What style of interaction is considered the most effective. Interaction situations and their styles

The main characteristics of interaction are manifested in different ways based on the conditions and situations in which the interaction of participants in the pedagogical process is carried out, which allows us to speak of a variety of types of interaction. There are various bases for classification.

Interactions are distinguished first of all by subject and object to subject:

- personality - personality (student - student, teacher - student, teacher - teacher, teacher - parent, etc.);

- a team - a team (a team of juniors - a team of seniors, a class - a class, a student team - teaching staff etc.).

Each of these types has its own characteristics based on age: same-age and uneven-age interaction, interaction in a team of younger and older students, etc.

Celebrate direct and indirect interaction.

direct interaction characterized by direct influence on each other, indirect same directed not at the person himself, but at the circumstances of his life, its microenvironment. For example, a teacher, organizing collective cognitive activity, interacts directly with consultants, whose activities determine the participation of other students in the work. In advising his assistants, the teacher directs their attention and actions to each student, gives advice on how to include his comrades in the work. Through consultants, the teacher corrects the activities of other children with whom the interaction is carried out indirectly.

The basis for classifying interaction types can also be:

- the presence of a goal or its absence - in the interaction can be set special purpose, then it is customary to call it purposeful; or the goal may be absent, and then one speaks of spontaneous interaction;

- the degree of controllability - controlled, semi-managed, unmanaged; managed - purposeful interaction, accompanied by systematic information about its results, allowing you to make the necessary adjustments to subsequent interaction; semi-managed - ϶ᴛᴏ also purposeful interaction, but feedback is used on a case-by-case basis; uncontrolled - ϶ᴛᴏ spontaneous interaction;

– type of relationship – ʼʼon equalsʼʼ or ʼʼmanagementʼʼ; for interaction ʼʼon equalsʼʼ the subject is characteristic - subjective relations, activity from both interacting parties; with ʼʼleadershipʼʼ - activity on the one hand.

· AT practical work characterize the interaction by optimality, efficiency, frequency and sustainability. Different approaches to the classification of interaction types do not exclude each other, and once again emphasize the multidimensionality and versatility of this process.

We took the nature of the interaction as the basis for the classification, highlighting the following three features:

- the attitude of the interacting parties to the interests of each other,

- the presence of a conscious common goal of joint activity,

- subjectivity of the position in relation to each other in interaction.

Various combinations of these signs give certain types of interaction: cooperation, dialogue, agreement, guardianship, suppression, indifference, confrontation.

This typology is applicable to the characterization of the interaction of participants in the educational process at all levels: teacher - student, student - student, teacher - teacher, etc. The most effective for the development of the team and personality is the collaborative type of interaction, which is characterized by:

- objective knowledge, based on the best sides each other, the adequacy of their assessments and self-assessments;

– humane, friendly and trusting, democratic relationships;

- the activity of both parties, jointly conscious and accepted actions, positive mutual influence on each other, in other words, a high level of development of all its components.

Cooperation participants in the educational process - ϶ᴛᴏ joint determination of the goals of the activity, joint planning of future work, joint distribution of forces, means, subject of activity in time in accordance with the capabilities of each participant, joint monitoring and evaluation of the results of work, and then forecasting new goals and objectives.

The most important social functions of language are communication, communication and impact. To implement these functions, separate varieties of the language historically developed and took shape, characterized by the presence in each of them of special lexico-phraseological, partially syntactic, means used exclusively or mainly in this variety of language. These varieties are called functional styles.

Functional styles often interact with each other. In the journalistic style, the communicative and informational functions, i.e., the functions of communication, are mixed to a greater or lesser extent with the function of influence. The combination of two functions - aesthetic and communicative - is characteristic of the language of fiction.

The literary and artistic style belongs to the number of book styles, but due to its inherent originality, it does not fall on a par with other book styles.

Functional styles can be divided into two groups: the first group includes scientific, journalistic and official business styles; for the second group, formed by various types of conversational style, dialogic speech is a typical form. The first group - book styles, the second - colloquial style.

From functional styles and from the types of speech it is necessary to delimit the forms of speech - oral and written. They converge with styles in the sense that bookish styles are clothed in written forms, and colloquial styles in oral.

Material for stylistic differentiation language tools and highlighting individual styles can be either a literary language or a common language as a whole.

