Sociability tests for students. Appendix B

Section 1. Psychology of communication

Methods for determining the development of cognitive abilities

Exercise 1

Münsterberg Perception Test

Instructions: There are words among the alphabetic text. Your task is to search line by line to find these words as quickly as possible. Underline the found words.
Time for completing the task - 1 min.

Individually

Bsolntsevtrgshchotsdistric
ftsuigzkht
handzdperceptiontsu
osldsplaychachs
ljhashshchgienakuyfishreport
yfyachytsuvskPersonalityz
ezbtrdschshzhnprkvkome
hftsenlaboratory
ntaoprukgvsmtrpsychiatry

Evaluation of results: The technique is aimed at determining the selectivity of attention. The number of highlighted words and the number of errors, that is, missing and incorrectly highlighted words, are estimated. The text contains 25 words.

Assignment 2

Schulte Tables Test

Instructions: Investigation of attention switching in conditions of active selection of useful information (according to the Schulte table).

Show the numbers from 1 to 25 in order, calling them out loud (at maximum speed)

Individually

21	12	7	1	20
6	15	17	3	18
19	4	8	25	13
24	2	22	10	5
9	14	11	23	16

Conclusion on the assignment: __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Assignment 3

Method "Determining the type of memory"

Target: Determination of the predominant memory type.

For memorization by ear:

Machine, apple, pencil, spring, lamp, forest, rain, flower, saucepan, parrot.

To memorize by visual perception:

Airplane, pear, pen, winter, candle, field, lightning, nut, frying pan, duck.

To memorize with motor-auditory perception:

Steamer, plum, ruler, summer, lampshade, river, thunder, berry, plate, goose.

To memorize with combined perception:

Train, cherry, notebook, autumn, floor lamp, meadow, thunderstorm, mushroom, cup, chicken.

Assignment 4

Methodology "Study of logical and mechanical memory"

Target: the study of logical and mechanical memory by memorizing two rows of words.

First row: Second row:

§ doll - play beetle - chair

§ chicken - egg compass - glue

§ scissors - cut the bell - arrow

§ horse - sleigh tit - sister

§ book - teacherlake - tram

§ butterfly - fly boots - samovar

§ snow - winter match - decanter

§ lamp - evening hat - bee

§ brush - teeth fish - fire

§ cow - milk saw - scrambled eggs

Processing and analysis of results... The type of memory is determined by which of the series was the largest reproduction of words.

Conclusion on the assignment _____________________________________________________________________________________________

Assignment 5

Methodology "Study of short-term memory" A.R. Luria

Instructions... “I will read the words to you, and then you will repeat everything that you remember. Listen to me carefully. Start repeating as soon as I finish reading. Ready? I read: needle, wood, water, cup, table, mushroom, shelf, knife, roll, cat. "

Determine the percentage of words reproduced and draw a conclusion about the volume of the subjects' short-term memory.

Conclusion on the assignment __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Assignment 6

Method "Memory for images"

Instructions:“You will be presented with a table with images. Your task is to memorize as many images as possible in 20 seconds. After 20s. will remove the table, and you will have to write down verbally those

images that we remembered ”. Norm - 6

Conclusion on working with the subject _____________________________________________________________________________________________

Assignment 7

Method "Memory for numbers"

Instructions:“You will be presented with a table with numbers. Your task is to make it in 20s. memorize as many numbers as possible. After 20s. the table will be removed, and you will have to write down the numbers that you remember. "

13	91	47	39
65	83	19	51
23	94	71	87

Short-term visual memory was assessed by the number of correctly reproduced numbers. The norm of an adult is 7

Conclusion on the individual performance of the task _____________________________________________________________________________________________

Assignment 8

Assessment of the level of sociability (V.F. Ryakhovsky test)

Here are some simple questions for your attention. Answer quickly, unequivocally: "yes" - 2 points, "sometimes" - 1 point, "no" - 0 points.

You have an ordinary or business meeting. Does her expectation unsettle you?
Do you feel confused and displeased to be asked to give a presentation, message, information at a meeting, meeting or similar event?
Do you postpone your visit to the doctor until the last moment?
You are offered to go on a business trip to a city where you have never been. Will you do your best to avoid this business trip?
Do you like to share your experiences with anyone?
Are you annoyed if a stranger on the street asks you to (show the way, tell the time, answer a question)?
Do you believe that there is a problem of "fathers and children" and that people of different generations find it difficult to understand each other?
Are you ashamed to remind your friend that he forgot to return the money that he borrowed a few months ago?
In the restaurant or in the dining room, you were served an obviously poor quality dish. Will you keep silent, only angrily pushing the plate away?
Finding yourself alone with a stranger, you will not enter into a conversation with him and will be burdened if he speaks first. Is it so?
You are horrified by any long line, wherever it may be (in a store, library, cinema box office). Do you prefer to abandon your intention or stand in the tail and languish in anticipation?
Are you afraid to participate in any conflict resolution commission?
You have your own purely individual criteria for evaluating works of literature, art, culture and you will not accept any other people's opinions on this matter. This is true?
Hearing somewhere on the sidelines the statement of an obviously erroneous point of view on a question well known to you, do you prefer to remain silent and not enter into a conversation?
Do you feel annoyed by someone's request to help you sort out a particular business issue or academic topic?
Are you more willing to express your point of view (opinion, assessment) in writing than orally?

The points obtained are summed up.

30-32 points... You are clearly uncommunicative and difficult to rely on in a group effort. Try to be more sociable, control yourself.

25-29 points... You are withdrawn, taciturn, prefer loneliness, so you have few friends. New work and the need for new contacts are unbalanced. It is in your power to reverse these character traits.

19-24 points... You are sociable to a certain extent and feel quite confident in unfamiliar surroundings. New problems do not scare you. These flaws are fixable.

14-18 points... You have normal communication skills. You are inquisitive, willingly listen to an interesting interlocutor, are patient enough in communication, defend your point of view without irascibility. At the same time, do not like noisy companies; extravagant antics and verbosity irritate you.

9-13 points... You are very sociable (sometimes, perhaps even beyond measure). Curious, talkative, which sometimes irritates others. You lack perseverance, patience and courage when faced with serious problems.

4-8 points... You must be a guy-shirt. Sociability hits you with a key. You are always up to date with all matters. For this very reason, managers and colleagues treat you with some apprehension and doubts. Consider these facts.

3 points or less... Your communication skills are painful. You are talkative, verbose, intervene in matters that have nothing to do with you. You undertake to judge the problems in which you are completely incompetent. Yes, you need to work on yourself and your character! First of all, cultivate patience and restraint in yourself, treat people with respect, finally, think about your health - this lifestyle does not pass without a trace.

Conclusion on the individual performance of the task ______________________________________________________________________________________

Assignment 9

§ KOS test questionnaire

§ Instructions: the test is performed individually:

1. Do you have a lot of friends with whom you constantly communicate?

2. Do you often manage to persuade the majority of your comrades to accept your decision?

3. How long have you been bothered by the feeling of resentment inflicted on you by one of your comrades?

4. Do you always find it difficult to navigate in a critical situation?

5. Do you have a desire to establish new acquaintances with different people?

6. Do you enjoy doing public work?

7. Is it true that it is more pleasant and easier for you to spend time with books or any other occupation than with people?

