Methodological procedure of diagnosing behavioural stereotypes resilience of different language cultures representatives

Introduction

The recent progressive trends of modern worldwide life, such as globalization, multiculturalism, accelerated pace of total informatisation, etc. have changed these priorities due to the spread of coronavirus disease in the world and its danger to human health. The COVID-narrative influenced the collective consciousness and led to the transformation of the conventional models of relationships between both individuals within one country and in the course of intercultural contacts. W. Lippmann (2011), the American sociologist, in the beginning of the XXth century called these learned and stable patterns of behaviour stereotypes and even then assumed that in fact this phenomenon is next door to bias and sometimes has nothing to do with reality, but is resilient as scientific and social construct. 

Nowadays every society starts learning to live in COVID-narratives and is searching for resources (not only financial), firstly, to adapt people to the conditions of now and then extreme life; secondly, to maintain the well-being of people; thirdly, to create new conditions in the construction of meaning of life, and most importantly, is directing efforts, including scientific, to monitor the acquired resilience to such stressful situations in every particular country.

It is no coincidence that the studies of adaptation to changing environments and stress inducing factors in international psychological works (APA, 2015) have recently been given special priority. The outlined issues have acquired hot topicality and aroused enthusiastic debates about the design of a proficitarian approach to the analysis of the human psychotraumatic syndrome overcoming technique and the search for new stereotypical patterns of behaviour after having experienced it. It is the stereotypes which are the most resilient phenomena that root in human consciousness and form its protective functions (resilient – able to return quickly to a previous good condition after problems; viability (Maddi, Harvey & Khoshaba, 2009), passion (Gumilev, 2008), viability and stamina (Ananiyev, 2001), personal adaptive potential (Maklakov, 2001), personal potential (Leontiyev, 2006), etc.)

Hence, it follows that the basis of the behavioural resilient stereotypical pattern is a certain situation caused by an event that is one of the key concepts of modern narratology. Directly within psychology, the narrative is considered as a succession of events with their characteristic individual or collective meaning. Different scholars (Haslam, Rothschild, & Ernst, 2002) substantiates connection between the narratives of reality and the ability of man to adapt to them. Otherwise, an uncontrolled narrative makes a person a victim of circumstances, demonstrating incoordination of objective and subjective reality. Understanding the narrative as a representation of reality, scientists assume that it is a reflective process of personal and socio-cultural identification, the process of constructing memories and comprehending events. Respectively, the narrative approach to the study of resilience is focused on the study of stereotypical social behaviour models of the individual’s proficitarian development in extreme conditions. In this perspective, it is noteworthy to focus on the expressive side of such narratives as “adventure”, “crisis”, “confrontation”. The progression of events and the results of actions cannot be duly predicted and therefore require a prompt response of man and society in general through the ability to transform habitual patterns of behaviour into adaptive models that will help to reduce psychological tension. Definitely, in every society, scientists are working at compiling the corpus of such stereotyped-adaptive patterns of behaviour, however, the matter of how these stereotypes are resilient in different narratives requires and merits a detailed study, first and foremost experimental.

The hypothesis is that stereotype resilience models are based on five constructs, each of them performs its own function in the adaptation of individual to expressive narratives. The first construct is extraversion dealing with forthcoming of positive events, the second one is neuroticism connected with avoidance of negative consequences, the third construct is conscientiousness involving constructive participation in the narrative, the fourth one is openness of experience, the fifth construct is friendliness presupposing tolerant attitude to social alliances and relations. 

To identify these and other narrative codes of the adaptive behavioural stereotypes resilience, it is necessary to measure experimentally cognitive ability of different cultures representatives to adapt to stressful and extreme conditions via choosing from each culture positive patterns of relationships with the environment that will help to avoid conflicts and tragic consequences from stress.

The purpose of the article is to represent the methodological procedure of various cultures stereotype resilience in expressive narratives study.

