The Relationship Between Human Values and Acceptability of Corruption in Russia and Greece
Background.In both Russia and Greece, corruption is a serious problem. In Greece, the level of corruption is one of the highest in the EU, and in Russia it is one of the highest in the world.
Objective. Three questions were addressed: (1) Are basic human values related to the acceptability of corruption for individuals in both countries? (2) Are these relationships the same in Russia and Greece? (3) Are levels of acceptance of corruption the same in Russia and Greece?
Design. Following S.H. Schwartz’s model, four higher-order values were assessed: Conservation versus Openness to Change, and Self-Transcendence versus Self-Enhancement. The studies were conducted in Russia (N = 256) and Greece (N = 469). To analyze the associations of individual values with the acceptability of corruption, we constructed a multigroup regression model using structural equation modelling software.
Results. Identical relationships were found in the two countries.Conservation values and Self-Transcendencewere negatively related to the acceptability of corruption, whereas Self-Enhancementwas positively related to the acceptability of corruption.Russians scored higher on acceptance of corruption. Implications are discussed.
Conclusion. The acceptability of corruption seems to be interrelated with basic human values across different cultural conditions. Our study shows that the relationships between higher-order values on the one hand, measured in the framework of Schwartz’s values model, and the acceptability of corruption on the other, are identical in Russia and Greece, suggesting that the acceptability of corruption is related to personal values.
The present article is devoted to a comparison of today’s values of Russians with those of people living in the other countries of Europe. Many publications have broadly discussed the question of similarities and differences in the cultural and psychological characteristics of Russians and other Europeans, and these discussions represent part of a broader polemic concerning the paths of Russia’s development. New opportunities to make well-founded comparisons between the populations of Russia and other European countries have emerged because of our country’s participation in the European Social Survey (ESS), a largescale international project in which all of the participants have to work in accordance with strict methodological requirements.1 Russia joined this international project in the third round. Surveys in this round have been carried out in twenty-five European countries; they were launched in September 2006 and completed at the beginning of 2007. In Russia the survey took place in September 2006–January 2007, with 2,437 respondents taking part.
This two-part overview of contemporary Russian anthropology focuses in detail on the work of several scholars and situates it in the changing landscape of Russian academia. The main issue I address is debates about an academic identity of Russian anthropology as ‘historical science’. Given that in Western anthropology, history has become one of the leading modes of anthropological analysis and that the turn to history marked a radical repositioning of anthropology’s very subject, it is important to explore how such configurations of history and anthropology work in other anthropological traditions and what the reasons are for turning to history or, conversely, avoiding it, for specific national, continental and transnational anthropological schools. In this article, I explore these questions by focusing on anthropology in Russia with an aim of reassembling the relationship between anthropology and history from the point of view of the anthropology of time. I ask what temporal frameworks underscore the relationship between anthropology and history. I explore these understandings ethnographically, that is, through ethnographic interviews with Russian scholars in addition to close readings of their works.
The book is dedicated to the 100th anniversary of Russian parliamentarism. The analysis of historical experience and actual problems of development of parliamentarism in Russia, Germany and a number of other European countries is presented. The authors are leading Russian and foreign experts from a number of research centers in Russia and Europe. Materials on the analysis of the development of parliamentarism in Germany and other European countries are based on the results of the European project "Parliamentary representation in Europe: recruiting and the career of legislators in 1848-2005", implemented during the last decade.
The book is addressed to a wide range of readers - scientists, politicians, public servants, teachers and students, everyone who is interested in the history and modern experience of Russian and European parliamentarism.
This book is the essential guide for understanding how state power and politics are contested and exercised on social media. It brings together contributions by social media scholars who explore the connection of social media with revolutions, uprising, protests, power and counter-power, hacktivism, the state, policing and surveillance. It shows how collective action and state power are related and conflict as two dialectical sides of social media power, and how power and counter-power are distributed in this dialectic. Theoretically focused and empirically rigorous research considers the two-sided contradictory nature of power in relation to social media and politics. Chapters cover social media in the context of phenomena such as contemporary revolutions in Egypt and other countries, populism 2.0, anti-austerity protests, the fascist movement in Greece's crisis, Anonymous and police surveillance.
The distractive effects on attentional task performance in different paradigms are analyzed in this paper. I demonstrate how distractors may negatively affect (interference effect), positively (redundancy effect) or neutrally (null effect). Distractor effects described in literature are classified in accordance with their hypothetical source. The general rule of the theory is also introduced. It contains the formal prediction of the particular distractor effect, based on entropy and redundancy measures from the mathematical theory of communication (Shannon, 1948). Single- vs dual-process frameworks are considered for hypothetical mechanisms which underpin the distractor effects. Distractor profiles (DPs) are also introduced for the formalization and simple visualization of experimental data concerning the distractor effects. Typical shapes of DPs and their interpretations are discussed with examples from three frequently cited experiments. Finally, the paper introduces hierarchical hypothesis that states the level-fashion modulating interrelations between distractor effects of different classes.
This article describes the expierence of studying factors influencing the social well-being of educational migrants as mesured by means of a psychological well-being scale (A. Perrudet-Badoux, G.A. Mendelsohn, J.Chiche, 1988) previously adapted for Russian by M.V. Sokolova. A statistical analysis of the scale's reliability is performed. Trends in dynamics of subjective well-being are indentified on the basis the correlations analysis between the condbtbions of adaptation and its success rate, and potential mechanisms for developing subjective well-being among student migrants living in student hostels are described. Particular attention is paid to commuting as a factor of adaptation.