Testing the Psychological Model of Russian Scientific, Engineering, and IT Elite
https://doi.org/10.21603/sibscript-2026-28-2-265-278
EDN: UIHRPX
Abstract
The article introduces a psychological model of the emerging Russian scientific, engineering, and IT elite. This substantive and structural model consists of functional layers and includes factors influencing social and professional success. The empirical research covered 635 first-year students from eight institutes of the National Research Nuclear University MEPhI, Moscow, of different years of study (2022–2025). The psychodiagnostic tools involved Schwartz Value Survey (SVS), Potemkina’s Test of Socio-Psychological Attitudes, Lyusin’s Emotional Intelligence Inventory, and a Russian adaptation of The Ways of Coping Questionnaire (WCQ) by Lazarus & Folkman. The empirical study made it possible to expand the theoretical model and substantiate it. Different criteria corresponded to different model types: social success – dominant-controlling or socially labile (constructive) and pragmatic (destructive); professional success – cognitive (constructive) and maladaptive (destructive). The data may help to prevent emotional instability and burnout, motivate in-training specialists to work, direct value orientations to socially important problems, and improve the psychological literacy of students and professors of technical universities. The psychological typology makes it possible to project the career paths of future leaders in the most important branches of national science and technology.
About the Authors
Natalya B. Karabushchenko
Russian State University for the Humanities;
Zhirinovsky University of World Civilizations
Russian Federation
Competing Interests:
Russian Federation
Moscow
Scopus Author ID: 57190950556
Competing Interests:
The authors declared no potential conflict of interests regarding the research, authorship, and / or publication of this article.
Pavel P. Karabushchenko
National Research Nuclear University MEPhI
Russian Federation
Competing Interests:
Russian Federation
Moscow
Competing Interests:
The authors declared no potential conflict of interests regarding the research, authorship, and / or publication of this article.
References
1. Barabanshchikova V. V. Professional deformations of a specialist in innovative activities. Moscow: Kogito-Tsentr, 2017, 234. (In Russ.)
2. Grosheva L. I. Intellectual elite of digital space in perception of modern youth. State, society, and church in the history of Russia in the 20th–21st centuries: Proc. XXI Intern. Sci. Conf., Ivanovo, 30–31 Mar 2022. Ivanovo: IvSU, 2022, 165–176. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/cvnfue
3. Dzhaneryan S. T., Zabara I. V. Peculiar properties of emotional burnout among the programmers with a different value-semantic attitude to professional activity. Pedagogy and education, 2019, (2): 32–40. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.7256/2454-0676.2019.2.29723
4. Zhuravleva A. A., Chervinskaya K. R. The role of corporate culture and trust as criteria of the efficiency of knowledge sharing. Vestnik Sankt-Peterburgskogo universiteta. Seriia 12. Psikhologiia. Sociologiia. Pedagogika, 2013, (1): 23–28. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/pxtayx
5. Karabushchenko N. B. Scientific and engineering elite of Russia: Psychological approach. Vestnik Tverskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Seriia: Pedagogika i psikhologiia, 2024, (1): 77–88. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.26456/vtpsyped/2024.1.077
6. Karabushchenko N. B. Psychological foundations of elite development in higher education. Obrazovatelnye tekhnologii, 2014, (1): 56–70. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/ryjlpx
7. Karabushchenko N. B., Bobkov A. N. Value-semantic orientations of the personality of the potential scientific and engineering elite. Vestnik IarGU. Seriya Gumanitarnye nauki, 2023, 17(4): 586–597. (In Russ.) http://dx.doi.org/10.18255/1996-5648-2023-4-586-597
8. Karabushchenko N. B. Elite educational environment. The Caspian Region: Politics, Economics, Culture, 2014, (4): 171–176. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/teusrb
9. Karabushchenko N. B., Parshutin I. A., Bobkov A. N. Emotional intelligence of Russia’s potential scientific and technical elite. SibScript, 2024, 26(2): 277–286. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.21603/sibscript-2024-26-2-277-286
10. Kryukova T. L., Kuftyak E. V., Zamyshlyaeva M. S. R. Lazarus and S. Folkman’s Way of Coping Questionnaire: Adaptation. Psikhologicheskaia diagnostika, 2005, (3): 57–76. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/ygchhn
11. Lyusin D. V. EmIn Questionnaire of emotional intelligence: New psychometric data. Social and emotional intelligence: From processes to dimensions, eds. Lyusin D. V., Ushakov D. V. Moscow: IP RAS, 2009, 264–278. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/slanqv
12. Mochalova N. M. Academic elite. Vatandash, 2022, (8): 129–141. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/ahidfo
13. Mochalova N. M., Abdullina M. A. Pedagogical elite. Vatandash, 2023, (11): 136–142. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/hugsqv
