Personal characteristics and their influence on the strategy of behavior in conflicts among students majoring in "Management in technical systems"

Introduction. The problem of creating psychological and pedagogical conditions for training specialists in global high-tech markets is one of the current areas in modern education. This issue is especially significant in modern socio-economic conditions, which require taking into account personal characteristics and patterns of response in a conflict situation in the process of teaching students.

Materials and methods. To solve the set tasks we used the following research methods: theoretical (analysis of psychological, pedagogical, methodological literature and dissertation research on the studied problems, comparison, synthesis of essential characteristics of concepts, generalization of practical experience); empirical (observation, survey, analysis of the educational process, experiment (ascertaining stage)). Empirical methods: psychodiagnostic techniques: "Kellerman-Plutchik Questionnaire", R. Cattell's technique of multifactorial personality research (16PF questionnaire), Thomas's technique for diagnosing personality predisposition to conflict behavior. Methods of descriptive and nonparametric statistics using the SPSS program. A study was conducted aimed at studying the influence of personality traits of students studying in the direction of "Management in Technical Systems" on the mechanisms of their psychological defense and patterns of response in conflict situations.

Results. Analysis of the personality traits of the tested students showed that they are characterized by: high intelligence, independence, independence, self-control. To study the relationship between the personal characteristics of students and their psychological defense strategies and behavior patterns in conflicts, the collected empirical data were subjected to mathematical processing using the method of one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA). The study revealed a connection between personality traits and behavior strategies in conflicts. Students who prefer avoidance (low cooperation and pursuit of goals) have the following characteristics: gentleness, dependence, empathy and compassion. The tested students, who are prone to the strategy of compromise in conflicts, have certain personality traits. They show openness and goodwill, sociability and friendliness. In communication they are distinguished by naturalness and ease, showing care, goodwill and responsiveness. They actively interact with others, participate in conflict resolution, are trusting and receptive to criticism. Their emotional sphere is characterized by spontaneity and openness. In the course of the study, we identified areas of psychological and pedagogical support for students during their studies at the university.

Discussion and conclusions. The work defines the relationship between personal qualities and defense mechanisms and tactics of behavior in conflict. The directions for taking into account the personal characteristics of students studying in the specialty “Management in Technical Systems” during their studies at the university are indicated.

1. Auer M. A. International Society for Engineering Pedagogy (IGIP) and New Challenges in Engineering Education. Vysshee obrazovanie v Rossii, 2014, no. 6, pp. 28-33. (In Russ.)

2. Borisov V. E. Problems of training operators of unmanned aircraft systems. Teoreticheskie i prikladnye voprosy nauki i obrazovaniya: sbornik nauchnyh trudov po materialam Mezhdunarodnoj nauchno-prakticheskoj konferencii 31 yanvarya 2015 g.: v 16 chastyah. Tambov, 2015. Part 5. Pp. 24-25. (In Russ.)

3. Borisova E. V. Personal characteristics in the processes of monitoring students' competencies. Mezhdunarodnyj nauchno-issledovatel'skij zhurnal, 2020, no. 12-4 (102), pp. 9-14, doi: 10.23670/IRJ.2020.102.12.113. (In Russ.)

4. Gadzhiev A.G., Mihalyova M.V. The role of the innovation leader in creating a new technological order. Innovacionnoe razvitie Rossijskoj ekonomiki: materialy X Mezhdunarodnoj nauchno-prakticheskoj konferencii: v 5 tomah. T. 1: Innovacii i rossijskaya ekonomika v kontekste global'nyh ekonomicheskih processov. Moscow, 2017. Pp. 82-85. (In Russ.)

5. Gamezo M. V., Petrova E. A., Orlova L. M. Age and educational psychology: a tutorial. Moscow, 2003. 512 p. (In Russ.)

6. Dorozhkov N. D. Features of building and interacting with an innovation project team. Biznes-obrazovanie v ekonomike znanij, 2017, no. 2 (7), pp. 43-47. (In Russ.)

7. Innovative management. Moscow, Alpina Publisher, 2017. 206 p. (In Russ.)

8. Karpov A. V., Karpov A. A., Volchenkova A. A. Sexual differentiation as a determinant of the cognitive sphere of programmers in professional activities and at the stage of university training. Perspektivy nauki i obrazovaniya, 2023, no. 4 (64), pp. 539-558, doi: 10.32744/pse.2023.4.33. (In Russ.)

9. Kolomoec M. V. Problems of adaptation of students of technical specialties in professional activities. Vestnik Kazanskogo tekhnologicheskogo universiteta, 2012, vol. 15, no. 4, pp. 207-210. (In Russ.)

10. Mikova I. S., Pavlyukevich L. V. Taking into account the developmental characteristics of students of generation Z when organizing the educational process in higher education. Lingvodidaktika i metodika prepodavaniya inostrannyh yazykov v svete sovremennyh issledovanij: sbornik nauchnyh statej XXXIII Mezhdunarodnoj nauchno-prakticheskoj konferencii. Cheboksary, 2022. Pp. 210-216. (In Russ.)

