Methods for processing semantic differential. Scientific electronic library

The semantic differential method was developed in the 50s by American scientists under the leadership of Charles Osgood. At the moment, many applications have been found for it in various fields. This method is a tool for studying the semantic spaces of the subject and serves to index meanings using bipolar scales defined by two opposite adjectives, between which there are three, five or seven gradations of the degree of occurrence of a given quality. Any object, phenomenon or feeling perceived by an individual evokes some kind of reaction in him, which can be successfully characterized using semantic differential methods. These methods allow you to see the image that appears in the recipient’s mind when evaluating an object.

Can be considered as a type of projective tests that allow us to take into account the fact that a certain stimulating situation acquires meaning not only due to its objective content, but also for reasons related to the characteristics of the recipient himself - inclinations, drives, beliefs - that he attaches to this situation . Simply put, the individual traits of the test subject seem to be projected onto situations, affecting the test results. This method allows you to measure connotative meaning - a state that follows the perception of a stimulus symbol and precedes operations with symbols. Connotative meaning is directly related to the personal qualities of the recipient, such as social attitudes, stereotypes, etc. and is close to us in terms of the concept of personal meaning.

As mentioned earlier, objects in the semantic differential method are assessed on a number of opposing (bipolar) graduated scales. The extreme values ​​of these scales are antonyms. Evaluations of concepts on different scales interact with each other, which makes it possible to identify bundles of such strongly interacting scales and group them into factors. This mechanism, which explains the grouping of scales together, was considered by Osgood to be synesthesia. Synesthesia is a phenomenon when, when one sense organ is stimulated due to its specific sensations, sensations corresponding to another sense organ also arise. An example is the case when, looking at some object, some taste sensations may arise.

When the transition from features to factors is made, this is already the construction of a semantic space, which in some way is a metalanguage for describing meanings. Osgood, in his research, built a semantic space based on the gradation of various conceptual classes (for example, father, ice, table).

Three main factors have been identified

• "grade" ( light-dark, ppleasant-unpleasant);
• "strength" ( durable-fragile, strong-weak);
• "activity" ( fast-slow,active-passive).

All these factors together form a semantic space.

The method of semantic psychological differential, developed by Osgood, makes it possible to study not only the meaning of words, but also their emotional connotation, since the identified factors made it possible to study in more detail the structure of a person’s (or group of people’s) thinking.

Numerous further studies in this area only confirmed the universality of the identified structures. The identity of factor structures in people of different nationalities, nationalities, people with different levels of education and mental health was shown. An important conclusion follows from this - since the structure of spaces is identical for different subjects, the factorization results obtained on one group of people can be used on another group of subjects.

Somewhat later, Bentler and Lavoie expanded the semantic space by adding factors such as “reality,” “density,” “orderliness,” and “ordinariness” to “strength,” “activity,” and “evaluation.”

Using materials from Russian vocabulary, a group of scientists identified the following factors: “evaluation”, “orderliness”, “complexity”, “activity”, “strength” and a specific factor - “comfort”.

Below we will consider several types of semantic differentials.

Nonverbal semantic differential

In addition to scales using antonyms, Osgood attempted to use graphic oppositions instead. The subjects were offered pairs of any geometric shapes such as: black circle - white circle, up arrow - down arrow. After that, they were called various words, and they had to choose the figure from the proposed pair that, in their opinion, was more suitable for this word. For example, for the word “happy,” most participants in the experiment pointed to images of something colorful, sharp, and clear. This experiment showed a high level of versatility. Practical applications of the nonverbal semantic differential can be found in studies of visual reasoning.

Partial semantic differentials

For some individual conceptual classes (private), when the differential methodology was built, the emergence of new factors specific to these conceptual classes was demonstrated. An example is the scaling of political terminology, as a result of which factors - “assessment”, “strength”, “activity” - which are usually independent of each other, merged together. They could be described as follows: “benevolent dynamism” - “malicious impotence.” Therefore, partial semantic differentials are characterized by a different number of factors. According to Osgood, there is an interaction between concepts and scales in making judgments.