14. Mochalova N. M., Abdullina M. A. Creative elite: Creators. Vatandash, 2022, (12): 117–132. (In Russ.)
15. Novgorodova N. G. Engineering elite. Technical regulation in a single economic space: Proc. X All-Russian Sci.-Prac. Conf. with Intern. Participation, Ekaterinburg, 18 May 2023. Ekaterinburg: RSVPU, 2023, 160–164. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/krejkl
16. Oparina M. E. Employee motivation in IT specialists in the context of a dominating type of organizational structure. Social Psychology and Society, 2014, 5(4): 90–103. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/sqypfv
17. Troitskaya I. V., Mongush Ch. N. Motivation and professional self-determination of the future architects, engineers, economists. Vestnik grazhdanskikh inzhenerov, 2012, (6): 359–364. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/qzaumv
18. Chimitova I. Z., Vasyutkin G. A. Features of the intellectual elite. Bulletin of Buryat State University, 2023, (3): 11–18. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.18101/1994-0866-2023-3-11-18
19. Shumeiko E. I., Vereshhagina L. A. Intrinsic motivation as a predictor of proactive behavior in IT specialists. Ananyev Readings: Proc. Intern. Sci. Conf., St. Petersburg, 8–11 Dec 2020. St. Petersburg: Skifiia-print, 2020, 323–324. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/zcemsj
20. Ahn Y. H., Annie R. P., Kwon H. Key competencies for U.S. construction graduates: Industry perspective. Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice, 2012, 138(2): 123–130. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)EI.1943-5541.0000089
21. Cropley D. H., Cropley A. J. Fostering creativity in engineering undergraduates. High ability studies, 2000, 11(2): 207–219. https://doi.org/10.1080/13598130020001223
22. Cunningham P., Matusovich H. M., Hunter D. A., McCord R. E. Teaching metacognition: Helping engineering students take ownership of their own learning. 2015 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE), Oct 2015.
23. Danh Nguyen N., Yoshinari Y., Shigeji M. University education and employment in Japan: Students’ perceptions on employment attributes and implications for university education. Quality Assurance in Education, 2005, 13(3): 202–218. https://doi.org/10.1108/09684880510607945
24. Flavell J. H. Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive–developmental inquiry. American psychologist, 1979, 34(10): 906–911. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.34.10.906
25. Goldberg D. E., Somerville M. A. Whole new engineer. The coming revolution in Engineering Education. Douglas MI: Threejoy, 2014, 264.
26. Gray C. M., McKilligan S., Daly S., Seifert C., Gonzalez R. Idea generation through empathy: Reimagining the ‘cognitive walkthrough’. 2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, 2015. https://doi.org/10.18260/p.24208
27. Hess J. L., Beever J., Strobel J., Brightman A. O. Empathic perspective-taking and ethical decision-making in engineering ethics education. Philosophy and engineering: Exploring boundaries, expanding connections, eds. Michelfelder D., Newberry B., Zhu Q. Springer, Cham., 2017a, vol. 26, 163–179. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-45193-0_13
28. Hess J. L., Strobel J., Pan R., Wachter Morris C. A. Insights from industry: A quantitative analysis of engineers’ perceptions of empathy and care within their practice. European Journal of Engineering Education, 2017b, 42(6): 1128–1153. https://doi.org/10.1080/03043797.2016.1267717
29. Kirn A., Benson L. Engineering students’ perceptions of problem solving and their future. Journal of Engineering Education, 2018, 107(1): 87–112. https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20190
30. Krajcik J. S. Teaching children science: A project-based approach. McGraw-Hill College, 1998, 356.
31. Lucas B., Claxton G., Hanson J. Thinking like an engineer: Implications for the education system. University of Winchester, 2014, 369.