8. If there are any obstacles in the implementation of your intentions, do you easily deviate from them?

9. Do you easily establish contacts with people who are much older than you?

10. Do you like to invent and organize various games and entertainment with your friends?

11. Is it difficult for you to join a new company for you?

12. Do you often postpone for other days those things that should have been done today?

13. Do you easily manage to establish contacts with strangers?

14. Do you strive to ensure that your comrades act in accordance with your opinion?

15. Is it difficult for you to get used to the new team?

16. Is it true that you do not have conflicts with your comrades because of their failure to fulfill their promises, duties, obligations?

17. Do you strive to meet and talk with a new person at an opportunity?

18. Do you often take the initiative in solving important matters?

19. Do the people around you annoy you and do you want to be alone?

20. Is it true that you are usually poorly guided in unfamiliar surroundings?

21. Do you like being around people all the time?

22. Do you get annoyed if you are unable to finish the job you started?

23. Do you feel embarrassed, uncomfortable or embarrassed if you have to take the initiative to meet a new person?

24. Is it true that you get tired of frequent communication with your friends?

25. Do you like to participate in group games?

26. Do you often show initiative when solving issues affecting the interests of your comrades?

27. Is it true that you feel insecure among people you don't know much?

28. Is it true that you rarely strive to prove your case?

29. Do you think that it is not difficult for you to revitalize a company you are unfamiliar with?

30. Did you take part in social work at school?

31. Do you strive to limit your circle of acquaintances to a small number of people?

32. Is it true that you do not seek to defend your opinion or decision if it was not immediately accepted by your comrades?

33. Do you feel at ease when you find yourself in a company unfamiliar to you?

34. Are you willing to start organizing various events for your comrades?

35. Is it true that you don't feel confident and calm enough when you have to say something to a large group of people?

36. Are you often late for business meetings and dates?

37. Is it true that you have many friends?

38. Do you often find yourself in the spotlight with your comrades?

39. Do you often feel embarrassed or embarrassed when communicating with unfamiliar people?

40. Is it true that you do not feel very confident when surrounded by a large group of your comrades?

The purpose of processing the results is to obtain indices of communicative and organizational inclinations. For this, the subject's answers are compared with a decoder and the number of matches is counted separately according to communicative and organizational inclinations.

To determine the level of communication and the level of organizational inclinations, you need to calculate their coefficients. The odds are the ratio of the number of matching responses of a given propensity to the maximum possible number of matches, in this case to 20.

Scale of assessments of communicative and organizational aptitudes

The level of development of communicative and organizational inclinations is characterized using assessments on a scale as follows.

Subjects who received a grade of 1- these are people with a low level of manifestation of communicative and organizational inclinations.

Subjects who received a grade of 2, have communication and organizational inclinations below the average. They do not strive for communication, feel constrained in a new company, team, prefer to spend time alone with themselves.

For subjects who received a score of 3, the average level of manifestation of communicative and organizational inclinations is characteristic. They strive for contacts with people, do not limit the circle of their acquaintances, defend their opinion, plan their work, but the potential of their inclinations is not highly stable.

Subjects who received a grade of 4, belong to a group with a high level of manifestation of communicative and organizational inclinations. They do not get lost in a new environment, quickly find friends, constantly strive to expand the circle of their acquaintances, and engage in social activities.

Subjects who received the highest score of 5, have a very high level of manifestation of communicative and organizational inclinations. They feel the need for communicative and organizational activity and actively strive for it, quickly navigate difficult situations.

Conclusion on the individual performance of the task __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

1. Methodology of the general level of sociability (test of V.F. Ryakhovsky)

2. Methods for studying communicative and organizational inclinations (CBS).

The methodological basis of the research is the principles of the personal approach adopted in Russian psychology (B.G. Ananiev); systemic approach (E.G. Yudin); objectivity of research and determinism (A. N. Leontiev, S. L. Rubinstein).

The works of Lomov B.F., Leontyev A.A., Parygin B.D., Shkoporov N.B., Labunskaya V.A., Tolstykh A.V., Gorelov I.N., R.S. Nemova, E.I. Golovakha, L.P. Grimaka and others.

Experimental base: The study involved students from universities in Yoshkar-Ola, in the amount of 10 people.

Chapter 1. The problem and styles of communication in modern psychology 1.1 Concept and basic characteristics of communication

Communication as a specific social relation has long attracted the attention of philosophers and representatives of other areas of social thought. Nowadays, communication has become the subject of special study in a whole group of sciences - first of all, in general and social psychology, in sociology, pedagogy, in ethnography, in ethics and aesthetics and other sciences. Of course, each of these sciences considers communication within the framework of its specific scientific problems.

It would seem that the meaning of the concept of communication is clear and does not require special explanations. There are, however, many concepts, the meaning of which in everyday speech and in scientific use does not completely coincide. It also happens that in science itself, the term is used in different meanings. This also applies to the concept of "communication". In psychology, there are different approaches to understanding communication.

In the psychological dictionary, communication is defined as follows: "Communication is the interaction of two or more people, consisting in the exchange of information between them of a cognitive or affective-evaluative nature."

V.N. Panferov, considering the epistemological formula of communication, "which assumes a consistent dependence of the following phenomena: person - channel - sign - meaning - meaning - attitude - behavior - personality", believes that this chain defines "the main problematic moments of the communication process that arise in the context of all levels of interaction of people with their differentiation according to the main functions of the subject of communication ”. Assuming that all human functions are his functions as a subject of mental activity, he proposes to include communicative, informational, cognitive, emotive, conative and creative functions among the main functions. Since these functions take place both in the processes of human-human interaction, and in the processes of human interaction with objects, the author believes that they can be considered universal functions in the structure of an integral act of joint activity.

It is obvious that communication is the most important factor in the formation and development of a personality. During the transition from general philosophical to other levels of analysis, the concepts of the communication process are concretized, the content of more and more facets of this phenomenon is revealed.

The study of communication as a factor in the development of personality in socio-psychological analysis presupposes, first of all, the search for transitions of objective relations into subjective ones, as well as the objectification of subjective relations in the process of communication.

The categories "communication", "social relations", "activity" are inextricably linked, moreover, "the necessary mediating link between the categories" social relations "and" communication "is the understanding of a person as a subject of activity."

Analyzing the interaction of the categories "social relations" and "communication" at the general philosophical level, one can imagine the dialectic of their relationship as the dialectic of essence and phenomenon, content and form, universal, special and individual. At this level, communication acts as a process of actualizing all relations of social individuals. The human attitude itself is viewed here as a kind of integrity, in the unity of the subjective and objective aspects. Communication acts as an extremely broad concept, as a process of actualization of all human relations, being, in fact, an attribute of the very existence of people.

Theoretical questions of the general philosophical theory of communication were raised in the works of S.S. Batenin, G.S. Batishcheva, L.P. Buyeva, M.S. Kagan, V.M. Sokovnina. The importance of studying the category of communication and all personality traits necessary for its success, submitted by A.A. Brudny, was noted in ancient times.

Conceptual developments of the problem of communication in Russian psychology, first of all, “are associated with the names of B. G. Ananyev, L.S. Vygotsky, A.N. Leontyeva V.M. Myasishcheva, S.L. Rubinstein, who considered communication as an important condition for the mental development of a person, his socialization and individualization, and the formation of personality.