Research background

The theoretical fundamentals concerning stereotypes were analysed and successfully implemented in several empirical researches by the following scholars: Kapranov (2018), Korolyova (2020), Shutova (2016), Vasko et.al. (2019) The problem of resilience is observed in the recent studies of Fominova (2012), Leontiyev (2011), Loginova (2009), Lushyn (2012),  Maddi (2004), Masten (2001), where the efficient stress adaptation methods and the ability to incorporate the negative experience into one's view of the world with positive prospective have been explained. Without taking into account any strategies of coping with stress and building strong fundamentals of personal and national well-being, it is impossible to prevent the deteriorating impact of expressive narratives (such as crisis, pandemic, anticipated risks, etc.) on personal and all-national history.

Methodology

The research is based on the widespread use of general scientific methods and logical techniques, such as analysis and synthesis. They are used in the process of defining approaches to hardiness, resilience, behaviour stereotype resilience study; components, indicators, factors and mechanisms of the above-mentioned notions; cross-cultural aspects of behaviour stereotype in extreme narrative development study. Methods of deduction and induction are used in the study of specific components of the phenomena and their holistic characteristics; evaluation and description of extreme conditions by the sample. Methods of abstraction, comparison and generalization are the basis for identifying common and specific in hardiness, resilience and stereotype resilience study, determining the content of the phenomena and generalizing the concept of behaviour stereotype resilience of the representatives of various cultures.

The above-mentioned methods will also be used in the description and further implementation of the semiometric procedure of the psycholinguistic experiment planned to be conducted with the representatives of different cultures to identify narrative codes of stereotypes resilience of various nations’ representatives in extreme conditions.

The methodological procedure involves the implementation of six successive stages that will help: 1) to compile a list of personal characteristics of respondents involved in the survey; 2) to compile stimulus lists, i.e. markers of expressive narratives (by keywords); 3) to enter the compiled stimuli lists into the Google Forms with corresponding guidelines for respondents; 4) to perform a free associative experiment with the British, French, Germans and Ukrainians of different social groups through electronic communication; 5) to do the computer processing of the obtained results with the involvement of the information-analytical service STIMULUS; 6) to differentiate the degree of stereotypes resilience of separate social groups of each studied linguoculture in situations of expressive narratives, and differentiate linguistic cultures according to three types of their resilience and their degrees of adaptation to stressful phenomena.

In general, a new methodological procedure called “ethnosemiometry” was launched in the works of Prof. A. Korolyova’s students (2020), first in her doctoral dissertation, the research project leader M. Shutova (2016) developed and used ethnosemiometry to reconstruct ethnocultural stereotypical portraits of the English and Ukrainians by measuring the dominance of autostereotypical estimation of each ethnic group and its national character, mentality, traditions, patterns of behaviour in different situations, etc. O. Cherkhava (2015) perfected this method using the material of religious-agitation and religious-informative texts of the English, German and Ukrainian languages.

Results and discussion

Theoretical Overview of “Stereotype”, “Resilience” and “Stereotype Resilience” Notions

Recent research studies show that the problems of efficient stress adaptation methods and the ability to incorporate negative experience having its positive consequences into one's image of the world become more and more crucial.

In order to define both resilience and stereotype resilience notions properly, first and foremost the definition of stereotype must be given. At the beginning of the XXth century W. Lippmann (2011), the American sociologist, called learned and stable patterns of behaviour stereotypes and assumed that this phenomenon is next door to bias and sometimes has nothing to do with reality (Lippmann, 2011), but is resilient as a scientific and social construct.

American Psychological Association (2015) defines the stereotype as follows: “a set of cognitive generalisations (beliefs, expectations) about the qualities and characteristics of the members of a group or social category, which, like schemas, simplify and expedite perceptions and judgments, but they are often exaggerated, negative rather than positive, as well as resistant to revision even when perceivers encounter individuals with qualities that are not congruent with the stereotype” (APA, 2015, p. 1031).

