Contents foreword Research on values Chapter 1: Introduction and explanation of the term 'values' Chapter 2: The theory of human values according to Shalom H. Schwartz and its relevance for the study of the development of values in childhood and adolescence Chapter 3: Values and Behaviors The research of value development Chapter 4: How to research values in childhood? A question of diagnostics Chapter 5: How do values evolve? Research designs and results from selected subject areas Chapter 6: Values in the family - conveying values through parenting goals and values Chapter 7: Values development and change of values in children - wishes for research Educational approaches to value formation Chapter 8: Storytelling - Goals and content of a school value building project Chapter 9: Experiencing values - an example of conveying values through experiential project work in the fields of theater and outdoor
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.
In this paper we introduce a model of a society with two distinct linguistic groups, each consisting of heterogeneous individuals speaking their native language. There is also a world language so that every individual is faced with four learning choices: to study the other local language only, to study the world language only, to study both, and to refrain from studying either language. We examine the Nash equilibiria of that game determined by communicative benefits (Selten & Pool), and address inefficiency of the equilibrium. We then show that government subsidies for language learning could serve as welfare‐enhancing policies. Finally, we analyze the three‐language policy, certain variants of which have been adopted in multilingual countries or regions.
The basic values of the Russian population and the population of thirty-one European countries were compared with data obtained by Schwartz Questionnaire embedded into the fourth round of the European Social Survey. Conclusions about similarities and differences of basic human values between Russia and other European countries confirm the thesis that Russia is a country which shares with the other world the general logic of cultural and social development and which has a lot in common with the countries of similar economic level and recent political history. In most value comparisons Russia appeared to be closer to the Post-Communist and to the Mediterranean countries than to Western European or Nordic countries.
The fact that the Russians are less committed than most Europeans to the values of caring, tolerance, equality and ecology and conversely more than most Europeans committed to the competitive "zero- sum” values of personal success, wealth and power confirms the validity of current moral criticism of mass values and morals in Russia. The other disturbing fact is the relatively low commitment of Russians to the values of Openness to Change and conversely a strong focus on Conservation. So the Russian basic values create a cultural barrier to the development of innovative economy and to the society development as a whole.
Thanks to the shift from the country to an individual and group level of analysis we challenge the notion of the "average Russian" and demonstrate that the Russian value majority consists of two subtypes. Russia has the sizable value minority also and its members share the values atypical for most of the Russians. Two value minorities which embrace 19% of Russian population are more committed to values of Openness and Self-Transcendence than the rest of the Russian population. These value groups are typical for the European countries with more prosperous and happy populations and we can hypothesize that in Russia they are resource groups for the country advancement also.
A joint research project carried out by an interdisciplinary group of Russian and Swedish linguists, sociologists and educators-psychologists (the Swedish Institute grant), besides solving pragmatic tasks of finding out relative quantitative-qualitative specificity of national cognitive representations of values, first of all, had methodological goals. They were to check the efficiency of the linguistic methods developed in this study (and, thus, to prove the theoretical ideas that served the basis for it) of getting factual data that allow reconstructing and comparing of the corresponding areas of cognitive representations.
The results of cross-cultural research of implicit theories of innovativeness among students and teachers, representatives of three ethnocultural groups: Russians, the people of the North Caucasus (Chechens and Ingushs) and Tuvinians (N=804) are presented. Intergroup differences in implicit theories of innovativeness are revealed: the ‘individual’ theories of innovativeness prevail among Russians and among the students, the ‘social’ theories of innovativeness are more expressed among respondents from the North Caucasus, Tuva and among the teachers. Using the structural equations modeling the universal model of values impact on implicit theories of innovativeness and attitudes towards innovations is constructed. Values of the Openness to changes and individual theories of innovativeness promote the positive relation to innovations. Results of research have shown that implicit theories of innovativeness differ in different cultures, and values make different impact on the attitudes towards innovations and innovative experience in different cultures.