FACTORS OF VICTIMIZATION

Every person is object socialization, should become subject socialization may turn out to be victim unfavorable conditions of socialization.

Subject of socialization is a person who, having assimilated social norms and cultural values, is active, engages in self-development, and strives for self-realization in society.

Victim unfavorable conditions of socialization is a child experiencing the consequences of negative influence of an external nature (conditions of upbringing, various situations, the attacker's actions).

There are 3 types of victims:

1. Real victim. People with psychosomatic defects, disabled people, orphans, street children, children living in dysfunctional families.

2. Potential victims. People with borderline mental conditions (neuroses), migrants, children living in “at-risk” families (low-income, single-parent families, large families).

3. Latent victims. People whose conditions of existence, in principle, are not negative, but, nevertheless, do not allow them to fully realize their inherent inclinations (gifted children).

These are unfavorable conditions of socialization that can have a negative impact on human development.

Victimization is the process and result of a person becoming a victim of unfavorable conditions of socialization. Victimization is a two-way, external process. On the one hand, this is the influence on a person of a combination of negative external conditions and factors, on the other hand, this is the process of socio-psychological changes in a person’s personality under the influence of negative external conditions that shape the psychology of the victim in him.

Distinguish objective And subjective factors of victimization.

Objective factors of victimization.

· unfavorable natural and climatic conditions (harsh climatic conditions, unstable climate negatively affects human health and psyche, causing depression),

· unfavorable environmental features of the environment (pollution of the air, water, and land environments provokes the occurrence of chronic and cancerous diseases, and sometimes causes self-destructive behavior),

· another such factor may be the state-social system, which is characterized by a low level of economic development, the absence of a well-thought-out social policy in relation to vulnerable segments of the population - children, orphans, disabled people, foreign state policy leading to wars, deportation of social groups and entire nations.

· type of settlement (low cultural level of the population, the presence of antisocial subcultures in the city (for example, criminal structures, drug addicts, sects), demographic structure of the population).

· microsociety (family, peers). An unfavorable socio-psychological climate in the family or school complicates the process of socialization of the individual, etc.

Objective factors of victimization of Russians and Belarusians are considered (features of historical development, ethnocultural conditions, features of the social, political, economic life of peoples). The results of an empirical study of subjective factors of victimization of Russians and Belarusians (428 residents of Moscow and Minsk) are presented. The psychological characteristics of people that influence the ability to adapt were studied: the type of role victimization, life-meaning orientations, resilience, characteristics of the motivational sphere, the formation of overcoming behavior strategies. A comparative analysis of systemic manifestations of victimization among Russians and Belarusians was carried out.

Keywords: victimization, victim, objective factors of victimization, subjective factors of victimization

Formulation of the problem

Victimization is the process and result of the transformation of a person or group of people into victims of unfavorable conditions of socialization under the influence of objective and subjective factors [Kozyrev, 2008; Miller, 2006; Mudrik, 2000; Riveman, 2002].

This topic has become especially relevant in the “era of change.” The collapse of the Soviet Union, armed conflicts, disasters, crises and many other shocks of the perestroika period have a destructive impact and contribute to the victimization of large groups of people [Riveman, 2002; Mudrik, 2000; Hiroto, Seligman, 2001]. Along with this, mass migration from the former republics, the aggravation of numerous ethnic conflicts with the manifestation of elements of xenophobia, Russophobia and many other situations are considered to be objective factors of victimization of the peoples of the post-Soviet space [Miller, 2006; Mudrik, 2000; Surguladze, 2010]. These unfavorable conditions can serve as a kind of indicator of people’s victimization and identify potential victims.

Subjective factors of victimization are subtle, hidden, and therefore labor-intensive to study. These include the peculiarities of the mentality of a particular people, the psychological characteristics of people that influence the ability to adapt (meaningful orientations in life, resilience, characteristics of the motivational sphere, the formation of certain overcoming behavior strategies, and much more). Victimization, as D. Riveman rightly points out, combines dynamics (realization of victimization) and statics (already realized victimization), is a kind of materialization of subjective (personal) and objective (situational) victimization (victimogenic) potentials [Riveman, 2002, p. 80]. Awareness of this contributes to the most complete and adequate analysis of the process of victimization of entire groups of people.

However, at the moment, most studies are aimed primarily at finding objective causes of victimization; the most important psychological component of this process is missed. The issues of subjective and objective factors of victimization of ethnic groups have been poorly studied. No comparative studies of victimization and the causes that give rise to it have been found among Russians and Belarusians, although there are many unproven “touches on the portrait” of these two peoples that have not been empirically confirmed.

Firstly, this is due to the fact that in science, when developing the problem of victimization, the emphasis still shifts towards criminal and extreme situations that give rise to potential victims of crimes and accidents. Although questions of psychologization of the problem posed have been asked since the time of E. Kraepelin (1900) [Krepelin, 2007]. K. Jung (1914) [Jung, 1994], A. Adler (1926) [Adler, 1997], I. Pavlov (1916) [Pavlov, 2001], L. Vygotsky (1924) [Vygotsky, 2003] and others. Modern experts in the field of victimology and criminology constantly write about this [Riveman, 2002; etc.], acutely aware of the lack of psychological development of this topic. Secondly, the problem of the specific manifestations of victimization and the reasons that give rise to it in various economic, political, and cultural conditions until recently was “closed” for discussion in broad scientific circles. Thirdly, the study of victimization of Russians and Belarusians seems to be a rather difficult task due to the similarity of the genotype, culture, language, and common historical development of these peoples.

Subjective and objective factors of victimization of Russians and Belarusians

To date, relatively favorable preconditions have developed in psychology for the study of subjective and objective factors of victimization of Russians and Belarusians.

The work of foreign psychologists devoted to the study of the “mysterious Russian soul” has become available for analysis [Erikson, 2000]. Back in 1950, E. Erikson, in his “conceptual travel notes” (E. Erikson. Childhood and Society), raised the question of the Russian soul as a “swaddled” soul. The tradition of tight swaddling in Russian families was viewed from a historical and political perspective, as part of a system that helped maintain and prolong the Russian combination of slavery with the “soul” [Erikson, 2000], thereby emphasizing the indestructible ability of the Russian person to be a victim.

Works by Belarusian historians and cultural scientists appeared, in which the motives of ethnic victimization were more clearly defined, contributing to the imposition and consolidation of the victimized properties of the Belarusian people, including helplessness, “pamyarkonast” (passivity, reluctance to act), inferiority, “softness,” “narrow-mindedness,” “ downtroddenness", inferiority, fear, etc. [Bukhovets, 2009; Dubyanetsky, 1993; Litvin, 2002].

Psychology has accumulated studies of the specific characteristics of the Soviet person [Rotenberg, 2000; Fromm, 2000], on the basis of which scientists write about the emerging victim mentality during the period of totalitarian state control over all aspects of the life of Soviet society. Ideas about the influence of the type of society (modernized or totalitarian) on the emergence of one or another type of victim have also appeared in modern domestic social pedagogy [Mudrik, 2000]. In recent decades, many sociological studies have been carried out to identify the socio-political, socio-cultural conditions for the development of Belarusians and Russians [Nikolyuk, 2009; Sikevich, 2007; Sokolova, 2010; Titarenko, 2003] and their influence on the development and maintenance of victimization.