J. Bowlby, R. Spitz, A. Freud and many others were engaged in the study of the genesis of communication abroad.

In the early 60s of the XX century, a broad study of the genesis of communication began in Russian psychology. So, for example, the problems of interaction between an adult and a child are reflected in the works of N.M. Shchelovanova, N.A. Askarina, V. Tonkova-Yanpolskaya. Thanks to these scientists, the scientific school of normal physiology of childhood was created. M.I. Lisina and A.V. Zaporozhets was subjected to a systematic and in-depth study of the genesis of communication in children of the first years of life.

E.G. Zlobodina strove to build a philosophical theory of communication, relying on the psychological concept of communication, presenting it as a spiritual interpersonal contact, as a "personification of social relations." Other researchers, considering communication, rely in its understanding on the data of other sciences, which often leads to a one-sided interpretation of communication. So, in the work of B.A. Rodionova, communication is identified with communication.

The development in the 60s of the XX century of social psychology as a scientific discipline at the intersection of sociology, psychology and philosophy, gave impetus to the consideration of communication from a new angle. In a book published in 1965 by B.D. Parygin "Social psychology as a science" the problem of communication was singled out as one of the subjects of study of this science. Communication here is understood as the mental interaction of people in all its forms, including information-communicative, receptive, and opposite. 13 of his next monograph, the author attached even greater importance to communication as a subject of socio-psychological research, recognizing it as one of the main objects of analysis. At the same time, communication was still interpreted as a purely psychological phenomenon, as “a complex and multifaceted process that can act at the same time as a process of interaction between individuals, and as an information process, and as the attitude of people to each other, and as the process of their mutual influence on each other, and as a process of claim of empathy and mutual understanding of each other. " Having singled out the content (communication) and form (interaction or interaction) in communication, then, on the basis of these structural components, he again singles out the content and form. Thus, the definition of B.D. Parygina focuses on a systemic understanding of the essence of communication, its multifunctionality and activity nature.

In the work of E.S. Kuzmina "Fundamentals of social psychology", communication is considered as the basis for building a system of socio-psychological knowledge: "In social psychology, all subjective psychological qualities: attitudes, values, motives, group norms, opinions are considered by themselves, by their content and mechanisms, as a result direct communication of people, through the prism of which the entire system of social relations acts ”. This understanding of communication laid the foundation for the idea of its integrity, since it turned out to be not a simple sum of different forms of mental contacts of individuals, but the main phenomenon of the individual and collective psyche. There is no doubt that the study of social psychology of communication between people was of great importance for deepening the general scientific understanding of the problems of man, life, culture. With differences in the specific interpretation of communication within the framework of socio-psychological theory, as well as its place in the subject of science, communication was recognized by all representatives of this science as a necessary object of research, and it brought many valuable and practically important results.

Within the framework of research on child and general psychology, communication is traditionally viewed as a condition for human development in the works of V.N. Panferova, B.F. Lomova, M.I. Lisina, L.I. Bozovic.

A.N. Leontiev considered communication and work as two main types of human activity. This is the essence of his concept and analysis of communication as an activity, which he designated as "communicative activity."

At the same time, in the work "Man: Activity and Communication" L.P. Buyeva interprets communication as something fundamentally different from activity: "Activity and communication are two interrelated, relatively independent, but not equivalent sides of a single (individual and social) process of life."

B.G. Ananyev also recognizes communication as one of the three main types of human activity, along with work and knowledge.

B.F. Lomov asserts in his research that “it is wrong to consider the problem of communication only as exclusively belonging to social psychology”, because within the complex of psychological sciences, this problem is of interest to both labor psychology, and management psychology, and engineering psychology, both medical and pedagogical, “in which the problem of communication is one of the central ", and psycholinguistics, and, finally, the general theory of psychology."

BF Lomov argued that communication cannot be defined as a type of human activity, that it is something fundamentally different from activity, because it connects the subject not with the object, but with another subject.

According to the definition of G.M. Andreeva "Communication is the process of establishing and developing contacts between people, which includes the exchange of information, the development of a unified interaction, perception and understanding of another person by a person."

Trying to overcome the one-sidedness of various interpretations of this problem, G.M. Andreeva proposed a broader understanding of the connection between activity and communication, “when communication is considered both as a side of joint activity (since the activity itself is not only labor, but also communication in the labor process), and“ sak is its kind of derivative ”. G.M. Andreeva considers the following processes to be the main processes of communicative activity: communicative proper (providing the exchange of information), interactive (regulating the interaction of partners in communication) and perceptual (organizing mutual perception, mutual assessment and reflection in communication).

M.I. Lisin, as a result of many years of experimental research of communication processes in children, identifies the following components: the subject of communication, the need for communication, communicative motives, communication actions, communication tasks, means of communication, communication products:

The subject of communication is another person, a communication partner as a subject;

The need for communication is the desire of a person to cognize and evaluate other people, and through them and with their help - to self-knowledge, to self-esteem;

Communicative motives are what communication is undertaken for;

Communication actions are units of communicative activity, an integral act addressed to another person;

Means of communication are those operations with the help of which the actions of communication are carried out;

The product of communication is formations of a material and spiritual nature that are created as a result of communication.

Based on the principles of systems analysis, Kagan MS identifies the following communication goals:

1) the purpose of communication is outside the very interaction of subjects,

2) the purpose of communication lies in himself,

3) the purpose of communication is to familiarize the partner with the experience and values of the initiator of communication,

4) the purpose of communication is to familiarize the initiator himself with the values of the partner.

A productive development of the problem of classification of communication functions is contained in the works of B.F. Lomov. In them, according to his own assessment, an attempt was made as yet incomplete classification of some of the main functions of communication, in particular, two series of functions were identified for different reasons. The first includes three classes of the following functions: information-communicative, regulatory-communicative, affective-communicative; the second is determined according to a different system of grounds and includes the organization of joint activities, people's cognition of each other, the formation and development of interpersonal relations.

The formation of communication needs can also be considered in terms of determining the patterns inherent in the formation of any communicative need in the course of the inclusion of an individual in the system of interpersonal relations. An analysis of the development of communication needs in ontogenesis allows us to consider the formation of a personality and its development through the prism of the evolution of a communicative need, and shows, in general, the role of communication as one of the most important factors of socialization.

In the scheme of the evolution of communication needs proposed by M.I. Lisina, the emergence of a new need is noted - for mutual understanding, for emotional empathy, because only if these needs are satisfied, it becomes possible to form an adequate self-assessment and mutual assessment.

Newcomb divided the social needs that determine interaction and communication into three main types: 1) needs focused on the object or goal of interaction; 2) needs focused on the interests of the communicator himself; 3) needs focused on the interests of another person or society as a whole. In real social behavior of a person, all three types of needs always appear, which, however, are hierarchized in different ways.

In motivation, V.G. Leont'ev, there is "coordination of external influences, key, environmental, triggering stimuli with the internal state of a person, with his needs and other mental formations, which is an acquired and innate experience." Motivation is an active process that goes towards external influences. It directly opposes the "external" in a person through his behavior and activities.

Researchers distinguish verbal (verbal) and non-verbal (non-verbal) means in communication.

In particular, a rich range of non-verbal means is used in communication, embodied in the behavioral features of the rituals of acquaintance, greetings, farewell; in an emotional tone of communication, depending on the situation, reflecting the national, professional or other characteristics of the communicators; conventional gestures, known only to one or another social group, and many others. A person's behavior is built taking into account the actions and deeds of the people around him, and communication in itself is an intrinsic value for a person.

