Components of Social Maturity in Students

Nazokatkhon Rakhimova

National University of Uzbekistan named after Mirzo Ulugbek,Tashkent, Uzbekistan

Keywords: Personality, Motivation, Communication, Social Maturity, Inflexibility, Self-Awareness, Personality

Behavior, Social Values.

Abstract: This article provides an analysis of theories of social maturity, as put forth by numerous scholars,

demonstrating the theoretical and practical significance of students' social maturity in contemporary society.

The study presents an in-depth exploration of the concept of social maturity, including an individual's lifetime

achievements, societal status, personal and professional accomplishments, philosophical perspective, notable

character traits, and values. Moreover, this piece elucidates the phenomenon of social maturity, expounding

upon its investigation via psychological research. It further sheds light on psychological external and internal

factors influencing the student, psychological elements of social maturity, age-specific characteristics,

processes of professional growth and adaptation, social maturity development, motivational aspects of career

selection, and contemporary scientific psychological constructs of social maturity.

1 INTRODUCTION

Today, the concept of maturity is frequently

employed to classify various age stages of an

individual. During the 1960s and 1970s, maturity was

typically synonymous with 'middle age'. According to

J. Birren's research, 'maturity' is equated with old age,

categorised into the following stages: adolescence

(12-17 years), early adulthood (17-25 years), full

maturity (25-50 years), late maturity (50-75 years),

and old age (over 75 years). Researchers such as A.K

Bolotova and T.Z Kozlova concur that adolescence

marks the onset of maturity. It is acknowledged that

each age phase is characterised by distinct

developmental stages, evident in familial, educational

and student training, new forms of activities, and

physical traits. The notion of a 'mature individual' has

been consistently evaluated in most literature.

Investigative psychologists have also considered

characteristics of a mature individual, including their

activity, creativity, behaviour in social scenarios and

interpersonal relationships, as well as purposeful and

efficient thinking skills. Ancient Greek philosophers

depicted maturity as 'acme', signifying a high level of

achievement based on age and mental state.

The term 'acme' is presently utilised in pedagogy

and psychology. N.N Rybnikov first scientifically

Corresponding author:

introduced 'acmeology' in 1928, defining maturity as

the most productive and creative phase of human

existence (Ribkina I.V. (2000)). A.A Bodalev

interprets 'acme' as embodying human potential and

strength - social, moral, professional, and

psychological maturity. He concludes that 'acme'

represents personal development, indicating a

person's capacity to exhibit their abilities in any

situation and behaviour. A highly developed

individual reflects societal cultural values as personal

values.

In this regard, the author discerns that growing up

and maturity are distinct concepts. An individual may

age without necessarily reaching maturity. If he

abides by a rule in one situation but fails to adhere to

it in another, he can be considered 'partially mature'

(Bodalev A.A. (2007)). The term 'acmeology' (or

'acme') originates from the Greek words representing

a high point, peak, maturity, indicating the optimal

growth period.

Psychologists denote the thinking process as

responsible for thought regulation, appropriate

application, and control. As human life is inseparable

from personal thought, researchers highlight the

social aspect of thought in their studies. This

Rakhimova, N.

Components of Social Maturity in Students.

DOI: 10.5220/0012476900003792

Paper published under CC license (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)

In Proceedings of the 1st Pamir Transboundary Conference for Sustainable Societies (PAMIR 2023), pages 50-54

ISBN: 978-989-758-687-3

perspective is elaborated in the works of Uzbek

psychologist E. Gaziev. Gaziev emphasises the

following essential quality of thought: "Independent

thinking signifies the ability to set specific objectives,

make practical and scientific hypotheses, envision

results, and carry out tasks without assistance or

guidance, essentially conducting mental research to

identify varied ways, methods and means for

problem-solving” (Goziev E.G. (2010)). His manual,

"High School Psychology," underscores the socio-

psychological aspects of students.

Drawing from his research, one of the key

characteristics of the student phase is the swift

development of social maturity. Social maturity

necessitates that an individual possesses the required

mental capacities and is capable of assuming roles in

social life, raising children, and preparing for labour

activities. In my view, the issue of a student's social

maturity warrants focused research. Types of social

maturity include sexual, civic, professional, socio-

economic, spiritual, moral, and psychological

maturity. Professor G.B Shoumarov highlights that

the concept of 'maturity' is connected with life

experience, that is, 'life knowledge'. Individual

features of acquiring 'Life skills' and 'University of

Life' are also observed. In my opinion, it is crucial to

establish a specific criterion of social maturity; a

student cannot be deemed mature without life

experience and knowledge mastery. When

interpreting maturity, it's necessary to analyse diverse

facets of an individual's activities.

2 METHOD

Several methodologies were chosen to undertake this

research. They include A.A. Rean's adaptation of K.

Zamfir's professional motivation questionnaire, M.

Schneider's communicative control questionnaire,

and Yu.M. Orlov's inventory for determining the

level of reflexivity as well as I.G. Timoshuk's survey

to determine the level of spiritual and moral

responsibility. It would be beneficial to explore these

selected psychodiagnostic tools in greater detail.