Modern psychology has shown the influence of various situations (from everyday situations to situations of extreme complexity) on people’s victim behavior [Osukhova, 2005], which indicates that modern people do not possess certain qualities that ensure their effective functioning. Using the example of the Chernobyl disaster, the process of formation of the “eternal victim” syndrome [Saenko, 1999] among the Slavic peoples is considered.

Interest in the problems of the national character of Belarusians and Russians in the post-perestroika period has revived [Bobkov, 2005; Mnatsakanyan, 2006; Naumenko, 2008; Pezeshkian, 1999; Titarenko, 2003], which emphasize the “paradoxical nature” [Mnatsakanyan, 2006; Titarenko, 2003], multiculturalism [Pezeshkian, 1999], “transculturalism” [Bobkov, 2005] of the mentality of two peoples.

Purpose of the study

This paper examines the combination of subjective and objective factors of victimization of Russians and Belarusians.

1. Scientific works are analyzed that, to one degree or another, cover the objective factors of victimization of Russians and Belarusians (micro- and macrofactors), which include features of historical development, ethnocultural conditions, features of the social, political, economic life of peoples.

2. An empirical study of subjective factors of victimization of Russians and Belarusians is described (psychological characteristics of people influencing the ability to adapt), to which we include: type of role victimization, life-meaning orientations, resilience, characteristics of motivation, level of formation of overcoming behavior strategies.

3. The results of a comparative analysis of systemic manifestations of victimization among Belarusians and Russians are presented, taking into account the fact that subjective victimogenic factors are sensitive to various phenomena of public, social, economic and political life, in particular in Russia and Belarus.

Methods

The study involved 428 people, residents of two capitals - Moscow and Minsk. The subsamples were balanced by gender, age, education, and social status. The age of the men who took part in the study ranged from 20 to 40 years (average age - 27 years). The age of women is from 20 to 43 years (average age is 28 years). The sample included students of various specialties, employees, teachers, educators, military personnel, medical workers, workers, etc.

Questionnaires were presented both individually and in small groups. The duration of the study procedure ranged from 20 to 30 minutes. The study was conducted from December 2010 to February 2011.

To study the subjective factors of victimization of Russians and Belarusians, the following methods were used: the “Type of Role Victimization” questionnaire by M. Odintsova [Odintsova, 2010]; Vitality test by D. Leontiev, E. Rasskazova [Leontiev, Rasskazova, 2006]; Test of life-meaning orientations (SLO) by D. Leontiev [Leontiev, 2006]; methodology for studying the motivational sphere of personality by V. Milman [Milman, 2005]; questionnaire “Types of behavior and reactions in stressful situations” by T. Kryukova [Kryukova, 2005].

When processing the data, the statistical software package Statistica 8.0 was used.

Results and discussion

Role victimization is the predisposition of an individual, due to specific subjective and unfavorable objective factors, to produce one or another type of victim behavior, expressed in the position or status of the victim, as well as in their dynamic embodiment, that is, in the game or social roles of the victim [Odintsova, 2010]. Between the examined groups of Russians and Belarusians, using the t-Student test, significant differences were identified on the scales of role victimization (see Table 1).

Table 1
Comparative analysis of subjective factors of victimization of Russians and Belarusians

Notes t - Student's test; p - level of significance of differences.

A comparative analysis of the data showed that the playing role of the victim as a unit of analysis of free, situational, mutually beneficial and easily accepted by members of interpersonal interaction role relationships, consistent with the internal characteristics of the victimized individual (infancy, manipulativeness, helplessness, etc.), which are based on hidden motivation and harmoniously fitting into the situation being played out, is more expressed in the behavior of Belarusians than Russians (t = 1.67, p = 0.04). These results are consistent with the data we obtained in a study conducted in 2009 (N = 525), which also found significant differences using the Student t test at the 0.02 significance level. A detailed analysis is presented in the work of M.A. Odintsova, E.M. Semenova “Overcoming strategies of behavior of Belarusians and Russians” [Odintsova, Semenova, 2011].

Belarusians, more often than Russians, resort to identifying themselves with the victim, which leads to the assimilation of the latter’s personal meanings. This means that the victim role motivates Belarusians to use external resources to defend an internal problem. The main characteristics of the playing role of the victim include infantilism, fear of responsibility, rent-seeking attitudes, manipulative skills, helplessness, etc. It should be noted the special plasticity and ingenuity of the playing role of the victim, which allows one to adapt quite “successfully” in any conditions. However, such adaptation, focused on conservative and regressive strategies, creates only the illusion of its success.

In addition, our study showed that the position of the victim, as the embodiment of the game role of the victim, a persistent formation characterized by a set of entrenched rental attitudes, which, with increasing strength of the game role, are subject to gradual destruction, is also more pronounced among Belarusians, in contrast to Russians (t = 1.64, p = 0.05). All characteristics characteristic of people with the playing role of the victim are preserved, consolidated, and acquire an expressive character. Belarusians, to a greater extent than Russians, tend to demonstrate their suffering and misfortunes, complain, blame others, believe that life is unfair to them, but at the same time remain passive and helpless observers of what is happening.

Analysis of the results using the “Type of Role Victimization” method showed that the position of the victim and its dynamic embodiment (the playing role of the victim) are more expressed in the behavior of Belarusians. These results are fully consistent with the data of sociological studies of Belarusian colleagues G. Sokolova, L. Titarenko, M. Fabrikant [Sokolova, 2010; Titarenko, 2003; Fabrikant, 2008]. Thus, according to G. Sokolova, many Belarusians are mainly focused on paternalistic expectations of help, benefits, compensation, dependency, doing nothing, and, at best, searching for forms of life activity that allow them to maintain the achieved level with minimal costs [Sokolova, 2010, p. 40]. Social and political life causes indifference among a significant part of Belarusians; for the most part they prefer “the position of a critical and evaluative observer” [Fabrikant, 2008, p. 260]. “Abyyakavast” (indifference) as a national trait of Belarusians is emphasized by most modern researchers [Bobkov, 2005; Sokolova, 2010; Titarenko, 2003], and this is considered one of the components of victimization.

The pronounced level of role victimization among Belarusians can be explained by sociopolitical reasons. For example, I. Bibo [Bibo, 2004]; A. Miller [Miller, 2006]; V. Surguladze [Surguladze, 2010] and others are of the opinion that the development of “victim syndrome of a small nation” [Surguladze, 2010, p. 85] can contribute to a long life surrounded by stronger and more active peoples, the lack of their own statehood, a lack of national identity and national dignity [Ibid]. I. Litvin believes that a significant place in the system of instilling an inferiority complex among Belarusians is occupied by science, which represented Belarusians as “narrow-minded and backward lapotniks,” and Belarus as “one of the poorest and most backward regions of Tsarist Russia” [Litvin, 2002].

