The level of civic identity formation: The problem of empirical determination
Abstract
It is clarified the phenomenon of civic identity, as well as its empirical indicators. It is carried out the comparative analysis of the methods and techniques of individual civic identity diagnostics to find the effective methods of its determination. An important empirical indicator of civic identity is recognized not only as the formal personal awareness of belonging to the state as a citizen, but also by the value-semantic inclusion in the organizational and axiological environment of the state. The problem of the adequate tools selection for determination and fixation of these phenomena is crucial for the results reliability. This is evidenced by the controversial results of our empirical civic identity studies, obtained with the usage of various measuring instruments. The first study was conducted by a questionnaire, in which the respondents were asked a direct question about their citizenship, its priority and value for them. In the second study it was used the method of incidents – diagnostic situations of offenses committed by the state / person; the participant was evaluating the responsibility degree of the offender. The first study showed the existence of a prevailing majority of respondents’ civic identity: they are not only considering themselves as citizens of the Ukrainian state, but also proud of it. The results of the second study approved that when assessing the state responsibility the participants show rigorism, and when assessing the responsibility of a person who causes damage to the state – the tolerance and relativism are shown. The third study, performed with the usage of the projective method "Completion of the story", showed the dominance of the individual-adaptive behavior value in the state threatening conditions. This indicates the discrepancy between the declared values and behavioral sets in the civic identity experience, therefore confirms the need to use a different-leveled (both conscious and unconscious) diagnostics of civic identity
References
[1] Hart, D., Richardson, C., & Wilkenfeld, B. (2011). Civic Identity. In S. J. Schwartz, K. Luyckx, & V. L. Vignoles (Eds.). Handbook of Identity Theory and Research, 771–787.
[2] Hansen, H. E., & Hesli, V. L. (2009). National identity: civic, ethnic, hybrid, and atomised individuals. Europe-Asia Studies, 61(1), 1–28.
[3] Pakulskі, J., & Tranter, B. (2000). Civic, national and denizen identity in Australia. Journal of Sociology, 36 (2), 205–222.
[4] Patyrbaeva, K. V., Kozlov, V. V., Mazur, E. Yu., Konobeev, H. M., Mazur, D. V., Marycas, K., & Patyrbaeva, M. Y. (2012). Identichnost: sotsialnopsikhologicheskiye i sotsialno-filosofskiye aspekty [Identity: socio-psychological and socio-philosophical aspects]. Perm: Permskiy gosudarstvennyy natsionalnyy issledovatelskiy universitet (rus).
[5] Khazratova, N. V., & Havrylovska, K. P. (2012). Diahnostyka rivnia subiektyvnoi lehitymnosti pravovykh norm [Diagnostics of the level of subjective legitimacy of legal norms]. Praktychna psykholohiia i sotsialna robota, 3, 17–23 (ukr).
[6] Petrovska, I. R. (2016). Strukturno-typolohichnyi pidkhid do analizu hromadianskoi identychnosti [Structural-typological Approach to the Analysis of Civic Identity]. Psykholohichni perspektyvy, 27, 161–173.