Scientific and journalistic styles can function in oral form (lecture, report, speeches, etc.), in the form of a political polylogue (discussion, dispute), penetration of elements of colloquial style into them is observed.

Depending on the goals of communication and the sphere of language use, our speech is formed in different ways. These are different styles.

Style is a speech concept, and it can be defined only by going beyond the limits of the language system, taking into account extralinguistic circumstances, for example, the tasks of speech, the sphere of communication.

Each speech style uses the linguistic means of the national language, but under the influence of factors (theme, content, etc.), their selection and organization in each style is specific and serves to ensure optimal communication.

Among the factors underlying the allocation of functional styles, the leading function of each style is common: for colloquial - communication, for scientific and official - communication, for journalistic and artistic - impact. The leading functions of styles are distinguished according to the classification of V. V. Vinogradov.

Speech functions:

1) communication (establishment of contact - an actual function, incentive), exchange of thoughts, feelings, etc.;

2) message (explanation);

3) influence (beliefs, influence on thoughts and actions);

4) message (instructing);

5) influence (image, influence on feelings, imagination of people).

SCIENTIFIC STYLE

Scientific style belongs to the number of book styles literary language, which have a number of common language features: preliminary consideration of the statement, monologue character, strict selection of language means, gravitation towards normalized speech.

At first, the scientific style was close to artistic style. The separation of styles occurred in the Alexandrian period, when scientific terminology began to be created in the Greek language.

In Russia, the scientific style began to take shape in the first decades of the 8th century.

Scientific style has a number common features that manifest themselves regardless of the nature of the sciences and genre differences. The scientific style has varieties (sub-styles): popular science, business science, science and technology, science and journalism and educational and science.

The scientific style is used in the works of scientists to express the results of research activities. The purpose of scientific style is communication, explanation of scientific results. The form of implementation is a dialogue. Typical for scientific speech are semantic accuracy, ugliness, hidden emotionality, objectivity of presentation, rigor.

The scientific style uses linguistic means: terms, special words and phraseology.

The words are used in their direct meaning. Genres are inherent in it: monograph, article, dissertation, report, etc. One of the features of scientific speech is the operation with concepts that reflect the properties of entire groups, objects and phenomena. Each concept has its own name and term. For example: prefix(a term naming the concept being defined) is a significant part of the word (generic concept), which is located before the root and serves to form new words (specific features).

The scientific style has its own phraseology, which includes compound terms (angina pectoris, solar plexus, right angle, freezing and boiling points, participle turnovers etc.).

The language of science and technology also has a number of grammatical features. In the field of morphology, this is the use of shorter variant forms, which corresponds to the principle of “saving” language means. (key - keys).

In scientific works, the singular form of nouns is often used in the meaning of the plural. For example: the wolf is a carnivorous animal of the dog genus(a whole class of objects is called with an indication of their characteristic features); linden begins to bloom at the end of June(the specific noun is used in the collective concept).

Of the syntactic features of the scientific style, a tendency to complex constructions is distinguished. For this purpose, sentences with homogeneous members and a generalizing word are used. AT scientific literature common different types complex sentences. They often contain subordinating conjunctions characteristic of book speech.

To unite parts of the text, paragraphs, words and their combinations are used, indicating their connection with each other.

Syntactic structures in scientific prose are more complex and richer in lexical material than in fiction. Sentences of a scientific text contain one and a half times more words than sentences of a literary text.

Each situation dictates its own style of behavior and actions, in each situation a person “presents” himself in different ways. And if self-presentation is not adequate, it makes communication difficult.

There are four main interaction styles: ritualistic, imperative, manipulative and humanistic.

ritual style

This style is usually given by the culture in which the person lives. Ritual, for example, may be the style of greetings and questions asked at a meeting, and answers. So, in American culture, it is customary to answer the question: “How are you?” to answer: "Fine", no matter how things really are. It is common for our culture to answer “essentially”, not shy about weighing the negative characteristics of our own existence. A person accustomed to a different ritual will be puzzled by such an answer.

imperative style

This is an authoritarian, directive form of interaction. The purpose of the imperative style is to achieve control over the behavior of another, over his attitudes or coercion to certain actions and decisions. Orders, instructions and demands are used as means of exerting influence. The spheres where imperative communication is used quite effectively are the “chief-subordinate” relations, military statutory relations, work in extreme conditions.