The system of suppression that remains in Belarus only aggravates the situation. Numerous studies have proven that any suppression prevents adequate problem resolution. The inability to overcome situations of suppression over a long period of time creates helplessness for entire social groups. The helplessness of Belarusians is a phenomenon that is included in Belarusian culture and becomes a national trait. Most Belarusians come to terms with their fate, passively submit to it and no longer even try to look for a way out. Sociological polls of public opinion on certain social, economic and political problems only confirm this [Nikolyuk, 2009; Sokolova, 2010; Titarenko, 2003]. However, as Yu. Chernyavskaya writes, the shortcomings of the people are a continuation of their merits [Chernyavskaya, 2000]. Some indifference to what is happening, lack of conflict, and passivity of Belarusians are continued in high tolerance and their historically developed high adaptability to changes in living conditions [Titarenko, 2003].

The playing role of the victim, which has become a way of life for Belarusians, really contributes to adaptation, which is somewhat conservative and regressive in nature. There is a stagnation of personal resources, behavior is characterized by inaction, indifference, avoidance, but allows the people to “survive” in any conditions. Perhaps such a situational method of adaptation is justified for the current difficult situation in Belarus and is quite suitable for this amazingly peace-loving and adaptive people. This method helps to avoid disorganization, instability, instability, inconsistency and disorder in the organization of their lives.

For a more accurate analysis of the subjective reasons for the psychological victimization of Russians and Belarusians, we carried out a comparative analysis using the resilience test [Leontyev, Rasskazova, 2006], which showed that Russians are more involved in what is happening and open to experience than Belarusians (t = -1. 64, p = 0.05). Clear differences between Belarusians and Russians were also found on the “Risk Taking” scale (t = -2.32, p = 0.01). In general, Belarusians scored lower on the resilience test than Russians. Significant differences were obtained using Student's t-test at a significance level of 0.02. Belarusians are more likely to strive for comfort and security, dreams of a measured, quiet life, etc. Perhaps these needs (comfort, safety, etc.) do not find their satisfaction in the real life of modern Belarusians, perhaps this is due to their national character. In the studies of Z. Sikevich, S. Ksenzova [Sikevich, 2007; Ksenzov, 2010] shows that Belarusians are calm, conservative, peaceful, they are characterized by a tendency to compromise, they reject such qualities as risk-seeking and conflict. O. Batraeva continues the list of national qualities of Belarusians, arguing that the prudence of Belarusians does not allow them to take risks [Batraeva, 2010].

Russians, to a greater extent than Belarusians, are involved in interaction with the outside world, experience involvement in life events, evaluate themselves positively, are interested in what is happening, and are ready to take risks, even if success is not guaranteed. This is confirmed by research by colleagues who have shown that the modern Russian has become completely different, the absolute opposite of what I. Pavlov [Pavlov, 2001], E. Erikson [Erikson, 2000], and classics of Russian literature (M. Gorky) once wrote about , F. Dostoevsky, A. Chekhov, etc.), researchers of the first perestroika decade [Burno, 1999; Pezeshkian, 1999].

In search of the Russian national character, a large-scale study was conducted by a group of scientists in 2009. The authors of [Allik et al., 2009] compiled a picture of modern Russian and made the following conclusion. A typical Russian is a person who rarely experiences depression or feelings of inferiority [Ibid]. This is a strong-willed, hasty in decision-making, dominant person. The most “convex” [Allik et al., p. 14], as the researchers write, the characteristic of a typical Russian that distinguishes him from other nations is openness, which was confirmed in our study (on the “Involvement” scale of the vitality test, Russians scored higher than Belarusians).

Using the method of life-meaning orientations [Leontiev, 2006], significant differences were also found between Belarusians and Russians on the “Result” scale (t = -2.54, p = 0.005) and in the general level of life-meaning orientation (life-meaning orientations as the highest level of personal self-realization) (t = -2.58, p = 0.005). Belarusians are not satisfied with their self-realization and consider their lives to be insufficiently productive. These data are supplemented by indicators of some scales of V. Milman’s methodology [Milman, 2005]. Belarusians, to a lesser extent than Russians, fulfill their needs for a sense of usefulness and significance of their activities (t = -2.42, p = 0.007), which emphasizes their awareness of the meaninglessness and uselessness of their self-realization.

Further analysis of the data obtained using V. Milman’s method showed that Belarusians, to a lesser extent than Russians, tend to strive for the general (t = -2.09, p = 0.018) and for the creative (t = -2.19, p = 0.014). ) activity. The motivation for general activity, reflecting energy, the desire to apply one’s energy and skills in a particular field of activity, endurance, perseverance, and possibly opposition [Cited from: Milman, 2005] is much less expressed among Belarusians than among Russians. Similar conclusions can be drawn about the motivation of creative activity, which reflects the desire of people to use their energy and capabilities in the area where they can get some creative results [Ibid]. These indicators are to some extent consistent with monitoring data (2002-2008) by G. Sokolova. Thus, the value of interesting and meaningful work is not becoming more popular among Belarusians. It is isolated by only 9.7%. The values ​​of good earnings continue to be in first place for Belarusians (86.9%). During the entire monitoring period, such values ​​as compliance of work with abilities fall catastrophically (from 73.2% in 2002 to 17.5% in 2007); initiative and relative independence (from 74% in 2002 to 27.9% in 2007) [Sokolova, 2010, p. 38].

At the same time, our study showed that Belarusians, to a greater extent than Russians, express status-prestige motivation (t = 3.52, p = 0.0002), that is, motives for maintaining livelihoods and comfort in the social sphere. It, according to V. Milman, reflects the subject’s desire to receive the attention of others, prestige, position in society, influence and power [cited from: Milman, 2005]. We can only assume that among Belarusians, unlike Russians, these needs are not sufficiently realized, and therefore urgently require their satisfaction. Although G. Sokolova’s monitoring data only partially confirms our assumptions. Thus, twice as many Belarusians (68%) began to strive for good working conditions and comfort compared to 2002. The desire of Belarusians for prestigious, high-status work has increased somewhat (from 6.8% in 2002 to 13.5% in 2007) [Sokolova, 2010], but it is far from being in first place in terms of importance. These needs: “to occupy a prestigious position in society,” “to have comfortable conditions,” but at the same time not to show any initiative or activity, once again confirm L. Titarenko’s idea about the “paradoxical nature” [Titarenko, 2003] of the consciousness of modern Belarusians.

