The Semiosociopsychological Paradigm and the Development of a Communication Strategy for a Charity
Abstract
In this article, a charity as a social institution is defined by the author as an organisation that helps individuals with problematic life situations to resolve their situations if they cannot do this for themselves.
Analysing the development of communication strategies in charities, the author focused on several problems that inhibit the adequate and effective functioning of charitable programmes. These problems include different images of the world held by the different parties involved in charitable projects, the absence of common goals, and social conflicts, which prevent service recipients from solving their problematic life situations. These obstacles are serious, and the author considers that they need to be solved for charitable projects to achieve their goals.
The introduction of dialogue and two-way subject-to-subject communication—essential elements of the semiosociopsychological paradigm—can assist in eliminating these problems. The foundations of two-way communication—socialisation and prosocial behaviour—are the main steps towards engaging in charitable acts with correct altruistic motivation.
This article argues for the effectiveness of the semiosociopsychological paradigm for developing communication strategies for charities, since it affects the interactions of people with their environment, enabling the donors and recipients of charitable acts to form a unified image of the world and create goals for charitable projects, thus eliminating misunderstanding among charitable project members.
Downloads
References
Adamyants, T. Z. (2015). Intentsional'nogo analiza metod [Method of intentional analysis]. In A. V. Tikhonov (Ed.), Sotsiologiya upravleniya: Teoretiko-prikladnoy tolkovyy slovar' (pp. 101-103). [Sociology of Management: Theoretical and practical Dictionary]. KRASAND [In Russian]. https://www.isras.ru/publ.html?id=3828&printmode
Adamyants, T. Z. (2020). Aktual'nye smysly sovremennoy sotsiokul'turnoy sredy [The Actual meanings of a modern sociocultural environment]. Obshchestvennye nauki i sovremennost' [Social Sciences and modern world], 5, 121-130. [In Russian]. https://doi.org/10.31857/S086904990012327-1
Bandura, A. (2000). Social learning theory. (V. V. Chubar', Trans.). Eurasia.
Batson, D. (2008). Empathy-Induced Altruistic Motivation. http://portal.idc.ac.il/en/symposium/herzliyasymposium/documents/dcbatson.pdf
Batson, C., Duncan, B., Ackerman, P., Buckley, T., & Birch, K. (1981). Is empathic emotion a source of altruistic motivation? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 40(2), 290–302. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.40.2.290
Bourdieu, P. (2002). The Forms of Capital. Economic sociology, 3(5), 60-74. http://ecsoc.hse.ru/data/2011/12/08/1208205039/ecsoc_t3_n5.pdf
Comte, A. (2012). A General View of Positivism. (I. A. Shapiro, Trans.). Librokom.
Cooley, C. (2000). Human nature and social order. Transaction Publ.
Dridze, T. M. (1984). Tekstovaya deyatel'nost' v strukture sotsial'noy kommunikatsii. Problemy semiosotsiopsikhologii [Text activities in the structure of social communication. Problems of semiosociopsychology]. Nauka. [In Russian]. http://www.isras.ru/files/File/Publication/Dridze.pdf
Dridze, T. M. (1994). Na poroge ekoantropotsentricheskoy sotsiologii [On the threshold of ecoanthropocentric sociology]. Obshchestvennye nauki i sovremennost' [Social Sciences and Modernity], 4, 97-103. [In Russian]. http://ecsocman.hse.ru/data/990/150/1217/010_Dridze.pdf.