For instance, for psychodiagnosis of the first

component (motivation for future professional work),

K. Zamfir's questionnaire on professional activity

motivation was chosen, as modified by A.A. Rean

(Goziev E.G. (2010)). E. Mitrofanova recommends

using this psychodiagnostic tool to investigate an

individual's motivation in their chosen profession and

their professional activity motivation. This

questionnaire is based on the well-known concept of

internal and external motivation. The first framework

(internal motivation) probes the importance of the

selected professional activity, while the second

(external motivation) explores the individual's desire

to fulfil other types of needs (material, image, etc.)

through their chosen profession (Shoumarov G.B.

(2012)).

The results of the psychodiagnostic observations

are analysed by calculating the accumulated points

based on provided keys on the following scales:

internal motivation; external positive motivation; and

external negative motivation.

To determine the second component of student

social maturity (spiritual and moral responsibility), a

questionnaire by I.G. Timoshuk was employed to

assess the level of personal spiritual and moral

responsibility (Mitrofanova E. (2011)). This survey

investigates the moral and ethical responsibility that

becomes evident in specific life situations, which is

seen as a multifaceted structure necessitating the

activation of corresponding spiritual and moral traits

in behaviour.

To ascertain the third component of student social

maturity (communicative tolerance), V.V. Boyko's

survey for determining general communicative

tolerance was chosen (Bodalev A.A. (2007)). This

method aims to study communicative tolerance,

evident in person-to-person information

transmission, interaction, and communication. The

detected phenomenon includes the capacity to accept

different or opposing mental states, behaviours,

positions, and lifestyles of others, thereby reflecting a

level of tolerance and non-aggression (Boyko V.V.

(1996)).

In terms of identifying the fourth component of

student social competence (communicative control), .

Schneider's "Communicative control questionnaire"

was utilised (Goziev E.G. (2010)). This tool is

designed to examine the level of communicative

control. High scorers, or those with a high level of the

identified trait, demonstrate the ability to regulate

their emotional displays during communication and

know how to behave in any situation. Conversely,

those with lower scores may exhibit excessive laxity

or even self-satisfaction, typically characterised by

frankness and openness (Ribkina I.V. (2000)).

M. Schneider's psychodiagnostic toolkit

comprises an explanatory guide consisting of ten

Components of Social Maturity in Students

considerations that the respondent must answer by

choosing one of the provided options.

The results obtained from the psychodiagnostic

observation are processed by calculating, adding

together and interpreting the relevant scores using the

questionnaire key. To identify the fifth component

(reflexivity) of students' social maturity, A.V.

Karpov's survey to ascertain the level of reflexivity

was employed (Goziev E.G. (2010)). This

questionnaire is intended for the psychodiagnosis of

reflexivity, which involves an individual's

understanding of their own activities and their critical

thinking about outcomes and consequences.

Moreover, reflexivity presents as a logical form of

understanding personal traits and an attempt to

logically analyse specific signs and generalisations

about the individual themselves and others, and their

behaviour. Through reflection, a person can draw

preliminary conclusions about personal attributes and

characteristics or their formation in others

(Timoshchuk I.G. (2002)).

Table 1: Levels of social maturity development in modern

students (n = 211)

Levels of social maturity

development

Quantitative

indicators

Quantity %

High level of social maturity 41 19.4

Moderate to high level of social

maturit

42 19.9

Middle high level of social

maturit

43 20.4

Below-average development of

social maturity

42 19.9

Low level of development of

social maturit

43 20.4

Overall 211 100

3 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

The provided table's data indicates that a substantial

number of students display an average (20.4% - 43

individuals) and low level of social maturity

development (20.4% - 43 individuals). Students with

an average level of this characteristic display an

interest in their vocational training, an elevated

motivation to study, and demonstrate adequate self-

reliance and activity in their cognitive tasks.

However, they also show a certain emotional

instability and maintain an attitude of constant need

for approval and a sensitive reaction to criticism,

indicating a maintained stance of "I am the object,

teach me".

In contrast, a low level of social maturity is

signified by irresponsibility towards oneself and

others, a weak desire to acquire professional

knowledge, relative independence in learning

activities, inconsistent work, and heavy reliance on

teacher control. Students with this level of social

maturity also demonstrate low self-esteem, emotional

instability, and a lack of reflexive and communicative

abilities.

A modest proportion of the participants (19.9% -

42 individuals) exhibited a development of social

maturity that ranged from low to moderate to high.

Only a small number of participants (19.4% - 41

individuals) demonstrated a high level of social

maturity development. At this level, students

typically exhibit responsibility, self-knowledge, a

desire to understand others, emotional stability, an

accurate self-assessment of their abilities,

independent judgement and action, and an ability to

envision their professional growth prospects. These

students generally adhere to the principle of being

authentic.

It would be beneficial to briefly analyse the

aforementioned data, differentiating between

acceptable (high, medium, and high levels of social

maturity) and unacceptable levels (low and very low

levels of social maturity) in the development of the

studied characteristic. Consequently, the majority of

participants (59.7%, 126 individuals) are deemed to

have an acceptable level of social maturity

development. On the other hand, an undesirable level

of social maturity development is observed in 40.3%

(85 individuals).

