CC BY
0Central Asian Journal of
Education and Innovation
THE RESULTS OF THE FORMATION OF SANOGENIC THINKING IN THE STUDY OF BEHAVIORAL CHARACTERISTICS Zukhra Abdurakhmanova
- Associate Professor, Department of Psychology, Tashkent University of Applied Sciences, (PhD) https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.11409642
ARTICLE INFO
Qabul qilindi: 20-May 2024 yil Ma'qullandi: 25- May 2024 yil Nashr qilindi: 31- May 2024 yil
KEY WORDS
person, adolescent, student, teacher, parent, fear, anxiety, sanogenic thinking, positive thinking
ABSTRACT
This article describes the psychological units that made up the factor analysis between personality traits and personality traits in our research work on the psychological characteristics of sanogenic thinking in the respondents.
In the world, creative, modular technologies for improving social-psychological mechanisms of development of sanogenic thinking of teenagers and students are put into practice. Improvement of cognitive, creative, socio-psychological mechanisms of interpersonal relations, kindness, tolerance, feelings of mutual loyalty, gratitude, development of philosophical-methodological, spiritual-ethical aspects of development of healthy thinking, development of socio-psychological characteristics of sanogenic thinking in adolescent students systematic works are being carried out.
340 respondents from Tashkent State Pedagogical University and Institute of Social and Political Sciences participated in the study of the psychological characteristics of the development of sanogenic thinking in students. During the study of the level of sanogenic thinking and its socio-psychological aspects in the selected respondents, the method of factor analysis was also used on the questionnaires conducted together with their general average values. In order to check the psychological characteristics that serve to develop and form the level of sanogenic thinking in young students using factor analysis, the "Level of Anxiety" methodology developed by Spielberger Khanin, the questionnaire "Study of the motive of success" by Ehlers, the questionnaire "Sanogenic thinking" by Morozyuk, the questionnaire "Social Thought" and Stefanson Questionnaires such as "Q-sorting i.e. determination of personal behavior" developed by Factor analysis is such a statistical indicator that the methods or questionnaire scales used in the research have weight or there are redundant scales and it is considered one of the criteria that allows to determine a high result in achieving the goal of the research.
The factor analysis indicators of the results obtained from questionnaires such as the study of the factors of personality characteristics taken from the student youth studying at the Tashkent State Pedagogical University and the Institute of Social and Political Sciences are presented. The results obtained from the research showed that the factor analysis indicators
of the questionnaires, such as the anxiety level of the students, motivation for success, characteristics of sanogenic thinking and social opinion, and the mechanism that determines how their mutual socio-psychological characteristics are established. The results of the test subjects were combined into one component by factor analysis. The psychological factors that made up the factor analysis indicators of student youth were mutually differentiated with results such as anxiety level 0.903, success motive 0.889, sanogenic thinking characteristics 0.924 and social opinion 0.880. The values collected by the examinees were combined into single factors, and these factors formed the main characteristics that determined the main values and significant differences in the questionnaire.
In the course of clarifying our research on the psychological characteristics of the development of sanogenic thinking in young students, the psychological characteristics of various levels cannot remain unaffected in the life of each respondent. In this regard, we can see that the psychological units that formed the factor analysis between the characteristics of the Q-sort questionnaire were manifested as follows. According to the factor analysis of the results of the examinees, it was shown that the indicators were combined into 3 components. The psychological factors that made up the first scale were differentiated with the following results: submissive 0.549, introverted 0.509, sociable 0.537, combative 0.841, and combative 0.721. The psychological factors that make up the second scale are characterized separately with the result of subordination 0.430, independence 0.862, sociability 0.572, struggler 0.444 and struggle avoider 0.502. The psychological factors that make up the third scale: submissive 0.507, introverted 0.623, sociable 0.595, combative 0.580 and combative 0.491 are separately characterized. We can see that the results obtained by the students from the research are combined into three factors and these factors form the main indicators that define the main important results and indicators in the survey.
Factor analysis indicators obtained from questionnaires of personality characteristics and Q-sorting characteristics of students are shown. The results obtained from the study on sanogenic thinking in the respondents show that the results of the questionnaires of the students' personality characteristics and the Q-sort indicators were combined into 4 components according to the factor analysis. The psychological factors that made up the first scale were differentiated with the following results: approachability 0.535, personality 0.471, anxiety 0.923, achievement motive 0.885, sanogenic thinking 0.889 and social thinking 0.840. The psychological factors that make up the second scale: subordinate 0.502, approachable 0.534, combative 0.878, avoidant 0.670, sanogenic thinking 0.529 and social thinking 0.549 are characterized separately. The psychological factors that make up the third scale: independent 0.870, approachable 0.472, sociable 0.445, conflict-avoidant 0.519 and social opinion 0.577 were recorded. The psychological units that made up the fourth scale were differentiated by such psychological characteristics as submissive 0.526, approachable 0.500, sociable 0.603, conflict-avoidant 0.479 and sanogenic thinking 0.508. The values collected by the testers are combined into five factors, and these factors form the main characteristics that determine the main values and significant differences in the questionnaire. The following table presents the factor analysis indicators obtained on the questionnaires of personality characteristics of students.
