CC BY
6__
2. BUJDOVA, N., BUJDA, S., RAZZOUKOVÀ, E. 2013. Status seniora v su-casnej spolocnosti. In BOCAKOVA, O. (ed.). So-
ciâlna politika a seniori. Trencin. Trencianska univerzita Alexandra Dubceka v Trencine, 2013, s. 26-31, ISBN 978-80-8075-612-3.
3. HABAnIK, T. 2016. Determinants of demographic changes in Slovakia and their impact on national social policy. In BOCAKOVA, O., HABANIK, T. (eds.) Slovenskâ republika ako predsedajûca krajina Europskej ûnie (Europska kohézia). Brno: Tribun EU, 2016, s. 44-52, ISBN 978-80-263-1065-5.
4. HROZENSKA, M. 2013. Medzigen-eracnâ solidarita zperspektivy vzt'ahov medzi dos-pelymi det'mi a ich starnûcimi rodicmi. In Slovak Journal for Educational Sciences, Vol. 4, No. 3, s. 197-213, ISSN 1338-0982.
5. CHOMOVA, S. 2012. Euröpsky rok ak-tivneho starnutia a solidarity medzi generâciami 2012. Bratislava: Nârodné osvetové centrum,
2014, 39 s.
6. koprlovA, J., KOPRLA, M. 2010.
Analyza vyvoja a struktùry procesov starnutia obyvatel'ov Slovenskej republiky - specifikâcia pre kraje. In Sociâlne a politické analyzy, 2010, Vol. 4, No. 2, s. 28-92, ISSN 1337 5555.
7. UHER, I. 2014. Determinanty kvality ziv-ota seniorov. Kosice: Univerzita Pavla Jozefa Safârika v Kosiciach, 2014, 133 s. ISBN 978-808152-136-2.
8. VANO, B. 2015. Sùcasny a ocakâvany populacny vyvoj na Slovensku a jeho spolocenské a ekonomické dopady. In Prognostické prâce,
2015, Vol. 7, No. 3, 2015, s. 273-293 ISSN 13383590.
Национальная ассоциация ученых (НАУ) # 2 (29), 2017
CONCEPTUALIZATION PRINCIPLES OF QUALITY OF LIFE
prof. PhDr. Dusan Polonsky, CSc.
Professor
Ss. Cyril and Methodius University Faculty of Social science in Trnava
Slovakia
ПРИНЦИПЫ КОНЦЕПТУАЛИЗАЦИИ КАЧЕСТВА ЖИЗНИ
Душан Полонски Профессор
Университет св. Кирилла и Мефодия Факультет социальных наук Словакия
ABSTRACT
The paper deals with defining the conceptualization principles of quality of life. It refers to its essence, the fundamental aspects and factors (subjective and objective) that will determine its level. At the same time it deals with the problem domains and indicators of quality of life (subjective) that could be measured.
АННОТАЦИЯ
В статье paccMarprnaeTCH определение принципов концептуализации качества жизни. Это относится к его сущности, основным аспектом и фaктоpoм (субъективным и объективным), которые будут определять его уровень. В то же время она имеет дело с проблемными областями и показателями качества жизни (субъективные), которые могут быть измерены.
Keywords: Quality of Life, Domains and Indicators of Quality of Life, Ways of Measuring Quality of Life, Survey Subjective Understanding of Quality of Life
Ключевые слова: качество жизни, домены и показатели качества жизни, субъективное понимание качества жизни
We can say the universal definition of quality of life is not available. M. Rapley (10) writes about the possibility of a particular specification in practice by defining the so called "Conceptualization principles" group. He suggests that the quality of life:
• consists of such factors and relationships that are important for people with intellectual disabilities as well as for people without any disabilities,
• is felt when one's needs are meet when and one has the opportunity to accomplish his/her life aims in the major life areas,
• consists of the objective and subjective components, but mainly it is the perception of the individual, which reflects the quality of life that he/she lives,
• is based on the individual's needs, choices and control,
• is a multidimensional construct, affected by personal and environmental factors such as intimate relationships, family life, friendship, work, education, housing, health, standard of living, etc.