Next, an analysis was made of the behavior strategies of Russians and Belarusians overcoming stress, which revealed that Belarusians, more often than Russians, in stressful situations resort to such a partially adaptive coping-stress behavioral strategy as avoidance (t = 1.67, p = 0.048). They are characterized by care and distraction from problems. They prefer not to think about difficulties, using various forms of distraction, including social ones. At the same time, Belarusians are more likely than Russians to use this type of maladaptive coping, such as emotion-oriented (t = 2.44, p = 0.007). More often than Russians, when faced with difficult life situations, they focus on suffering, tend to immerse themselves in their pain and pessimistically assess what is happening. These data fully confirmed what we obtained in a similar study in 2009, which also revealed significant differences in the choice of avoidance-oriented coping and emotion-oriented coping by Belarusians and Russians according to Student’s t-test at a significance level of 0.01 and 0.039 respectively. A detailed analysis is presented in the work of M.A. Odintsova, E.M. Semenova “Overcoming strategies of behavior of Belarusians and Russians” [Odintsova, Semenova, 2011].

conclusions

The results of a comparative study of subjective and objective factors of victimization of Russians and Belarusians allow us to conclude the following.

1. Analysis of the subjective factors of victimization showed that the playing role of the victim is becoming the “favorite” way of adaptation of Belarusians. Such adaptation is somewhat conservative and regressive in nature, stagnation of personal resources occurs, and the desire for a higher level and quality of life is blocked. The features of victimization of Belarusians are gradually emerging more clearly (indifference to what is happening; fear of taking risks; avoidance, avoidance of problems and difficulties; reluctance to act, show activity and initiative; dissatisfaction with one’s self-realization and productivity of one’s life; desire for comfort, etc.). Rental attitudes are activated, expressed in a utilitarian approach to one’s plight; in feeling especially victimized and helpless; in focusing mental activity on suffering; in helplessness, passivity and indifference (“abyakness”). At the same time, the adaptation of Belarusians through the playing role of the victim is historically and psychologically completely justified, because it allows the Belarusian people to “survive” in any conditions, helps to avoid disorganization, instability, instability, and inconsistency in life.

2. Objective factors of victimization include features of historical development, ethnocultural conditions, features of the social, economic and political life of peoples. The objective macrofactor of the victimization of Belarusians is the historical development of the people. Considered one of the “most backward regions of Tsarist Russia” [Litvin, 2002], Belarus has long been endowed with the stigma of inferiority, inferiority, and, in a milder version, “long-suffering” [Ibid]. All this only supports and perpetuates the victim syndrome in modern Belarusians. Today’s somewhat condescending and conniving attitude towards the Belarusian people as a “younger brother” on the part of Russia, on the one hand, can be compared with “improper upbringing”, which contributes to the maintenance of an old inferiority complex and honing the skills to manipulate a stronger and more developed environment (“senior brother"). On the other hand, turning the “little brother” into a helpless, infantile victim turns out to be mutually beneficial for both parties. Thus, a weak and helpless “victim” in difficult life situations, as a rule, arouses sympathy and can claim unimaginable compensation. At the same time, the “elder brother,” in order to overcome feelings of guilt and maintain his superiority, is forced to compensate for any losses.

These socio-political collisions are similar to the process reflected in the famous triangle of E. Bern, which clearly represents mutually beneficial, but unconstructive relationships between the victim, the savior, the aggressor [Bern, 2008]. In addition, the system of suppression that has survived in Belarus prevents the manifestation of activity, creates indifference, passivity, humility and creates favorable conditions for maintaining the “eternal victim” syndrome [Saenko, 1999] in Belarusians. Against the backdrop of all this, the Chernobyl tragedy, which at one time strengthened the stigma of victimhood among Belarusians, seems to be a completely harmless factor in victimization.

3. Objective microfactors of victimization include the ethnic self-awareness of the people. Ethnic self-awareness as an idea of ​​one’s own essence, one’s position in the system of interactions with other peoples, one’s role in the history of mankind, including awareness of the right to independence and the creation of an original ethnic culture [cited by Chernyavskaya, 2000], is more blurred among Belarusians than the Russians. Russians have always considered themselves a great people, capable of changing the world; This perception is supported by the greatest inventions, discoveries, victories, and achievements.

In all analyzed sources without exception [ Batraeva, 2010; Bobkov, 2005; Bukhovets, 2009; Dubyanetsky, 1993; Litvin, 2002; Naumenko, 2008; Nosevich, 1998; Titarenko, 2003; Fabrikant, 2008; Chernyavskaya, 2000 ] The lack of national self-awareness of Belarusians is designated as one of the main problems of the Belarusian nation, which is still forced to defend the right to exist. The lack of their own language (“Trasyanka”, which Belarusians do not want to speak), blurred nationality, vagueness of the national idea, and much more are connected with historical processes. The formation of the Belarusian nation took place exclusively in a multi-ethnic, as Yu. Chernyavskaya writes (multicultural, multilingual, multi-confessional) [Chernyavskaya, 2000] society, which cannot but affect national self-awareness. The Belarusian “denationalized” people, deprived of national identity, national self-awareness, feel like a “lonely and helpless cog” [Litvin, 2002]. In such a situation of disunity, “the nation’s potential is close to zero” [Ibid].

Conclusion

Subjective factors of victimization are sensitive to various phenomena in the social life of the population of Russia and Belarus. In this work, we clarified the results of a previous study [Odintsova, Semenova, 2011]. Based on the results of the analysis, both studies revealed some patterns in the manifestation of certain aspects of victimization among Russians and Belarusians.

Significant differences between the samples of Russians and Belarusians, obtained on the “playing role of the victim” scale, are explained by many objective micro- and macrofactors of victimization - ethnocultural conditions, features of historical development, social, political, economic life of peoples. There are pronounced differences between Belarusians and Russians in their preferences for certain coping strategies of behavior in stressful situations. Belarusians, more often than Russians, resort to avoidance-oriented coping and emotion-oriented coping.

Some distancing and detachment from problems may be associated with the peculiarities of the national character of Belarusians, their passivity, peacefulness and tolerance. Belarusians are more pessimistic than Russians in assessing what is happening and immersing themselves in their suffering. The “suffering” complex, conditioned historically, intensifies in stressful situations among Belarusians.

In general, the characteristics identified in this study, together with previously obtained data [Odintsova, Semenova, 2011], made it possible to more clearly identify the subjective factors of victimization of Belarusians and Russians.

Adler A. Science of living / trans. with him. A. Yudina. Kyiv: Port-Royal, 1997. pp. 57-62.

Allik Yu. , Myttus R. , Realo A. , Pullmann H. , Trifonova A. , McCray R. , Meshcheryakov B. Construction of national character: personality traits attributed to a typical Russian // Cultural-historical psychology. 2009. N 1. P. 2-18.

Batraeva O. Belarus as a sociocultural type in the context of the Eastern Slavs // Belarusian Thought. 2010. N 2. P. 102-107.

Bern E. Games People Play. People who play games / trans. from English: L. Ionin. M.: Eksmo, 2008.

Bibo I. About the disasters and squalor of small Eastern European states // Selected essays and articles: collection. Art. / lane from Hungarian N. Nagy. M.: Three squares, 2004. pp. 155-262.

Bobkov I. Borderland ethics: transculturality as the Belarusian experience // Crossroads. Journal of Eastern European Borderland Studies. 2005. N 3/4. pp. 127-137.

Burno M. The strength of the weak. M.: PRIOR, 1999.

