development.

Static agreement with the environmental requirements leads to the fact that the subject does not take into account the changes of environmental conditions and as a result the system of adaptation in the given environment collapses. The interaction system in this case proceeds to the next level of development, a whole new system, functioning under different conditions and in a different time period, is formed. Excessive disagreement with the environment leads to the same result, if a person by the power of will does not “launch” the cycle of necessary interactions again.

The diachronic study of interaction systems changing in time under the influence of disagreements allows us to trace patterns of transition and predict possible ways of development of socialization and social and psychological adaptation processes in the future taking into account the past and the present [12].

Empirical evidence of the determining role of disagreements in the development of personality-environment interactions is presented to us on the example of the school interaction system [8, 9, 13]. It is shown that the whole system of these interactions is flexible and is in constant dynamics. The only things that change are the structure, the ratio of the various elements within the non-connected subsystems and intersystem relationship. Functioning of the school student – educational environment interaction system also depends on the context of the interaction situation and in accordance with the requirements of age periods.

Throughout the time of school education, interaction systems are changing qualitatively. The quality of a change is connected to the increase of the possibility of the adequate change and increase of its effectiveness, i.e. with the increase of adaptation potential of the school interaction system. It happens under the conditions of accumulation of information about a large number of variants (types) of interactions in the system. In turn, it becomes possible either through mental modeling of the set of opportunities with educational environment by the subject (a school student or a teacher), or through mastering of a set of initiatives and responses in the process of its real interaction with the educational environment. In other words, the mechanisms responsible for the optimal dynamics of student-educational environment interaction system are intellectualization of all areas of activity of a student due to the accumulation of experience in the past and at the present, and the expansion of spheres of real activity (set of activities) during its interaction with the educational environment.

Methodological requirement of the diachronic approach, which is in the necessity for interconnecting the past, the present, and the future situations or phenomena in the research, allows us to identify yet another mechanism of optimization of dynamics of the personality-environment interactions system. This is the mechanism of anticipation by the personality of the process and result of interactions with the environment. A significant role of the intellectual actions in adaptation process, beginning from the capacity for minimal differences, allowing us to notice the disagreement between its capabilities and the requirements of the environment, anticipation, and abilities for a wide transfer of effective adaptation action onto a set of situations while maintaining the flexibility of mental structures, allows us to define the intelligence of the personality as a common adaptive capacity.

As stated above, the diachronic approach allows studying the specific system selected as the unit of analysis at a certain time interval, provided that the system in this interval changes qualitatively for several times. This raises the problem of choosing the time scale. Obviously, this choice should be determined by the dynamics of an objectively existing reality, research objectives and the level of psychological analysis. In the context of the school interactions system, the time scale of existence of a certain system feature can be attached to the schooling stage – elementary, secondary and higher. However, the individual systems of school adaptation can exist in a shorter time interval and be caused by heterochrony of personality development and generalized requirements of educational environment attached to the group mode of study. In addition, at the psychophysiological level of analysis of school interactions system time scale, selected for the study, may be longer than at the psychological and socio-psychological levels. Thus, we have shown that changes in the students’ individual dynamics of their mental functioning connected with the properties of the nervous system requires more time and personal contribution than a qualitative change in cognitive and socio-psychological phenomena [8, 9].

If we understand diachrony as a transition of the studied system to another level, i.e. its structural and qualitative changes and transformation into the system with other features, characteristics, goals, and synchrony as operation of the modified system, then the problem of given phenomena correlation inevitably arises. When does diachrony begin and end in its development, how does synchrony become diachrony, what are the mechanisms of this transition, what methods do we use for studying both processes and their mutual transitions?

Developers of diachronic approach in philosophy and linguistics speak about the symbiotic relationships of diachrony and synchrony in the development of a language: “… although the simultaneous analysis of language phenomena precedes the diachronic one, diachrony, nevertheless, has the basis for understanding the facts of a language in synchrony” [25], “… diachrony does not exclude the notion of a system and synchrony cannot entirely exclude the concept of evolution. Both diachrony and synchrony form two successive phases of a diachronic (in form and structure) analysis of a language as elements of a general approach” [25].

Obviously, with regard to the system of adaptive interactions, the main objective of which is the establishment of a dynamic equilibrium in the “personality – environment” system, the answers to these questions can be sought in the analysis of the processes of agreements and disagreements of the requirements (capabilities) of the environment and capabilities (requirements) of the personality. Objective presence of disagreements between requirements and capabilities in the “personality – environment” system can be a criterion for the synchronic existence of the adaptive interaction system, as their main objective is to overcome this disagreement and pursuit of a perfect match between requirements and capabilities of the personality and the environment [12]. At the same time this situation of objective disagreement is the beginning of a diachronic existence in the “personality – environment” system as a personality in its interaction with the environment tends to its optimality and efficiency. As well as the current interactions system does not allow to achieve this objective, it is necessary to destroy it or convert into a new one.