PAMIR 2023 - The First Pamir Transboundary Conference for Sustainable Societies- | PAMIR

Figure 1: Levels of social maturity development in modern students. (1) the desired level of social maturity; (2) the undesired

level of social maturity.

The above correlation analysis results of

comprehensive psychodiagnostic observations of

contemporary students, utilising the Kendall Tau

nonparametric criterion (n = 211), allowed for the

identification of statistically significant correlations.

These correlations, in turn, suggest a positive

influence on the development of the following

components of social maturity within the educational

process:

1. Communicative tolerance at p <0.001 (-0.42);

2. Work motivation (0.28 at p <0.001);

3. Reflexivity (0.28 at p <0.001);

The implementation of a four-stage mechanism,

designed for the generalisation and interpretation of

the psychodiagnostic data (n = 211), demonstrated an

insufficiency in the positive impact of the educational

process on the development of social maturity in

higher education students. According to the feedback,

most of the participants (59.7%, 126 individuals),

when considering desirable (high, average, average

levels of social maturity) and unwanted levels

(medium and low levels of social maturity), indicated

that they possessed a desirable level of social

maturity. Currently, 40.3% (85 individuals) display

an unwanted (or problematic) level of social maturity

development. This reality reinforces the relevance of

this dissertation research, underlining the practical

necessity of developing efficient tools to foster the

social maturity of today's students.

For an objective assessment of the unique

structure of modern students' social maturity,

considering the accumulated knowledge of previous

researchers, the following psychodiagnostic complex

has been identified:

1. Motivation for future professional work - K.

Zamfir's professional motivation survey, as modified

by A.A. Rean, for the psychodiagnostics of the first

component.

2. Spiritual and moral responsibility - I.G.

Timoshuk's survey to determine the level of personal

spiritual and moral responsibility for the

psychodiagnostics of the second component.

3. Communicative tolerance - V.V. Boyko's

questionnaire to determine general communicative

tolerance, aimed at identifying the third component.

4. Communicative control - M. Schneider's

communicative control survey for determining the

fourth component.

5. Reflexivity - A.V. Karpov's questionnaire for

determining the level of reflex development, meant

for the identification of the fifth component.

6. Empathy - Orlov and Yu.N. Emelyanov’s self-

assessment test-questionnaire of empathic abilities,

for discerning the final, sixth component.

The use of a prepared four-stage mechanism of

generalisation and interpretation of psychodiagnostic

data, including the standardisation of final scores (n =

211), revealed that the educational process's positive

impact on the development of students' social

maturity in higher education is insufficient. Thus,

considering desired (high, average, average levels of

social maturity) and unwanted levels (low and

medium levels of social maturity), the majority of

subjects (59.7%, 126 people) possess a desirable level

of social maturity. Currently, 40.3% (85 people) show

an unwanted (problematic) level of social maturity

development. This reaffirms the pertinence of this

dissertation research, emphasising the practical

necessity for devising effective instruments to foster

the social maturity of contemporary students.

59,7

40,3

Components of Social Maturity in Students

4 CONCLUSION

An examination of the methodologies employed by

earlier scholars regarding the organisation of the

development process of the phenomenon in question

indicates that the current societal stage places evolved

requirements on the professional training of

prospective specialists. This, in turn, heightens the

significance of social maturity development in their

professional education. This intricate process is

typically facilitated through a variety of approaches

that necessitate collaborative engagement. In the

milieu of a contemporary university, the social

maturity of students evolves in alignment with the

actual society that encompasses them and can be

effectively fostered through the implementation of

proactive group work methodologies. In the current

context, socio-psychological training appears to be

the most fitting approach towards the development of

the phenomenon under study. According to the

majority of scholars, it should primarily concentrate

on those components of students' social maturity that

are more amenable to development (or

transformation) over a relatively brief timeframe,

particularly during the most impressionable age.

REFERENCES

Ribkina I.V. (2000).The role of moral and ethical

responsibility in the self-determination of the

individual. // Philosophical conversations. - No. 7. p

128-134.

Bodalev A.A. (2007)Peaks in the development of an adult.

- St. Petersburg: Peter,.

Goziev E.G. (2010) Psychology of ontogeny. - T.:

Publisher. p 48.

Goziev E.G. (2010) General psychology. - T.: National

Society of Philosophers of Uzbekistan. 488-p.

Shoumarov G.B. (2012) et al. Eastern family. - T.: 122-p.

Mitrofanova E. (2011) Motivation and stimulation of labor

activity. // Personnel officer. Personnel management. -

No. 8. - S. 125-13-p.

Timoshchuk I.G. (2002) Methodology for studying the

level of moral and ethical responsibility of a future

psychologist. // Continuing professional education:

theory and practice. - Kyiv, No. 4, p 158-163.

Boyko V.V. (1996) The energy of emotions in

communication: a look at yourself and others. M.: Filin,

1996. 472-p.

PAMIR 2023 - The First Pamir Transboundary Conference for Sustainable Societies- | PAMIR