On the basis of the study of communication, such a personality trait as sociability, manifested in communication, is considered. Comparison of literary data allows us to characterize sociability as a relatively stable individual personality trait that develops in the course of communicative activity and manifests itself in it. Sociability as a personality trait includes the following features: desire for communication, initiative in communication, ease of making contact, stability, breadth of communication, expressiveness of communication and signs of an extroverted orientation. Sociability in the broadest sense is a person's mental readiness for organizational and communicative activity.

In psychology, three functions of communication are distinguished (sometimes they are called sides, aspects), which make it possible to more clearly structure this process. Among them stand out: communicative, including the exchange of information; interactive, providing for the organization of interaction; perceptual, reflecting the process of perception and formation of the image of another person and the establishment of interaction. Let's take a closer look at each of them.

The communicative function of communication provides that people, in the course of joint activities, exchange various ideas, ideas, feelings, moods, etc. This is the information of human communication, during which information is not only transmitted, but also formed, refined, and developed.

The communicative function has its own specifics. First, communication is not just the exchange or movement of information. Here we are dealing with the relationship of two individuals, each of which is an active subject. Communication can be schematically represented as an intersubjective process (S = S), as a "subject-subject relationship of active exchange of information, during which the subject of communication is jointly comprehended.

Secondly, the exchange of information provides for the mutual influence of subjects, involves a psychological impact on the behavior of a partner in order to change it.

Thirdly, communicative influence is possible only when subjects have a single or similar system of encoding and decoding, i.e. speak the same language when the signs and the meanings assigned to them are known to everyone.

Fourthly, communication is characterized by communication barriers of a social or psychological nature. On the one hand, this is a different outlook, worldview, worldview, which gives rise to different interpretations of the same concepts. On the other hand, barriers can be purely psychological in nature due to individual personality traits (shyness, secrecy, mistrust, incompatibility, etc.).

The interactive function of communication is associated with the development of a strategy, tactics and technology of interaction between people, the organization of their joint activities to achieve certain goals. Such communication presupposes the achievement of mutual understanding, the application of joint efforts for the further organization of activities, in the final results of which the communicators are interested. The specificity of interaction is that it fixes not only the exchange of information, but also, most importantly, the organization of joint actions, and, therefore, develops their forms and norms.

The versatility of the interaction structure has given rise to various approaches to its description. The theory of social action analyzes the components of human interaction, their connection, interaction and their changes. Other scientists view interaction as a process that goes through certain stages: spatial, psychological, social contacts, interaction and, finally, social relations.

An original approach to describing the interaction is presented in E. Byrne's transactional analysis - a direction that suggests regulating the positions of interaction participants (for example, a parent, an adult, or a child) and taking into account the nature of the situation and the style of interaction.

Possible types of interaction are usually divided into two opposite groups: positive (cooperation, agreement, adaptation, association) and negative (competition, conflict, opposition, dissociation). In the first case, interaction contributes to the organization of joint activities. In the second, it creates obstacles in its path. For a deeper understanding, consider two categories: cooperation and conflict.

Cooperation is the ordering, coordination of the efforts of partners. A.N. Leontiev in this case identified two features of joint activity: 1) the division of a single process of activity between the participants; 2) change in the activities of each of them. It is important that the result of each person's activity is combined with the final result of joint activities through the development of interpersonal relations.

In contrast to cooperation, the phenomenon of conflict lies in the fact that it can be based on two characteristics: psychological antagonism and conflicting actions. Destructive conflicts lead to disagreement and loosening of interaction. They are characterized by an increase in the number of participants and their conflicting actions, an increase in negative attitudes and acuteness of statements, an increase in tension and prejudice, an increase in the number of poor perceptions of the traits and qualities of another person's personality.

At the same time, not every conflict has a negative meaning. For example, a productive conflict is generated by different points of view on the problem, on the way to solve it. There is no personal incompatibility here. Such a conflict promotes a comprehensive understanding of the problem and cooperative interaction within it.

The perceptual function of communication explains the perception and understanding of another person and oneself, the establishment on this basis of mutual understanding and interaction. All mental processes are included in the act of communication and work. With their help, the individual characteristics of the psyche and behavior of people are perceived and evaluated. Social perception involves not only understanding and accepting the goals, motives, attitudes of the communication partner, but also considers how, how he is perceived. In the process of interpersonal perception, we, according to S.L. Rubinstein, as if we "read" the thoughts of another person. This is on the one hand. On the other hand, the more fully another person is revealed, the more complete the idea of himself becomes. In the course of cognizing another person, several processes are simultaneously carried out: his emotional assessment, and an attempt to understand the structure of his actions, and the strategy of his own behavior based on this.

Identification, empathy and reflection are distinguished as mechanisms of social perception. Identification means identification, assimilation of oneself to others. To identify oneself with subordinates means, firstly, to unite oneself with them on the basis of an established emotional connection and to include in one's own world the norms and values they have adopted; secondly, it is a representation, an officer's vision of his subordinates as an extension of himself (projection), endowing them with his own characteristics, traits, feelings, desires; thirdly, putting oneself in the place of a subordinate, which manifests itself in the form of immersion, transferring oneself into the field, space, circumstances of subordinates and leads to the assimilation of their personal meanings.

Rational comprehension of the partner's situation is enhanced by emotional experience, i.e. empathy (feeling). Empathy allows you to take into account the line of behavior of another person. On the basis of his emotional assessment, an appropriate attitude is formed: sympathy is a positive image of another, antipathy is negative. Empathy can manifest itself in the following forms: empathy - experiencing the same emotional states as another person, through identification with him or sympathy - experiencing one's own emotional states about the feelings of another person. An important characteristic of empathy is isolation within the framework of direct emotional experience and the weak development of the reflective side.

Reflection is the next mechanism of perception. In social psychology, it is understood as the awareness of the acting individual of how he is perceived by a communication partner. In other words, understanding the interlocutor by thinking for him. Mutual perception in the process of reflection presupposes the following positions: the subject itself, as it is in activity, and the subject as it is seen by another. Both subjects of communication are in these positions. Consequently, reflection is a kind of process of double mirroring by the subjects of each other.

So, there are different approaches to understanding the category of communication and, accordingly, different interpretations of the relationship between communication and activity.

According to the meaning of our work, communication is an independent category, which has its own internal laws of development and acts as:

First, the interaction of subjects;

Secondly - the basis of interpersonal relationships;

Third, how to exchange information.

1.2 Individual styles of communication and their place in the stylistic space of the personality of the student, the future psychologist

It is conditioned by the specifics of the activity itself, the individual psychological characteristics of its subject (I.V. Strakhov, N.D. Levitov, B.C. Merlin, E.A. Klimov, etc.).

In a strictly psychological, narrow sense, an individual style is “a stable system of methods determined by typological characteristics that develops in a person striving for the best implementation of this activity ... an individually unique system of psychological means, which a person consciously or spontaneously resorts to for the best balancing their (typologically conditioned) individuality with the objective external conditions of activity. "

This definition especially emphasizes that this is "an individual unique combination of techniques and methods that ensure the best performance of the activity" (B.C. Merlin). The style of activity includes its operational composition, skills and abilities (V.E. Chudnovsky), revealing the abilities of the object itself and being determined by its individual psychological and personal characteristics.

The style of activity is associated with the style of self-regulation. Both are considered as two interrelated aspects of a holistic individual style of activity, human activity (V.I. Morosanova, G.A. Berulava). In the last decade, this education has included the concept of a cognitive style that determines the features of cognitive activity and is characterized by field independence, differentiation, and analyticity. Currently, the concept of "style" is interpreted in a very broad context, as a style of behavior, style of activity, style of leadership (leadership), communication style, cognitive style, etc.

