The coordination of interests in public policy making in Ukraine through the mechanism of consolidation of socio-political groups
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17721/BPSY.2023.2(18).13Keywords:
public policy, prosocial behavior, political behavior, cooperation, mobilization, integration, ideology, coordination of interests, value orientations, ideological group, electoral groupAbstract
Background. The article is devoted to an empirical study and substantiation of the structure and content of consolidation of political groups, the potential of consolidation as a mechanism for reconciling the interests of political groups in public policy making. The purpose of the study was to find out the socio-psychological features of the consolidation of ideological and electoral political groups, to find common ground between them in order to harmonize interests in public policy making.
Methods. theoretical, empirical, methods of mathematical and statistical data processing, as well as psychodiagnostic techniques: "Political Values" (G. Eysenck), "Political Values" (A. Seleznev), "Group Identity" (J. Feitos, E. Salas), "Political Identity" (O. Sknar), political identification scales (J. Kruker, R. Lihtanen), "Study of Political Motives" (A. Krasnyakov), "Political Self-Efficacy" (I. Sariev), "Political Self-Efficacy" (I. Sariev), "Political Solidarity" (K. Newfield, D. Goucher, K. Starzuk, in the author's adaptation), "Perceptions of Consolidation and Ways to Achieve It" (S. Kravchenko), and a research questionnaire.
Results. The content and structure, patterns and features of political consolidation of socio-political groups are determined. Consolidation is a systemic unity based on the principle of conjunction, the systemic factor of which is the value system of the group. It consists of: value-oriented unity, common socio-political motives and image of Ukraine's needy future, political and group identities, reflective capital (common ideas about: a) consolidation unity, b) mechanisms of its implementation, c) similarities and differences between the ideas of their group members and other groups in political interaction, d) readiness for joint actions, dialogue, development of possible productive solutions), self-efficacy of the political group.
Conclusions. The socio-political consolidation functionality of a community sets the scale, direction, and coordinate system of interaction between electoral and ideological groups - from competition, cooperation, and options for productive confrontation to extreme borderline conflict, as various types of wars. The author identifies the universal and specific bases of possible coordination of interests of political groups and their consolidation.
References
Chayinska, M., Minescu, A., & McGarty, C. (2017). Political solidarity through action (and inaction): How international relations changed intracultural perceptions in Ukraine. Group Processes, & Intergroup Relations, 20(3), 396-408.
Cortland, C., Craig, M., Shapiro, J., Richeson, J., Neel, R., & Goldstein, N. (2017). Solidarity Through Shared Disadvantage: Highlighting Shared Experiences of Discrimination Improves Relations Between Stigmatized Groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 113(4), 547-567. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000100
Ferrera, M., & Burelli, C. (2019). Cross-National Solidarity and Political Sustainability in the EU after the Crisis. JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies, 57(1), 94-110.
Gauvain М. (2018). Collaborative Problem Solving: Social and Developmental Considerations. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 19(2). 53-58.
Goodwin, J., & Jasper, J. M. (2009). The social movements reader: Cases and concepts. Wiley-Blackwell.
Janmaat, G., & Braun R. (2009). Diversity and Postmaterialism as Rival Perspectives in Accounting for Social Solidarity: Evidence from International Surveys. International Journal of Comparative Sociology, 50(1), 39-68.
Kerner, I. (2018). Solidarity across Difference Lines. Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State, & Society, 25(1), 44-49. https://doi.org /10.1093/sp/jxy004
Klandermans, B. (2019). Political Solidarity. Oxford University Press.209.
Klandermans, B., & van Stekelenburg, J. (2013). Social movements and the dynamics of collective action. In L. Huddy, D. O. Sears, & J. S. Levy (Eds.). The Oxford handbook of political psychology (pp. 774-811). Oxford University Press.
McAdam, D., Tarrow, S., Tilly, C. (2001). Dynamics of Contention. Cambridge University Press.
Melucci, A. (1995). The process of collective identity. In H. Johnston, & B. Klandermans (Eds.), Social movements and culture (pp. 41-63). University of Minnesota Press
Meyer, D., & Whittier, N. (1994). Social movement spillover. Social Problems, 41 (2), 277-298.
Neufeld, К., Starzyk, K., & Gaucher, D. (2019). Political Solidarity: A Theory and a Measure. Journal of Social and Political Psychology, 7, 726-765.
Parsa, M. (1985).Economic development and political transformation. Theory and Society, 14(5), 623-675.
Sommers, M. (1993). Citizenship and the place of the public sphere: Law, community, and political culture in the transition to democracy. American Sociological Review, 58(5), 587-620.
Soss, J. (1999). Lessons of welfare: Policy design, political learning, and political action. American Political Science Review, 93(2), 363-380
Taylor, V. (1989). Social movement continuity: The women's movement in abeyance. American Sociological Review, 54(5), 761-775.
Yamagishi, T., & Mifune, N. (2009). Social exchange and solidarity: in-group love or out-group hate? Evolution and Human Behavior, 30(4), 229-237.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Bulletin of Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv. Psychology
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