Manipulative style

If the goal of imperative communication is not veiled in any way, then when using a manipulative style, the influence on the interlocutor is carried out covertly. The goal remains the same: to gain control over the behavior and thoughts of another person. In manipulative communication, the interlocutor is perceived not as an integral person, but as a carrier of certain qualities necessary for the manipulator. Therefore, a person who has chosen manipulative communication as the main style of communication, over time, begins to perceive himself fragmentarily, switching to stereotypical forms of behavior. At the same time, the use of manipulative skills in one area (for example, in business) usually ends with the transfer of these skills to all other areas of a person's life.

humanistic style

This style includes all varieties of dialogic communication: it is an equal interaction, the purpose of which is mutual knowledge, self-knowledge. The humanistic style of communication is devoid of the imperative and allows you to achieve deep mutual understanding.

2.2 Interaction situations and their styles

In management psychology, there are many classifications of interaction situations.

Each situation dictates its own style of behavior and actions: in each of them, a person “feeds” himself differently, and if this self-feeding is not adequate, interaction is difficult. If a style is formed on the basis of actions in a particular situation, and then mechanically transferred to another, then, naturally, success cannot be guaranteed. There are three main styles of action: ritual, manipulative and humanistic.

Ritual style is usually given by some culture. His goal is not to change the other in communication, but simply to confirm his presence in a given culture, in a given situation, to declare his competence in it: for example, the style of greetings, questions asked at a meeting, the nature of the expected answers. So, in American culture, it is customary to answer the question: “How are you?” - to answer: “Great!”, no matter how things really are. It is common for our culture to answer “essentially”, moreover, not to be embarrassed by the negative characteristics of our own being (“Oh, there is no life, prices are rising, transport is not working”, etc.). A person accustomed to a different ritual, having received such an answer, will be puzzled how to interact further. Non-compliance with the ritual gives rise to an assumption about the incompetence of a person, about his inability to comply with the “rules of the game” (for example, prolonged trampling of a guest in the hallway, when the meeting has long been over, can cause a negative assessment of behavior from the point of view of accepted norms).

As for the use of a manipulative style of interaction, the goal when using it is the intention to manage, educate, influence, impose one's position. For the sake of manipulation, a wide range of means is used, such as distracting attention, seizing the initiative, "exploiting" the personal qualities of the object of manipulation. The phenomenon of “foot-in-the-door” is widely known, when the impact on the partner is in portions: at first, he is invited to make a small concession, and then imperceptibly subordinate him to the imposed opinion. The ability to resist a manipulative style depends on a number of factors: a sufficiently high self-esteem, the firmness of established beliefs, the ability to resist other people's opinions, etc.

The humanistic style manifests itself when the goal of interaction is not to change the other, but to change the ideas of both partners regarding the object of interaction. Relative to each other, the goal is mutual support. The humanistic style implies an appropriate awareness and even experience of the situation of interaction. Naturally, special attention is paid to the study of this style in humanistic psychology, in particular, in the works of K. Rogers.

When using each style apply different tricks self-feeding - from the desire to please to intimidation. It is impossible to say unequivocally which of these styles is "good" or "bad": in different situations and with different positions of the participants in the interaction, various combinations of behavior styles are possible. The most important thing for effective interaction is the adequate coordination of all three components - position, situation and style.

It is important to draw a general conclusion that the division of a single act of interaction into such components as the positions of the participants, the situation and the style of action also contributes to a more thorough psychological analysis of this side of communication, making a certain attempt to link it with the content of the activity.

2.3 Types of interactions

There is another descriptive approach in the analysis of interaction - the construction of classifications of its various types. The most common is the dichotomous division of all possible types interactions into two opposite types: cooperation and competition. Different authors designate these two main species with different terms. In addition to cooperation and competition, they talk about agreement and conflict, adaptation and opposition, association and dissociation, and so on. Behind all these concepts, the principle of separation is clearly visible. various kinds interactions. In the first case, such manifestations are analyzed that contribute to the organization of joint activities, are “positive” from this point of view. The second group includes interactions that in one way or another "shatter" joint activity, representing a certain kind of obstacle to it.