From the literature available and from our daily experiences it is clear that the quality of life is a multi-dimensional phenomenon with several aspects: material (materialized) (e.g. economic, biological, neuro-physiological, etc.); spiritual (e.g. political, ethical, aesthetic, axiological, religious, etc.); cultural (e.g. the state of possibilities and available material, spiritual and normative culture) and two fundamental dimensions - social (social and group) and individual (personality) dimension (5, 6, 10, 11).
In concrete real fulfilment of the above mentioned (not the only one possible) structure some of the aspects or dimensions can dominate, another one can be suppressed to the background or even distorted. Therefore, the definition of the principle of the quality of life in its optimal (optimized) level and the form must necessarily reckon with this poly-dimensionality, take it into account in relation to personality structure or if you like a particular type of social group (e.g. family), organization or society as a whole.
In light of societal influence we can distinguish two groups of factors that simultaneously affect the quality of people's lives. It concerns endogenous and exogenous factors. The endogenous factors create and develop the potential for accepting or rejecting the exogenous factors which affect the examined unit from the outside. Endogenous and exogenous factors thus create the framework for quality of life (7). Endogenous factors form the location, human capital, knowledge society and regional competitiveness. Macro considers location of the state in terms of east - west gradient to
be a key factor. The exogenous factors include civilization change, globalization and competition among other regions. S.P. Huntington (4) delivered the following inspirational statement of facts in connection with civilization changes: "Far more significant than economics and demography are problems of moral decline, cultural suicide, and political disunity in the West".
Based on these ideas, we summarize that the phenomenon of the quality of life has its objective determinants on one hand consisting in natural, material-technical and social conditions under which people live their everyday life. On the other hand there is the quality of life of each individual subjectively perceived from his/her point of view and evaluated according to saturation of his/her own needs, fulfilling his/her expectations of life, comparing his/her quality of life with the quality of life of other people, etc. - reclining also upon the activities and the value orientation of each person.
Domain and social indicators have become the specific problem in understanding and coordination of the quality of life. The expected result as well as the means of objective knowledge of quality of life is indicators of the quality of life. We see them as qualitative-quantitative characteristics of the social processes that include individual respect and aspects of social development of individuals and social groups.
One of the synthesizing models of the quality of life is the model of the World Health Organisation (WHO) set in 1997 (WHQOL 1997), in which the four main areas (domains) of the quality of life and its internal components (indicators) were defined. These areas of the quality of life are: physical health and level of independence; mental behaviour; social relationships and environment. Each of the aforesaid indicators itself presents a complex problem set.
In social-geographical approach to quality of life the study of its spatial differentiation and relations within its personal (human) dimension is accented. The essence of this fact is shown in R. Veenhoven table - suitability of the environment for life (Table 1- next page).
On the other hand, as it has been pointed out by E. Hermanova (3) a large number of indicators (objective and subjective aggregated at macro, meso and micro levels of the society) may cause unintentional as well as intentional misrepresentation of reality - if, for example several indicators are included in one figure (for better clarity and comprehension). Therefore, she points out to the possibility of framework, so-called aggregated hierarchy (hierarchical) indexes, which enables more relevant interpretation of sub-areas (at R.
Veenhoven's quadrants) and the structure of quality of life.
Table 1
Mod el of four qualities of life (summative expression of eight matrixes)
Dimensions of the quality of life Outer qualities of life (Social dimension) Inner qualities of life (Personal dimension)
Life chances, opportunities 1. Liveability of environment General and special conditions for happiness; income, social contacts, social position (safety), opportunities; political support; social relationships; gender equality; income equality; material wealth. The quality of society - environmental suitability score. Position in society - deprivation index. 2. Life-ability of a person The absence of work and social functions limits; good general health, energetic, without nervousness; productivity; autonomy; education. Decrease of index value, positive health conditions, tests of skills and level of education.
Life results 3. Utility of life Productivity, social responsibility, ir-retrievability; 4. Appreciation of life Happiness; satisfaction with material conditions, social contacts, social position, security, freedom; doing interesting things; life satisfaction; life experiences. A summary of life satisfaction, self-assessment of happiness and happy years of life.