It can be observed from the results of the research that the psychological diagnosis of sanogenic thinking provides students with a foundation for future educational and work
activities. In this regard, we can see that the psychological units that formed the factor analysis between the respondents' level of anxiety, success motive, sanogenic thinking and characteristics of social opinion questionnaires were shown as follows. The results of the tests showed that the indicators were combined into one component according to the factor analysis. The psychological factors that made up the scales of the questionnaire: anxiety 0.863, achievement motive 0.909, sanogenic thinking 0.949 and social thinking 0.935 were mutually differentiated. We can see that the results obtained by the students from the research are combined into one factors and these factors form the main indicators that define the main important results and indicators in the survey.
Factor analysis results from Q-sort characteristics questionnaire are presented. The results of the study on the psychological characteristics of the development of sanogenic thinking in young students show that the results of the study of the indicators of the Q-sort questionnaire of the respondents and the mechanism that determines how their individual-psychological characteristics are established. The results of the examinees were combined into three components according to the factor analysis. The psychological factors that made up the first scale were differentiated with the following results: submissive 0.772, independent 0.512, approachable 0.726, sociable 0.522 and combative 0.754. The psychological factors that make up the second scale: independent 0.521, sociable 0.830, fighter 0.536 and fight-avoidant 0.626 are characterized separately. The psychological factors that make up the third scale were recorded with 0.449 levels of subordination, 0.887 levels of independence, 0.493 levels of manhood, 0.531 levels of struggle and 0.475 levels of struggle avoidance. The values collected by the testers are combined into three factors, and these factors form the main characteristics that determine the main values and significant differences in the questionnaire.
Factor analysis indicators obtained from respondents' personal characteristics and Q-sort questionnaires are presented. According to our research work on the psychological characteristics of Sanogenic thinking, we can see that the psychological units that formed the factor analysis between personality characteristics and personality characteristics were manifested as follows. The results of the tests showed that the indicators were combined into four components according to the factor analysis. The psychological factors that made up the first scale were differentiated with the following results: enterprising 0.482, sociable 0.534, struggling 0.445, anxious 0.861, achievement motive 0.891, sanogenic thinking 0.927 and social thinking 0.921. The psychological factors that make up the second scale: subordinate 0.823, approachable 0.575, combative 0.713, avoidant 0.464, sanogenic thinking 0.506 and anxiety 0.567 are characterized separately. The psychological factors that make up the third scale: subordination 0.479, tyranny 0.822, struggler 0.519, struggle avoider 0.633 and success motive were recorded with 0.448 levels. The psychological units that made up the fourth scale were distinguished by psychological characteristics such as: independent 0.833, achievement motive 0.537, sociable 0.483, struggle avoidant 0.535 and sanogenic thinking 0.480. The values collected by the testers are combined into four factors, and these factors form the main characteristics that determine the main values and significant differences in the questionnaire. Indicators of factor analysis obtained from questionnaires of personal characteristics of respondents selected from students of the training center are presented.
The results of the research conducted on the psychological characteristics of the development of sanogenic thinking in these respondents show that the level of personality characteristics of the respondents selected from the pedagogues of public educational institutions, i.e. anxiety, success motive, sanogenic thinking and social opinion questionnaires are the most necessary psychological factors for the educational activities of the students through factor analysis. can be seen to be manifested. The psychological factors that determined the level of personality characteristics of the respondents: anxiety 0.878, success motive 0.905, sanogenic thinking 0.937 and social thinking 0.921 reflected high psychological factors.
The results obtained from the research showed that when the relationships related to questionnaires used to measure pedagogues' level of anxiety, success motive, sanogenic thinking, social opinion and Q-sort personality characteristics were checked through the criteria of factor analysis, their results were connected to medium-level significant factors, when entering the process of further professional activity It can be distinguished from the obtained results that the knowledge and skills in the current educational activity are the main indicators, they are important for them, and the psychological characteristics that develop sanogenic thinking are the factors that are united to the positive pole for them.
