Психологический смысл процесса обме

Психологический смысл процесса обмена действий включает в себя три очка:) учета планов «созрел в голове другого и сопоставления их с их собственных планов; b) анализ «оценок» каждый участник взаимодействия; ) в понимании взаимодействия каждого из партнеров. Но прежде чем характеризовать каждого из этих психологических процессов, вам нужно как-то описать структуру взаимодействия.
В истории психологии было несколько попыток дать такое описание. Так например, большое распространение приобрела так называемой теории действий, или теория социальных действий, которые в различные способы описания отдельного акта действий. С этой идеей обратился и социологов (м. Вебер, п. Сорокин, т. Парсонс) и психологи. Все зарегистрированные некоторые компоненты взаимодействия: люди, их отношения, влияние на друг друга и, следовательно, их изменения. Задача всегда вам сформулировать как доминантных факторов в мотивации действий во взаимодействии.
Примером того, как реализовалась эта идея, может служить теория Т. Парсонса, в которой была сделана попытка наметить общий категориальный аппарат для описания структуры социального действия. В основе социальной деятельности лежат межличностные взаимодействия, состоящие из отдельных действий. Единичное действие есть определенный элементарный акт; из них впоследствии складываются системы действий. Каждый акт берется сам по себе, изолированно, с точки зрения абстрактной схемы, в качестве элементов которой выступают: а) деятель, б) «другой» (объект, на который направлено действие); в) нормы (по которым организуется взаимодействие); г) ценности (которые принимает каждый участник); д) ситуация (в которой происходит действие). Деятель мотивирован тем, что его действие направлено на реализацию его установок (потребностей). В отношении «другого» деятель развивает систему ориентации и ожиданий, которые определены как стремлением к достижению цели, так и учетом вероятных реакций «другого». Может быть выделено пять пар таких ориентации, которые дают классификацию возможных видов взаимодействий. Предполагается, что с помощью этих пяти пар можно описать все виды человеческой деятельности.
Эта попытка была неудачной: схема действий, которая показывает его «серых» была настолько абстрактным, что без значения для эмпирического анализа различных типов действий не малы. Противном случае он был и экспериментальной практики: на основе этой теоретической схемы была одна одноместная, создатель концепции. Методологически неверно появился здесь принцип – раскрывая некоторые абстрактные структуры индивидуальных действий. При таком подходе невозможно захватить значимых побочных действий, потому что это социальной деятельности в целом. Поэтому более логичным, чтобы начать с характеристиками социальной активности и от нее идти к структуре отдельных индивидуальных действий, т.е. в прямо противоположном направлении. Направление — что же, предлагаемые Парсонсом, неизбежно приводит к потере социального контекста, потому что это богатство социальной активности (иными словами, вся совокупность социальных отношений) является производным от психологии личности. Другая попытка построить структуру взаимодействия, связанные с описанием ступеней его развития. Взаимодействие разделяется не на элементарные акты, а на сцене, что она проходит. Такой подход предлагается, в частности, польские социологом я Сепанского. Для Сепанского центральным понятием при описании социального поведения является понятие социальной коммуникации.

Results (English) 1:

The psychological meaning of the process of exchange of action includes three points) the plans matured in my head another, and matching them with their own plans; (b) analysis of the "assessments") each participant interaction; understanding interaction) of each of the partners. But before I describe each of these psychological processes, you need a way to describe the structure of interaction.In the history of psychology has had several attempts to give such a description. For example, large distribution acquired the so-called theory of action, or the theory of social action, which in various ways to describe the individual act of action. With this idea appealed and sociologists (m. Weber, p. Sorokin, t. Parsons) and psychologists. All registered some components of interaction: people, their relationships, impact on each other and, therefore, their changes. The task is always you make as the dominant factor in motivating action in an interaction.An example of how this idea was realized, can serve as the theory t. Parsons, in which an attempt was made to map out a common categorical apparatus for describing the structure of social action. Social activities are based on interpersonal interaction, consisting of individual actions. Single action has a certain elemental Act; they subsequently fold system action. Every act is taken by itself, in isolation, in terms of the abstract schema, elements of which are: a) figure b) "other" (the object that sent the action); in) rules (that is interaction); g) values (which takes each member); d) situation (where the action occurs). Activist motivated by the fact that its action aimed at realizing his units (needs). With regard to "the other" worker develops the system of orientation and expectations, which are defined as the desire to achieve the goal, and taking into account the likely reactions of the "other". May be allocated five pairs of orientation, which give the classification of possible interactions. It is expected that these five pairs, you can describe all kinds of human activity.This attempt was unsuccessful: the pattern that shows his "grey" was so abstract that without values for empirical analysis of various types of action are not small. Otherwise it was and experimental practices: based on this theoretical scheme was one single, creator of the concept. Methodologically wrong appeared here is revealing some of the abstract structure of individual action. In this approach, you cannot capture the important side effects, because it is a social activity in General. Therefore, the most logical to start with the characteristics of social activity and from her to go to a separate individual actions, i.e. in the opposite direction. Direction-what is offered by Parsons, invariably results in the loss of the social context, because it is the wealth of social activity (in other words, the totality of social relations) is derived from personality psychology. Another attempt to build a communication structure associated with the description of stages of development. Interaction is not the basic acts and on stage that she passes. This approach should, in particular, Polish sociologist I Sepanskogo. For Sepanskogo the central concept in describing social behavior is the concept of social communication.

