1. Personality and self-regulation study
Lab of self regulation, PI RAE
Psychological institute Russian Academy of
Education, Moscow, Russia

2. Self regulation theories in Russia
• Theory of functional systems (P.K. Anokhin);
• Theory of movement behavior –
(N.A. Bernstein);
• A systemic-structural theory of activity and
Concept of operative image – (D.A.Oshanin);
• Theory of functional self-regulation of activity –
(V.D.Shadrikov);
• Theory of conscious self-regulation of behavior
(O.A. Konopkin, V.I. Morosanova)

3.  Self-regulation: ability to initiate,
organize, support, and manage individual
activity, which is goal oriented.
(Conscious self-regulation theory of O.A.Konopkin, 1970)
 Self-regulation processes:
- Goal planning
- Modeling of significant conditions
- Programming of actions
- Results evaluation

4. THEORY OF CONSIOUSS
SELF - REGULATION
Memory
• O.A. Konopkin proposed a
conceptual model OF SELF-
Goal REGULATION representing the
most general structural-
functional aspects of conscious
Criteria self-regulation (Konopkin,
Modeling system 1980).
• The main functional
Result components of conscious self-
achievement regulation process ARE :
Programm
estimation
• Goal of the activity (as it is
understood and accepted by
ing subject);
Result
information • Subjective model of activity
conditions significant for the
achievement of the goal;
Correction • Program of the activity;
• System of criteria of success of
goal achievement;
Program • Evaluation of information
regarding the results of the
realization activity.

5. Contemporary study of conscious
self-regulation:
Differential approach to self-regulation study
(V.I. Morosanova)
• Over the past years, PI RAE laboratory of self-
regulation has been studying individual differences in
conscious self-regulation across various types of activity
– operator’s, athlete’s and scholar’s.
• We have defined, described, and systematically
analyzed the phenomenon of individual differences in
self-regulation, which manifests itself in the way that
people differ in the developmental level of conscious
self-regulation, plan their activity goals and model the
conditions of their achievement differently, apply
different methods and algorithms to complete their
actions, have different success criteria to evaluate the
results (Morosanova, 1998).

6. Individual differences in self-
regulation
We have found evidence suggesting the existence of persistent individual
differences in the way a person plans, programs, and estimates the results of
his/her activity. Essentially, it implies individual styles of self-regulation. Self-
regulation styles are individual features of organization and management of
external and internal activity that are typical and most important to a person.
These features constantly manifest themselves in various kinds of activities.
Firstly, stylistic features of self-regulation are determined as individual
differences in processes implementing the main components of self-
regulation system.
Secondly, stylistic features that characterize the function of all components of
self-regulation system are at the same time personal traits (e.g.
independence, flexibility, and reliability). (V.I.Morosanova & self-regulation
lab. PI RAE)

7. Individual differences in conscious self-
regulation:
1) Operative-processual differences
• Goal planning;
• Modeling of significant conditions
• Programming of actions
• Control and result evaluation
2) Regulative-personality differences
(subjectness) – autonomy, responsibility,
persistence, assertiveness

8. Self-regulation diagnostic and
evaluation methods
To study and diagnose the described features the following
questionnaire methods have been developed and
standardized:
• Style Features of Behavioral Self-Regulation (SSB),
• Sportsman’s Self-Regulation in Preparing to a Contest
(SPS),
• Self-Regulation in Election Campaign of a Deputy (SIK),
• Individual Self-Regulation of Students and Schoolars
(ISSH) (Morossanova, 1998).

9. Individual profiles of self-
regulation
• The typical profiles can change at various levels of
conscious self-regulation development.
• For a highly developed self-regulation system, the
profiles are characterized by highly developed and
closely interconnected main components of self-
regulation structure, i.e. harmonious self-regulation style,
which allows one to compensate the influence of
personality characteristics and traits hindering successful
goal achievement.

10. Мethods - SSPM
SPQ (Self-regulation Profile Questionnaire, V.I. Morosanova, 2000).
• The statements of the questionnaire SPQ (Self-regulation Profile
Questionnaire, V.I. Morosanova, 2000) were grouped into six scales,
which diagnose individual typical peculiarities of regulatory
processes
• training planning scale -Pl ;
• modeling of conditons – M;
• programming of actions scale - Pr ;
• results evaluation scale ER;
• regulatory tactical flexibility scale - Fl;
• independence of planning, programming and result evaluation scale
(In).
• A l e v e l (degree) of development of the conscious self-regulation
- the general questionnaire-based indicator.