Bukhovets O. Historical description of post-Soviet Belarus: demythologization, “remythologization” // National histories in the post-Soviet space: collection. Art. M.: AIRO XXI, 2009. pp. 15-31.

Vygotsky L. Fundamentals of defectology. St. Petersburg: Lan, 2003.

Dubyanetsky E. The features of slavery are gradually disappearing. The mentality of Belarusians: an attempt at historical and psychological analysis // Belarusian Thought. 1993. N 6. P. 29-34.

Kozyrev G.“Victim” as a phenomenon of socio-political conflict (theoretical and methodological analysis): abstract. dis. ... Doctor of Sociol. Sci. M., 2008.

Kraepelin E. Introduction to the psychiatric clinic / trans. with him. M.: BINOM, 2007.

Kryukova T. Research methodology and adaptation of the diagnostic questionnaire for coping behavior // Psychological diagnostics. 2005. N 2. P. 65-75.

Ksenzov S. Features of the formation of basic institutions of small nations (on the example of Belarus) // Journal of Institutional Research. 2010. T. 2. N 3. P. 144-152.

Leontyev D., Rasskazova E. Vitality test. M.: Smysl, 2006.

Leontyev D. Test of life-meaning orientations. M.: Smysl, 2000.

Litvin I. Lost World. Or little-known pages of Belarusian history [Electronic resource]. Minsk, 2002. URL: http://lib.ru/POLITOLOG/litwin.txt (access date: 08/22/2011).

Milman V. Motivation for creativity and growth. Structure. Diagnostics. Development. Theoretical, experimental and applied research on the dialectics of creation and consumption. M.: Mireya and Co., 2005.

Miller A. The Romanov Empire and nationalism. M.: New Literary Review, 2006.

Mnatsakanyan M. Paradoxical man in a paradoxical world // Sociological Research. 2006. N 6. P. 13-19.

Mudrik A.V. Social pedagogy / ed. V.A. Slastenina. M.: Academy, 2000.

Naumenko L. Ethnic identity of Belarusians: content, dynamics, regional and socio-demographic specifics // Belarus and Russia: social sphere and sociocultural dynamics: collection. scientific works Minsk: IAC, 2008. pp. 111-132.

Nikolyuk S. Belarusian mirror // Bulletin of public opinion. 2009. N 2. P. 95-102.

Nosevich V. Belarusians: the formation of an ethnos and the “national idea” // Belarus and Russia: societies and states: collected articles. M.: Human Rights, 1998. P. 11-30.

Odintsova M. The many faces of the victim or a little about the great manipulation. M.: Flinta, 2010.

Odintsova M., Semenova E. Overcoming behavior strategies of Belarusians and Russians // Cultural-historical psychology. 2011. N 3. P. 75-81.

Osukhova N. Psychological assistance in difficult and extreme situations. M.: Academy, 2005.

Pavlov I. Freedom reflex. St. Petersburg: Peter, 2001.

Pezeshkian X. Therapeutic relationships and Russian mentality from a transcultural point of view // First World Conference on Positive Psychotherapy: abstracts. (St. Petersburg, May 15-19). St. Petersburg, 1997. pp. 47-74.

Perls F. Inside and outside the garbage can / per. from English St. Petersburg: Petersburg XXI century, 1995.

Riveman D. Criminal victimology. St. Petersburg: Peter, 2002.

Rotenberg V. Self-image and behavior. Jerusalem: Mahanaim, 2000.

Saenko Yu. Post-Chernobyl phase of victims: self-rescue, self-rehabilitation, self-defense, self-preservation. Kyiv: Institute of Sociology NASU, 1999. pp. 473-490.

Sikevich Z. Russians, Ukrainians and Belarusians: together or apart? // Sociological research. 2007. N 9. P. 59-67.

Sokolova G. Socio-economic situation in Belarus from the perspective of cultural trauma // Sociological Research. 2010. N 4. P. 33-41.

Surguladze V. Facets of Russian self-awareness. Empire, national consciousness, messianism and Byzantineism in Russia. M.: W.Bafing, 2010.

Titarenko L.“Paradoxical Belarusian”: contradictions of mass consciousness // Sociological studies. 2003. N 12. P. 96-107.

White S., McAllister Y. Belarus, Ukraine and Russia: East or West? / lane from English D. Volkova and A. Morgunova // Bulletin of public opinion. 2008. N 3. P. 14-26.

Fabricant M. Narrative analysis of national identity as a theoretical construct and empirical phenomenon // Collection of scientific works of the Academy of Education and Science. Minsk: APA, 2008. pp. 255-268.

Fromm E. Can a person prevail? / lane from English S. Barabanova et al. M.: AST, 2000.

Ziering D. Learned helplessness and life events // Bulletin of the Institute of Psychology and Pedagogy. 2003. Vol. 1. pp. 155-159.

Chernyavskaya Yu. Folk culture and national traditions. Minsk: Belarus, 2000.

Erickson E. Childhood and society / trans. from English A. Alekseeva. St. Petersburg: Summer Garden, 2000.

Jung K. Problems of the soul of our time / trans. A. Bokovnikova // The problem of the soul of modern man. M.: Progress, 1994. pp. 293-316.

Goffman E. Stigma: Notes on the Management of Spoiled Identity. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1963.

Hiroto D., Seligman M. Generality of learned helplessness in man // Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1975. Vol. 31. P. 311-327.

HirotoD.,Seligman M. Ethnopolitical warfare: Causes, consequences, and possible solutions. Washington, DC: APA Press, 2001.

About the author

Odintsova Maria Antonovna.Candidate of Psychological Sciences, Associate Professor, Department of Social Psychology, Faculty of Psychology. University of the Russian Academy of Education, st. Krasnobogatyrskaya, 10, 107564 Moscow, Russia.
Email: This email address is being protected from spambots. You must have JavaScript enabled to view it.

Citation link

Style psystudy.ru
Odintsova M.A. Subjective and objective factors of victimization of Russians and Belarusians. Psychological Research, 2012, No. 1(21), 5. http://psystudy.ru. 0421200116/0005.

GOST 2008
Odintsova M.A. Subjective and objective factors of victimization of Russians and Belarusians // Psychological studies. 2012. No. 1(21). P. 5. URL: http://psystudy.ru (date of access: hh.mm.yyyy). 0421200116/0005.

[The last digits are the state registration number of the article in the Register of Electronic Scientific Publications of the FSUE STC "Informregister". The description corresponds to GOST R 7.0.5-2008 "Bibliographic reference". Date of access in the format “date-month-year = hh.mm.yyyy” - the date when the reader accessed the document and it was available.]

Gadzhieva A. A. Magomedov A.K.

FORENSICS Gadzhieva A. A., Magomedov A. K. The article is devoted to the analysis of victimogenic factors that cause serious violent crimes against the individual. The authors state the importance of identifying the latter for victimological prevention of this type of crime, and outline the range of crimes that have been the object of victimological study. Victimization in the work is considered as a process of transforming a person from a potential victim into a real one (at the mass and group levels), taking this into account, its main factors are identified. Particular emphasis is placed on regional nuances of victimological factors that determine serious violent crime.

