Нормативные взгляды россиян на эвтаназию и смежные практики: поиск детерминант
The aging of the population during the twentieth century sparked a discussion on end-of-life issues and particularly voluntary life termination due to unbearable suffering (euthanasia and related practices). Most of the euthanasia attitude studies have been focused on groups directly involved in end-of-life issues, such as physicians and patients. This article investigates the typical views of common Russians in regard to euthanasia and related practices, and looks for their determinants. A survey of 1201 respondents in 2014 was conducted using a probabilistic sample representing the population of Russia. Measurement of euthanasia justifiability included descriptions of patients’ conditions and types of life termination procedures. Analysis of the results showed that basic values were important predictors of euthanasia justifiability. However, a model derived from international and western research failed to confirm this. Our hypothesis regarding the relations between values of autonomy and justification of euthanasia found only weak support, while benevolence values demonstrated a strong negative effect. Proximity to death showed a negative effect: the fact of caring for sick close ones, as well as one’s own ill-health, were related to a lower justification of euthanasia. Religiosity demonstrated only marginally significant coefficients. Contrary to our hypothesis, interactions between death proximity indicators and trust in physicians and people in general were insignificant. Another unexpected result was a negative link between confidence in the healthcare system and euthanasia justifiability. We attribute these findings to a “priestly” model of care prevalent among Russians; the characteristic structuring of values among Russians, in which care for others contradicts personal autonomy; as well as endorsement of avoidance over approach motivations. In conclusion we list the limitations of the study and point out the weak explanatory power of the models presented.
Comparability of scores between culturally and socially different is always a problematic question. It is even more questionable when the scores of latent variables are compared. Latent variables are frequently measured with several indicators, and the structure of indicators may differ between groups, resulting in the scores of the latent variables that may turn to be very different in terms of configuration and scale. This problem was labeled measurement invariance (MI) and became a necessary part of the studies with latent constructs. The lack of MI between groups may lead to biased or wrong conclusions. MI is an issue especially in cross-cultural studies, in which cultural differences as well as translation of questionnaire may evolve differences in latent construct structures. The paper discusses different methods of assessing MI and uses multiple group confirmatory factor analysis to test MI of four Schwartz higher order values among four populations surveyed during 4 and 5th rounds of European Social Survey. Since our interest is the sources and the extent of MI, only samples surveyed in Russian language were selected. The results show only partial scalar invariance that allows for comparison of means across groups. However, full scalar invariance is not achieved due to the differences in translation to Russian between four countries.
Survey data on comparisons between teachers in Russia and other countries show that the average Russian schoolteacher places a very high value on security and a very low value on the opportunity to enjoy life and have pleasure. Russia's schoolteachers are more often ahead of other Europeans when it comes to the importance of personal success, wealth, and power, as well as obedience and conformity to traditions, and, in contrast, they tend to lag behind when it comes to their adherence to the values of independence, equality, tolerance, helping people around them, and the protection of the environment. The authors see these orientations as cultural barriers to the successful functioning and development of Russian society.
This paper examines commonalities and differences in the value theories proposed by Ronald Inglehart and Shalom Schwartz. A systematic review of previous findings was conducted. Then, we showed, with a joint multidimensional scaling (MDS) analysis, that Schwartz’s Autonomy vs. Embeddedness dimension tends to lie at the diagonal of the Inglehart Cultural Map of the World, suggesting that in order to be autonomous/open, individuals need to have both self-expressive and secular-rational values, whereas being embedded /conservative involves both traditional and survival values. Two distinct regions of Schwartz’s values (one at each level) which are missed by Inglehart’s instrument were identified. At the same time, an MDS plot revealed that, at the individual level, Inglehart’s Survival values are not captured by the Schwartz’s items included. The obtained structures at the two levels of analysis were shown to be remarkably similar (Tucker’s Phi > .90).
Several approaches to the concept of fatherhood present in Western sociological tradition are analyzed and compared: biological determinism, social constructivism and biosocial theory. The problematics of fatherhood and men’s parental practices is marginalized in modern Russian social research devoted to family and this fact makes the traditional inequality in family relations, when the father’s role is considered secondary compared to that of mother, even stronger. However, in Western critical men’s studies several stages can be outlined: the development of “sex roles” paradigm (biological determinism), the emergence of the hegemonic masculinity concept, inter-disciplinary stage (biosocial theory). According to the approach of biological determinism, the role of a father is that of the patriarch, he continues the family line and serves as a model for his ascendants. Social constructivism looks into man’s functions in the family from the point of view of masculine pressure and establishing hegemony over a woman and children. Biosocial theory aims to unite the biological determinacy of fatherhood with social, cultural and personal context. It is shown that these approaches are directly connected with the level of the society development, marriage and family perceptions, the level of egality of gender order.
This article is talking about state management and cultural policy, their nature and content in term of the new tendency - development of postindustrial society. It mentioned here, that at the moment cultural policy is the base of regional political activity and that regions can get strong competitive advantage if they are able to implement cultural policy successfully. All these trends can produce elements of new economic development.