Specific Features of the Generation Z Family Values System
https://doi.org/10.21603/2078-8975-2020-22-4-982-991
Abstract
The research featured family values of the so-called Generation Z. The survey involved an authentic survey, S. S. Nosov’s Family Values Questionnaire, and the Morphological Test of Life Values developed by V. F. Sopov and L. V. Karpushina. A comparative analysis proved that Generation Z and Generation Y have both similar and different views on family values. The sphere of marriage and parenting had more differences, while the sphere of kinship showed more similarities. Representatives of Generation Z appeared to accept the idea of cohabitation; they also tended to get married relatively late in life. The gap between the optimal age of marriage for men and women proved to be quite narrow, while the age of first childbirth for women approximated that of men. In general, Generation Z shifted to an egalitarian family type. Unlike Generation Y, members of Generation Z valued spiritual satisfaction and underestimated achievements. In the hierarchy of family life values, they focused on spiritual satisfaction, self-development, individuality, and active social contacts. The research results can be used in health and family life education programs.
About the Authors
E. V. Grigoryeva
Kemerovo State University
Russian Federation
Kemerovo
Russian Federation
Kemerovo
N. R. Khakimova
Kemerovo State University
Russian Federation
Kemerovo
Russian Federation
Kemerovo
References
1. Aksyutina Z. A., Ozerova O. A. Representations of young people of rural society on family values. Vestnik Surgutskogo gosudarstvennogo pedagogicheskogo universiteta, 2019, (5): 79–88. (In Russ.) DOI: 10.26105/SSPU.2019.62.5.008
2. Vishnevsky Yu. R., Yachmeneva M. V. The attitude of student youth to family values (case study of the Sverdlovsk region). The Education and Science Journal, 2018, 20(5): 125–141. (In Russ.) DOI: 10.17853/1994-5639-2018-5-125-141
3. Dobriakov I. V., Gorkovaya I. A., Miklyaeva A. V. Representation of family functioning in marital relations using the "Associative rhombus" technique (students case study). Sibirskiy Psikhologicheskiy Zhurnal, 2020, (76): 78–90. (In Russ.) DOI: 10.17223/17267080/76/5
4. Dorskaya A. A. Family values as a subject of scientific discussion: main directions of studying family law in Russia at the present stage. Bulletin of Moscow Region State University. Series: Jurisprudence, 2019, (3): 27–41. (In Russ.) DOI: 10.18384/2310-6794-2019-3-27-41
5. Oyunsuren J., Ermolaev V. V. Crosscultural analysis of family values among Russian and Mongolian youth. Uchenye zapiski Crimean Federal University named after V. I. Vernadsky. Sociology. Pedagogy. Psychology, 2019, 5(4): 65–72. (In Russ.)
6. Lokosov V. V. Population change in Russia: dynamics and socioeconomic risks. Vestnik Rossiiskoi akademii nauk, 2020, 90(3): 251–258. (In Russ.) DOI: 10.31857/S086958732003010X
7. Lotova I. P. A systematic approach to the study of family values in the modern Russian society. Ekonomika, statistika i informatika. Vestnik UMO, 2015, (5): 62–66. (In Russ.)
8. Mzhelskaya E. V. The modern approaches to the idea of family values. Samarskii nauchnyi vestnik, 2013, (4): 113–116. (In Russ.)
9. Sosnovskaya N. A. The transformation of family values in the modern Belarusian society. The Science and Innovations, 2015, (9): 14–19. (In Russ.)
10. Rean A. A. A family in the structure of values of young people. Russian Psychological Journal, 2017, 14(1): 62–76. (In Russ.) DOI: 10.21702/rpj.2017.1.4
11. Campbell S. M., Twenge J. M., Campbell W. K. Fuzzy but useful constructs: making sense of the differences between generations. Work, Aging and Retirement, 2017, 3(2): 130–139. DOI: 10.1093/workar/wax001
12. Parry E., Urwin P. The evidence base for generational differences: where do we go from here? Work, Aging and Retirement, 2017, 3(2): 140–148. DOI: 10.1093/workar/waw037
13. Pishchik V. I. Typological and identifying characteristics of generations. Russian Psychological Journal, 2018, 15(2): 215–236. (In Russ.) DOI: 10.21702/rpj.2018.2.9
14. Martsinkovskaya T. D., Poleva N. S. Generations of the era of transition: values, identity, communication. Mir psikhologii, 2017, (1): 24–37. (In Russ.)
