2313-8971Research result. Pedagogy and Psychology of Education2313-897110.18413/2313-8971-2024-10-3-0-73518PSYCHOLOGY<strong>Features of the personal and semantic sphere of students with different indexes of propensity to cognitive errors</strong><br /> &nbsp;<strong>Features of the personal and semantic sphere of students with different indexes of propensity to cognitive errors</strong><br /> &nbsp;ToproverVictor IgorevichToproverVictor Igorevichvstarkov69@mail.ruHerzen State Pedagogical University of Russia202410300

Introduction. Cognitive errors (distortions) are of a semantic nature; they are based on distortions in the semantic sphere of personality, first of all, at its deep levels related to beliefs, semantic attitudes, life orientations, and metacognitive characteristics. However, there is currently a shortage of studies that would set a goal to prove this statement. The purpose of the work: to identify the peculiarities of the personal and semantic sphere of students with different indexes of propensity to cognitive errors. The materials and methods. The study was conducted using the Google Forms platform for creating and administering surveys and online forms. The sample size was 485 respondents, including 433 men and 52 women aged 17-25 years. The Cognitive Mistakes Questionnaire (CMQ - CMQ) (A. Freeman, R. Devulf, adapted by A.E. Bobrov and E.V. Faizrakhmanova) was used to study the propensity of personality to cognitive errors. The following methods were used to study the personal and semantic sphere of the respondents: the method of diagnostics of socio-psychological adaptation (SPA) (C. Rogers, R. Diamond, adapted by A.K. Osnitsky), &ldquo;Big Five&rdquo; (BFI) (R. McCrae, P. Costa, adapted by A.B. Khromov), Irrational Attitudes Diagnostic Methodology (A. Ellis), Basic Beliefs Scale (WAS-World assumptions scale) (R. Janov-Bulman, adapted by O. Kravtsova), Biographical Questionnaire for the Diagnosis of Behavioural Disorders (BIV-Biographisches Inventar zur Diagnose von Verhaltensstoerungen) (Bottscher, Jager, Lischer), Life Orientations Questionnaire (LOQ) (E. Yu. Kravtsova), The Questionnaire to determine the content of the system of life meanings (V.Y. Kotlyakov), the method of diagnostics of coping mechanisms (E. Heim). Kruskal-Wallis H-criterion was used as a method of statistical data processing. The results of the research. It was revealed that there are statistically significant differences in the following indicators of the personal and semantic sphere of students with different indexes of propensity to cognitive errors: in adaptability in interpersonal relations; in the indicators of extraversion, emotional instability and expressiveness; in the expression of irrational attitudes and such basic beliefs as the benevolence of the world, the kindness of people, the value of one&#39;s own self, the degree of luck, the conviction in one&#39;s own value; in the indicators of family deficit syndrome; in such life orientation as transsituational mobility; in communicative life meanings and dominant coping mechanisms. The conclusion. The study revealed differences in the indicators of the personal and semantic sphere in students with different indexes of propensity to cognitive errors.

Introduction. Cognitive errors (distortions) are of a semantic nature; they are based on distortions in the semantic sphere of personality, first of all, at its deep levels related to beliefs, semantic attitudes, life orientations, and metacognitive characteristics. However, there is currently a shortage of studies that would set a goal to prove this statement. The purpose of the work: to identify the peculiarities of the personal and semantic sphere of students with different indexes of propensity to cognitive errors. The materials and methods. The study was conducted using the Google Forms platform for creating and administering surveys and online forms. The sample size was 485 respondents, including 433 men and 52 women aged 17-25 years. The Cognitive Mistakes Questionnaire (CMQ - CMQ) (A. Freeman, R. Devulf, adapted by A.E. Bobrov and E.V. Faizrakhmanova) was used to study the propensity of personality to cognitive errors. The following methods were used to study the personal and semantic sphere of the respondents: the method of diagnostics of socio-psychological adaptation (SPA) (C. Rogers, R. Diamond, adapted by A.K. Osnitsky), &ldquo;Big Five&rdquo; (BFI) (R. McCrae, P. Costa, adapted by A.B. Khromov), Irrational Attitudes Diagnostic Methodology (A. Ellis), Basic Beliefs Scale (WAS-World assumptions scale) (R. Janov-Bulman, adapted by O. Kravtsova), Biographical Questionnaire for the Diagnosis of Behavioural Disorders (BIV-Biographisches Inventar zur Diagnose von Verhaltensstoerungen) (Bottscher, Jager, Lischer), Life Orientations Questionnaire (LOQ) (E. Yu. Kravtsova), The Questionnaire to determine the content of the system of life meanings (V.Y. Kotlyakov), the method of diagnostics of coping mechanisms (E. Heim). Kruskal-Wallis H-criterion was used as a method of statistical data processing. The results of the research. It was revealed that there are statistically significant differences in the following indicators of the personal and semantic sphere of students with different indexes of propensity to cognitive errors: in adaptability in interpersonal relations; in the indicators of extraversion, emotional instability and expressiveness; in the expression of irrational attitudes and such basic beliefs as the benevolence of the world, the kindness of people, the value of one&#39;s own self, the degree of luck, the conviction in one&#39;s own value; in the indicators of family deficit syndrome; in such life orientation as transsituational mobility; in communicative life meanings and dominant coping mechanisms. The conclusion. The study revealed differences in the indicators of the personal and semantic sphere in students with different indexes of propensity to cognitive errors.

