THE PERCEPTION PECULIARITIES OF THE CITY BY STUDENTS OF RURAL AND URBAN ORIGIN
Abstract
The aim of the study is to determine the specifics of the city image among students of urban and rural origin.The methods. The architectural semantic differential “The city” (A.S. Shemelina, O.E. Vanina) to identifythe main characteristics of the urban space perception, the differences and similarities of the urban environment perception by different people and groups. The semantic differential contains 28 pairs of polar definitions to berated on the scale from 1 to 5. The respondents were also offered the questionnaire’s questions regarding theirwillingness to leave the city or stay. The research sample consisted of students of urban origin and those whoseparents live in the village, and the students live in a university dormitory.The results. It has been revealed that the rural residents, when changing their place of living, havethe adaptation problem, that is, the transformation of the value-meaning system and identity. This transformationcan have the following consequences: positive (personal growth, discovery of creative aspects of one’s self,self-realization), neutral (adaptation, restoration of the previous functional level, preservation of stableconnections with the self-image), negative (traumatic, destructive tendencies, disorganization reactions,the feeling of loneliness, irritation).The conclusions. The differences in the ideas of the city image by the students-“citizens” and students-“villagers” have been established. It has been stated that the students who came to the city of Kherson to studyfrom rural areas consider the city to be more noisy, energetic, dynamic, fast in comparison with students-Kherson’s residents. Yet, the students-“citizens” believe that the city is beautiful, cozy, and warm. It has beendetermined that the desire to leave this city and change the city of residence is associated with a certain imageof the city, that is, the more negative characteristics the image has, the higher the probability of the students’migration willingness, and the desire to find another city to live in.
References
2. Голубь О.В., Тимофеева Т.С., Озерина А.А. Визуальный образ города как когнитивно-аффективный компонент городской идентичности. Форум. Серия: Гуманитарные и экономические науки. 2019. № 1(18). С. 99–103.
3. Губеладзе І.Г. Сільська молодь у місті: пошук ідентичності : монографія. Київ : Міленіум, 2015. 236 с.
4. Кулик М.А. Соціальна пам’ять у формуванні територіальної ідентичності міського та сільського населення Запорізької області. Соціальні технології: актуальні проблеми теорії та практики. 2013. Вип. 57. С. 117–125. URL: http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/stapttp_2013_57_17
5. Михайлов В.Т., Рунге Й. Идентификации человека. Территориальные общности и социальное пространство: опыт концептуализации. Социологические исследования. 2019. № 1. С. 52–62. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31857/S013216250003747-4
6. Мозговая А.В., Шлыкова Е.В. Стиль жизни городской общности как ресурс адаптации к неопределенности среды. Научный результат. Социология и управление. 2019. Т. 5, № 1. С. 52–69. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18413/2408-9338-2019-5-1-0-5
7. Покатиловская Е.Н., Шибаева Л.В. Образ города проживания в представлениях жителей с разной городской идентичностью. Социальная и экономическая психология. 2019. Том 4. № 2(14). С. 192–209.
8. Anton C.E., Lawrence C. The Relationship between Place Attachment, the Theory of Planned Behaviour and Residents Response to Place Change. Journal of Environmental Psychology. 2016. Vol. 47. P. 145–154. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2016.05.010.
9. Bernardo F., Palma-Oliveira J. M. Place identity, place attachment and the scale of place: the impact of place salience. Psychology. 2013. Vol. 4. P. 167–193. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/21711976.2013.10773867
10. Belanche D., Casalуs L. V., Flaviаn C. Understanding the cognitive, affective and evaluative components of social urban identity: Determinants, measurement, and practical consequences. Journal of Environmental Psychology. 2017. Vol. 50. P. 138–153. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2017.02.004
11. Blynova, O. Ye, Popovych, I. S., Bokshan, H. I., Tsіlmak, O. M., & Zavatska, N. Ye. Social and Psychological Factors of Migration Readiness of Ukrainian Students. Revista ESPACIOS. 2019. Vol. 40. (№ 36). Page 4. URL: http://www.revistaespacios.com/a19v40n36/19403604.html
12. Hogg М., Williams K. From I to We: Social Identity and the Collective Self. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice. 2000. V. 4. № 1. Р. 81–97.
13. Kashima Y., Paladino A., Margetts E. A. Environmentalist identity and environmental striving. Journal of Environmental Psychology. 2014. Vol. 38. P. 64–75. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2013.12.014