Crimes against individuals continue to cause particular concern and concern on the part of law enforcement officers, although their number in the Russian Federation as a whole maintains relative downward trends. Thus, according to available official data, for 11 months of 2015, 2163.4 thousand crimes were registered, or 8.4% more than in the same period last year. Against the backdrop of an increase in crime rates in general, the share of serious and especially serious crimes in its structure decreased from 24.5% in January - November 2014 to 22.1%. Similar trends can be traced at the regional level. Thus, in the Republic of Dagestan in 2013, 14,003 crimes were registered, which is 2.6% more than in 2012 (13,647). Despite this, the number of crimes per 100 thousand population (478) is 1.5 times less than the average for the North Caucasus Federal District, and 3 times less than the national average (North Caucasus Federal District -750; Russia - 1539). The growth rate of grave and especially grave crimes has noticeably decreased (4034; +0.4%), and their share in the total array of registered criminal acts has decreased and does not exceed 29%.

Despite the outward appearance of “prosperity,” the change in qualitative crime indicators towards deterioration is of serious concern. Among them, the following are noted: the growth of “motiveless” attacks against the individual, the increasing cruelty of their commission, crimes increasingly accompanied by cynicism, mockery of the individual, the proportion of group crimes is growing, the tendency of their feminization is increasing, the degree of their severity is increasing, the victimization of “atypical” victims is growing (children and the elderly), etc.

The greatest damage to society is caused by serious crimes committed against the individual, and, above all, against life, health and other most important rights. In this regard, within the framework of this work, the research analysis is devoted to the most dangerous types of serious crimes against the person. They not only cause enormous damage to the most important values ​​in a civilized society, but also have many common criminologically and victimologically significant characteristic features and characteristics that allow them to be separated into certain groups, categories, categories.

In criminology, among grave and especially grave crimes against the person, it is customary to distinguish the following groups:

Attacks against life, health, bodily and sexual integrity of the person (murder, causing grievous harm to human health, rape);

Attacks against freedom (kidnapping, unlawful imprisonment, human trafficking, use of slave labor).

The common starting point for both groups is the ability to control these types of crime, influencing them not only through a set of means of criminological prevention, but also through measures of victimological influence. The multifaceted nature of victimological influence and its wide possibilities determine the significance and necessity of its proper organization in the prevention of serious violent crimes against the individual. In the system of victimological influence, important means of prevention are measures aimed at eliminating, minimizing and reducing the factors of victimization of the studied categories of crime. At the same time, victimization is considered by the authors as the process of becoming individuals and human communities (one can speak at the level of the entire population) as victims of crime, or rather, their acquisition of victimizing qualities. Hence, the factors of victimization are defined as a set of objective and subjective circumstances that determine or contribute to the processes of transformation of certain social groups, individuals, and populations into victims of crime.

Factors of victimization of grave and especially grave crimes against the person can be considered at the general and special levels.

Common victimization factors for serious crimes against the individual were the hardening of morals, the marginalization and lumpenization of significant sections of the population, an increase in stressful situations, and the weakening of traditional forms of social control.

At a special level, it is customary to identify specific factors of victimization that are characteristic of social processes and interpersonal relationships in the country as a whole, or in a particular region, taking into account its specifics.

In relation to the crimes under consideration, perhaps the main factor in victimization has become the decadent moral and psychological atmosphere that has developed in recent years, which has been observed in the social environment.

Dissatisfaction with everything that happens in the country, injustice that flourishes in the field of social welfare and protection of people's interests, low, if not beggarly, living standards for millions, on the one hand, preaching the immorality of consumerism, sex, violence in the media, with on the other hand, all this embitters people, causing emotional stress and quarrels, as a result of which many violent crimes are committed in which the victims are the weaker and less protected.

Social disadvantage and social vulnerability are one of the most important factors of victimization in Russian reality today. According to researchers, it is in the lower and marginal strata that a stable tendency towards antisocial behavior manifests itself, where it is difficult to see the difference between the criminal and the victim; they, as a rule, have similar social deformations and behavioral stereotypes. Thus, according to Abeltsev, victims from a marginal environment are characterized by: “selfish habits, loss of a sense of responsibility, indifference to the problems of other people, cynicism. They are characterized by weakened feelings of shame, duty, conscience, as well as lack of restraint and conflict, rudeness, aggressiveness, deceit, hypocrisy, lack of education, bad manners.

The process of victimization is directly related to the standard of living and income of a person. Victimization of citizens is in a non-linear relationship to their standard of living. People with low incomes are the most victimized; the middle class is the least victimized; victimization begins to increase as the average level of profitability is exceeded. The very wealthy are failing to reduce their high levels of victimization, despite significant precautions.” People with wealth and all persons in power, government officials turned out to be more victimized, so they protected themselves and their homes with armed guards and are protected by all types of special equipment, alienated from the people.

In recent years, there has been a gap between the growth of a person’s material condition and the spiritual maturity of a person. Today it is clearly visible: many of the difficulties of the transition period are born of a lack of culture and morality in its broadest sense.

It is necessary to emphasize that the process of mass migration equally determines the processes of criminalization and victimization of the population in the countries where migrants arrive. The most dangerous consequences come from illegal migration, which feeds the marginal part of the migrants’ host country with new conflicts (for example, ethnocultural) and a specific criminal subculture.

Migrants themselves represent a social group with an increased risk of vulnerability. More often than not, illegal immigrants find themselves completely dependent on transnational organized crime from the very beginning. Organized criminal groups involved in illegal migration transport migrants in cramped, unhealthy and dangerous conditions. To avoid confrontation with the authorities, smugglers may abandon their clients in the desert without water or food or throw them into the open sea.

At the present stage, along with the increasing instability of the Russian statehood generated by the economic crisis, the ineffectiveness of the legislative mechanism regulating the fight against crime, and the uncertainty of the political situation in the country, there is an avalanche-like increase in the conflict situation. In Russian reality, the problem of conflicts is becoming increasingly acute; conflicts and tensions have become omnipresent, manifest themselves at different levels and are very diverse in their genesis and content.

In this regard, the most politically problematic regions of Russia is the North Caucasus, which represents a unique cultural mosaic of peoples, in which the Russian government today does not have an adequate policy with a greatly exaggerated importance of the ethnocultural factor as almost the main cause of problems and conflicts in the North Caucasus.

Dagestan occupies a special place in the Caucasus, representing a unique phenomenon of loyal interaction and at the same time ethnic consolidation of more than 30 indigenous ethnic groups living compactly in a relatively small area of ​​50.3 thousand sq.m. The specific influence of factors and conditions on victimization from serious crimes against the individual in Dagestan is due to such features as the multinational composition of the population, difficult geopolitical situation, and backwardness in economic development. In addition, the peoples of Dagestan are genetically characterized by abnormal aggressiveness. And in that historical situation, when interethnic tension, most often as a result of the insufficiently effective influence of the federal government, has increased to a critical point, and beyond which bloody clashes begin.