Source: VEENH [OVEN, R. (11)
International comparisons are an important tool for awareness of the real position of a country in a certain geopolitical area and finding solutions for desired development trends and given objectives. External indicator of maturity of countries and a comprehensive indicator of living conditions for people is a HDI - Human Development Index. Its results are published each year by the UN in form of "Reports on the social situation". The achieved quality of life is examined and the GDI -Gender Related Development Index is also measured. The Index compares protection of equal conditions and opportunities for men and women (9).
One of the models that include the individual aspects is so called model of subjective quality of life of the Centre for Health Promotion at University of Toronto. This multidimensional model based on a holistic understanding of quality of life is composed of three main areas - domains ("to be", "to belong somewhere " and "to fulfil oneself") and the indicators assigned to them (www.utoronto.ca/qol/proj ects.htm).
Institute of Experimental Psychology of Slovak Academy of Science created a hypothetical model of quality of life, which consists of three levels and their indicators (5):
1. basal existential (universal / all-people) -it consists of areas of life that saturate the quality or non-quality of life of any person in this world
namely somatic condition, standard mental condition, functional family, material and social security, vital environment, acquisition of basic skills necessary for survival;
2. meso individual-specific (civilization) - is made up of good health, a prosperous social inclusion, level of civilization development, friendly environment, degree of acquired knowledge and skills, experiences of satisfaction - well-being;
3. meta elite (cultural - spiritual) level of quality of life - lies in non-problematic ageing, enjoying well-deserved recognition, diapason of doing good, contributing to the development of life, adequacy of solidarity and pro-social behaviour, as well as in the intensity of self-cultivation.
Subjective quality of life means first and foremost the perception of personal well-being of people, evaluate their own position in life, based on personal experience. Quality of human life cannot but be methodologically grab a one-off measurements, questionnaires or making provision so simple. Objective factors and subjective factors are complex - it can be based on the application of several research methods and techniques.
J.C. Flanagan (1978) constructed a measure that encompasses 15 quality of life elements within 5 domains (Table 2 - next page). These elements are the concrete indicators of quality of life - we can measure them by sociological, social-psychological or psychological techniques.
Национальная ассоциация ученых (НАУ) # 2 (29), 2017 21
Table 2
Domains of Quality of Life
DOMAINS INDICATORS (quality of life elements)
Physical and Material well-being • Material well-being and financial security • Health and personal safety
Relations with other people • Relations with spouse • Having and raising children • Relations with parents, siblings or other relatives • Relations with friends
Social, Community and Civic Activities • Activities related to helping or encouraging other people • Activities relating to local and national governments
Personal Development and Fulfilment • Intellectual development • Personal understanding and planning • Occupational role • Creativity and personal expression
Recreation • Socializing • Passive and observational recreational activities • Active and participatory recreational activities
Source: FLANAGAN, J.C. (2)
An area in which lively interest has been shown in subjective indicators of QL has been the field of gerontology. As mentioned earlier, use of subjective measures of well-being was particularly high during the 1960s and 1970s, when social gerontologists were occupied with assessing the merits of disengagement and activity theories. In the late 1970s, Larson (1978) reviewed three decades of research and concluded that the most consistent predictors of subjective well-being are self-reports of health. Although gerontological studies have employed general well-being measures (e.g. the Affect Balance Scale), they have also employed scales specifically developed for use with older people. The two best known are the Life Satisfaction Index A (Neugarten et al. 1961) and the Philadelphia Geriatric Morale Scale (Lawton 1975). The Life Satisfaction Index A consists of twenty items, with which respondents indicate agreement or disagreement. A combined life satisfaction score is obtained by summing scores on all twenty items (6).
In Ss. Cyril and Methodius University, Faculty of Social sciences in Trnava we want to examine research project: The Current Status of Research and the Possibilities for Increasing the Quality of Life of Seniors in Social Services in the Slovak Republic (1). It is based on subjective perception of quality of life of personal well-being and to identify possibilities of enhancing - by seniors in institutions of Social Services.
Bibliography
1. BOCAKOVA, O. a kol. Aktualny stav a vyskum moznosti zvysenia kvality zivota sen-iorov v zariadeniach socialnych sluzieb v Slov-enskej republike (The Current Status of Research and the Possibilities for Increasing the Quality of Life of Seniors in Social Services in the Slovak Republic). Research project VEGA. Trnava: FSV UCM, 2016.