32. Meier R. L., Williams M. R., Humphreys M. A. Refocusing our efforts: Assessing non-technical competency gaps. Journal of Engineering Education, 2000, 89(3): 377–385. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2000.tb00539.x
33. Nelson K. G., Shell D. F., Husman J., Fishman E. J., Soh L.-K. Motivational and self-regulated learning profiles of students taking a foundational engineering course. Journal of Engineering Education, 2015, 104(1): 74–100. https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20066
34. Pintrich P. R. The role of metacognitive knowledge in learning, teaching, and assessing. Theory into Practice, 2002, 41(4): 219–225. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4104_3
35. Prince K., Saveri A., Swanson J. The future of learning: Redefining readiness from the inside out. Cincinnati: Knowledge Works, 2017, 57.
36. Ralston P. A., Bays C. L. Critical thinking development in undergraduate engineering students from freshman through senior year: A 3-cohort longitudinal study. American Journal of Engineering Education (AJEE), 2015, 6(2): 85–98. https://doi.org/10.19030/ajee.v6i2.9504
37. Rasoal C., Danielsson H., Jungert T. Empathy among students in engineering programmes. European Journal of Engineering Education, 2012, 37(5): 427–435. https://doi.org/10.1080/03043797.2012.708720
38. Savage R., Chen K., Vanasupa L. Integrating project-based learning throughout the undergraduate engineering curriculum. Journal of STEM Education, 2008, 8(3): 76–105.
39. Schwartz S. H. Are there universal aspects in the structure and contents of human values? Journal of Social Issues, 1994, 50(4): 19–45. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.1994.tb01196.x
40. Skipper C. O., Brandenburg S. Emotional intelligence and academic performance of engineering students. Engineering Project Organization Journal, 2013, 3(1): 13–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/21573727.2012.738669
41. Smith K. A., Sheppard S. D., Johnson D. W., Johnson R. T. Pedagogies of engagement: Classroom-based practices. Journal of Engineering Education, 2005, 94(1): 87–101. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2005.tb00831.x
42. Snyder K. E., Barr S. M., Honken N. B., Pittard C. M., Ralston P. A. Navigating the first semester: An exploration of short-term changes in motivational beliefs among engineering undergraduates. Journal of Engineering Education, 2018, 107(1): 11–29. https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20187
43. Stump G. S., Husman J., Corby M. Engineering students’ intelligence beliefs and learning. Journal of Engineering Education, 2014, 103(3): 369–387. https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20051
44. Turns J. A., Sattler B., Yasuhara K., Borgford-Parnell J. L., Atman C. J. Integrating reflection into engineering education. 2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Jun 2014. https://doi.org/10.18260/1-2--20668
45. Vallero D. A., Vesilind P. A. Preventing disputes with empathy. Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice, 2006, 132(3): 272–278. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1052-3928(2006)132:3(272)
46. Vos H., de Graaff E. Developing metacognition: A basis for active learning. European Journal of Engineering Education, 2004, 29(4): 543–548. https://doi.org/10.1080/03043790410001716257
47. Walther J., Kellam N., Sochacka N., Radcliffe D. Engineering competence? An interpretive investigation of engineering students’ professional formation. Journal of Engineering Education, 2011, 100(4): 703–740. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2011.tb00033.x
48. Walther J., Sochacka N. W., Benson L. C., Bumbaco A. E., Kellam N., Pawley A. L., Phillips C. M. Qualitative research quality: A collaborative inquiry across multiple methodological perspectives. Journal of Engineering Education, 2017, 106(1): 398–430. https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20170
49. Wertz R. E., Purzer Ş., Fosmire M. J., Cardella M. E. Assessing information literacy skills demonstrated in an engineering design task. Journal of Engineering Education, 2013, 102(4): 577–602. https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20024
50. Yadav A., Subedi D., Lundeberg M. A., Bunting C. F. Problem-based learning: Influence on students' learning in an electrical engineering course. Journal of Engineering Education, 2011, 100(2): 253–280. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2011.tb00013.x
51. Zimmerman B. J. Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory into Practice, 2002, 41(2): 64–70. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4102_2
Review
For citations:
Karabushchenko N.B., Karabushchenko P.P. Testing the Psychological Model of Russian Scientific, Engineering, and IT Elite. SibScript. 2026;28(2):265-278. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.21603/sibscript-2026-28-2-265-278. EDN: UIHRPX
Views:
82
JATS XML
Email this article 