Sociocultural Identity In A Situation Of Crisis Transitivity

Culture as identity formation factor

At present, for many Russians who find themselves in a new social situation that forces them to adapt to unusual conditions, the very fact of socialization, and the difficulties and deviations that arise in this process, are only partially recognized (Belinskaya & Dubovskaya, 2009). And in this situation, acculturation, acceptance and appropriation of culture are one of the important factors determining the success of socialization in the new conditions (Andreeva & Dontsov, 2002). Native culture, language “absorbed with mother’s milk” from an early age and remain unchanged in a changing world; this constancy distinguishes enculturation from other types of social adaptation (Martsinkovskaya & Siyuchenko, 2014). Therefore, acculturation gives the rooting and stability necessary in today's life, which is perceived by many as broken, indefinite. In the case of successful enculturation and / or acculturation, culture is emotionally perceived as a whole, however person needs to realize (independently or with the help of other, for example, adults, teachers) the connection of culture with different periods of Russian history - ancient, pre-revolutionary, Soviet and modern, and also highlight certain historical characters through emotional identification with which different structures of self-awareness can be formed (national, legal, personal). Thus one of the most important components of the structure of self-identity is formed - “I am a cultured person”.

Social identity in new crisis situation

For many decades, sociocultural identity has been formed in a stable world, with stable ideas of people about norms, values, ideals, with a stable image of the world - both physical and spiritual. In current decades, globalization and mass migration processes have significantly shaken not only the image of the world, but also self-image, the sociocultural identity of many people. The transitivity of the modern world, variability and uncertainty sets many different options for combining personal, linguistic, social and cultural identities, the infinite variety in the ratio of its types, the instability of the balance of identities (Martsinkovskaya, 2015).

At present, for many Russians, who find themselves in a new sociocultural situation that forces them to adapt to unusual conditions, the very fact of socialization, and the difficulties and deviations that arise in the formation of a new identity, give reason to assume that this situation for them is a situation of crisis, rigid transitivity.

In this situation, acculturation, acceptance and appropriation of a new culture are one of the important factors determining the success of the formation of a new identity. Culture, language, art, remains unchanged even when life, worldview, and social environment of a person change. This constancy distinguishes culture as a factor that helps to “restore the connection of time,” namely, a culture that is emotionally perceived as a whole, as part of social, ethnic and personal identity, gives root and stability, allowing to find points of support in a changing reality and restore lost integrity of perception peace and one-self.

Therefore, it is culture that can become the basis for the formation of the sociocultural identity of people in a new situation. Since the formation of a sociocultural identity is impossible without internalizing external requirements, turning them into intentions, motivation and values ​​of people, the most important question arises about the psychological mechanisms that contribute to the transition of these requirements into the internal structure of the personality. Such a mechanism can be emotional experiences (both positive and negative) that form personal attitude towards the norms, values ​​and rules adopted in society. These emotional experiences, in contrast to emotions mediating a person’s attitude to vitally important things for him personally (food, danger, etc.), can be called social (Martsinkovskaya, 2015).

At the same time, cardinal changes in crisis transitivity associated with moving to another country with a different culture and language pose new problems for people, since the basis for the establishment of a sociocultural identity must be radically or at least partially transformed (Martsinkovskaya & Solodnikova, 2018). Therefore, the problem of studying the specifics of the structure and content of identity of people living in a new ethnic and cultural environment, as well as how the process of transformation of social identity in people changing their living conditions, city, country, culture, is currently becoming efficient. To a large extent, this question arises for people who change their country of residence in adulthood. This drastically changes the idea of ​​one’s own and another’s culture, even if the culture and customs of the new environment are familiar. The specificity of studying the social identity of “Russian Germans” is that we are dealing with representatives of the same ethnic group, having the same historical roots but different social experiences of recent decades, which, in our opinion, should determine the differences in socialization and constructing the image of them-selves and the image of the world (Kiseleva & Orestova, 2018). Therefore, it can be assumed that the central element of the new sociocultural identity, especially in the first time after the move, is not the language or culture as a whole, but the family, which provides the basis for being rooted in the new sociocultural environment.

Attitude to native and foreign language and culture

In the course of the study, data were obtained on the attitude to the native and foreign culture of respondents living in different regions and having changed or not changed their place of residence.

See Full Size >

The materials obtained showed that among the Karelian youth who moved to Helsinki, a positive attitude towards a foreign culture is increasing. At the same time, a positive attitude towards the native culture does not decrease, although it does not grow (fig. 01 ).

See Full Size >

German youth who moved to Germany also do not reject another culture. At the same time, with the Germans who moved to Germany, a positive attitude towards Russian culture grows a little more than positive attitude towards German culture. Of interest in this regard is the fact that before moving both cultures were considered as native. After moving to Germany, we can see the division into Russian (old, native) and German (new, native-foreign) cultures. It is noteworthy that almost all respondents identify culture with language (fig. 02 ).

Increasing of the positive attitude towards a foreign culture shows a good level of socialization in a new place of residence. On the contrary, a decrease in positivity, sometimes even emotional rejection with a sharp increase in status and an emotionally positive attitude towards native culture, is usually an indicator of nostalgia and low acculturation in a new place or a new sociocultural situation.

These materials correlate well with the data obtained in the study of the structure of sociocultural identity.

The difference in the degree of socialization is evidenced by the fact that for the German sample, regardless of place of residence, the family is in the first place (fig. 03 ). It can be assumed that this is due to the somewhat marginal position of these groups in all sociocultural environments as in Russia, and among German immigrants to Germany, who often do not even know the language very well.

See Full Size >

See Full Size >

On the contrary, the Karelian language helps a lot of young people to adapt well in Finland, especially since many people know Finnish quite well. They are also fluent in Russian, which for most young people is, in fact, native (and even more native) than Karelian.

Therefore, they are well socialized in Helsinki, and the structure of their sociocultural identity is significantly different from the young people who moved to Germany (fig. 04 ). If in Petrozavodsk the family occupies a significant place in the structure of sociocultural identity, then in the new social situation the importance of friends is increasing - according to interests, age, and gender. Perhaps this is due to the fact that families move to Germany, while the guys go to Finland mainly to study on their own. In Helsinki, we can observe both options for moving, which makes the fact of nomination of friends in the first place especially interesting.

Culture and ethnocentrism

During this part of the study participants were asked to answer the question of how they are seen by people of the same cultures and people of other cultures.

See Full Size >

As can be seen from the results, people assume that representatives of the same culture see them as individual and evaluate, based primarily on their personal, rather than role or sociocultural characteristics. Interestingly, in Russia, when assessing people of one culture, there are no ethnic characteristics that, albeit to a small extent, are present when they evaluate people of another culture. It is also interesting that in Germany personal and sociocultural characteristics are present almost equally (fig. 05 ). Perhaps this to some extent may explain the results of changes in the structure of sociocultural identity in people who moved to Germany, obtained in the previous study.

No less interesting are the results of the answers to the second question. Most respondents believe that people of a different culture will see individuals in them, and not representatives of another, alien large group. Despite a significant increase in assessments related to ethnicity, personal and sociocultural characteristics dominate in this case as well (fig. 06 ).

Thus, we can say that the assessment of people of a different nationality is affected by the typical effects of the psychology of social cognition (Andreeva, 2000).

See Full Size >