As emphasized by G.M. Andreeva, the styles of behavior defined by K. Levin were primarily related to the type of decision-making by managers. Three leadership styles were identified: authoritarian, democratic, and permissive. In subsequent studies, such definitions as directive, collegial and permissive were introduced. However, in relation to activity (behavior), interaction, communication, the designations proposed by K. Levin are most often used. There are two sides to the style: content and technical, i.e. formal (techniques, methods). Below is a complete description of the formal and substantive aspects of the three styles according to G.M. Andreeva

Authoritarian style
Formal side	Content side
1. Business, brief instructions. Prohibitions without leniency, with a threat. Clear language, unfriendly tone. Praise and blame are subjective. Emotions are not taken into account. Show techniques are not a system. The leader's position is outside the group. Instructions in the form of proposals.	2. Activities in the group are planned in advance (in all their scope). Only immediate goals are determined, distant ones are unknown. Events are not planned in advance, but in a group. Everyone is responsible for the implementation of the proposals.
Democratic style
Not dry speech, but a friendly tone. Praise and censure - with advice. Orders and prohibitions with discussions. The leader's position is within the group.	All sections of the work are not only proposed, but also discussed
Permissive style
The tone is conventional. Lack of praise, censure. The leader gives no direction. No collaboration. Leader's position - imperceptibly in side of the group.	Things in the group go by themselves. Sections of work are formed from individual interests or come from a new leader.

Researchers define the various functions of a style:

instrumental,

compensatory,

backbone

integrative.

Individual style of activity, according to E.A. Klimov, has a certain structure, the core of which includes individual psychological characteristics that either promote or oppose the success of the activity.

Determining the general styles of behavior, researchers note that in situations of difficulty, conflict, people identify up to ten individual styles of behavior: conflict, confrontational, smoothing, cooperative, compromise, opportunistic, style of avoidance, suppression, rivalry and defense (G.B. Morozova). It is essential that these styles of behavior always accompany one or another individual style of activity, making up its background and giving it an appropriate emotional coloring. They also determine the general emotional background of the style of pedagogical activity, pedagogical communication.

In conclusion, we can say that in relation to behavior, activity, communication, the most common are the definitions of the types of style (in the aggregate of its formal and substantive sides), proposed by K. Levin. Differentiation of style is associated with the specifics of the nature of the interaction of people and their individual psychological characteristics, for example, character accentuation.

The style of activity, reflecting its specificity, includes the style of management, and the style of self-regulation, and the style of communication, and the cognitive style of the psychologist. The style of activity reveals the impact of at least three factors: a) the individual psychological characteristics of the subject of this activity - the teacher (teacher), including individual typological, personal, and behavioral characteristics; b) the characteristics of the activity itself and c) the characteristics of students (age, gender, status, level of knowledge, etc.). In pedagogical activity, characterized by the fact that it is carried out in subject-subject interaction in specific educational situations of the organization and management of the student's educational activity, these factors also correlate: a) with the nature of the interaction; b) with the nature of the organization of activities; c) with the subject-professional competence of the teacher; d) with the nature of communication. At the same time, under the style of communication, according to V.A. Kan-Kaliku, the individual-typological features of the socio-psychological interaction of the teacher and students are understood.

Types of styles. Communication styles are primarily subdivided into three general types: authoritarian, democratic and liberal-permissive, filling at the same time with a proper "pedagogical" content. Here is their description given by A.K. Markova.

Authoritarian style. The opponent is viewed as an object of communicative influence, and not as an equal partner. The communicator decides alone, makes decisions, establishes strict control over the fulfillment of the requirements presented to him, uses his rights without taking into account the situation and opinions of students, does not justify his actions in front of students. As a result, activity is lost or only the leading role of a psychologist is performed, low self-esteem and aggressiveness are revealed. With an authoritarian style, the strength of, for example, students is aimed at psychological self-defense, and not at the assimilation of knowledge for their own development. The main methods of influence are orders, instructions. For a teacher, the character-L is low satisfaction with the profession and professional stability. Teachers with this style of leadership pay the main attention to the methodological culture; they are often in the lead in the teaching staff.

Democratic style. The opponent is viewed as an equal partner in communication, a colleague in a joint search for knowledge. The teacher engages students in decision-making, takes into account their opinions, encourages independence of judgment, takes into account not only academic performance, but also the personal qualities of students. The methods of influence are motivation for action, advice, request. Among teachers with a democratic style of leadership, schoolchildren more often experience states of calm satisfaction and high self-esteem. Teachers with this style pay more attention to their psychological skills. Such teachers are characterized by great professional stability, satisfaction with their profession.

Liberal style. The teacher avoids decision-making, transferring the initiative to students and colleagues. The organization and control of the activities of students is carried out without a system, shows indecision, hesitation. The classroom has an unstable microclimate, latent conflicts. "

Each of these styles, revealing the attitude towards the interaction partner, determines its character: from submission - to partnership - to the absence of directional influence. It is essential that each of these styles presupposes the dominance of either a monologue or a dialogical form of communication. Differentiation of styles, more detailed in terms of the nature of involvement in the activities of a communication teacher, was proposed by V.A. Kan-Kalikom:

the style of the teacher's enthusiasm for joint creative activities with students, which is an expression of the teacher's attitude to his work, to his profession;

a style of friendly disposition, which serves as a general background and a prerequisite for the successful interaction of the teacher with the class. V.A. Kan-Kalik draws attention to the danger of the transition of friendly disposition into familiarity, familiarity, which can have a detrimental effect on pedagogical activity in general. “Friendliness should be pedagogically expedient, not contradict the general system of interactions between a teacher and children”;

communication style is a distance, which is an expression of an authoritarian style, which, having a favorable effect on the external indicators of discipline, organization of students, can lead to personal changes - conformism, frustration, inadequate self-esteem, a decrease in the level of claims, etc.;

communication style - intimidation and flirting, which testifies to the teacher's professional imperfection.

Based on the analysis of the dominance of each of the above styles in the behavior (activity) of the teacher V.A. Kan Kalik is considering eight models.

Styles of activity depending on its nature

The most complete, proper activity-based understanding of the styles of pedagogical activity was proposed by A.K. Markova, A. Ya. Nikonova. As these authors note, the following grounds were put in the basis for distinguishing the style in the work of the teacher: content characteristics of the style (predominant orientation of the teacher to the process or the result of his work, the development by the teacher of the indicative and control-evaluative stages in his work); dynamic characteristics of the style (flexibility, stability, switchability, etc.); effectiveness (the level of knowledge and learning skills of students, as well as the students' interest in the subject). On this basis, the authors have identified four types of individual styles that characterize the modern teacher.

Emotional Improvisational Style (EIS). EIS teachers are distinguished by a predominant focus on the learning process. Explaining new material such a teacher builds lots, it is interesting, but in the process of explaining he often lacks feedback from students. During the survey, the teacher addresses a large number of students, mostly strong ones who are of interest to him, asks them at a fast pace, informal questions, but gives them little to talk, does not wait until they formulate an answer on their own. A teacher with insufficiently adequate planning of the educational process is characteristic: for practicing in the classroom, he picks up the most interesting educational material; less interesting, albeit important, leaves students to work independently. The teacher is distinguished by high efficiency, the use of a large arsenal of various teaching methods. He often practices brainstorming, stimulates students' spontaneous statements. The teacher is characterized by intuition, which is expressed in the frequent inability to analyze the characteristics and effectiveness of their activities in the classroom.