Nevertheless, besides some negative stereotypes features, stereotypes play a great role in psychological self-preservation while protecting people and groups from an accelerated pace of total informatisation and psychological strain by providing some vital psychological and psycho-social functions, such as: saving personal or shared values (while incorporating stereotypes about the groups to which one belongs into one’s self-concept (autostereotyping) (APA, 2015), systematisation of abundant and complex information obtained from the outside, intergroup differentiation, maintaining positive group identity, and existing relationships, etc. According to the kernel-of-truth hypothesis (APA, 2015) stereotypes contain elements that accurately describe the qualities of the stereotyped group, despite all in all being exaggerated generalisations. 

It is the stereotypes which are the most resilient phenomena that root in human consciousness and form its protective functions. Stereotypes, as a matter of fact, are the products of individual human experience, later becoming common to a large number of people within (sub)cultures, and therefore acquire such a feature as resilience.

The studies of adaptation to stress-inducing factors of volatile, uncertain, complex and ambiguous (VUCA) environment in international psychological works have recently been given special priority. The outlined issues have aroused enthusiastic debates about the design of a proficit-focused approach to the analysis of the human stress coping strategies (Lushyn, 2010) and the search for new stereotypical patterns of behaviour after having experienced any kind of adversity.

Considering the resilience phenomenon as a core structure of maintaining either personal or national sustainable development it is necessary to shed light on the key points of resilience definition and structure.

American Psychological Association (2015) defines the notions of resilience as “the process and outcome of successfully adapting to difficult or challenging life experiences, especially through mental, emotional, and behavioural flexibility and adjustment to external and internal demands. A number of factors contribute to how well people adapt to adversities, predominant among them (a) the ways in which individuals view and engage with the world, (b) the availability and quality of social resources and (c) specific coping strategies. Psychological research demonstrates that the resources and skills associated with more positive adaptation (i.e., greater resilience) can be cultivated and practiced”.

Dr. P. T. Bartone (2017), professor of clinical psychology, Department of Counselling and Clinical Psychology, Teachers College, Columbia University, New York City, defines resilience as a stable trajectory for a healthy lifestyle after experiencing extremely unfavourable events, and adversities (Seery et al., 2011). The category of resilience is also interpreted by Dr. R. Yehuda, an expert in the field of trauma, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and resilience, Department of Psychiatry, James J. Peters Bronx School of Medicine, amidst the concept of reintegration of “Self”, which involves conscientious efforts, directed to the formation of a positive conduct pattern after experiencing stress disorder (Somvanshi ae al., 2019). 

Dr. Catherine Panter-Brick (2020), a medical anthropologist of Dpt. Of Anthropology, Yale University, emphasises the importance of constructing reliable structures in society that would provide people with the necessary information and tools for a relatively comfortable existence in stressful conditions and accordingly teach them cooperative models of resilient behaviour in stressful conditions, including isolation, catastrophes, pandemics, etc.

Sociocultural aspects of the above-mentioned phenomenon are equally important as they cover the problems of group resilience, reducing disaster risks at the national and community levels, national resilience (Canetti, Waismel-Manor et.al., 2013), comparative analysis of resilience in individualist and collectivist communities (Castro & Murray, 2010), etc.

Richardson (2002) admits, that “resilience is not only about overcoming a deeply stressful situation, but also coming out of such situation with "competent functioning". Resiliency allows a person to rebound from adversity as a strengthened and more resourceful person”.

According to the recent studies, resilience includes such components, as open communication, empathy, maintenance of a routine, self-efficacy, outcome expectancy, optimism, hope, self-esteem, risk propensity (Moenkemeyer, & Hoegl, 2012), self-confidence, self-esteem and self-concept (Siebert, 2005), etc.

Resilience phenomenon is often compared to the range of similar phenomena like passion              (Gumilev (2008)), viability and stamina   (Ananiyev (2001)), personal adaptive potential (Maklakov (2001)), personal potential (Leontiyev et al., 2006), and hardiness (Maddi, Harvey, & Khoshaba (2009)). But only “hardiness” is defined as a pathway to resilience.

