Ethnocultural Features in the Representations of Family as a Resource of Resilience among Russian and Buryat Youth

Objective. Comparative analysis of representations about family as a resilience resource among Russian and Buryat youth (15 to 24 years old).
Background. The influence of family on human resilience is mediated by cultural and ethnic contexts. A comparative analysis of the concepts of family as a resource of youth resilience, due to the families belonging to different cultures – more collectivist (Buryats) and more individualistic (Russians), will help to clarify the ethnocultural features of human resilience.
Study design. A comparison was made of the concepts of family as a resource of resilience among Russian and Buryat respondents who support their resilience.
Participants. 109 Russian and 98 Buryat university and college students. A total of 207 people.
Measurements. The following were used: focus groups, a socio-demographic questionnaire, the Twenty Statements Test by M. Kuhn and T. McPartland, and the author's version of the "Unfinished Sentences" method. Based on the qualitative data from focus groups on the essence of human resilience and its components, 9 unfinished sentences were formulated and combined into 4 categories: "Resilience", "Family", "Values", and "Culture". For quantitative formalization of the qualitative data of respondents, the lexical base (n = 3921 for Buryats, n = 4124 for Russians) was processed using the Atlas.ti program (version 9.5.6) and subjected to comparative lexicographic content analysis with an assessment of word frequency. The results are visualized as word clouds.
Results. The semantic core in the "Resilience" category is different: himself, ability for Russians; person, ability for Buryats. In the core of the "Family" category – person, child – for Russians; good, beloved – for Buryats. Respondents of both groups report the high importance of family. For Russians, family members are equal, there are negative characteristics of family, while for Buryats, family relationships are usually hierarchical, there are no negative characteristics. In the core of the "Values" category for Russians: family, life; family, friends – for Buryats. In the core of the "Culture" category: the word many, tradition for Russians; important, tradition for Buryats. Interest in folk traditions was revealed in both samples. For Russians, traditions are associated with family, for Buryats with the traditions of the nation. The statements show the opposition of "I" (for Russians) and "we" (for Buryats).
Conclusion. The ideas about family as a resource of resilience among Russian and Buryat youth have ethnocultural features. They are determined by the fact that the Buryats belong to a more collectivist culture and the Russians to a more individualistic culture. Russian youth perceive family as a resource of resilience, which is aimed at: strengthening their ability to cope with difficulties independently and forming an "I" identity. For Buryat youth, family as a resource of resilience strengthens their “we” identity, which contributes to the development of “We” identity. The idea of the ethnocultural context of the family as a resource of youth resilience allow us to understand how the family support for the younger generation varies.

1. Bovina I.B., Dvoryanchikov N.V., Mel'nikova D.V., Lavreshkin N.V. K voprosu ob issledovanii sotsial'nykh predstavleniy: vzglyad so storony [Studying Social Representations: an Outsider’s Perspective]. Sotsial'naya psikhologiya i obshchestvo = Social Psychology and Society, Vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 8–25. (In Russ.). DOI:10.17759/sps.2022130302
2. Borisova S.A., Krasheninnikova E.I. Ponyatie «individualnogo» I «kollektivnogo» v kontekste mezhkulturnoj kommunikacii [The concept of “individual” and “collective” in the context of intercultural communication]. Sovremennyye issledovaniya sotsial'nykh problem = Modern studies of social problems, Vol. 13, no. 1-2, pp. 144–151. DOI:10.12731/2077-1770-2021-13-1-2-144-151 (In Russ.).
3. Voitenko V.P., Sokolov V.A., Lubsky R.A. Kollektivizm i individualism v Rossii kak predmet teoreticheskoj refleksii [Collectivism and individualism in Russia as a subject of theoretical reflection]. Filosofiya prava = Philosophy of Law, 2019, 3(90), pp. 71–77. (In Russ.).
4. Gusel'tseva M.S. Rozhdeniye sub"yektivnosti iz dukha chelovekoznaniya [The birth of subjectivity from the spirit of anthropology]. Voprosy psihologii = Questions of Psychology, 2018, no. 1, pp. 3– (In Russ.).
5. Denisova G.S., Avdeev E.A., Vorobev S.M. Konfliktogennye riski ehtnokulturnyh osnovanij identichnosti studencheskoj molodezhi sluchaj frontirnogo severokavkazskogo regiona [Conflict-generating risks of the ethnocultural foundations of the student youth identity: the case of the frontier North Caucasus region]. Regionologiya = Regionology, Vol. 32, no. 2, pp. 198–216. DOI:10.15507/2413-1407.127.032.202402.198-216 (In Russ.).