The psychological factors of the level of development of sanogenic thinking in students show a high ratio of several characteristics, i.e. success motive, level of sanogenic thinking, social opinion, dependence, independent, enterprising and fighting scales, on the contrary, psychological factors such as anxiety level, introversion and struggle avoidance show a negative value. appeared.
Taking into account the characteristics related to the research work on the socio-psychological characteristics of the development of sanogenic thinking in students, the indicators of the scales in the questionnaire according to the factor analysis: anxiety, success motive, the level of sanogenic thinking, social opinion, psychological factors such as independent and enterprising show a high weight, dependence , while the antisocial, combative, and avoidant scales were found to show lower factors
References:
1. Tursunovna, A. K. (2024). A THEORETICAL APPROACH TO THE INTERPRETATION OF LEXICAL UNITS OF TRANSLATOR, A GUIDE-TRANSLATOR AND A TOUR GUIDE. Western European Journal of Linguistics and Education, 2(4), 209-214.
2. Алимова, К. (2020). Feature of the guide-translator's rhetoric. in Library, 20(4), 242-245.
3. Алимова, К. (2024). Features of the speech of male and female translation guides. Зарубежная лингвистика и лингводидактика, 2(2), 85-90.
4. Алимова, К. (2021). Гид-таржимон нутцида риториканинг ахамияти. in Library, 21(4), 39-42.
5. Tolkinovich, U. J. (2023). Hazrati Imom (Hastimom) Me'moriy Majmuasinig Qayta Tiklanishi.
6. Tolkinovich, U. J. (2023). ARCHITECTURAL PRINCIPLES OF SHRINES IN UZBEKISTAN. Open Access Repository, 4(3), 1060-1064.
7. Tolkinovich, U. J. (2023). THE LEVEL OF SEISMIC RESISTANCE OF RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS IN ARCHITECTURE. Open Access Repository, 4(03), 141-147.
8. Tolkinovich, U. J. (2023). MONUMENTS INCLUDED IN THE UNESCO LIST IN HISTORICAL
CITIES OF UZBEKISTAN. Open Access Repository, 4(3), 1048-1053.
9. Tolkinovich, U. J. (2023). REPAIR AND RESTORATION OF ARCHITECTURAL MONUMENTS. Open Access Repository, 4(3), 1054-1059.
10. Tolqinovich, O. J. (2022). Modern Residential Buildings in the Historical Part of Samarkand Formation of Modern Typology. European Journal of Life Safety and Stability (2660-9630), 13, 87-92.
11. O'Sarov, J. T. L. (2022). TURARJOY BINOLARINI QAYTA TIKLASH VA SHAKLLANTIRISH MUAMMOLARI. Scientific progress, 3(2), 96-101.
12. Tolqinovich, O. J. (2022). Architecture of Traditional Residential Buildings in Historical Cities of Uzbekistan. EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF BUSINESS STARTUPS AND OPEN SOCIETY, 2(1), 65-69.
13. Tolqinovich, O. J. (2022). IT Has Not Been Saved to US in Bukhara" Madrasah's Cure". EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF BUSINESS STARTUPS AND OPEN SOCIETY, 2(2), 9-13.
14. Qazaqovna, K. M. (2024). HEUTAGOGY: UNLEASHING LEARNER AUTONOMY AND SELF-DIRECTED LEARNING: AN IN-DEPTH EXPLORATION. Galaxy International Interdisciplinary Research Journal, 12(1), 302-305.
15. Xidirova, M., & Abduvahobov, S. (2023). THE ROLE OF PHYSICAL CULTURE IN THE FORMATION OF PERSONAL CHARACTERISTICS. Modern Science and Research, 2(12), 397400.
16. Ergasheva, S. A. (2021). History of baisun silk knitting factory. ACADEMICIA: An International Multidisciplinary Research Journal, 11(5), 581-585.
17. Ergasheva, S. A. (2020). CRAFT OF SURKHANOAKH FROM THE HISTORY OF DEVELOPMENT. Theoretical & Applied Science, (7), 56-59.
18. Ergasheva, S. A. (2020). The history of surkhan doppies (skullcups) and the characteristics of this folk craft. American Journal of Social and Humanitarian Research, 1(6), 7-13.
19. Abdusoatovna, E. S. (2023). SURXONDARYO VILOYATI IQTISODIY RIVOJLANISHIDA BOYSUN AN'ANAVIY HUNARMANDCHILIGINING O 'RNI. PEDAGOGS jurnali, 31(1), 10-17.
20. Abdusoatovna, E. S. (2023). The Role of Crafts in the Economy of Surkhan Oakh (In the Example of Cosibility).