Emotional Methodical Style (EMS). A teacher with EMS is characterized by an orientation toward the process and learning outcomes, adequate planning of the educational process, high efficiency, and a certain predominance of intuition over reflexivity. Focusing both on the process and on the learning outcomes, such a teacher adequately plans the educational process, works out all the educational material in stages, closely monitors the level of knowledge of all students (both strong and weak), reinforcement and repetition are constantly presented in his activities. educational material, control of students' knowledge. Such a teacher is distinguished by high efficiency, he often changes types of work in the lesson, practices collective discussions. Using the same rich arsenal of methodological techniques when working out educational material as a teacher with EIS, a teacher with EMC, unlike the latter, seeks to activate children not with external entertainment, but to firmly interest them in the peculiarities of the subject itself.

Reasoning and improvisational style (RIS). A teacher with RIS is characterized by an orientation towards the process and learning outcomes, adequate planning of the educational process. Compared to teachers of emotional styles, a teacher with RIS shows less ingenuity in the selection and variation of teaching methods, is not always able to provide a high pace of work, rarely practices collective discussions, the relative time of spontaneous speech of his students during lessons is less than that of teachers with an emotional style. The teacher with RIS speaks less himself, especially during the survey, preferring to influence the students in an indirect way (through hints, clarifications, etc.), giving the respondents the opportunity to formulate the answer in detail.

Reasoning Methodical Style (RMS). Focusing mainly on learning outcomes and adequately planning the educational process, a teacher with PMC is conservative in using the means and methods of pedagogical activity. High methodology (systematic consolidation, repetition of educational material, control of students' knowledge) is combined with a small, standard set of teaching methods used, a preference for the reproductive activity of students, and rare group discussions. During the interview process, the teacher addresses a small number of students, giving each a lot of time to answer, paying particular attention to weak students. Reflexivity is characteristic of the teacher as a whole ”.

So, communication activity, like any other activity, is characterized by a certain style. In the broadest sense of the word, the style of activity (for example, managerial, production, pedagogical) is a stable system of methods, techniques, manifested in different conditions of its implementation.

Chapter 2. diagnostic study of the individual style of communication among students, future psychologists 2.1 Organization and research methods

To study the level of sociability, we conducted an experimental study in which 10 students from universities in Yoshkar-Ola took part.

The study used the methodology for determining the general level of sociability V.F. Ryakhovsky and the method of assessing communicative and organizational aptitudes (CBS) (Appendices 1-2)

V.F., Ryakhovsky's methodology explores the level of sociability, communicativeness, the students studied by us took part in it. We proposed a test that contained the ability to determine the level of a person's communication skills. Students had to answer the questions using three options - "yes", "sometimes" and "no". The results obtained by us were summed up, and the classifier determined which category the subject belongs to (see Appendix 1).

Students willingly took part in this study .. They answered with interest the questions presented in the methodology, wishing to reveal their level of sociability

The CBS methodology determines the level of development of communicative and organizational inclinations (Appendix 2). The "KOS" methodology is also based on the principle of reflection and assessment by the subject of certain features of his behavior in various situations. Situations are selected that are familiar to the subject from his personal experience. Therefore, the assessment of the situation and behavior in its conditions is based on the subject's reproduction of his real behavior and the real relationship experienced in his experience. Based on this principle, a projective questionnaire has been created, which makes it possible to identify stable indicators of communicative and organizational inclinations.

In our study, the test students were given the texts of the questionnaire, answer forms, and instructions were read out. Everyone took an active part in the study, tried to answer the questions of the methodology as truthfully as possible, and then shared their impressions.

2.2 Analysis and processing of research results

Sociability results in table 1 and in diagram 1.

Table 1

Results of the study of the level of sociability according to the method of V. Ryakhovsky

№№	Points	General conclusion about the level of sociability
1	16	understated
2	19	understated
3	13	o / low
4	19	understated
5	11	o / low
6	12	o / low
7	19	understated
8	14	o / low
9	22	average
10	11	o / low

Rice. 1. Analysis of the results of the study of the level of sociability according to the method of V. Ryakhovsky

So, according to the results of this study, it can be seen that students generally have an underestimated and low level of sociability.

No one showed a high level of sociability (0%), average - 1 person, underestimated - 4 people, very low - 5 people.

From the data of diagram 1, it can be seen that the average level of managers' sociability is 10%, a high level is 0%, an underestimated level is 40% and a very low level is 50%.

The analysis of the results of the level of development of communicative and organizational aptitudes according to the CBS methodology is presented in tables 2-3 and in diagrams 2-3.

table 2

Results of the study of the level of communication skills (CS) among social teachers using the CBS method

№№	Points	General conclusion about the level
1	0,95	very tall
2	0,85	very tall
3	0,15	short
4	0,8	very tall
5	0,5	below the average
6	0,55	below the average
7	0,85	very tall
8	0,2	short
9	0,35	short
10	0,35	short

Table 3

Results of the study of the level of organizational skills (OU) among social teachers using the CBS method

№№	Points	General conclusion about the level
1	0,95	o / high
2	0,85	o / high
3	0,15	short
4	0,8	high
5	0,5	short
6	0,55	short
7	0,85	o / high
8	0,2	short
9	0,35	short
10	0,35	short

Diagram 2. Results of the study of the level of communication skills (CG) among managers using the CBS method

Diagram 3. Results of the study of the level of organizational skills (OS) among managers using the CBS methodology

So, according to the results of this study, it can be seen that 40% of students have a very high level of communication skills, 20% have a level of communication skills below the average and 40% have a low level of skills.

A high level of organizational skills was shown by only 1 student-psychologist (10%), 60% of students demonstrated a low level, and 30% - a very high level of organizational skills.

To increase the level of development of sociability, communication and organizational skills, we have developed a system of classes (APPENDIX 3) on the formation of students' communicative skills and communication styles. The program is based on the works of A.S. Prutchenkov and F. Burnard.

The program is the development of classes to improve the level of communication, communication and organizational skills, communication style of students.

The system of lessons is built on the basis of 10 lessons of 2 exercises, 1.5-2 hours a week on weekends. The group consists of 10 people.

Conclusion

In conclusion, after conducting theoretical and practical research, it is necessary to draw the following conclusions:

The problem of human communication and its place in the development of a person's ideas about himself is one of the most urgent among those that psychological science is working on.

The concepts consider communication as an independent category, which has its own internal laws of development and acts as the interaction of subjects; as the basis of interpersonal relations and a condition for the development of personality; as an exchange of information. Communication unfolds in the presence of a communicative need, initiative and activity of the subject. Communication is a complex, multi-level and multifunctional social phenomenon. From the standpoint of modern concepts, we have characterized three interrelated aspects of communication: informational (communication), interactive and perceptual.

In communication, both in the process of sequential actions, behavioral acts (both verbal and non-verbal), information is exchanged, interpreted, mutual perception, mutual understanding, mutual appreciation, empathy, the formation of likes and dislikes, the nature of relationships, psychological impact, resolution of contradictions, implementation and regulation joint activities. In business communication, people are united by business interests and joint activities aimed at achieving common goals. The main principle of business relationships is rationality, the search for means to increase the effectiveness of cooperation.