6. Dorzhieva D.A. Subehtnosy v processe ehtnicheskoj konsolidacii buryat: Dis. … кand. istorich. nauk [Subethnic groups in the process of ethnic consolidation of the Buryats: author’s abstract of thesis cand. sc. (History)]. Ulan-Ude, 2005. 21 р.
7. Dukhova L.I. Faktory formirovaniya predstavleniy o sem'ye budushchikh uchiteley [Factors in the formation of future teachers’ representations of a family]. Uchenyye zapiski. Elektronnyy nauchnyy zhurnal Kurskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta = Scientific Notes. Electronic scientific journal of the Kursk State University, 2012, no. 4-1(24), pp. 129–136. (In Russ.).
8. Emel'yanova T.P. Razrabotka ponyatiya sotsial'nogo predstavleniya – novyy etap v razvitii kontseptual'nogo apparata sotsial'noy psikhologii [The development of the concept of social representation is a new stage in the development of the conceptual apparatus of social psychology]. In Sergiyenko E.A., Zhuravlev A.L. (Eds.). Razrabotka ponyatii sovremennoi psikhologii [The development of concepts of modern psychology]. Moscow: Institut Psikhologii RAN Publ., 2018, pp. 397– (In Russ.).
9. Emel'yanova T.P. Sotsial'noye predstavleniye – ponyatiye i kontseptsiya: itogi poslednego desyatiletiya [Social representation – notion and conception: last decade summary]. Psikhologicheskiy zhurnal = Psychological Journal, Vol. 22, no. 6, pp. 39–47. (In Russ.).
10. Lebedeva N.V. Kross-kulturnye osobennosti otnosheniya rossijskoj molodezhi k innovaciyam [Cross-cultural features of the attitude of Russian youth to innovation]. In Yu. Martynova, N.M. Lebedeva (Eds.). Molodye moskvichi. Kross kul’turnoe issledovanie [Young Muscovites. Cross-cultural research]. Moscow: RUDN University, 2008, pp. 9–40. (In Russ.).
11. Lopuhova O.G. Psihologiya ehtnicheskogo samosoznaniya I mezhkulturnogo obshcheniya [Psychology of ethnic identity and intercultural communication]. Kazan’: Brig, 124 p.
12. Makhnach A.V., Miklyaeva A.V., Saraeva N.M., Gor'kovaya I.A., Laktionova A.I., Postylyakova Yu.V., Sukhanov A.A. Zhiznesposobnost' rossiyskoy molodezhi: sotsial'no-ekologicheskaya paradigma psikhologicheskogo issledovaniya [Resilience in Russian youth: socio-ecological paradigm of psychological research]. In: A.V. Makhnach (Ed.). Mosсow: Institute of Psychology RAS Publ., 2024. 286 p. DOI:10.38098/fund_24_0473 (In Russ.).
13. Makhnach A.V., Saraeva N.M., Dagbaeva S.B., Laktionova A.I., Postylyakova Yu.V., Sukhanov A.A. Sravnitel'nyy empiricheskiy analiz zhiznesposobnosti russkoy i buryatskoy molodezhi [Comparative empirical analysis of the Russian and Buryat youth resilience]. Sotsial'naya psikhologiya i obshchestvo = Social psychology and society, Vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 66–84. DOI:10.17759/sps.2023140205 (In Russ.).
14. Moskovici S. Sotsial'noye predstavleniye: istoricheskiy vzglyad [Social representation: a historical perspective]. Psikhologicheskiy zhurnal = Psychological Journal, 1995. 16, no. 1, pp. 3–18. (In Russ.).
15. Natsional'nyy korpus russkogo yazyka (ruscorpora.ru [National Corpus of the Russian Language] [Electronic resource]. URL: https://ruscorpora.ru/ (Accessed 10.09.2024). (In Russ.).
16. Nesterova A.A. Contseptualizatsiya zhiznesposobnosti cheloveka v sovremennoy psikhologii [Conceptualization of human resilience in modern psychology]. In YU. Bekasova (Eds.). Psikhologiya zhiznesposobnosti lichnosti: nauchnyye podkhody, sovremennaya praktika i perspektivy issledovaniy. Materialy metodologicheskogo seminara [Psychology of personality resilience: scientific approaches, modern practice and research prospects. Materials of the methodological seminar]. Moscow: MGOU Publ., 2021, pp. 54–61. (In Russ.).
