We address the issue of anomie in the post-Communist area at the example of Ukraine. We use the data of the monitor of the Institute of Sociology of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine 1992-2010, where an adjusted version of the anomie scale of McClosky and Schaar (1965) was applied. We carry out a latent class analysis with MPLUS 7 upon the data of 2010 (N=1800). We find and describe three substantial classes – “disoriented pessimists,” “socializedoptimists,” and “socialized realists” – which enable us both to capture the state of the Ukrainian society and to understand the strategies of the individuals’ responses. We conclude that among the group of disoriented individuals, another group is widely spread in the Ukrainian society. These is individuals who agree with the existence of an overall level of disorientation in the society, but in the same time see themselves as highly oriented and aware of the societal norms and values.
The authors do not claim to give their own definition of the middle class, the much disputed issue in contemporary Russia. They rather describe the two cases of the 'middle class' selfdefinition: the broad one (when over 80% of Russian population place themselves in this category), and the narrow one. Here, entrepreneurs and employees in the new private sector of economy are singled out. This group view themselves as the only social class who have managed to achieve what the authors see as norms and expectations rooted in the consumption and ethical ideals of the Soviet period. This make them different from either the 'low class' who have failed to find means to do this, and the 'upper class' who have failed to find the adequate social ideal. This would-be middle class is in the process of acquiring its own identity and discourse that is reflected in ideology, as well as in the consumption behavior. The authors do not share the view that the present political regime has an interest in these people as in law-abiding citizens, but think that they definitely have an interest in a regime that would implement the proper execution of the law.
In 2015, the Russians drew the greatest attention to the economic and political issues. However, events in the field of culture and sport also were memorable for Russians. Mostly people pay attention to the incident in the Russian and international events with the participation of Russia. While international events related only to foreign countries and the news about Russian regions occupy a much smaller place in the most memorable events of the year. It should also be noted that most of the memorable events attracted attention as a result of discussions in the media. Most often it was not connected with personal experience of people. Only 10% of memorable events were related to the «obtrusive», i.e. attracting attention due to direct contact of the respondent with the problem, such as various holidays or premiere movies and TV shows. The article tests the hypothesis of the agenda-setting theory, according to which the media have a significant impact on people's attention to certain issues. We compared the results of the Levada-Center opinion polls on the most memorable events of the month with the number of articles on this subject in the press. The focus of our attention is the period from January 2014 to December 2016. The findings confirm the influence of the intensity of the debate in the media on people's attention to the problem. In addition, the research demonstrated the large importance of the debate in the media during a week prior to the survey than in the whole previous month. Events that occurred shortly before the start of the survey are most memorable for people, as well as the events, for which the debate intensified this period.
Using the data of International Social Survey Program of 1996 and 2006 in 15 countries from author analyses population beliefs connected with the role of the State in social and economic life. During these years paternalistic dispositions have decreased in some countries – this trend is particularly pronounced in Poland and Eastern Lands of Germany which populations, according to the data of 1996, were close to the Russians on paternalism. In Russia the majority of population still support intensive interference of the State in economic life, situation in labor market. The greatest level of paternalism is observed in the Russian social periphery: less educated groups, inhabitants of rural and small towns’ communities.
The article discusses the results of a method- ological experiment conducted by Levada-Center in December 2014, in which author analyzes ad- vantages of face-to-face and telephone sampling method for representation of socio-demographic and electoral variables. There were a comparison of random-digit dialing (RDD) sample of cell and landline telephones and random route face-to-face sample of 500 Muscovites in each method.
The results of experiment show the statistical difference between two samples of the core ques- tions of the survey. While basic demographic vari- ables are the same in both samples (employment, access to the Internet, number of cell and landline phones, presence of travelling abroad passport), larger differences emerge on measures of politi- cal and social engagement. The respondents of telephone survey more involved in the discussion of political issues and looking for such informa- tion and they have more level of civic engagement – 23% saying that they did some type of volunteer work for or through an organization in the past year, compared with 11% who report doing this in face- to-face survey. They are also more likely to know a foreign language and have a surpass representation of the group of high-income (26% compared to 6% in door-to-door survey).
However, despite these differences in interest in politics and lifestyle, both samples were similar across all socio-political issues - in their attitude to democracy, willingness to participate in the elec- tions and their electoral preferences.
The development of cashless payments is widely discussed in contemporary Russia. Different interest groups (especially banks) are interested in stimulating this process. But there are some obstacles to develop cashless payments in contemporary Russian retailing. As the acquiring market is a two-sided market, banks have to increase the quantity of card holders and the number of shops where people are able to pay by card. The research questions are why Russian citizens prefer cash payments and why retailers are not interested in the development of cashless payments. The study is based on two data sources. In 2014 about 1600 people were questioned in the framework of the Monitoring of Financial Behavior and Trust in Financial Institutions by the National Research University Higher School of Economics (the HSE) and in 2012 about 40 retailers fulfilled the questionnaire and about 10 managers were questioned in the framework of the research “Retailers’ Costs of Accepting Cash and Cashless Payments” by the HSE. The findings demonstrate that rural citizens and citizens of small towns who have low income and low level of education do not use their cards to buy anything in shops. In other words, cashless payments are not a common practice for them. Different programs of improving the financial literacy can solve this problem. Another obstacle to develop cashless payments in contemporary Russian retailing is the large acquiring fee. If retailers, banks and international payment systems agree upon the decrease in the rate, this problem can be also solved.
The article analyzes the phenomenon that has appeared in recent years in the public eye - a very high figures of support of top officials and their policies. Based on the work of Bourdieu and Blumer, the author elaborates approaches to the understanding of public opinion and, by using examples, shows the reaction of the mass consciousness to the intensive information pressure. The conclusion is made that the observed phenomenon is determined by the strong attitudes towards the nature of power and its regulatory functions. Power as no alternative figure of a tough leader who will be able to provide a "rule of law" is a massive expectation, the origin of which is more complicated than a simple reaction to the uncontested propaganda. Mass surveys just fix these values.
According to the given article the main basis of the present political regime’s legitimacy in Russia seems to be the absence of institutionalized citizen’s communication across differences. In the absence of effective political competition and social critically media there is not public communication. This, in turn, does not generate the collective form of political change’s internalization. A consequence is the private character of political preference formation which rationality is aimed not at improvement of own political knowledge, but on improvement of own material welfare. For this reason the public sphere institutions/political communication institutions are devaluated as a basis of preference formation in the opinion of most citizens. The exclusion of the democratic institutions from possible ways to improve one’s personal situation does not conflict with interventions of the authoritarianism.