Communication activity, like any other activity, is characterized by a certain style. In the broadest sense of the word, the style of activity (for example, managerial, production, pedagogical) is a stable system of methods, techniques, manifested in different conditions of its implementation.

It is conditioned by the specifics of the activity itself, the individual psychological characteristics of its subject.

An empirical study of communication was carried out on the example of a group of students, future psychologists. The general level of sociability, the level of development of communicative and organizational inclinations has been determined.

For students, well-developed communication skills, the desire to expand the sphere of contacts, the ability to convince and achieve their goals are more important.

An analysis of the results of empirical research showed that students have a low level of sociability and a low level of communication and organizational skills.

40% of students showed a very high level of communication skills, 20% had a level of communication skills below the average and 40% had a low level of skills.

Only 10% of the respondents showed a high level of organizational skills, 60% of students demonstrated a low level, and 30% - a very high level of organizational skills.

To increase the level of development of sociability, communication skills and communication style, we have developed a system of classes for the formation of empathic, communicative and organizational skills of managers. The program is based on the works of A.S. Prutchenkov and F. Burnard. The program is a system of classes to improve the level of communication, empathy, communication and organizational skills of managers.

Completing the training course contributes to the development of communication skills, the development of an optimal communication style, more effective communication with clients and partners, prompt resolution of issues and, ultimately, an increase in work efficiency.

Thus, the hypothesis is proved, the goals are achieved, the tasks are solved.

List of used literature

1. Abulkhanova-Slavskaya, K.A. Activity and personality psychology. /K.A. Abulkhanova-Slavskaya, - M .: Mysl, 1991.-174 p.

2. Andreeva, G.M. Social psychology / G.M. Andreeva, - M .: AspectPress, 2002 .-- 363 p.

3. Batarshev, A.V. Psychodiagnostics of the ability to communicate, or how to determine the organizational and communicative qualities of a person

/ A.V. Batarshev, - M .: VLADOS, 1999 .-- 174 p.

4. Bodalev, A.A. To the problem of social perception. Sat. Experimental and Applied Psychology / A.A. Bodalev, L.-1970, 312 p.

5. Bodalev, A.A. Personality and communication: Selected psychological works. - 2nd ed. / A.A. Bodalev, - M .: International. ped. Academy, 1995.- 420 p.

6. Buyeva, G.A. Man: activity and communication / G.A. Buyeva, - M., 1978 .-- 132 p.

7. Gorelov, I.N. Non-verbal components of communication / I.N. Gorelov - M., Nauka, 1980 .-- 345 p.

8. Zlobodina, E.G. Communication as a factor in personality development. / E.G. Zlobodina, - Kiev: Nauk, Dumka, 1982.

9. Fundamentals of management / GB. Kaznachevskaya, I.N., Chuev, - Rostov-on-Don, 2004 .-- 490 p.

10. Kalyuzhny, A.S. Psychology of interpersonal communication: Textbook. pos. / A.S. Kalyuzhny, - N. Novgorod: NSTU, 2004.-132 p.

11. Kolominskiy, Ya.L. Psychology of communication / Ya.L. Kolominsky, - M .: Knowledge, 1989. - 440 p.

12. Kuzmin, E.S. Fundamentals of Social Psychology. / B.C. Kuzmin, - SPb .: LGU, 1967.-173 p.

13. Carnegie D. How to win friends and influence people / D. Carnegie. - M., 2006 .-- 864 p.

14. Lavrinenko V.N. Psychology and ethics of business communication / V.N. Lavrinenko, - M .: Unity, 1997 .-- 211 p.

15. Leontiev A.L. Pedagogical communication / A.L, Leontiev - M., 1979 - 118 p.

16. Lisina M.I. Communication, personality and psyche of a child / M.I., Lisina, - M .: Voronezh, 1997.-320 p.

17. Lomov, B.F. Communication and social regulation of individual behavior // Psychological problems of social regulation of behavior / B.F. Lomov, - M., 1976. - 345 p.

18. Mescon M.Kh. Fundamentals of Management / M.Kh. Mescon, M. Albert, F. Hedouri, - M .: Delo, M., 1993 .-- 512 p.

19. Panferov V.N. Communication as a subject of social and psychological research. Diss. Doctor of Psychological Sciences / V.N. Panferov- SPb .: Leningrad State University, 1983.-300 p.

20. Parygin, B.D. Fundamentals of socio-psychological theory / B.D. Parygin, - M .: Mysl, 1971.-351 p.

21. Rodionov, B.A. Communication as a social phenomenon / B.A. Rodionov / Otv. ed. V.E. Davidovich. - Rostov-on-Don: RSU, 1984. -143 p.

22. Rytchenko T.A. Psychology of business relations / T.A. Rytchenko - MGUESI, M., 2001 .-- 356 p.

Annex 1

Methodology "Determination of the general level of sociability"

Instruction: "Some simple questions are offered to your attention. Evaluation of answers:" yes "- 2 points," sometimes "- 1 point," no "- 0 points.

The points obtained are summed up, and the classifier determines which category the subject belongs to.

Test classifier

30-31 points. You are clearly uncommunicative, and this is your problem, since you yourself suffer the most from this. But it is not easy for people close to you. You are hard to rely on in a group effort. Try to be more sociable, control yourself.

25-29 points. You are withdrawn, taciturn, prefer loneliness, so you have few friends. New work and the need for new contacts, if not plunging you into panic, then throw you off balance for a long time. You know this feature of your character and are dissatisfied with yourself. But do not limit yourself only to such dissatisfaction - it is in your power to reverse these character traits. Doesn't it happen that with any strong enthusiasm you suddenly acquire complete communication skills? One has only to shake things up.

19-24 points. You are sociable to a certain extent and feel quite confident in unfamiliar surroundings. New problems do not scare you. And yet you converge with new people with caution, they are reluctant to participate in disputes and disputes. There is sometimes too much sarcasm in your statements, for no reason at all. These flaws are fixable.

14-18 points. You have normal communication skills. You are inquisitive, willingly listen to an interesting interlocutor, are patient enough in communication, defend your point of view without irascibility. You go to meet new people without unpleasant feelings. At the same time, do not like noisy companies; extravagant antics and verbosity irritate you.

9-13 points. You are very sociable (sometimes, perhaps even beyond measure). They are curious, talkative, like to speak out on various issues, which sometimes irritates others. Meet new people willingly. Love to be in the spotlight, do not refuse requests to anyone, although you cannot always fulfill them. It happens, flare up, but quickly withdraw. What you lack is perseverance, patience and courage when faced with serious problems. If you wish, however, you can force yourself not to back down.

4-8 points. You must be a shirt-guy. Sociability hits you with a key. You are always up to date with all matters. You love to take part in all discussions, although serious topics can give you migraines or even blues. You are willing to take the floor on any issue, even if you have a superficial understanding of it. You feel at ease everywhere. Take on any business, although you cannot always successfully complete it. For this very reason, managers and colleagues treat you with some apprehension and doubts. Consider these facts.

3 points or less. Your communication skills are painful. You are talkative, verbose, intervene in matters that have nothing to do with you. You undertake to judge the problems in which you are completely incompetent. Willingly or unwillingly, you are often the cause of all sorts of conflicts in your environment. Hot-tempered, touchy, often biased. Serious work is not for you. People - at work, at home, and in general everywhere - find it difficult with you. Yes, you need to work on yourself and your character! First of all, cultivate patience and restraint in yourself, treat people with respect, finally, think about your health - this lifestyle does not pass without a trace.

