Psychological features of interpersonal interaction of ses emergency service employees in conditions of long-term traumatic stress
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.29038/2227-1376-2024-44-harKeywords:
interpersonal interaction, group communication, relationships, joint activities, continuous traumatic stressAbstract
Purpose. The study aims to examine the psychological features of interaction between SES employees under conditions of continuous traumatic stress. To achieve this goal, the following tasks were performed: assessment of interpersonal interaction; diagnosing the personal components of interpersonal interaction; to determine the style of interpersonal interaction.
Methods. The research used the method of theoretical analysis of scientific literature and empirical study of the problem using the «Methodology for assessing the personal components of interpersonal interaction» (S. Sitnik).
Result. Analyzing the study, it is worth noting that in the process of interaction, all types of attitudes towards others are in a certain way connected by the motives of interpersonal interaction, the desire for acceptance, and the desire to establish and maintain relationships. There are also low communication needs, demand for attention from partners, disinterest in establishing emotional relationships, a desire to be among people, and the need to be liked by people, to be accepted into the community.
Conclusions. The study allowed us to draw the following conclusions: interpersonal interaction of employees of external services is defined as personal contact that operates in space and time. The interaction took place through communication joint activities, and training, which influenced each other and built certain relationships. For the group, communication skills are the most important factor determining success in both professional and personal spheres. Interpersonal interaction was developed in the process of defining goal and establishing psychological contact.
References
1. Havriushenko, V. (2021) Teoretychni osnovy doslidzhennia mizhosobystisnoi vzaiemodii v psykholohii [Theoretical foundations of the study of interpersonal interaction in psychology]. Visnyk Lvivskoho universytetu. Seriia psykholohichni nauky – Bulletin of Lviv University. Psychological Sciences Series,11, 37–47. [in Ukrainian]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.30970/PS.2021.11.6
2. Holubiev, S. M. (2020) Sotsialno-psykholohichni skladovi zghurtovanosti trudovoho kolektyvu [Social and psychological components of labour collective cohesion]. Ekonomichnyi rozvytok i spadshchyna Semena Kuznetsia: materialy V naukovo-prakt. konf.:tezydopov – Economic development and the legacy of Semyon Kuznets: materials of the V scientific and practical conference: theses (m. Odesa, 26-27 lystop.2020 r.). (s. 282– 283). Odesa. http://dx.doi.org/10.32837/11300.16008 [in Ukrainian]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.32837/11300.16008
3. Kozigora, M. A. (2021). Konceptual`ni mezhi ponyat` «stres», «tryvalyj travmatychnyj stres», «posttravmatychnyj stresovyj rozlad» [Conceptual boundaries of «stress», «continuous traumatic stress», «post-traumatic stress disorder»]. Science and Education a New Dimension. Pedagogy and Psychology, IX (97), 56–58. http://dx.doi.org/10.31174/send-pp2021-246ix97-13 [in Ukrainian]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31174/SEND-PP2021-246IX97-13
4. Rozmyrska, Yu. A. (2020). Communicative and speech styles of students' interpersonal interaction [Komunikatyvno-movlennievi styli mizhosobovoi vzaiemodii studentiv]. Lutsk: Vezha-Druk. [in Ukrainian].
5. Sytnik, S. M. (2021). Motyvy mizhosobystisnoi vzaiemodii v osib z riznym stavlenniam do liudei [Motives of interpersonal interaction in individuals with different attitudes towards people]. Visnyk Lvivskoho universytetu. Seriia psykholohichni nauky – Bulletin of Lviv University. Psychological Sciences Series, 10, 159–169. [in Ukrainian]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.30970/PS.2021.10.23
6. Sytnik, S. V. (2019). Rozrobka psykhodiahnostychnoi metodyky otsinky mizhosobystisnoi vzaiemodii [Development of a psychodiagnostic methodology for assessing interpersonal interaction]. Innovative Solutions In Modern Science, 9 (36). [in Ukrainian].
7. Baltes, B., Zhdanova, L., Parker, C. (2009). Psychological Climate: A Comparison of Organizational and Individual Level Referents. Human Relations, 62(5):669-700. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726709103454 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726709103454
8. Ibrahim, M., Riyadi, A., Rahmani, T. K., Alamsyah, S., Syaifudin, M., &Mawarni, A. T. (2024). Psychology In The Perspective Of Interpersonal Communication: Urgency And Theory. Refleksi: Jurnal Risetdan Pendidikan, 2(1), 15-24. https://doi.org/10.25273/refleksi.v2i1.18534 DOI: https://doi.org/10.25273/refleksi.v2i1.18534
9. Shore, D., Robertson, O., Lafit, G. et al. (2023). Facial Regulation During Dyadic Interaction: Interpersonal Effects on Cooperation. AffecSci 4, 506–516 https://doi.org/10.1007/s42761-023-00208-y DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s42761-023-00208-y
10. Power, N., Alcock, J., Philpot, R., & Levine, M. (2024). The psychology of interoperability: A systematic review of joint working between the UK emergency services. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 97(1), 233-252. https://doi.org/10.1111/joop.12469 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/joop.12469
11. Berger, J. (2024). What Gets Shared, and Why? Interpersonal Communication and Word of Mouth. AnnualReviewofPsychology, 76. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-013024-031524 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-013024-031524
12. Gilboa-Schechtman, E., Huppert, J. D., &Ginat-Frolich, R. (2024). Social anxiety from the perspective of affiliation and status systems: Intrapersonal representations and the dynamics of interpersonal interaction. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 33(1), 10-17.https://doi.org/10.1177/09637214231202488 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/09637214231202488
13. Springstein, T., Growney, C. M., Strube, M. J., & English, T. (2024). Intrinsic interpersonal emotion regulation strategy use and effectiveness across adulthood: The role of interaction partner age. Emotion. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1037/emo0001435 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/emo0001435
14. Yang, X., Liao, T., Wang, Y., Ren, L., & Zeng, J. (2024). The association between digital addiction and interpersonal relationships: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Clinical Psychology Review, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2024.102501 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2024.102501
15. Feher, A., & Vernon, P. A. (2021). Looking beyond the Big Five: A selective review of the potential for the BigFive model of personality. Personality and Individual Differences, 169, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2020.110002 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2020.110002
16. Lwande, C., Muchemi, L., &Oboko, R. (2021). Identifying learning styles and cognitive traits in a learning management system. Heliyon, 7(8). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e07701 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e07701
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Iryna Kharko, Yuliia Rozmyrska
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