Results (English) 2:

Psychological meaning of the exchange of action includes three points :) accounting plans "matured in the head of another and comparing them with their own plans; b) Analysis of "grade" each participant interaction; ) In understanding the interaction of each of the partners. But before I describe each of these psychological processes, you need to somehow describe the structure of interaction.
In the history of psychology have been several attempts to give a description. Thus, for example, has increasingly gained so-called theory of action, or the theory of social action that are different ways to describe the actions of a separate act. With this idea appealed and sociologists (m. Weber, p. Sorokin, t. Parsons) and psychologists. All registered some components of interaction: people, their relationships, the impact on each other and, therefore, they change. The challenge is always how you formulate the dominant factors in motivating action in the interaction.
An example of how to implement this idea, is the theory of Talcott Parsons, in which an attempt was made ​​to outline the general categorical apparatus for describing the structure of social action. At the heart of social activities are interpersonal interactions, consisting of individual actions. Single action has a certain elementary act; of them subsequently folding system actions. Every act taken by itself, in isolation, from the perspective of the abstract schema, as the elements of which are: a) figure, b) the "other" (the object on which the action); c) rules (which organized interaction); d) values ​​(which takes each participant); d) the situation (in which the action takes place). Figure motivated by the fact that its action is aimed at the realization of its installations (needs). With regard to the "other" worker develops a system of orientation and expectations, which are defined as the desire to achieve the goal, and taking into account the likely reactions of the "other." Maybe there are five pairs of such orientation that provide a classification of possible types of interactions. It is assumed that with these five pairs can describe all kinds of human activity.
This attempt was unsuccessful: flow chart, which shows its "gray" was so abstract that without empirical values ​​for different types of analysis action is small. Otherwise, he was a pilot and practice: on the basis of this theoretical scheme was one single, creator of the concept. Methodologically wrong principle appeared here - revealing some abstract structure of individual actions. With this approach, it is impossible to capture the significant side effects because it is a social activity as a whole. Therefore more logical to start with the characteristics of social activity and from her to go to the structure of separate individual actions, ie in the opposite direction. Direction - what is offered by Parsons, inevitably leads to a loss of social context, because it is the wealth of social activity (in other words, the totality of social relations) is derived from the psychology of personality. Another attempt to build a structure of interaction associated with the description of stages of its development. Interaction is not shared on the elementary acts, and on the stage that it passes. Such an approach is proposed, in particular, the Polish sociologist I Sepanskogo. For Sepanskogo central concept in the description of social behavior is the concept of social communication.

Results (English) 3:

Psychological meaning the process of exchange of action includes the three points:) accounting plans "is ripe for another head and to compare them with their own plans; (b) analysis of "assessments" each party interaction.) In understanding interaction between each of the partners. But before you characterize each of these psychological processes, you need to as the describe the structure interaction.
In the history of psychology there have been several attempts to provide such a description. For example, a large distribution has become the so-called theory of action, or theory of social action,Which in various ways to describe an individual act of action. With this idea appealed and sociologists (m. Weber, p.. Sorokin, t. Buzachi Operating) and psychologists. All registered some components interaction: people,Their relationship, the impact on each other and, consequently, their changes. The challenge is always you to formulate such as algebraic varieties factors in motivation for action in collaboration.
an example of how translated this idea,It may serve as a theory, ETC. The eyeless creature, in which an attempt has been made to identify the common sordid apparatus to the description of the structure social action.The social activities are based on interpersonal interaction, consisting of individual action. Single action there are some elementary act; of them subsequently fold system of action.Every act is taken by itself, in isolation, from the point of view of an abstract scheme, as an element of which are: (a) activities, and b) the "other" (an object, to which the);A) a fault (for which is organized by interaction); g) values (which takes each party); d) the situation (in which action occurs). Activities motivated by order,That its action is aimed at the implementation of its installations (needs). With respect to the "other" personality develops the system orientation and expectations, which are defined as the desire to achieve the goal,And the probable reaction of an "other". Can be allocated five pairs such orientation, which give classification possible types of interactions. It is expected thatThat with the support of the five pairs you can describe all human activities.
this attempt was unsuccessful: diagram of action, which shows his "gray" was so abstract,That without the values for an empirical analysis of the various types of action are not small. Otherwise, he was and experimental practices: on the basis of this theoretical scheme was one deck single, the creator of concepts.Methodologically incorrect appeared here is the principle of uncovering some abstract structure individual action. With this approach it is not possible to capture significant spin-off action,Because that social activities as a whole. It is therefore more logical to start with the characteristics and social activity from it to go to the structure of the separate individual action, i.e.In the opposite direction. The direction is the same, the proposed Parsons boasted, inevitably lead to loss of social context, because that wealth social activity (in other words,The entire set of social relations) is a derivative of psychology. Another attempt to build a structure interaction, associated with a description stages its development.Interaction is not the basic acts, as well on the stage, that it passes. Such an approach is proposed, in particular, the Polish Sociologist i Сепанского.For Сепанского the central notion in the description social behavior is the notion of social communication.