The disagreements mentioned above and an agreement of the requirements and capabilities ratio allows us to determine a very complex and non-linear nature of the development of the adaptive interactions system. At a certain moment, the ability of a person to spontaneously generate new structures by means of internal reserves appears. Not only multiplicity of knowledge, abilities, skills, but also a complex system of interpersonal interaction with a special surrounding, readiness to openly investigate a problem, reflect an entire structure of basic elements of the problem, “generalization” by the personality of its way of life etc. can act as such new formations [12].

Maturity of any new formation in a given process can serve as a criterion for the end of the diachrony and transition of adaptation system to synchronic existence. Excessive accumulation of agreement between the requirements (capabilities) of environment and capabilities (requirements) of personality during synchrony of adaptation is also a diachrony for the “personality – environment” system, as it leads to the destruction of familiar and no longer contributing to the personal development of relations with the environment.

Alternating periods of synchrony and diachrony in the processes of interaction of an individual with the environment and adaptation can determine the qualitative difference between interaction and adaptation. Effective interactions are accomplished on the basis of successful result of the individual adaptation to the conditions of life and activity in the particular environment, i.e. on the basis of achieved equilibrium in the “personality – environment” system. Adaptation as a process begins within conditions of imbalance between the requirements (capabilities) of environment and capabilities (requirements) of the individual. However, the characteristics of the subject activity and reflexivity during the adaptation process allows to distinguish the category of “adaptive interactions”, which include perceptive, intellectual, communicative, willed, etc. actions aimed at identifying the inconsistencies in the “personality – environment” system, and at modeling of its overcoming and anticipation of a result. In turn, any interaction of the individual with the environment is ultimately directed to achieving equilibrium with it via changes in the environment, self-modification, or both at the same time. All the actions of the subject related to the cognition and change of the environment and with the cognition and change of itself, either way, always match the objectives of adaptation. All this allows us to consider adaptation to be a permanent process of agreement and disagreement within the “personality – environment” system. Moreover, some of the parameters of dynamics determining the occurrence of the disagreement after the agreement can be supported in this system.

Thus, diachronic approach in psychological research allows us to trace the patterns of evolution of the studied phenomenon, the development of the system chosen as the subject of analysis, to reveal the patterns of transition of inefficient system to the desired level of development, to predict the possible trajectories of the evolutionary and the synchronic development of the system. However, beginning to use the diachronic approach for analysis of socialization and adaptation processes in psychology needs further development and empiric confirmatory research.

29.4 Adaptational Capabilities of a Personality

Adaptation has been studied for a long time in medicine and physiology. Also the present problem has specific psychological content whose meaningful core is the achievement of an optimal balance of human capabilities and requirements of the environment from the point of view of the internal and the external criteria; this is a must for psychological adaptation and development of an individual. Great theoretical significance of the psychological adaptation problem combines with its lack of conceptual development in psychology which shows in a small number of theoretical studies of the present problem, prevailing of the empirical, applied research solving the particular practical problems.

The school environment example showed that the problem of adaptational capabilities of a personality must be solved in accordance with the specific character of the preceding development of the personality [11]. Constant micro-changes in the educational environment, placing new requirements on the behalf of the educational environment not only in particular periods of studying period but in the course of study as a whole, tense and density of the new information in the educational process, orientation towards the development objectives of the students combined with the orientation towards the positive results of the Unified State Examination, − these thing actualize the problem of accordance of the requirements (capabilities) of the educational environment to the capabilities (requirements) of the students. In some of our studies we point out that school adaptation as a process goes during the whole period of studies at school; all the psychic phenomena and resources of the students are involved into this process; his/her school adaptation is determined by all the components of the educational environment and goes as an active process of self-change and transformation of the environment in the process of interaction with it [5, 6, 14, 15].

The acuteness of the problem increases when we talk about the readiness of the school leavers to the new conditions of learning, professional activities, and social interaction after school. Till the recent times scholars have been solving this question in terms of building up a certain bulk of academic knowledge with the school students that was necessary to study in a professional educational institution. However the process of the further development with the school leavers is much wider in its contents, and includes not only mastering of the new profession but also the active mastering of other areas of life and activity: social interaction, further personal self-cognition, building up family relationships, social activity, etc.

In order to successfully complete personal self-realization according to the requirement of modern dynamic society, a school leaver should possess adaptational capabilities that allow him to cognize the world adequately, understand the changing society, tune up his/her capabilities to the changed conditions, development of his/her personality, and changed environment, which is necessary to achieve socially effective results.

Adaptational capabilities develop during the whole period of studies at school and have complicated multi-level structure including cognitive, emotional, motivational, social-psychological components [11]. At each stage of schooling, in primary, secondary, and high school these component influence the result of school adaptation with different force, and have different contents. In this regard at each stage of schooling the structure of adaptational changes is unique, particular components prevail in it, and intra-structural links provide its efficient functioning. It is necessary to point out qualitative uniqueness of the structure of adaptational capabilities of the school students because the nature and peculiarities of this structure on the period of schooling influence on the result of school adaptation and provide further psychological, social-psychological, professional adaptation with the school, gymnasium, and lyceum leavers. Besides, the necessity to predict adaptational capabilities of the school leavers, there is need for development of a diagnostic criteria and coefficients, methodical apparatus, and programs for development correction. As it was mentioned before, there are almost no studies on the problems of adaptational capabilities of the general full-time school leavers (ibidem).