Conflict in the North Caucasus is due to the presence of clans and the struggle between them for power. Reducing conflict is directly dependent on overcoming and limiting clanism, which has taken a stable, long-term and hypertrophied form not only in the North Caucasus region, but also in Russia as a whole. Contradictions and conflicts between clans, created, as a rule, on a monoethnic basis, often appear on the surface of life as interethnic. These circumstances provoke permanent conflict for the entire period of the foreseeable future.

The problem of conflict at the interpersonal level is associated with such a victimization factor as provocation on the part of the victim. In this regard, sociological surveys were conducted as part of this study to assess provocation on the part of victims. The survey covered 150 law enforcement and judicial system employees, as well as 80 convicts serving sentences for serious crimes against the person. The questions were asked: “What role does provocation play in the mechanism of murders and infliction of grievous harm to human health?”, “What do you understand by provocation of rape?”, “Should provocation on the part of the victim be taken into account when assigning punishment, choosing its duration and type?” It has been hypothesized that provocation is the most important motivational factor in the etiology of fights leading to murder and injury. The respondents' answers on this issue were distributed as follows: 85% of the surveyed law enforcement officers and courts confirmed this provision, and only 54% of the convicted respondents agreed with this. More than 21% of employees of the law enforcement and judicial system assess as provocative the behavior of victims of crimes of sexual integrity, in which a “risky situation” was allowed. For the objectivity of the surveys and to obtain the most correct answer, an explanation was given of what constitutes a “risky situation.” “A risky situation can consist of such circumstances as place, time (season, time of day, etc.) and the environment in which the action develops, intimate atmosphere and, as some psychologists say, erotic mood or “sexually tense atmosphere” (obscene gestures or actions that seem to invite sexual intercourse).” It is interesting that on this issue, 42% of those convicted noted that crimes against sexual integrity are based on the immoral behavior of the victim and a risky situation. Regarding the third question, the range of contrasting answers is small. Thus, 56% of the surveyed law enforcement and judicial system employees responded that taking into account provocation on the part of the victim in crimes against the person is necessary in practice. Approximately 49% of convicts believe that when assigning punishment, the provocative behavior of the victim must be taken into account. It must be borne in mind that in victimological terms, provocation is understood broadly and covers conflict, immoral behavior, as well as carelessness, imprudence, and oversight on the part of the victims.

Crimes (victims) are increasingly becoming ways of resolving conflicts at all levels. Moreover, in conditions of impoverishment of the population, growing unemployment, homelessness and other deprivation, and insufficient protection of citizens from crime, an increasingly large part of the population begins to cooperate with criminals, does not trust law enforcement agencies, the state, creating self-protection (“roof”) for themselves.

It should be noted the processes of self-organization of part of the population on an illegal, including criminal basis. A characteristic feature of the region is the social approval of the facts of reprisals between the victims themselves and the criminals: personally through acquaintances, close people, or on the basis of payment for the services of a mercenary.

The spread of terrorism and religious extremism has significantly increased the degree of vulnerability of the residents of Dagestan to serious criminal attacks against individuals. It should be noted that the victims of these crimes were often not only representatives of other faiths, but also Muslims who adhere to the traditional Islamic faith of the Republic of Dagestan.

Thus, the active criminal victimization of the population (including from violent crime), which has been observed in our country for a number of years, requires the adoption of more effective measures to counter this negative phenomenon, which could ensure that citizens reduce the risk of becoming a victim of criminal manifestations, and instill in them the necessary rules correct behavior in pre-criminal and criminal situations, master the basic rules of self-defense, including the use of technical means and methods, ensure legal protection of the rights and interests of criminal victims.

Socio-pedagogical victimology(from lat. victima – victim) is a branch of knowledge that studies the development of people with physical, mental, social and personality defects and deviations; identifying categories of people whose socio-economic, legal, socio-psychological status predetermines or creates the preconditions for inequality in the conditions of a particular society, for a lack of opportunities, development and self-realization; analyzing the causes and developing the content, principles, forms and methods of prevention, minimization, compensation, correction of those circumstances as a result of which a person becomes a victim of unfavorable socialization conditions.

Purposeful activities of specialists of various professions (psychologists, social educators and social service workers, lawyers, etc.), aimed at identifying and eliminating various victimologically significant phenomena and processes in the sphere of intra-family, social, informal relations that determine the victimization of an individual as a potential victim of crime attacks by a specific individual or specific circumstances, is called victimological prevention.

Today victimology is a developing comprehensive doctrine about persons in crisis (victims of crimes, natural disasters, catastrophes, economic and political alienation, refugees, internally displaced persons, etc.), and measures to assist such victims. Modern victimology is implemented in several directions:

• A) general fundamental theory of victimology, describing the phenomenon of the victim of a socially dangerous manifestation, its dependence on society and its relationship with other social institutions and processes. The development of the general theory of victimology, in turn, is carried out in two directions:
  • – the first explores the history of victimization and victimization, analyzes the patterns of their origin and development following changes in the main social variables, taking into account the relative independence of the phenomenon of victimization as a form of implementation of deviant activity,
  • – the second studies the state of victimization as a social process (analysis of the interaction of victimization and society) and as an individual manifestation of deviant behavior through a general theoretical generalization of data;
• b) private victimological theories (criminal victimology, tort victimology, traumatic victimology, etc.);
• V) applied victimology, those. victimological technology (empirical analysis, development and implementation of special techniques for preventive work with victims, social support technologies, restitution and compensation mechanisms, insurance technologies, etc.).

Victimization can be understood in two senses:

• 1) as the predisposition of individuals to become a victim (in the criminological aspect, a victim of a crime);
• 2) as the inability of society and the state to protect its citizens. In modern Russia, victimization in the second, broader sense has become one of the most painful social problems.

Victimogenicity- this is the presence of conditions that contribute to the process of turning a person into a victim of socialization. Victimization is the process and result of such transformation.

Factors of human victimization

Among the conditions (factors) contributing to human victimization are:

• A) social factors, associated with external influences;
• b) phenomenological conditions, associated with those internal changes in a person that occur under the influence of unfavorable factors of upbringing and socialization.

Concept "victim behavior"(lit. "victim behavior") is usually used to refer to improper, careless, immoral, provocative behavior, etc. Victimna often referred to as the person himself, meaning that, due to his psychological and social characteristics, he can become a victim of a crime. A psychological predisposition to become a victim presupposes the presence of such personality traits as excessive gullibility, imprudence, increased temper and irritability, aggressiveness, and in behavior - a tendency to adventurous, arrogant, unrestrained actions. This group should also include those people who, having a psychological predisposition, also lead a certain lifestyle, moving among those who pose a danger to them. These are tramps, prostitutes, drug addicts, alcoholics, professional criminals.

