<<
>>

Structures of mental experience of the subject

Mental structures as object of theoretical research describe the relations of conformity resulting interaction of the subject and object of activity. In chaos of arriving signals, mental structures allocate the steadiest invarianty the validity.
In mental structures subject, operational, motivational and affective aspects of activity in which they were generated are fixed.

Representation about mental structures as the carrier of mental properties of the subject developed in various terminological veneering as in domestic, and foreign psychology: kognitivnye cards (E.Tolmen), an image of the world (A.N.Leontev, S.D.Smirnov), subjective model of the world (J. Bruner), private world of the person (B.G.Ananev), the internal plan of mental actions (J.A.ponomarev),"plan"(J. Miller, E.Galanter, K.Pribram),"scheme"(F.Bartlett, I.Kant, Z.Piazhe, U.Najsser), kognitivnye representative structures (N.I.Chuprikova), mental experience "," conceptual structures (M.A.Holodnaja), nuclear structures (E.A.Sergienko), structure of individual experience (I.O.Alexander, JU.I.Alexander) etc. All listed terms have the general basis – are models of mental reflexion. As base properties of mental structures as models of mental reflexion it is possible to allocate: reprezentativnost, obobshchennost, hierarchy, selectivity, activity, development.

Features the organisation of mental structures

In the paragraph the organisation representative kognitivnyh structures (N.I.Chuprikova) is surveyed; structures of mental experience (M.A.Holodnaja); structures of individual knowledge (I.O.Alexander); nuclear structures (E.A.Sergienko).

Substantiation of the ontologic status of mental structures: approaches and criteria

Despite numerous experimental researches, mental structures are still surveyed or as empirical model, or as a convenient way of the description of the empirical facts and patterns. However last years attempt to prove existence of mental structures as mental reality (Cold, 1997/2002) is undertaken. The substantiation of the ontologic status of mental structures, in our opinion, can be realised from the point of view of different approaches.

The theoretical approach assumes the external and internal justification konstrukta (Lebedev, 2010). The external justification – revealing of pragmatical value and utility konstrukta: mental structures define a way of thinking; process the shapeless information and give it the certain form and sense; carries out functions of ordering perceived, antitsipatsii changes of a situation, a direction of activity of the subject (Piazhe, 1969): explain selectivity of perception (Najsser, 1998). Thanks to data konstruktu questions of economy of thinking and memory (Miller, Galanter, Pribram, 2000 are solved; CHuprikova, 1997). Reading, hearing, touch and smotrenie, storing, imagination, speech, thinking, understanding, estimation and other forms kognitivnoj activity become more clear if to survey them as implication of action same fundamental kognitivnyh structures (Najsser, 1998; Rishar, 1998).

The internal justification konstrukta mental structures consists in their possibility to be an agent of the effective decision of theoretical problems and statements of new problems. Such problems dared in teoretiko-experimental researches of mental development and training (CHuprikova, 2007), intelligence as mental reality (Cold, 2002); developments of model of the mental person in an ontogenesis (Sergienko, 2009); a parity of formal descriptions of structure of knowledge with activity of a brain (I.O.Alexander, 2006), etc.

The empirical approach assumes the analysis of group of the empirical facts which can be surveyed as the certificate of existence of mental structures – empirical data about selectivity of attention, memories, thinking (Blonsky, 1979; Gorbachev, 2001; I.O.Alexander, 2006; Lupenko, 1998; Chace, Ericson, 1982; Simon, Chase, 1973; Mangina, 2009; Mauntkasl, 1981, etc.); mnemotehnicheskie receptions of augmentation of a memory size (Lurija, 1981); results of performance of projective techniques in which examinees on same stimulnyj a material give out different answers; the facts of differences kognitivnoj activity between masters chess players and beginners (Chase, Simon, 1973, 1982); the trained and unexercised observers (E.Gibson, 1977); younger and senior children (Najsser, 1998); more and less successful in training by preschool children, schoolboys, students (Ratanova, 1996, 2005; CHuprikova, 1995, 2005).

The evolutionary approach assumes revealing and bracing of stages of development (evolutionary criterion). Evolution process can be made only under condition of bracing of products of evolutionary development, therefore objects, processes and the phenomena generated in filogeneze or an ontogenesis, evolutions submitting to uniform principles, possess the existence status (I.O.Alexander, 2006).
According to K.Popper, interaction … is represented if not necessary, sufficient criterion of a reality (Popper, 2008, with. 37).

The gnoseological approach assumes studying of reflexion of properties of medium in inwardness of the subject – at image. That this or that signal has been apprehended, presence of the mental structures fixing essential signs of this signal is necessary. Thus, the gnoseological approach consists in allocation priznakovogo structure invariantov a subject reality and studying of change of structure of signs in process of development of mental structures.

Concept of a maturity of mental structures

Many researchers use a category "maturity" in a context of the higher vital achievements (Albuhanova, 1991), the higher stage of development (Rusalov, 2007), degrees of readiness of the person to a certain kind of activity (Bodrov, 2007), as an indicator of development of the person (Harlamenkova, 2007). E.A.Sergienko (2008), surveying development of the subject as continuous process of formation of its different levels where at each level integrity remains, unique individuality, selectivity of the subject and its activity in the relation with the world, asserts, that criteria of a maturity of the subject can be only urovnevymi. H.Verner (H.Werner, 1957) allocates five oppositions on which higher steps of development differ from lower: 1) sinkretichnost – step-type behaviour; 2) diffusion – raschlenennost; 3) uncertainty – definiteness; 4) a rigidity – mobility; 5) lability – stability. In our understanding the concept "maturity" is synonymous to concept "sformirovannost" and is surveyed as the higher degree differentsirovannosti and integrirovannosti mental structures of certain level obobshchennosti, allowing adequately to reflect the validity.
<< | >>
A source: Volkova E.V.. Development of mental structures as bases of special abilities. 2011

More on topic Structures of mental experience of the subject:

  1. the Conceptual scheme of methodology of system reconstruction of structures of mental experience of the subject
  2. 4.3 Algorithm of an estimation of a mental potential of the integrated structures [II]
  3. Volkova E.V.. Development of mental structures as bases of special abilities, 2011
  4. 4 Features of realisation of the tactical receptions applied by the defender by manufacture of interrogation of the minor, lagging behind in the mental development which has been not connected with the mental derangement and the minor, suffering the mental derangement
  5. Conceptual and legal bases institutsionalnoj structures of the European integration. Experience EOUS
  6. 4.2.1. Latentnost the semantic subject in structures with objective nominalizatsiej
  7. the Appendix Results of studying of 1200 criminal cases on structures of the crimes which subject was the official
  8. 3.2. Mineral structure, structures and structures of ores of the South Kirov deposit.
  9. the CHAPTER III. EXPERIENCE of INCLUSION of EKOLOGO-LEGAL REQUIREMENTS In TECHNICAL REGULATIONS of SOME COUNTRIES of the EUROASIAN ECONOMIC UNION, EXPERIENCE of the INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATIONS
  10. 2.8. Professional work and a mental lexicon
  11. mental conditions of ship crew
  12. IT IS SUBJECT - THE OBJECTIVE ANALYSIS OF MANAGEMENT OF THE STATE OWNERSHIP IN THE SUBJECT OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION (ON THE EXAMPLE OF KHABAROVSK TERRITORY).
  13. RE-STRUCTURING IT IS SUBJECT - OBJECTIVE STRUCTURE OF MANAGEMENT gosobstvennnostyo AND THE ECONOMIC RIGHTS OF THE SUBJECT OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION.
  14. the Problem of mental conditions in a psychological science
  15. mental signs