Questionnaire text

You have an ordinary or business meeting. Does her expectation unsettle you?

Do you feel confused and displeased to be asked to give a presentation, message, information at a meeting, meeting or similar event?

Do you postpone your visit to the doctor until the last moment?

You are offered to go on a business trip to a city where you have never been. Will you do your best to avoid this business trip?

Do you like to share your experiences with anyone?

Are you annoyed if a stranger on the street asks you to (show the way, tell the time, answer a question)?

Do you believe that there is a problem of "fathers and children" and that people of different generations find it difficult to understand each other?

Are you ashamed to remind your friend that he forgot to return the money that he borrowed a few months ago?

In the restaurant or in the dining room, you were served an obviously poor quality dish. Will you keep silent, only angrily pushing the plate away?

Finding yourself one on one with a stranger. You will not enter into a conversation with him and will be burdened if he speaks first. Is it so?

You are horrified by any long line, wherever it may be (in a store, library, cinema box office). Do you prefer to abandon your intention or stand in the tail and languish in anticipation?

Are you afraid to participate in any conflict resolution commission?

You have your own purely individual criteria for evaluating works of literature, art, culture and you will not accept any other people's opinions on this matter. This is true?

Hearing somewhere on the sidelines the statement of an obviously erroneous point of view on a question well known to you, do you prefer to remain silent and not enter into a conversation?

Do you feel annoyed by someone's request to help you sort out a particular business issue or academic topic?

Are you more willing to express your point of view (opinion, assessment) in writing than orally?

Appendix 2

Methods for studying communication and organizational skills

Instruction: “The test offered to you contains 40 questions. Read them and answer all questions using the form. The question numbers are printed on the form. If your answer to the question is yes, that is, you agree with what is asked in the question, then circle the corresponding number on the form. If your answer is no, that is, you do not agree, then cross out the corresponding number. Make sure that the question number and the number on the answer sheet match. Please note that the questions are general in nature and may not provide all the necessary details. Therefore, imagine typical situations and do not think about the details. Don't waste a lot of time thinking, answer quickly. Some questions may be difficult for you to answer. Then try to give the goth answer that you think is preferable. When answering any of these questions, pay attention to his first words and coordinate your answer with them. When answering questions, do not try to make an inherently pleasant impression. Sincerity is important when answering. "

Choose yes or no answers to the questions below.

P / p No.	Questions	Yes	Not
1	Do you have a lot of friends with whom you constantly communicate?
2	Do you often manage to persuade most of your classmates (colleagues) to accept your opinion?
3	How long have you been bothered by the feeling of resentment inflicted on you by one of your friends?
4	Is it always difficult for you to navigate in a critical situation that has arisen?
5	Do you have a desire to make new acquaintances with different people?
6	Do you enjoy doing community service
7	Is it true that you enjoy spending time with books or doing something (occupation) than with people?
8	If there are some obstacles in the implementation of your intentions, then do you easily deviate from them?
9	Do you easily connect with people who are much older than you?
10	Do you like to organize various entertainment with your friends?
11	Is it difficult for you to get involved in companies that are new to you?
12	Do you often postpone things for other days? Which should have been done today?
13	Do you find it easy to connect with strangers?
14	Do you strive to ensure that your colleagues (classmates) act in accordance with your opinions?
15	Is it difficult for you to get used to the new team?
16	Is it true that you do not have conflicts with classmates because of their failure to fulfill their promises, obligations, obligations?
17	Do you strive to meet and talk with a new person on a successful occasion?
18	How often do you take the initiative when solving important matters?
19	Do the people around you annoy you and do you want to be alone?
20	Is it true that you are usually not good at navigating in unfamiliar surroundings?
21	Do you like being around people all the time?
22	Do you get annoyed if you can't finish what you started?
23	Do you feel embarrassed, uncomfortable, or embarrassed to take the initiative to meet a new person?
24	Is it true that you get tired of frequent communication with your friends?
25	Do you like to participate in group games?
26	How often do you take the initiative in dealing with issues that affect the interests of your friends?
27	Is it true that you feel insecure among people you don't know much?
28	Is it true that you rarely seek to prove yourself right?
29	Do you think that it will not be difficult for you to revitalize a company you are unfamiliar with?
30	Do you take part in community work?
31	Are you trying to limit your circle of acquaintances to a small number of people?
32	Is it true that you strive to defend your opinion, a decision, if it was not immediately taken by your classmates (colleagues)?
33	Do you feel at ease. Finding yourself in an unfamiliar company?
34	Are you willing to start organizing various events for your classmates (colleagues)?
35	Is it true that you feel confident and calm enough when you have to say something to a large group of people?
36	Are you often late for business meetings, dates?
37	Is it true that you have many friends?
38	How often do you find yourself in the center of attention of your classmates (colleagues)
39	Do you often feel embarrassed or embarrassed when dealing with unfamiliar people?
40	Is it true that you are not very confident when surrounded by a large group of people you know?

Keys and processing of results.

The results are processed by comparing the answers with the key (separately for communicative (CS) and organizational (OU) skills).

The answer is "yes" to questions No. 1, 5, 9, 13, 17, 21, 25, 29, 33, 37

The answer is "no" to questions No. 3,7, 11, 15, 19, 23, 27, 31, 35, 39

The answer is "yes" to questions No. 2, 6, 10, 14, 18, 22, 26, 30, 34, 38

The answer is "no" to questions No. 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40

The number of answers coinciding with the key is calculated for each section of the methodology, then the estimated coefficients are calculated separately for CU and OU according to the formula:

K = 0.05 * C, where:

K is the value of the estimated coefficient

С - the number of answers that match the key.

Estimated coefficients can range from 0 to 1

An indicator close to 1. speaks of a high level of CU and OU, close to 0 - a low level. The primary indicators of CU and OU can be presented in the form of assessments indicating different levels of the skills being studied.

Communication skills:

Indicator	Grade	Level
0,10-0,45	1	I- low
0,46-0,55	2	II- below average
0,56-0,65	3	III- medium
0,66-0,75	4	IV-high
0,76-1	5	V-very high

Organizational skills:

Indicator	Grade	Level
0,20-0,55	1	I- low
0,56-0,65	2	II- below average
0,66-0,70	3	III- medium
0,71-0,80	4	IV-high
0,81-1	5	V-very high

Analysis of the results obtained.

The test for assessing the level of sociability, communicativeness contains the ability to determine the level of a person's sociability. The questions should be answered using three possible answers - "yes", "sometimes" and "no".

Instruction: "Several simple questions are offered to your attention. Answer quickly, unequivocally:" yes "," no "," sometimes. "

Evaluation of responses;

"yes" - 2 points, "sometimes" - 1 point, "no" - 0 points.

The points obtained are summed up, and the classifier determines which category the subject belongs to.

Test classifier

3 points or less.

Your communication skills are painful. You are talkative, verbose, intervene in matters that have nothing to do with you. You undertake to judge the problems in which you are completely incompetent. Willingly or unwillingly, you are often the cause of all sorts of conflicts in your environment. Hot-tempered, touchy, often biased. Serious work is not for you. People - at work, at home, and in general everywhere - find it difficult with you. Yes, you need to work on yourself and your character! First of all, cultivate patience and restraint in yourself, treat people with respect, finally, think about your health - this lifestyle does not pass without a trace.
Questionnaire text