The hardiness concept originates from American Hardiness Institute research under the guidance of Professor S. Maddi (2004). It was shown that hardiness is considered to be a pathway to resilience and it is responsible for enhancing performance and health under stress. Hardiness is considered as a pattern of attitudes and skills that helps in turning stressful circumstances from potential disasters into growth opportunities (Maddi, 2013). The initial hardy attitudes include commitment (being involved with people and events, as that seems the best way to find what is experientially interesting and meaningful (VS isolation and alienation), control (a struggle in order to have an influence on the outcomes of particular events, even if this may seem difficult in certain circumstances (VS powerlessness and passivity), and challenge (considering life experience developmentally fulfilling (VS expectation of easy comfort and security, feeling threatened by change); while among hardy skills – coping strategies, social support, relaxation, healthy lifestyle, and physical exercise are distinguished.

Behaviour stereotype resilience in expressive narratives can be defined as the persistence of a particular behaviour pattern in an emergency that helps to respond to a situation of uncertainty without delay in such a way as to maintain internal integrity and continue the path out of the crisis. Depending on how high the level of behaviour stereotype resilience is, the effectiveness of behavioural strategies in stressful situations and uncertainty conditions is determined.

This overview suggests the main focus of the above-mentioned phenomena of stereotype, resilience, hardiness and behaviour stereotype resilience analysis, which is: any human experience, even painful, can contain constructive, meaningful content, non-deficient nature. Crisis, stress and negative experience act as transitional phenomena and contribute to the logic of personal development. Development is a sign of health, while some disruptive events and, consequently, suffering are its integral parts. The opportunity of a subject (either a person or a nation) to get along with stressful conditions with the useful experience but not the burnout is stereotype resilience. The main focus shifts now to the idea of ecopsychological approach intending that there is no sense in restoring the previous level of mental health (before the stressful events), but it makes sense to integrate the experience of extreme response into new psychological constructs, new relationships, values, and actions (Lushyn, 2007).

In order to define the most efficient personal and national adversity coping strategies, based on stereotypes and stereotype resilience, it is necessary to approve coherent methodology of stereotype resilience study.

Methodological Procedure for Measuring Various Cultures Behaviour Stereotype Resilience 

The research methodology is based on the principle of ethnopsychological determinism. Linguistic culture is considered as a changing environment with various narratives, including expressive ones. Such narratives are the source of individual and collective resilience (psychomental stability) to stressful situations and, consequently, lead to the development of behavioural pattern stereotypes to adapt to the psychological crisis and overcome it.

This principle has become fundamental for various sciences: linguistics, axiology, mythology, folklore, ethnography, psychology, cultural semiotics, narratology, etc. It involves deep measurement (Korolyova (2020), Dronova (2012)) and epistemic understanding (Yermolenko (2006)) of such substances as “collective and individual consciousness”, “mentality”, “model of the world”, “image of the world”, “archetypes”, i.e. the entire culture with its types and forms (Baiburin (1993), Gurevich (1990), etc.). The fixators of these aspects are the stereotypes formed in each culture. The methodology for the analysis of stereotypes was first developed in the outstanding work of the American journalist and sociologist W. Lippman (2011) “Public Opinion”, in which the scientist defined the stereotype as “a special form of the world perception that affects the sphere of feelings at the subconscious level” and therefore is a viable construct of human consciousness.

Based on recent studies in the field of stereotypes (Bastian & Haslam, 2006; Haslam, Rothschild, & Ernst, 2002; Levy, Stroessner, & Dweck, 1998), which argue that the consequence of stereotype resilience is the development of essentialistic ideas about social groups, the methodological framework of the study involves the development of a new experimental ethnosemiometric approach to measure the degree of stereotype resilience of behavioural models in crisis narratives of different social groups of English, French, German and Ukrainian linguistic cultures. From this approach, a new hypothesis is formulated that each culture has its own degree of resilience under stress. 