Development of the adaptational capabilities of a student is provided for by both his/her adaptational potential and by the educational environment at school. Adaptational potential of personality having functions similar to personal potential, as “flexible reactions to the changes of external and internal environment” [19, p. 8], possesses its own peculiar features and differs from the latter. From D.A. Leontiev point of view, personal potential is “an integral systemic characteristic of individual-psychological peculiar features of personality underlying the capability of personality to follow the stable internal criteria and guidance in his/her life and preserve the stability of meaning orientations and efficiency of the activities with the background of pressure and changing external conditions” (ibidem).

Semantic accents of the given definition point out the stability of the internal criteria and guidance of one’s own life activity on the one hand, and pressure of the external conditions on the other hand, i.e. personality’s reaction to the changes in the external environment goes towards “the change in the external world” (ibidem), and self-regulation of the subject of activity is “autonomous” (Personal potential…, p. 6). In this regard, personal potential reflects some sort of personality resistance to the external environment, ability to withstand the pressure of the outer circumstances, and characterizes the viability of personality.

It is not really important for the psychologist how and how well personality resists the circumstances (though in particular situations this trait is extremely important to the student) but how adequately the essence of the changes is understood, what kind of reaction should follow, whether the choice of means and ways of adjustment is possible, how the operative correction is happening in this process, where the borderline of the optimal balance of requirements (capabilities) of the educational environment and capabilities (requirements) of the student is. Thus it is necessary to put the accents to the non-linear dynamics of the processes of interaction of an individual and environment, and activity of the subjects of educational process.

From our point of view, the characteristics of the individual-environment interaction, educational environment included are reflected most fully in the concept “personal adaptational potential” introduced by A.G. Maklakov [21]. The author includes neuro-psychic sustainability of personality, self-esteem, social support, proneness to conflict level, experience of social interactions into the personal adaptational potential [21]. However the notion “potential” in the broad sense of the word means the alternative means the object possesses. Their effective realization is determined not by the fact of their presence but by some other phenomena determining the activity of the subject and the educational environment. This does not mean that realization of adaptational potential is only connected to need-motivation phenomena. In some studies the significant role of psycho-dynamic peculiarities of personality, its ideas, intellect, emotional processes and conditions, and also socio-psychological components of adaptational process was proved [4, 8, 9]. Specific character of interconnections between different components of school adaptation proved to be crucial. New arising systemic characteristics and traits of personality allow the students to compensate the lack of development of certain characteristics and traits, optimize other traits by the will power from the “spare channel” [6, 15], develop necessary traits from the zone of the closest development, etc.

The important things about the adaptational process described above are integrated personality traits allowing us to choose means of interaction with the environment in a fast and efficient way, providing active and developing adaptation, i.e. adaptational capabilities of personality. Customary and preferable means of personality-environment interaction in adaptational process compose into adaptational style of personality [6, 15]. Adaptational capabilities are regarded as individual-psychological peculiarities of personality expressed in the choice of the most effective ways of adaptation to the environment. The present capabilities are the result of interaction between psycho-physiological, psychic, and social-psychological phenomena functioning in the process of achievement the dynamic balance in the system “personality-environment” [11].

Development of adaptational capabilities is a very complicated, multi-dimensional, heterochronous, and non-linear process of movements and changes in personality accompanied by heterogeneous and heterochronous changes in the components of educational environment themselves. In this case it is necessary to point out heterochrony of the subsequent changes of personality and environment. In our research we pointed out two forms of existence of such type of heterochrony of personal changes and changes in social component of educational environment: difference in disposition of the interacting subjects and violating the temporal agreement of interactions [13]. The strongly pronounced heterochrony of personal changes and changes in educational environment itself, chronical retardation of student’s capabilities from the requirements of the environment, inconsistency in dispositions of subjects participating in educational process, impossibility of conforming educational environment and requirements of the educational process participants, − these are the general reasons for decrease in school adaptation and risks of de-adaptation.

Adaptational capabilities of personality developing in the process of his/her interaction with educational environment are systemic, which means universal, and in this sense they have opportunities of broad shift to different areas of the subject’s activities; also poorly developed adaptational capabilities in the schooling process have opportunities of broad limitation in other activity areas. Development of adaptational capabilities at school happens mostly spontaneously. Indeed, psychological-pedagogical support (provided not only by the school psychologist, but also by teachers and parents) can help out towards more or less purposefulness and consistency of the process of the development of adaptational capabilities, but complexity and integrity of this problem do not contribute to its solving in modern school with its regular deficit of teachers-psychologists and low psychological competence of teachers setting the priorities if their pedagogical activities in favor of the good results of the Unified State Examination.

Therefore, adaptational capabilities of personality play a significant role in the process of his/her interaction with the environment, they are complex multi-dimensional systemic unity where interconnection of heterogeneous psychic phenomena and personal traits provides systemic new-formation – adaptational readiness of personality.