cognitive errorscognitive distortionspersonal and semantic spherestudent agecognitive errorscognitive distortionspersonal and semantic spherestudent ageСписок литературыIvanova, Y.S., Ratnikova, Y.M. and Tomilov Y.V. (2015), &ldquo;Experimental methodology for assessing cognitive errors of personality: data from a pilot study&rdquo;, V mire nauchnikh otkritii: materiali XVIII Mezhd. nauchno-prakt. konf. M.: Tsentr nauchnoi misli, 42-47 (In Russian).Ivanova, Y.S. and Tomilov, Y.V. (2017), &ldquo;A mathematical model of cognitive and personal characteristics depending on the type of belonging to a religious tradition&rdquo;, Education, Science and Humanities Academic Research Conference. SShA, San-Frantsisko, 65-87. (In Russian).Isaeva, A.N. and Malakhova, S.A. (2015), &ldquo;Clip Thinking&quot;: Psychological Deficits and Alternatives (spatial Focus)&rdquo;, Mir psikhologii, 4 (84), 177-191 (In Russian).Legostaeva, Y.S. (2018), &ldquo;Methodological prerequisites for the study of cognitive errors&rdquo;, Sovremennaya nauka v teorii i praktike, Pero, Moscow, Russia, 53-72.Leontev, D.A. (2019), &ldquo;Psychology of meaning: the nature, structure and dynamics of semantic reality&rdquo; [Psychology of meaning: the nature, structure and dynamics of meaningful reality], Smisl, Moscow, Russia.Olefir, S.V. (2013), &ldquo;Information and educational space for children and adolescents: principles of formation&rdquo;, Fundamentalnie issledovaniya, 8-2, 59-463. (In Russian).Popov, A.Y. and Vikhman, A.A. (2014), &ldquo;Cognitive distortions in the decision-making process: a scientific problem and humanitarian technology&rdquo;, Vestnik Yuzhno-Uralskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta, 7, 1, 5-16. (In Russian).Seriy, A.V. (2004), &ldquo;The system of personal meanings: structure, functions, dynamics&rdquo; [The system of personal meanings: structure, functions, dynamics], Kuzbassvuzizdat, Kemerovo, Russia.Toprover, V.I. (2023), &ldquo;Personal and semantic factors of propensity to cognitive errors among students&rdquo;, Zhivaya psikhologiya, 10, 7, 65-74. DOI:&nbsp;10.58551/24136522_2023_10_7_65. (In Russian).Toprover, V.I. (2024), &ldquo;Gender Differences in the Propensity for Cognitive Errors among Students. Society&rdquo;, Sociology, Psychology, Pedagogics, (2), 75-80. DOI:&nbsp;10.24158/spp.2024.2.9. (In Russian).Shelekhova, L.V. and Panesh, A.A. (2011), &ldquo;The structure of the personal and semantic sphere&rdquo;, Kulturnaya zhizn Yuga Rossii, 5 (43), 34-37. (In Russian).Beck, J.S. (1995), &ldquo;Cognitive therapy: basics and beyond&rdquo;. New York: Guilford Press, United States.Beck, A.T., Rush, J.A. and Shaw B.F. (1979), &ldquo;Cognitive therapy for depression&rdquo;, New York: Guilford Press, United States.Beck, A.T. (1964), &ldquo;Thinking and depression: II. theory and therapy&rdquo;, Arch Gen Psychiatry, 10 (6), 561-571. (In USA). DOI: 10.1001/archpsyc.1964.01720240015003.Blumenthal-Barby, J.S. and Krieger, Н. (2015), &ldquo;Cognitive biases and heuristics in medical decision making: a critical review using a systematic search strategy&rdquo;, Medical Decision Making, 35 (4), 539-557. (In USA). DOI: 10.1177/0272989X14547740.Burmeister, K. and Schade, С. (2007), &ldquo;Are entrepreneurs&rsquo; decisions more biased? An experimental investigation of the susceptibility to status quo bias&rdquo;, Journal of Business Venturing. 2007, 22 (3), 340-362. (In USA). DOI: 10.1016/j.jbusvent.2006.04.002.Tversky, A. and Kahneman, D. (1974), &ldquo;Judgment under uncertainty&rdquo;, Heuristics and biases. Science, 185, 1124-1131. (In USA). DOI: 10.1126/science.185.4157.1124.Zhang, S.X. and Cueto, J. (2017), &ldquo;The study of bias in entrepreneurship&rdquo;, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 41 (3), 419-454. (In USA). DOI: 10.1111/etap.12212.