Linguocultures with a low degree of resilience tend towards the society disorganization processes, while countries with a high degree of resilience quickly adapt and develop adequate behavioral patterns to overcome crises. These patterns are fixed in people's minds as stereotypes, whereas countries with redundant self-resilience function as dictators of the world that cause reduction of democracy within the society. We also assume that the country, in which the individual lives, leaves traces on his worldview, moulds in him certain forms of mental reactions and behaviour in expressive narratives that require resilience modelling to experience psychotraumatic events.

To verify the formulated hypothesis through the prism of the experimental-ethnosemiometric approach, a set of methods and techniques with their tools for conducting a free associative experiment with representatives of four linguistic cultures is provided.

In the first stage, it seems effective to use the method of direct questioning, which will help optimize the experiment, its aim being to compile a list of personal characteristics of respondents involved in the survey. The answers usually depend upon age, nationality, education, gender, profession, area of residence, affiliation with sub-cultural groups, etc., so these parameters are crucial for the initial stage of the experiment, which will be added to the electronic questionnaire Google Forms in four languages and offered to respondents (note that the questionnaire is anonymous) to react to them (preparation of so-called diagnostic test). 

The next stage is to utilize the computer program AntCont to compile stimulus lists, i.e. markers of expressive narratives (by keywords), which will be offered to respondents to get their immediate reactions to these stimuli. The third stage of the experimental study involves entering the compiled stimuli lists into the Google Forms with corresponding guidelines for respondents how to work with the proposed register of keywords. 

The fourth stage is the direct performance of a free associative experiment with the British, French, Germans and Ukrainians of different social groups through electronic communication. 

The fifth stage is the computer processing of the obtained results with the involvement of the information-analytical service STIMULUS (URL: http://stimulus.tools/uk/), which includes a program for constructing associative fields of respondents’ reactions to each stimulus provided. The advantages of this program are that it contains all the methodology of the psychosemantic method, and most importantly, the formulae of Yu. D. Apresyan (1974) for measuring the vividity index of each reaction, Ch. Osgood’s formulae for elaborating each reaction semantic scaling, etc. 

The sixth stage is focused on the procedure of comparison with its tools. The chosen number of criteria will differentiate the degree of stereotypes resilience of separate social groups of each studied linguoculture in situations of expressive narratives, and differentiate linguistic cultures according to three types of their resilience and their degrees of adaptation to stressful phenomena.

Conclusions

The represented theoretical overview of scientific works helped to define the core idea of stereotype resilience, having its crucial influence on both personal and national coping strategies in dealing with stressful conditions and maintaining well-being.

The following definitions have been given: 1) stereotype is considered as “a set of cognitive generalisations (beliefs, expectations) about the qualities and characteristics of the members of a group or social category, which, like schemas, simplify and expedite perceptions and judgments, but they are often exaggerated, negative rather than positive, as well as resistant to revision even when perceivers encounter individuals with qualities that are not congruent with the stereotype” (APA, 2015); 2) resilience is defined as “the process and outcome of successfully adapting to difficult or challenging life experiences, especially through mental, emotional, and behavioural flexibility and adjustment to external and internal demands (APA, 2015);  as a stable trajectory for a healthy lifestyle after experiencing extremely unfavourable events (Bartone, 2017) and adversities (Seery, 2010); 3) behaviour stereotype resilience in expressive narratives can be defined as the persistence of a particular behaviour pattern in an emergency that helps to respond to a situation of uncertainty without delay in such a way as to maintain internal integrity and continue the path out of the crisis.

To verify the formulated hypothesis through the prism of the experimental-ethnosemiometric approach, a set of methods and techniques with their tools for conducting a free associative experiment with representatives of four linguistic cultures is provided. It consists of six stages with different approaches and methods that will help to differentiate the degree of stereotypes resilience of separate social groups of each studied linguo-culture in situations of expressive narratives, and differentiate linguistic cultures according to three types of their resilience and their degrees of adaptation to stressful phenomena.