Dridze, T. M. (2000). Dve novye paradigmy dlya sotsial''nogo poznaniya i sotsial''noy praktiki [Two new paradigms for social learning and social practice]. In T. M. Dridze (Ed.), Sotsial'naya kommunikatsiya i sotsial'noe upravlenie v ekoantropotsentricheskoy i semiosotsiopsikhologicheskoy paradigmakh (pp. 5-42) [Social communication and social management in ecoanthropocentric and semiosociopsychological paradigms]. Izdatel'stvo instituta sotsiologii RAN. [In Russian]. https://www.isras.ru/files/File/publ/Dridze_Dve_novie_paradigmi.pdf
Dridze, T. M. (2000). Ekoantropotsentricheskaya model' sotsial'nogo poznaniya kak put' k preodoleniyu paradigmal'nogo krizisa v sotsiologii [Ecoantropocentric model of social knowledge as a way to overcome a paradigm crisis in sociology]. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya [Sociological Research], 2, 20-28. [In Russian]. http://ecsocman.hse.ru/data/259/013/1220/003.DRIDZE.pdf
Dridze, T. M. (n. d.). Tekhnologiya prognoznogo sotsial'nogo proektirovaniya i sotsial'noy kommunikatsii v ekoantropotsentricheskoy paradigme sotsial'nogo poznaniya [Technology of prognosis social projecting and social communication in ecoanthropocentric paradigm of social cognition]. Introduction to the special course. [In Russian]. http://ecsocman.hse.ru/data/504/673/1219/Dridze_TM.pdf
Federal Law N 135-FZ “O blagotvoritel'noy deyatel'nosti i dobrovol'chestve (volonterstve)” [“About charitable activity and volunteering”]. (1995). [In Russian]. http://www.consultant.ru/document/cons_doc_LAW_7495/
Fromm, E. (2000). Social character and “religious needs”. In E. Fromm (Ed.), To have or to be. (N. Voyskunskaya et al., Trans.). AST. http://www.golubinski.ru/socrates/fromm/fromm2/index.htm
Foucault, M (1996). The order of discourse. In M. Foucault (Ed.), Will to the truth: on the other side of the power, knowledge and sexuality. (S. Tabachnikova, Trans.). Kastal.
Gritsenko, L. (2011). Vospitanie v kollektive kak osnova razvitiya i sotsializatsii lichnosti [Group education as the basis for personal development and socialisation of an individual]. Psikhologiya obrazovaniya v XXI veke: teoriya i praktika [Educational psychology in the 21st century: theory and practice]. Peremena. [In Russian]. http://psyjournals.ru/education21/issue/54674_full.shtml
Hekgauzen, H. (1986). Motivation and activity. Pedagogika.
Ilyin, E. (2013). Psikhologiya pomoshchi. Al'truizm, egoizm, empatiya [Psychology of help. Altruism, egoism, empathy]. Mastera psikhologii. [In Russian].
Kant, I. (2015). Criticism of the practical mind. (M. Gregor, Trans.). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781316136478.001
Lindenberg, S. (2006). Prosocial Behavior, Solidarity, and Framing Processes. In D. Fetchenhauer, A. Flache, A. P. Buunk, & S. Lindenberg (Eds.), Solidarity and Prosocial Behavior: An Integration of Sociological and Psychological Perspectives (pp. 23-44). Springer Science + Business Media. https://doi.org/10.1007/0-387-28032-4_2
Parsons, T. (1996). The concept of society: The components and their relationships. In R. C. Merton, J. E. Mid, T. Parsons, A. Schütz (Eds.), American sociological thought (pp. 494-526). MGU.
Putnam, R., Leonardi, R., Nanetti R. (1993). Making Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in Modern Italy. Princeton University Press.
Schwartz, S., Howard, J. (1984). Internalized Values as Motivations of Altruism. Development and Maintenance of Prosocial Behavior, 229-255. http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-4613-2645-8_14
Shilova. V. A. (2006). K probleme izucheniya intentsional'noy napravlennosti kommunikatora v protsesse kommunikatsii [To the problem of studying the intentional orientation of the communicator in the communication process]. Sotsiologia [Sociology], 22, 38-60. [In Russian]. http://jour.isras.ru/upload/journals/6/articles/4078/submission/original/4078-7552-1-SM.pdf
Shilova, V. A. (2015). Kommunikativnoe pole upravleniya: teoriya, metodologiya, praktika: monografiya [Communication filed of management: theory, methodology, practice: monography]. Logos. [In Russian]. https://www.isras.ru/publ.html?id=4271
Solovyev, V. (2000). Opravdanie dobra. Nravstvennaya filosofiya [Justification of Good. Moral Philosophy]. Vehi. [In Russian]. http://www.vehi.net/soloviev/oprav/
USSR encyclopedia dictionary. (1989). Sovetskaya entsiklopediya.
Teun Van Dijk. (1998). Ideology: A Multidisciplinary Approach. Sage.
Weber, M. (1996). Basic sociology terms. In Western European sociology XIX-beginning of XX centuries (pp. 455-491). http://www.gumer.info/bibliotek_Buks/Sociolog/Weber/osn_soc.php