11. Miroshnichenko A. A., Merzlyakova D. R. Features of teaching schoolchildren of generation Z technologies of the national technological initiative. Pokolenie Z: social'nyj harakter, identichnost' i orientacii sovremennyh podrostkov: sbornik statej Vserossijskoj nauchnoj konferencii s mezhdunarodnym uchastiem. Ufa, 2019. Pp. 136-142. (In Russ.)

12. Muhina V. S. Age Psychology. Phenomenology of Development: a textbook for students of higher educational institutions. 15th ed. Moscow, 2015. 656 p. (In Russ.)

13. Ostapenko N. A. Taking into account age characteristics as a condition for pedagogical support for the adaptation of first-year students in a multi-level educational complex. Obshchestvo: sociologiya, psihologiya, pedagogika, 2020, no. 6 (74), pp. 192-196, doi: 10.24158/spp.2020.6.32. (In Russ.)

14. Rethinking engineering education. The CDIO approach / E. F. Crowley, J. Malmqvist, O. Östlund, B. D. Broder, K. Edström; trans. from English by S. Rybushkina; under scientific ed. A. Chuchalin. Moscow, Publishing House of the Higher School of Economics, 2015. 504 p. (In Russ.)

15. Romanchenko S. V. Innovations, novelties, innovations: definitions and essence. Molodoj uchenyj, 2012, no. 4, pp. 166-168. (In Russ.)

16. Slepko YU. N. Psychological content and dynamics of the goals of educational activities of students of a pedagogical university. Psihologicheskaya nauka i obrazovanie, 2022, Vol. 27, No. 2, pP. 69-81, DOI: 10.17759/pse.2022270206. (In Russ.)

17. Uryvaev V. A., Mazilov V. A., Senin I. G., Slepko YU. N., Zolotareva V. V. Dynamics of indicators of self-actualization of the individual in a transitive society. Ekologiya cheloveka, 2018, no. 8, pp. 27-31, doi: 10.33396/1728-0869-2018-8-27-31. (In Russ.)

18. Homutskij D. YU., Aliev I. G. Formation of competencies of an effective leader of teams working in the open innovation format. Iniciativy XXI veka, 2014, no. 2, pp. 19-21. (In Russ.)

19. Castelli P., Wan Abdul Rahman W. A. The impact of empathy on leadership effectiveness among business leaders in the United States and Malaysia. International Journal of Business, Economics and Management, 2013, no. 3, pp. 83-97.

20. Greene J. O., Burleson B. R. (eds.) Handbook of communication and social interaction skills. Mahwah, New Jersey, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc., 2003. 1032 p.

21. Hodges S. D., Klein K. J. Regulating the costs of empathy: the price of being human. Journal of Socio-Economics, 2001, no. 30, pp. 437-452.

22. Luthra A., Dahiya R. Effective Leadership is all About Communicating Effectively: Connecting Leadership and Communication. International Journal of Management & Business Studies, 2015, no. 3 (5), pp. 43-48.

23. Luthra A., Singh K. Organizational Communication and Management Effectiveness: An analytical Study at Various Managerial Levels. International Journal of Management & Business Studies, 2015, no. 5, pp. 59-66.

24. Mehrabian A. Evidence bearing on the affiliative tendency (MAFF) and sensitivity to rejection (MSR) scales. Current Psychology, 1994, no. 13, pp. 97-116, doi: 10.1007/BF02686794.

25. Mehrabian A., Epstein N. A Measure of Emotional Empathy. Journal of Personality, 2006, no. 40, pp. 525-543, doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6494.1972.tb00078.x.

26. Merzlyakova D. R., Miroshnichenko A. A., Baranov A. A., Popkov A. V., Ivanova N. P. Human and the foodnet market: on the formation of the agricultural producer ethos (psychological and pedagogical aspect). IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 2022, vol. 949, p. 012042, doi: 10.1088/1755-1315/949/1/012042.

27. Steinmann B., Ötting S. K., Maier G. W. Need for Affiliation as a Motivational Add-On for Leadership Behaviors and Managerial Success. Frontiers in psychology, 2016, no. 7, p. 1972, doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01972.

28. Trujillo J. P, Simanova I., Bekkering H., Özyürek A. Communicative intent modulates production and comprehension of actions and gestures: A Kinect study. Cognition, 2018, no. 180, pp. 38-51.

29. Verma D. Communication: A Necessary Leadership Skill. Management Guru: Journal of Management Research, 2013, no. 2, pp. 95-101.

30. Vries R. E. de, Bakker-Pieper A., Oostenveld W. Leadership = Communication? The Relations of Leaders' Communication Styles with Leadership Styles, Knowledge Sharing and Leadership Outcomes. Journal of business and psychology, 2010, no. 3 (25), pp. 367-380, doi: 10.1007/s10869-009-9140-2.