The word «manipulation» is borrowed from the French language. The original source is the Latin maniples «handful». In English, it appeared in 1831. We are interested in its values such as «skillful management or use», «control or play with the help of skillful, dishonest, or cunning means, especially to ensure someone's advantage».
Unfortunately, the problem of manipulation received a «right to exist» only in the related fields of knowledge. In Soviet psychology manipulation is most often mentioned as part of the general problem of the impact (influence) as one of its kinds, but at the same time the psychological characteristics of manipulative influence is practically not been studied. This fact has repeatedly been noted by many authors.
Recently, interest in the problems of manipulative influence grew, new literary sources, but almost all of them are descriptive rather than explanatory, contains numerous examples from literature, descriptions of everyday situations. This type of literature can be described more as a popular rather than scientific literature.
Let us focus on the problem of language and terminology, which are used by many authors when considering the problem of manipulation. The language of science, according to LS Vygotsky — there analysis tool, an instrument of thought. The language of science «as it detects molecular changes that are experiencing a science; it reflects the internal processes and have not issued — tendential development, reform and growth. «Indeed, not a study of problems of psychological manipulation is reflected in the language used to describe the phenomenon.
First, the lack of knowledge of the problem is reflected in the uncertainty of the very concept of psychological manipulation, its confusion with other concepts. In many literary sources devoted to the problem of manipulation, the range of phenomena, called manipulative, is poorly defined. The concept of manipulation is also often mixed with other concepts. So, for example, in our opinion, in the work of PS. Taranova concept psychological manipulation is mixed with the concept of «intrigue», in the work of R. R. Garifullina — with the concept of «illusion» and «bluff», Yu.A. Shcherbatykh mentions the concept of manipulation either as a special «type of deception», or as a «technology of deception».
Secondly, many of the concepts used to describe the phenomenon of manipulation, are borrowed from other fields, and, in our opinion, is not entirely successful, for example, RR Garifullin borrows the notion of illusory art, hardly justifying this choice.
However, in recent years the first attempts of empirical research and theoretical understanding of the accumulated knowledge of the psychology of manipulation. So E. L. Dotsenko first monograph published in 1996, dedicated to the theoretical understanding of the psychology of manipulation.
The term «psychological manipulation» is a metaphor that contains three important features:
A) The idea of «tidying hands»
B) Preservation of the illusion of independence of decisions
C) The skill of the manipulator in the performance of methods of exposure.
However, for the scientific consideration of the phenomenon of manipulation and delimitation it from other types of effects metaphor turns out to be not enough. In the majority of literary sources on the issue manipulation of the concept itself is not clearly defined. Russian scientist E. L. Dotsenko in 1996 attempted to design psychological definition of manipulation. As a material construction of the definition used separate features the manipulations of other authors, isolated from the descriptions.
The following criteria were highlighted for Dotsenko common signs: psychological impact, attitude manipulator to another as a means to achieve their own goals, the desire to get a one-sided gain, hidden impact, the use of psychological force, the game on the weaknesses, skill in the implementation of manipulative actions, motivational the introduction (the introduction of the goals of the manipulator into the psyche of the manipulated).
On the basis of the selection criteria was formulated the following definition of manipulation:
Manipulation — «is a kind of psychological impact, skillful execution that leads to a hidden excitement from the other person's intentions do not coincide with its true there is a desire».
In Russian psychology, there are also other variants of the definitions of manipulation, the definitions developed by E. L. some time later. Dotsenko.
Is not it. Ryumshina gives the definition of manipulation similar to Dotsenko as «the type of human impact when he acts as an object with which certain actions are performed... with the aim of» taking hold of hands «with the help of machinations, distracting tricks and techniques».
E. V. Sidorenko formulates the definition of manipulation as «the deliberate and hidden impulse of another person to experiencing certain states, making decisions and performing actions necessary for the initiator to achieve his own goals». Thus, the definition of manipulation here concerns not only the motivational sphere of the manipulated, but also cognitive and behavioral, but also emphasizes the procedural characteristics of the manipulation.
According to G. A. Balla and M. S. Burgin, the definition of manipulation should be spread not so often in social and pedagogical practice situations where «the subject of influence sincerely seeks for the welfare of the recipient (i.e. wishes good for him), but at the same time decides what the good should be " [nineteen]. This definition makes it possible to consider the phenomenon of manipulation in a new perspective, focusing on the positive side of influence. Yu.A. Yermakov also notes that «not always manipulations have a negative value for people, associated exclusively with damage to their consciousness and personal life». A similar position is demonstrated by R. R. Garifullin, highlighting 2 types of manipulation: malignant and virtuous.
Five groups of features were obtained, each of which highlighted a generalized criterion that pretends to enter the definition of manipulation:
– generic sign — psychological impact,
– attitude of the manipulator to another as a means of achieving its own goals,
– the desire to get one-sided winnings,
– the hidden nature of the impact (both the fact of the impact and its orientation),
– use of (psychological) strength, playing on weaknesses.
– In addition, two more criteria turned out to be several detached:
– motivation, motivation and
– skill and skill in the implementation of manipulative actions.
So, the following definition is proposed, which will be used in our work:
Manipulation is a type of psychological impact, the skillful execution of which leads to the hidden excitement of another person's intentions that do not coincide with his actually existing desires.
The difference between Machiavelli’s and manipulation.
- Manipulation may be unconscious.
Machiavellianism is the belief that people need to be manipulated: such is the nature of man.
- Manipulation can be done for the best of intentions. (For example, parents manipulate their own children. But they do it for the good of the children).
Machiavellist always performs actions for the sake of our own benefit, has a vested interest. He does not feel guilty for manipulation, acts confidently, openly towards people, which helps to establish contact with them.
Summing up all that we studied in the first chapter, I would like to focus on the fact that the style in the notion of «style of thinking» is reflected in a trivial fact: all people think differently, but about the same thing. Individual differences in thinking turned out to be so diverse, depending on such a large number of factors, that it was not possible to bring them to a common denominator until now, despite the almost century-long history of their experimental study. A thinking style is an open system of intellectual strategies, techniques, skills, and operations to which a person is predisposed by virtue of his individual characteristics. Thinking styles begin to take shape in childhood and develop throughout a person’s life.
However, the style of thinking is through open, that is, replenishing all the time, but a system with a relatively permanent core, structure and selectivity to external influences. There are people with a complex style organization, which have more than one such cores. It means that they either possess several styles of thinking equally well, or are characterized by what can be called intellectual spinelessness. Different scientists differ in determining the number of styles of thinking, but it, as a rule, does not go beyond a dozen. Here we look at the five basic styles of thinking and their combinations.
Machiavellianism is the belief that people need manipulate: such is the nature of man.
Manipulation can be done for the best of intentions. (For example, parents manipulate their own children. But they do it for the good of the children).
Machiavelli always performs actions for their own benefit, has a vested interest. He does not feel guilty for manipulation, acts confidently, openly towards people, which helps to establish contact with them.
References:
- Andreeva G. M. Social Psychology. M.: Aspect-Press, 2004
- Arbetnot J. Art of political lies. // Sat «England in a pamphlet», M., Progress, 1987, pp. 271–282. Translation by Y. Levin.
- Artemyeva E.Yu., Luchko L. M., Strelkov Yu.K. Methodology for the assessment of labor actions // psychological issues. 1984, № 5
- Bazarov T.Yu. Socio-psychological orientation direct leader of the labor collective. Author. Dis. Candidate of Psychological Science M.: 1981
- Bazarov T.Yu. Human resource management organizations. M.: IPK GS, 1995