11. New version of “Self-regulation Profile
Questionnaire, SPQ”
• New version of “Self-regulation Profile Questionnaire, SPQ”
(Morosanova, 2004). In this new questionnaire version (SPQ-2008)
basic scales are improved and a new Reliability scale is added. The
Regulative Reliability scale diagnoses individual ability to regulate
behavior in stressful situations.
• New questionnaire version includes 50 statements, grouped into 8
scales: Planning, Modeling, Programming, Result evaluation,
Correction of regulation, Programming of actions, Autonomy and
General level of conscious self-regulation scale.
• The data on the scales' factor structure, internal consistency,
convergent and discriminate validity was confirmed on a sample of
820 subjects (students, teachers, rescuers, managers) in age from
16 to 32.
• Questionnaire can be used to diagnose individual differences of
self-regulation as predictors of reliability and effectiveness in
learning and professional activity.

12. Self-regulation styles typology

13. Typical profiles of Self-regulation for Extraverts
and Introverts
Unstable
Pl M Pr ER
Introverts No. 1 Extraverts No. 1
N
Pl M Pr ER Pl M Pr ER
Introverts No. 2
I Extraverts No. 2
E
S
Pl M Pr ER Pl M Pr ER
Stable No. 1 Stable No. 2
Pl M Pr ER Pl M Pr ER
1.Morossanova V.I. (2003) Extraversion and Neiroticism:
2.The typical profiles of Self-regulation, European Psychologist 4, 279-288

14. 0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Pl
ann
in
•
g Pla
nni
ng
M
od
el
lin Mo
Pr g del
l in
og g
ra
m
R m Pro
es in gra
ul g mm
t ev ing
al Re
ua s ul
tio t ev
n al u
ati o
Fl n
ex
ib
il i
G Se ty Fle
en lf- xi b
er su ili t
y
al ffi
se ci
l f- en Sel
re cy f-s
gu Ge uff
la ner ic ie
ti o al l nc y
n e ve
le l of
High Responsibility group
High Reflexivity group
ve sel
l f-re
gul
at io
n
24%
45,50%
5,40%
34,90%
53,30%
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Plann Plann
i ng ing
Mode Mod
ll ing elling
Pr og
Progr
amm ra mmin
ing g
Res u
Resu lt est
lt eva imati
l uati o
n on
Flexi
Flexi
bili ty bility
(Morosanova, Plakhotnikova, 2006)
Self-
Self-S su fficie
uffic i n cy
High Anxiety group
enc y
Gene
High Reliability group
Gene r al S
elf- re
ra l Se
lf-re g gu lation
ulat io level
n leve
l
Personality traits and self-regulation differences study
24%
27%
10,30%
13,80%
67,82%
12.50%
32.30%

15. PERSONALITY TRAITS AND SELF-REGULATION
DIFFERENCES STUDY (MOROSANOVA,
PLAKHOTNIKOVA, 2006)
High Confidence group
9
8
7
6 68.50%
5 23.40%
4
3 5.40%
2
1
0
General Self-
Modelling
Programming
sufficiency
Planning
Flexibility
evaluation
regulation
Result
Self-
level
Individuals with high Reflexivity, Reliability, Responsibility
Confidence, Anxiety are characterized with different self-
regulation profiles

16. Implementation of self-regulation theory
The results of Self regulation study were applied to
increase effectiveness
• Of Professional activity (politics, managers, athlets’,
lifesavers)
• Learning activity (high school and College students)

17. Ge
ne
r al
Se
lf -re
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
gu
lat
Pla ion
n
Mo ning
P d
Re rogr elli n
su am g
lt e mi
sti n
ma g
Fle tion
Ex xib
tra i lit
y
Int versi
rov on
er s
Th ion
i nk
i
Rationals
F e ng
eli
Ge Ju ng
ne Pe dgi n
Em ral rc g
oti emo eivin
Int ona tio g
en l e na
Inf sivity xcite lity
lue m
nc of e ent
e o mo
f t
Emotionals
Ris emo ion
Ra k r tio
tio ea ns
na din
es
l ity
( pe s
rso IQ
na
in political voting (Indina, Morosanova, 2007)
lity
)
Personality and self-regulation of decision making

18. Regulation profiles of rational voters
(Indina, Morosanova 2007)
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2 Rationally -esteeming Rationally-modelling
1 Rationally-programming Rationally-planning
0
cy
g
ng
on
y
ing
ilit
llin
en
mi
ati
n
xib
de
i
an
fic
alu
ram
Fl e
Mo
Pl
uf
ev
og
lf-s
lt
Pr
su
Se
Re