Cooperation, or cooperative interaction, means the coordination of the individual forces of the participants (ordering, combining, summing up these forces). The attributes of cooperation are such processes as mutual assistance of participants, their mutual influence, their involvement in interaction. Cooperation is a necessary element of joint activity, generated by its special nature. A. N. Leontiev named two main features of joint activity: a) division of a single process of activity between participants; b) a change in the activity of each, since the result of the activity of each does not lead to the satisfaction of his needs, which in general psychological language means that the "subject" and "motive" of the activity do not coincide.

How is the direct result of the activity of each participant connected with the final result of joint activity? The means of such a connection are relations developed in the course of joint activity, which are realized, first of all, in cooperation. An important indicator of the tightness of cooperative interaction is the involvement of all participants in the process. Therefore, experimental studies of cooperation most often deal with the analysis of the contributions of the participants in the interaction and the degree of their involvement in it.

As for another type of interaction - competition, here at the ordinary level, negative characteristics of this process are most often offered (including even identifying it with enmity), which was noted in the above definition. However, a more careful analysis of competition allows us to endow it with positive features. A number of studies introduce the concept of productive competition, characterized as humane, honest, fair, creative, during which partners develop competitive and creative motivation. In this case, although single combat is preserved in the interaction, it does not develop into a conflict, but only provides a genuine competitiveness.

There are several degrees of productive competition, which differ in the measure of such quality as “softness/hardness”: a) competition when the partner does not pose a threat and the loser does not die (for example, in sports, the loser does not drop out, but simply takes a lower place in the ranking) ; b) rivalry, when only the winner is the unconditional winner, the other partner is in absolute loss (for example, the situation of the world chess championship), which means a violation of partnership, the emergence of elements of conflict; c) confrontation, when on the part of one participant in the interaction there is an intention to cause damage to another, i.e. rivals turn into enemies. The boundaries between these degrees are, of course, conditional, but it is important that the last degree can directly develop into a conflict.

The conflict is sometimes considered as a special form (or type) of interaction and is defined as the presence of opposite tendencies in the subjects of interaction, manifested in their actions. The specificity of the socio-psychological angle of view on the conflict lies in the simultaneous analysis of two components: conflict situation and its representation in the minds of participants. This provided grounds for discussing the most important general theoretical problem of conflict - understanding its nature as a psychological phenomenon. In fact: is the conflict only a form of psychological antagonism (ie, the representation of the contradiction in the mind) or is it necessarily the presence of conflict actions. Detailed description various conflicts in their complexity and diversity allows us to conclude that both of these components are mandatory signs of a conflict.

The tasks of its study can be successfully solved only if there is an adequate conceptual scheme for studying the conflict. It captures at least four main characteristics of the conflict: the structure, dynamics, function and typology of conflicts. Although the structure of the conflict is described differently by different authors, its main elements are practically accepted by all. This is a conflict situation, the positions of the participants (opponents), the object, the "incident" (trigger), the development and resolution of the conflict. These elements behave differently depending on the type of conflict. The ordinary idea that any conflict necessarily has a negative meaning has been refuted by a number of special studies. Most scholars in the field generally refer to two types of conflict: destructive and productive.

The definition of destructive conflict is more in line with the ordinary idea. It is this type of conflict that leads to a mismatch of interaction, to its loosening. A destructive conflict often becomes independent of the cause that gave rise to it, and more easily leads to the transition "to the individual", which gives rise to stress. It is characterized by a specific development, namely the expansion of the number of involved participants, their conflict actions, the multiplication of negative attitudes expressed towards each other, the sharpness of statements (“expansion” of the conflict). Another feature - the "escalation" of the conflict means an increase in tension, the inclusion of a false perception of an increasing number of both the traits and qualities of the opponent, and the situations of interaction themselves, the growth of prejudice against the partner. Understandably, resolving this type of conflict is particularly difficult.

A productive conflict often occurs when the clash is not about the incompatibility of personalities, but is generated by a difference in points of view on a problem, on ways to solve it. In this case, the conflict itself contributes to the formation of a comprehensive understanding of the problem, as well as the motivation of a partner who defends a different point of view - it is perceived as more “legitimate”. The very fact of allowing a different argumentation, recognizing its legitimacy contributes to the development of elements of cooperative interaction within the conflict, indicates the emergence of elements of a friendly atmosphere, and thus opens up possibilities for its regulation and resolution.