17. Postylyakova Yu.V. Faktory zhiznesposobnosti i faktory riska v obrazovatel'nom prostranstve vuza u studentov s raznym urovnem individual'noy zhiznesposobnosti [Resilience and risk factors in the educational space of a university among students with different levels of individual resilience]. Institut psikhologii Rossiyskoy akademii nauk. Organizatsionnaya psikhologiya i psikhologiya truda = Institute of Psychology of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Organizational Psychology and Psychology of Labor, Vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 49–69. DOI:10.38098/ipran.opwp_2024_30_1_003 (In Russ.).
18. Rinchinova A.Ts. Osobennosti etnopedagogicheskogo vospitaniya detey v soglasii s sotsial'noy sredoy u buryatskogo naroda [Peculiarities of ethnopedagogical education of children in accordance with the social environment among the Buryat people]. Rossiyskaya identichnost': Sbornik materialov Vserossiyskogo konkursa nauchno-issledovatel'skikh rabot (Moskva, 25 sentyabrya 2023 goda) [Russian identity: Collection of materials from the All-Russian competition of scientific research works]. Moscow: Moscow State University of A.N. Kosygin, 2023, pp. 488–495. (In Russ.).
19. Rostovtseva V.V., Butovskaya M.L., Mezentseva A.A., Dashiyeva N.B., Korotkova A.A. 2023. Кulturnye razlichiya v muzhskom kooperativnom povedenii: kross-populyacionnoe ehksperimentalnoe issledovanie [Cultural differences in male cooperative behavior: a cross-population experimental study]. Istoriya i sovremennost’ = History and modernity, 4, pp. 173–196. DOI:10.30884/iis/2023.04.07 (In Russ.).
20. Ryl'skaya E.A. Tendentsii razvitiya predstavleniy o zhiznesposobnosti professionala: transspektivnyy analiz [The trends of development of ideas about the resilience of a professional: transspective analysis]. Institut psikhologii Rossiyskoy akademii nauk. Organizatsionnaya psikhologiya i psikhologiya truda = Institute of Psychology of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Organizational Psychology and Psychology of Labor, Vol. 4(1), pp. 28–45. (In Russ.).
21. Tsoktoeva R.Yu. Struktura buryatskoj patriarhalnoj semi I transformatsiya vnutrisemejnyh svyazej v sovremennoj kulture buryat [The structure of Buryat patriarchal family and transformation of intrafamily connections in modern Buryat culture]. Vestnik Buryatskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta = Bulletin of Buryat State University, 2012, no. 6–1, pp. 248–251. (In Russ.).
22. Etnopsikhokul'tura lichnosti i traditsii buryatskogo naroda [Ethno-psychoculture of personality and traditions of the Buryat people]. In R.D. Sanzhaeva (Eds.). Ulan-Ude. Buryat State University of Banzarov, 2024. 186 p. (In Russ.).
23. Bhandari S., Alonge O. Measuring the resilience of health systems in low- and middle-income countries: A focus on community resilience. Health Research Policy and Systems, Vol. 18(1), Art. 81. DOI:10.1186/S12961-020-00594-W
24. Blessin M., Lehmann S., Kunzler A.M., van Dick R., Lieb K. Resilience interventions conducted in Western and Eastern countries – a systematic review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, Vol. 19(11), Art. 6913. DOI:10.3390/IJERPH19116913
25. Kuhn M.H., McPartland T.S. An empirical investigation of self-attitudes. American Sociological Review, Vol. 19, pp. 68–76. DOI:10.2307/2088175
26. McCubbin L.D., McCubbin H.I. Culture and ethnic identity in family resilience: Dynamic processes in trauma and transformation of Indigenous people. In M. Ungar (Ed.). Handbook for Working with Children and Youth. Pathways to Resilience Across Cultures and Contexts. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, 2005, pp. 27–44. DOI:10.4135/9781412976312
27. Panter‐Brick C. Energizing partnerships in research‐to‐policy projects. American Anthropologist, Vol. 124(4), pp. 751–766. DOI:10.1111/AMAN.13776
28. Ungar M. A commentary on Ehrlich et al. (2023): a resilience paradox for child development. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry and Allied Disciplines, Vol. 65(3), pp. 365–368. DOI:10.1111/jcpp.1392
29. Wilcox L., Larson K., Bartlett R. The role of resilience in ethnic minority adolescent navigation of ecological adversity. Journal of Child and Adolescent Trauma, Vol. 14(4), pp. 507–515. DOI:10.1007/s40653-020-00337-7
30. Zaretsky L., Clark M. Me, Myself and Us? The relationship between ethnic identity and hope, resilience and family relationships among different ethnic groups. Journal of Education, Society and Behavioural Science, Vol. 32(2), pp. 1–14. DOI:10.9734/jesbs/2019/v32i230167