19. Regulation profiles of emotional voters
(Indina, Morosanova 2007)
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
Pla
Mo
Pr
Re
Se
Fle
og
l f-
su
d
nn
xib
ell
su
ram
lr
in
ilit
ing
ff
es
g
ici
m
y
tim
ing
en
ati
cy
n o
Emotionally-neurotic type Emotionally extraverted type

20. Personality types in high and low rationality group
Personality types in high emotionality group
Champion
other types 13%
24%
Healer
Crafter 11%
6%
Promoter
5% Teacher
15%
Composer Performer Councelor
8% 10% 8%
NF Idealist (Intuitively -feeling) 29% SP -Artists (Sensory-percepting) 47%
Keirsy personality types in high rationality group
other types Inventor
Architector
26% 9%
11%
FieldMarshall
4%
Mastermind
7%
Inspector Provider
11% 5%
Supervisor Protector
16% 12%
NT- Rationals (Intuitively thinking) 31% SJ -Guardian (Sensory-judging) 44%

21. Regulation & Personality factors
of Decision making in emergency situations
(Indina, Morosanova, 2009)

22. Relation btw decision making domains, self-
regulation processes and personality traits
(Indina, 2009)
Effectiveness
Regulation of decision making Personality
(r=0,67;p<0,001) (r=0,33; p<0,01)
General level
Openness
of self regulation
(r=0,48; p<0,001)
(r=0,27; p<0,05)
Modeling of significant
Agreeableness
conditions
(r=0,52; p<0,001) (r=0,35; p<0,01)
Result estimation Conscientiousness

23. Regulation profiles in effective and not effective
decision making in emergency situations (Indina,
Morosanova 2010)
8
7
6,52 7,26
6 5,26
6,29
5 5,81
5,27 Effective DM
4 4,9 4,3 Not effective DM
3 3,85 3,6
2 2,65 2,67
1
0 ty
y
g
g
ng
n
om
in
in
io
i li
ni
m
el
ib
at
on
an
od
ex
am
lu
t
Pl
va
Fl
M
Au
gr
te
o
Pr
ul
es
R

24. Personality profiles for effective and not effective
decision making (Indina, Morosanova 2010)
9
8 6,45
7 6,2 7,2
5,67 7,81 6,78
6 6,45
5 Effective DM
4 Not effective DM
3 4,55 4,73 4,45
2 2,91 3,11 3,09 2,89
1
0
ion
lity
ss
ss
ss
ism
ss
e
ne
na
rs
ine
ne
nn
isc
ve
ble
t io
us
ad
e
ot
tra
Op
Ra
ea
io
re
ur
Ex
nt
re
Ne
sk
cie
Ag
Ri
ns
Co

25. Reliability of self-regulation in stress manifestations
study (Kondratuyk, Morosanova 2011)

26. Reliability of self-regulation study
(Kondratuyk, Morosanova 2011)
• Predictors of
reliability of
professional
activity of
extreme
profession
specialists

27. • It was confirmed that Conscious Self-regulation can be a resource of
coping with acute stress manifestations, meanwhile chronic stress
is more determined by personality dispositions
• Reliability of actions is determined by reliability of conscious self-
regulation system, determination of personality indicators on
reliability of actions is mediated by stylistic differences of self-
regulation.

28. • Self- consciousness and self-regulation study
(Aronova, Morosanova, 2005)
• Methods
• EPPS (Edwards Personal Preference Schedule - Russian version).
• POI (Personal Orientation Inventory - Russian version).
• SPQ (Self-regulation Profile Questionnaire, V.I. Morosanova, 2000).
• Findings
• The voluntary self-regulation is interrelated with the personal
preferences and orientations:
• People with high level of the voluntary self-regulation are primarily
orientated to the present rather than to the past and/or future, they
affirm primarily values of self-actualizing people and are aimed at
self-actualization and self-realization. Also they have a tendency to
leadership.
• People with low level of the voluntary self-regulation are
characterized by abasement.