2. FLANAGAN, J.C. A research approach to improving our quality of life. In: American Psychologist 1978. Dostupne na: http://psycnet.apa.org/ j ournals/amp/33/2/138/
3. HERMANOVA, E. Koncepty, teorie a mereni kvality zivota (Concepts, theory and measurement of quality of life). Praha : SLON, 2012, 239 s. ISBN 978-80-7419-106-0.
4. HUNTINGTON, S. Stret civilizaci. Boj kultur a promena svetoveho radu (The Clash of Civilizations. Fight Cultures and the Remaking of World Order). 1. Vyd. Praha: Rybka Publishers, 448 s. 2001. ISBN 80 86182-49-5
5. KOVAC, D. Kvalita zivota - naliehava vyzva pre vedu noveho tisicrocia (Quality of life -an Urgent Challenge for Science of the New Millennium). Ceskoslovenska psychologie, c. 1, roc. 45. Praha : Academia, 2001, s. 34-44. ISSN 0009-069X
6. MASSAM, B. H.: Quality of life: public planning and private living. Progress in Planning, Volume 58, Issue 3, 1 October 2002, pgs. 141227. ISSN 0305-9006
Национальная ассоциация ученых (НАУ) # 2 (29), 2017
22
7. MURGAS, F. Endogenne a exogenne predpoklady rastu kvality zivota (Endogenous and Exogenous Growth Assumptions of Quality of Life). In: Geographia Cassoviensis I., Kosice : UPJS, 2007, s. 133-136 ISBN 978-80-7097-700-2
8. NAKONECNY, M. Lexikon psychologie (Lexikon of Psychology). Praha: Portal, 1998. 397 s. ISBN 80-85255-74-X
9. POLONSKY, D. Quality of life - social (sociological) aspects. Bulgaria: International Multidisciplinary Scientific Conferences on Social Sciences and Arts - SGEM, 2015
10. RAPLEY, M. Quality of Life Research. A Critical Introduction. London : Sage Publications, 2003, 286 s. ISBN 0-7619-5457-0
11. VEENHOVEN, R. The four qualities of life. Ordering concepts and measures of the good life. Published In: Mark McGillivray & Mathew Clark (Eds.) 'Understanding Human Well-being', 2006, United Nations University Press. Tokyo-NewYork-Paris. Pages 74-100, ISBN 92-8081130-4.
12. The Quality of Life Model: Centre for Health Promotion, University of Toronto. www.utoronto.ca/ qol/proj ects.htm
SOCIAL STATE, PUBLIC SECTOR AND THE FAMILY
PhDr. Alexander Cemez, PhD.
Doctor of Philosophy University of Ss. Cyril and Methodius Faculty of Social science in Trnava
Slovakia
ГОСУДАРСТВО ВСЕОБЩЕГО БЛАГОСОСТОЯНИЯ, ГОСУДАРСТВЕННОГО
СЕКТОРА И СЕМЬИ
Александр 4eMe3
Доктор философских наук Университет св. Кирилла и Мефодия Факультет социальных наук Словакия
ABSTRACT
In this paper we deal with the connection between the social state, public sector and the family. We deal with the changes that appeared after the transformation process in 1989.
АННОТАЦИЯ
В этой статье мы опишем связь между государством всеобщего благосостояния, государственного сектора и семьи. Мы имеем дело с изменениями, которые произошли после того, как процесс трансформации в 1989 году.
Key words: social state, public sector, family
Ключевые слова: социальное государство, государственный сектор, семьи
Introduction
Family and state have still belonged among the most discussed concepts of public discourse and long-lasting social institutions in terms of applied ways of conduct and behaviour. Changes of family are related to the transformation of the society and politics after 1989, and the development of democracy, as well as the free competition of political parties and movements within the political system of these countries.
Main part
„The problem of relations that affect the state's social character is broadly conceived issue and it is possible to approach it from various aspects" [1]. The public sector provides the values, which are not determined for achieving the profit. In this way, it distinguishes from the private sector, which provides the values for the purpose of achieving the profit. From mentioned arises that the public sector is necessary for the reason that some values are not worth to be provided in some localities.