15. Miklyaeva A. V., Postnikova M. I. A socio-psychological structure of intergenerational relationships of students. Social Psychology and Society, 2019, 10(2): 114–126. (In Russ.) DOI:10.17759/sps.2019100209
16. Yanitskiy M. S., Seryy A. V., Braun O. A., Pelekh Yu. V., Maslova O. V., Sokolskaya M. V., Sanzhaeva R. D., Monsonova A. R., Dagbaeva S. B., Neyaskina Yu. Yu., Kadyrov R. V., Kapustina T. V. The value orientations system of Generation Z: social, cultural and demographic determinants. Sibirskiy Psikhologicheskiy Zhurnal, 2019, (72): 46–67. (In Russ.) DOI: 10.17223/17267080/72/3
17. Kulakova A. B. Generation Z: theoretical aspect. Territorial Development Issues, 2018, (2). (In Russ.) DOI: 10.15838/tdi.2018.2.42.6
18. Ivanov M. S., Yanitskiy M. S. Mobility as a strategy of personal security in perceptions of generation Z. Digital nomadism as a global and Siberian trend: Proc. III Intern. Transdisciplinary WEB-Conf., Tomsk, May 24–26, 2016. Tomsk: TGU, 125–133. (In Russ.) DOI: 10.17223/9785946216104/18
19. Ivanov M. S., Seryy A. V., Yanitskiy M. S. Mobility as strategy of providing personal security in postmodern society. European Proceedings of Social and Behavioural Sciences: Intern. Conf. on research paradigms transformation in social sciences, Tomsk, May 18–21, 2017. Future Academy, 2018, vol. 35, 1187–1196. DOI: 10.15405/epsbs.2018.02.140
20. Mokhova S. Yu. Hierarchy in purpose-in-life system of the generations X, Y, Z. Mir nauki, 2017, 5(2). Available at: http:// mir-nauki.com/PDF/69PSMN217.pdf (accessed 20.09.2020). (In Russ.)
21. Yanitskiy M. S. System of value orientations of personality and social communities: structural and dynamic model and its application in psychological research and psychological practice. Vestnik Kemerovskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta, 2020, 22(1): 194–206. (In Russ.) DOI: 10.21603/2078-8975-2020-22-1-194-206
22. Yurevich A. V. Empirical estimates of modern Russian society’s morals. Jaroslavskij pedagogicheskij vestnik, 2018, (4): 168–179. (In Russ.) DOI: 10.24411/1813-145X-2018-10111
23. Zhuravleva N. A. Valuable orientations of youth in the conditions of macrosocial transformations. Spiritual and moral problems of the modern personality, eds. Volovikova M. I., Zhuravlev A. L., Yurevich A. V. Moscow: IP RAN, 2018, 299–321. (In Russ.)
24. Bilan M. A., Grigoryeva E. V., Khakimova N. R. Specific features of spiritual and moral values of students of the deontological direction of education. Professional education in Russia and abroad, 2019, (1): 127–135. (In Russ.)
25. Arbatskaia E. S., Dichina N. Iu. Diagnostics of family dysfunctions in a foster family. Angarsk-Irkutsk: UMTs RSO, 2017, 44. (In Russ.)
26. Sopov V. F., Karpushina L. V. Morphological test of life values: application guide. Samara: Izd-vo SamIKP – SNTs RAN, 2002, 49. (In Russ.)
27. Yanitskiy M. S., Seryy A.V., Prokonich O. A. Peculiarities of personality temporal perspective among representatives of different value types of mass consciousness. Vestnik KRAUNTS. Gumanitarnye nauki, 2012, (2): 175–180. (In Russ.)
Review
For citations:
Grigoryeva E.V., Khakimova N.R. Specific Features of the Generation Z Family Values System. The Bulletin of Kemerovo State University. 2020;22(4):982-991. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.21603/2078-8975-2020-22-4-982-991
Views:
1515
Email this article 