Ways to resolve the conflict - the most important part of the problem. As well as in communication, feedback plays a big role here, i.e. identification of the partner's reaction to perfect action. Feedback serves as a means of regulating the behavior of the participants in the conflict, which is especially evident in the conduct of negotiations. The purpose of negotiations is to reach an agreement, the main method of which is a compromise, i.e. the agreement of each side to equally retreat from its previous position in order to bring them closer together. In the implementation of such a strategy, the role of an intermediary or arbitrator - a representative of a third, neutral party, contributing to the success of negotiations is great.

When analyzing various types interactions, the problem of the content of the activity within which certain types of interaction are given is fundamentally important. Thus, one can state a cooperative form of interaction not only in the conditions of production, but, for example, in the implementation of any asocial, illegal acts - joint robbery, theft, etc. Cooperation and competition are only forms of the “psychological pattern” of interaction, while the content in both cases is given by a broader system of activity, where cooperation or competition is included. Therefore, when studying both cooperative and competitive forms of interaction, it is unacceptable to consider them outside the general context of activity.

Specific content various forms joint activity is a certain ratio of individual "contributions" that are made by the participants. So, one of the schemes proposes to distinguish three possible forms, or models:

1) when each participant does his part of the common work independently of the others - “joint-individual activity” (for example, some production teams, where each member has his own task);

2) when common task performed sequentially by each participant - "joint-successive activity" (an example is a conveyor);

3) when there is a simultaneous interaction of each participant with all the others - “joint-interacting activity” (example - sports teams, research teams or design bureaus)

Thus, the psychological pattern of interaction in each of these models is unique in each specific case.

CONCLUSION

Joint activity is a constantly acting factor in the communication of members in a team. Business communication contributes not only to the solution of purely utilitarian tasks, but also to the spiritual enrichment of those who communicate. When analyzing the communicative side of communication, it was found that there is a certain relationship between the nature of communication and the relationship that exists between partners.

Interpersonal relationships are defined both as the type of interaction that occurs under given specific conditions (whether it will be cooperation or rivalry), and the result obtained (whether it will be more successful or less successful cooperation). In the process of joint activity, the emotional basis inherent in interpersonal relations, which gives rise to various assessments, orientations, attitudes of partners, “colors” the interaction in a certain way.

But at the same time, such an emotional (positive or negative) coloring of interaction cannot fully determine the fact of its presence or absence: even in conditions of “bad” interpersonal relations, given by a certain social activities, the interaction must exist.

To what extent it is determined by interpersonal relations and, conversely, to what extent it is “subordinate” to the requirements of the activity performed, depends, among other things, on the nature social relations in which this activity is carried out.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. Andreeva G.M., Bogomolova N.N., Petrovskaya L.A. Modern foreign social psychology. M., 2001.

2. Bazarov T.Yu., Eremin B.L. Personnel Management. M., 2001.

3. Bern E. Games that people play. People who play games / Per. from English. M., 1988.

4. Borodkin F.M., Karyak N.M. Attention: conflict! Novosibirsk, 2003.

5. Grishina N.V. Psychology of conflict. SPb., 2000.

6. Kunitsyna V.N., Kazarinova N.V., Pogolsha V.M. Interpersonal communication. SPb., 2001.

7. Leontiev A.N. Problems of the development of the psyche. M., 1972.

8. Lomov B.F. Communication as a problem of psychology // Methodological problems of social psychology. M., 1995.

10. Obozov N.N. Interpersonal relationships. L., 2005.

11. Parsons T. The concept of society: components and relationships / THESIS: Theory and history of economic and social institutions and systems. Almanac. - 1993, Vol. I, Issue. 2.

12. Management psychology: a textbook for universities. M.,

13. Solovieva O.V. Feedback in interpersonal communication. M., 1992.

14. Stolyarenko L.D. Psychology business communication and management. - Rostov n / a: "Phoenix", 2001. - 512 p.

team. Optimally organized pedagogical communication allows you to effectively influence the socio-psychological climate of the team, prevent interpersonal conflicts. 2.2. FEATURES OF NON-VERBAL COMMUNICATION IN THE ACTIVITY OF A TEACHER mental development student, and the main "tool" is his mental interaction with the child, ...