The main ideas of the victimological theory boil down to the following:

• 1. The behavior of the victim has a significant impact on the motivation of criminal behavior; it can facilitate and even provoke it. On the contrary, optimal behavior can make it impossible to commit a criminal offense (or reduce its likelihood to a minimum, or at least avoid the serious negative consequences of crime).
• 2. The likelihood of becoming a victim of a crime depends on a special phenomenon - victimization. Each individual can be assessed from the perspective of how likely he is to become a victim of crime. This probability determines a person’s victimization (the greater the probability, the higher the victimization).
• 3. Victimization is a property of a certain person, social role or social situation that provokes or facilitates criminal behavior. Accordingly, personal, role and situational victimization are distinguished.
• 4. Victimization depends on a number of factors, such as:
  • - personal characteristics;
  • – the legal status of a person, the specifics of his official functions, financial security and level of security;
  • – the degree of conflict of the situation, the characteristics of the place and time in which the situation develops.
• 5. The amount of victimization may vary. The process of its growth is defined as victimization, while its decline is defined as devictimization. By influencing the factors of victimization, society can reduce it and thereby influence crime.

According to A.V. Mudrik, at each age stage of socialization, one can identify the most typical dangers that a person is most likely to encounter:

I. Period of intrauterine development of the fetus : poor health of parents, their drunkenness and (or) chaotic lifestyle, poor nutrition of the mother; negative emotional and psychological state of parents; medical errors; ecological environment.

II. Preschool age (0–6 years): illness and physical injury; emotional dullness and (or) immorality of parents, parents ignoring the child and his abandonment; family poverty; inhumanity of workers in child care institutions; peer rejection; antisocial neighbors and (or) their children.

III. Junior school age (6–10 years): immorality and (or) drunkenness of parents, stepfather or stepmother, family poverty; hypo- or hyperprotection; poorly developed speech; lack of readiness to learn; negative attitude of the teacher and (or) peers; negative influence of peers and (or) older children (attraction to smoking, drinking, theft); physical injuries and defects, loss of parents, rape, molestation.

IV. Adolescence (11–14 years): drunkenness, alcoholism, immorality of parents; family poverty; hypo- or hyperprotection; mistakes of teachers and parents; smoking, substance abuse; rape, molestation; loneliness; physical injuries and defects; bullying by peers; involvement in antisocial and criminal groups; advance or lag in psychosexual development; frequent family moves; parents' divorce.

V. Early youth (15–17 years old): antisocial family, family poverty; drunkenness, drug addiction, prostitution; early pregnancy; involvement in criminal and totalitarian groups; rape; physical injuries and defects; obsessive delusions of dysmorphophobia (attributing to oneself a non-existent physical defect or deficiency); loss of life perspective, misunderstanding by others, loneliness; bullying by peers, romantic failures, suicidal tendencies; discrepancies or contradictions between ideals, attitudes, stereotypes and real life.

VI. Adolescence (18–23 years): drunkenness, drug addiction, prostitution; poverty, unemployment; rape, sexual failure, stress; involvement in illegal activities, in totalitarian groups; loneliness; the gap between the level of aspirations and social status; Military service; inability to continue education.

In the process of socialization, a person can be an object, a subject, as well as a victim of socialization. Human society, with its contradictory culture and political changes, often acts as an unfavorable social body, conditions for the formation and development of personality.

Circumstances that hinder the normal development of a person’s personality:

· Society and its culture;

· Low standard of living;

· Unemployment, customs and traditions of the people;

· Features of family education;

· Poor environmental conditions at the place of residence;

· Weak social support from the state

All these factors can make one a victim of socialization.

The concept of social victimization was introduced in connection with the study of the trial effects of an unfavorable society on a person in the process of socialization. Mudrik defined victimization as a branch of knowledge included in social pedagogy; it is a branch of various categories of people who are actual and potential victims of unfavorable conditions of socialization.

Victimization– the process of turning a person into a victim of socialization.

Victimogenicity– the presence of conditions that contribute to the transformation of a person into a victim of socialization.

Social factors of victimization (they are associated with external influences on a person):

1. Environmental pollution. The transformation of a person into a victim of socialization is associated with the fact that for a number of reasons he cannot leave the environmentally unfavorable area of ​​residence. Victimization is created by enterprises deprived of means of protection from air pollution, the unlimited use of chemicals, the use of atomic weapons, etc. In the city of Omsk, as in all cities of Russia, the maximum permissible standards for environmental pollution are exceeded. The result of the influence of these factors: the number of cancer patients, allergic diseases has increased, life expectancy is decreasing, and the birth of children with defects.

2. Psychological stress and tension. Often this factor of victimization accompanies the process of assimilation and reproduction of social experience. Every year more and more people experience stress and certain overloads. The results of the influence of this factor: an increase in cardiovascular diseases, an increase in chronic diseases, a weakening of the immune system, etc. In connection with the development of science and technology, physical stress on the muscular system decreases and, as a result, the overall tone of the human body decreases. Underutilization of the muscular system weakens a person’s ability to overcome stress.

3. Reduced adaptation of people due to rapidly changing living conditions. The process of turning a person into a victim of socialization is associated with mass migration of the population and loss of social status due to unemployment. Victimization of migration and unemployment force a person to re-socialize in new conditions and new living conditions. It is easier for the younger generation to adapt compared to middle-aged and mature people.

4. Disasters. Lead to disruption of normal socialization of large groups of the population. Disasters include: natural disasters, revolutions, wars and deportation of social groups. The potential victims of these disasters may be not only those who witnessed them, but also their descendants.

5. Features of social control. Social control operates in any society at all levels of social relations. Social control turns a person into a victim of socialization, since it often determines the person's lifestyle. Social control is the influence of society on the established values ​​and behavior of a person. Social control includes aspect(the demands of others placed on a person and appears in the form of expectations that he will perform all the functions prescribed by the social role), norms, sanctions (procedures by which a person’s behavior is brought to the norm of the social group, i.e. this is a measure of influence and the most important means of self-control).

Social norms- samples of instructions that should be said and done in a specific situation, these norms act as certain rules that are developed by the group, accepted by it, to which all its members must obey.

An obvious violation of social norms is perceived at the level of group consciousness as a challenge. And the group or society strives to force a person, in a soft or hard form, to comply with these norms.

Internal factors of personal victimization

They are associated with internal changes in a person that occur under the influence of unfavorable factors of perception and socialization. Once formed and consolidated, these internal changes (personality traits, habits) themselves become a condition for the development of new victimogenic factors, thus, the formed personality traits gradually turn a person into a victim of socialization. According to social psychologists, the most important factor in victimization is the development of aggressiveness in childhood.

Aggressive behavior- the action of an individual (or predisposition to certain actions) as a result of which they cause moral or physical harm to another person.

The main sources of the development of aggressiveness in a person are improper upbringing in the family and the immediate social environment. The main sources of demonstration of aggressive behavior are: the media, violent computer games, family and immediate social environment

The most dangerous thing is the formation of an addictive syndrome of demonstration of aggression. As a result, aggressiveness becomes a habit, and the media demonstrates how, with the help of aggression, a goal is achieved and goodness is established.