30. Self- consciousness and self-regulation study (Aronova,
Morosanova, 2005)

31. Self- consciousness and self-regulation study (Aronova,
Morosanova, 2005)

32. Self-regulation of career choice study
(O.G. Vlasova 2011)
Teleological type Reflective type
Situational type Operative type

33. • Teleological type (goal oriented) is characterized by orientation on
future perspective and programming of professional plans, but their
plans are not quite flexible
• Reflective type (self-oriented) is well aware about individual
personality resources and how they can be implemented in
profession, but are not enough aware about objective profession
demands
• Situational type (flexible in changing professional plans
according to situation) students are weak in long term goal
planning and more oriented at present, high modeling
• Operative type (programming, present oriented) students are
well informed about labor market options and demands, have high
programming, but weak in their own goal setting,
• Students with Controlling (result oriented) self-regulation type
have high reflexivity and good knowledge about profession but are
not able to correspond their personality resources with labor market
demands

34. Professional attitudes and self-regulation
domains in career choice (Vlasova, Vanin, 2010)
SR cluster Hesitation Rationality Optimism Self esteem Dependence
1 Mean 2,08 5,10 4,70 5,77 3,82
Impulsive type St.Dev 1,977 1,298 1,598 1,489 1,652
2 Mean ,95 4,93 4,73 6,25 3,31
Harmonic type St.Dev 1,395 1,518 1,628 1,027 1,578
3 Mean 3,13 5,33 4,58 5,51 3,93
Sticking St.Dev 2,370 1,314 1,764 1,456 1,684
4 Mean 2,99 5,65 5,28 5,80 4,20
Operative type St.Dev 2,509 1,548 1,351 1,486 1,557
General Mean 2,31 5,29 4,88 5,85 3,85
St.Dev 2,291 1,464 1,576 1,400 1,634
Cluster
1 2 3 4
Impulsive Harmonic Sticking Operative Total
Выбор Choice is clear Fr 35 36 22 60 153
% 77,8% 87,8% 73,3% 82,2% 81,0%
Choice is not Fr 10 5 8 13 36
clear % 22,2% 12,2% 26,7% 17,8% 19,0%

35. Relation between self-regulation components and time perspective
(Zimbardo)

36. • Students with high level of self-regulation are future oriented, active
life managers, effective in goal setting, modeling of significant
conditions, good at programming and result estimation
• Students with low self-regulation level are oriented on past and
negative future, are not able to change situation, are afraid of
failure.
• Students with Harmonic self-regulation profile are more effective in
career choice rather then students with Rigid style.
• Most effective in career choice are students with high self-regulation
level, effective in goal setting, future oriented, able to change the
negative past , improving their career choice in present

37. Self-regulation study of prosocial and antisocial
behavior (Garaleva, Morosanova,2006)
General self-
regulation level
Planned aggression
Spontaneous aggression
Psychopathy aggression

38. • Self-regulation of Aggressive behavior typology was built, it shows
interrelation between styles of self-regulation and personality
dimensions.
• Aggressive behavior manifestations are connected with self-
regulation differences.
• Self regulation differences define the type of aggressive behavior
(pro social, antisocial)
• Different types of aggressive behavior (spontaneous aggression,
planned aggression, psychopathic aggression are characterized by
different self-regulation and personality domains.
• Type of aggressive behavior is determined not only by personality
domains but mostly by different level of conscious self-regulation.

39. Role of Individual self-regulation
• Conscious self-regulation system has its projections on various
levels of individuality
• Personality-temperamental dispositions can be described by
individually-specific profiles of self-regulation
• The higher level of individual self-regulation gives better
opportunities for subjective voluntary behavior regulation and
control. The lower level of individual self-regulation is – the more
spontaneous and impulsive individual activity is.
• Conscious self-regulation is realized through the complex
multilevel system of cognitive and personality recourses of
individuality.
• System of conscious self-regulation integrates dynamic and
substanial aspects of individuality, conscious and unconscious
structures for individual goal planning and goal achievement in
human life span.

40. Self-regulation and learning
(Morosanova, Fomina, Borgoedova, Tsyganov, Vanin
2009-2011)
• Self-regulation in teacher- student interaction;
• Self-regulation and academic performance;
• Self-regulation questionnaire -preschoolers
version;
• Self‐regulation Profile of learning activity
Questionnaire;
• Individual personality and regulation differences
in learning ;
• Development of conscious self-regulation;
• Diagnostic and raining programs

41. ,
Future study directions:
S
E
L
Functions of psychic self-regulation F
-
R
E
G
U
L
Self regulation structure and components A
T
I
O
N
D
E
Dynamics of self-regulation V
E
L
O
P
M
Individual differences Situational manifestations E
N
T

42. The laboratory of self-regulation
PI RAE
The laboratory of self-regulation psychology was established in 1970 by
O.A. Konopkin, a member of the Russian Academy of Education,
who built the foundations of psychology of self-regulation as a
scientific field in Russia based on the ideas of famous Russian
psychologists P.K. Anokhin, N.A. Bernstein, D.A. Oshanin and
V.D. Nebylitsyn (1980, 1995, 2005).

43. • Thank you!
www.pirae.ru