Between partners, here it is also necessary to trace how this or that system of interaction is associated with the relations that have developed between the participants in the interaction. 3. The study of communication as an interaction on the example of a group of students The relevance of this topic lies in the fact that not everyone understands that there is a relationship between temperament and abilities. In today's schools...

Relations are divided into formal (for example, a conversation between officials during office hours and informal (party, hike), business (service) and personal. Friendship is a form of interpersonal relations based on common interests and mutual affection. Friendship is inherent in: personal character(as opposed to, for example, business relationships), voluntary and individual selectivity...

S.L. Bratchenko under style interaction understands individual model of interpersonal communication preferred by a particular person.

Criteria for the selection of styles: the ratio of the positions of the interlocutor (freedom, power, submission); degree of mutual understanding; results, consequences and opportunities for interaction.

Table 2. Styles of interpersonal interaction (according to S.L. Bratchenko)

	Position ratio	Degree of understanding	Opportunities
Dialogic	Complete equality, mutual freedom, trust, respect	High level of mutual understanding	Maximum opportunities for self-disclosure, self-development of both partners
		Unwillingness to understand and empathize, the demand to be understood	Lack of opportunities for one with maximum opportunities for the other
Manipulative	Inequality in relationships, the power of one over the other	The desire to hide one's position and the desire to reveal the vulnerable sides of the partner	Development at the expense of others
Altruistic	Inequality at your own expense	The desire for understanding, empathy; ignoring your problems	Opportunities for the development of the interlocutor at your own expense
Conformal	Lack of own position, adherence to the opinion of a partner or group	Striving for Uncritical Consensus	Lack of opportunities for self-development
Indifferent	Pragmatic position	Ignoring the psychological problems of interaction	Lack of opportunities for the development of another

Interaction types

The most common is the dichotomous division of all possible types of interactions into two opposite types: cooperation and competition.

Cooperation, or cooperative interaction,means the coordination of the individual forces of the participants (ordering, combining, summing up these forces). An important indicator of cooperative interaction is the involvement in it of all participants in joint activities.

Allocate three types of cooperative interaction:

pooling individual efforts (for example, teachers in the same school);

sequential joint activity (for example, conveyor);

proper joint activity (for example, actors playing in the same performance)

Competition is in competition. The most striking form of competition is conflict.

Conflict - this is a contradiction that arises between people on aspects of interaction that are significant for them and disrupts their normal interaction, and therefore causes certain actions on the part of the participants in the conflict to resolve the problem in their own interests.

To the main characteristics of conflicts can include the following:

Conflict is a common feature of social systems, it is inevitable and unavoidable, and therefore should be considered as a natural part of human life. Conflict must be accepted as one of the forms normal human interaction.

Conflict does not always and does not necessarily lead to destruction. On the contrary, it is one of the basic processes that serve to preserve the whole. Conflict is not always bad.

The conflict contains potential positive opportunities: Conflict-change-adaptation-survival

If we stop seeing conflict as a threat and start treating it as a signal that something needs to change, we will take a more constructive stance.

The conflict can be managed, and managed in such a way that its negative, destructive consequences can be minimized, and constructive ones can be strengthened. Conflict is an area that can and should be dealt with.

Allocate constructive and destructive functions of the conflict.

Constructive functions of conflict:developing function - it acts as a source of development, improvement of the interaction process; cognitive function - detects a contradiction; instrumental function - designed to resolve the contradiction; restructuring function - has objective consequences associated with a change in circumstances.

Destructive functions of conflict:

in a conflict situation, almost all people experience psychological discomfort, tension, depression or excessive excitement;

the system of interconnections is broken;

the effectiveness of joint activities decreases.

N.V. Grishina highlights the following types of conflicts.

Social(processes that take place at the level of macrostructures) is a social process or situation in which one social group is in conscious opposition to one or more other groups, since these groups pursue incompatible goals.

Socio-psychological(at the level of intergroup and interpersonal interaction). We are talking about small groups - those that are in direct interaction or at the level of interaction of individuals, their interests, etc.

Psychological(intrapersonal level) The clash of various personal formations (motives, goals, interests), represented in the mind of the individual by the corresponding experiences. The main condition of psychological conflict is the subjective insolubility of the situation.