Personal semantic differentials

Among private semantic spaces, there is a variety called the personal differential, built on adjectives that describe various qualities, both of others, surrounding people, and of oneself. The procedure for constructing such a semantic differential is no different. A person is taken as a subject (a real person or a movie character) and assessed on a bipolar scale of opposing adjectives.

B. P. Gromovik, A. D. Gasyuk,
L. A. Moroz, N. I. Chukhrai

Using the semantic differential in marketing research

Lviv State Medical University named after. Danil Galitsky
State University "Lviv Polytechnic"

In modern conditions, the need for marketing information is constantly growing, and marketing managers feel a lack of reliable, relevant and comprehensive data. To solve this problem, pharmaceutical enterprises must create a system for collecting the necessary marketing information - a marketing information system.

There are four main subsystems for collecting, processing, analyzing and researching marketing information, namely:

If external and internal information systematically accumulated in a marketing information system through market monitoring turns out to be insufficient, there is a need to conduct special studies of various marketing problems.

The marketing research process takes place in several stages (Fig. 1).

Rice. 1. Market research process

At the first stage, it is necessary to determine the subject of research and goals, which must be clearly defined and realistic.

The objectives of the study may be:

There are two types of marketing information collected during the research process:

Research mainly begins with the collection of secondary information. This stage is called “desk” research. Secondary information can be collected from internal and external sources.

In most cases, marketing research, after processing and analyzing secondary information, proceeds to collecting primary data, which requires careful preparation. The plan for collecting information should primarily determine the research method. The most used research methods are presented in Fig. 2.

Rice. 2. Methods for collecting primary information

Observation is an analytical method with which the researcher studies the behavior of consumers, sales personnel; sometimes he acts as a participant in events (active observation).

A survey involves finding out people’s positions, their views on certain problems based on their answers to pre-prepared questions.

One type of survey is an in-depth interview, which is used to study consumer behavior and his reaction to the design or advertising of a product.

If market research is insufficient, it is necessary to:

Most often used:

1. trade panel (especially retail panel);
2. consumer panel (end consumers or consumer organizations).

Experiment - a method with which you can study (find out) the reaction of the studied group of people to certain factors or their changes. The experiment aims to establish cause-and-effect relationships between the variables under study by testing a working hypothesis.

Imitation - a method based on the use of computers and the study of relationships between various marketing variables using appropriate mathematical models, rather than in real conditions. It is used quite rarely.

The most common method is the survey, which is used by about 90% of market research.

As a rule, a common tool for collecting primary data is a questionnaire. When developing questionnaires, two types of questions are used: open and closed. An open-ended question gives the respondent the opportunity to answer in their own words. The answers to them are more informative, but they are more difficult to process.

A closed question contains possible answer options and the respondent chooses one of them. The forms of closed questions can be different. The most common are alternative questions (assuming “yes” and “no” answers) and questions with selective answers. Quite often, researchers use various scales, in particular:

The stages of marketing research using semantic differential are presented in Fig. 3.

Rice. 3. Stages of marketing research using semantic differential

At the first stage, it is necessary to select a comparison base, i.e., a competitor’s product that contains the greatest threat to the enterprise under study and is the most representative on the market. Next, the consumer characteristics of this product category that are most important for the target group of consumers under study are determined, and a system for assessing these characteristics is selected. After this, a questionnaire is developed to build a semantic differential. The next stage is a survey of consumer respondents, i.e., their construction of semantic differential curves, guided by the perception of the characteristics of the product under study, the basic competitor product and the hypothetical ideal product. Marketing research is completed by constructing average curves based on consumer opinions and analyzing each consumer characteristic of the products being studied.

As an example, we chose the “Magic of Herbs” shampoo as an object of marketing research, produced by the Nikolaev Pharmaceutical Factory and JV LLC “Magic of Herbs”. The comparison base was Elseve shampoo produced by the French company L'oreal.

These products were examined according to 10 consumer characteristics, which were assessed on a 10-point scale (table). Respondents rated each item on the questionnaire with a corresponding score for the “Magic of Herbs”, “Elseve” shampoo and the ideal shampoo that they would like to purchase.

Table. Semantic differential of consumer characteristics of “Magic of Herbs”, “Elseve” shampoos and ideal shampoo

Based on the data obtained, average profiles of three curves were constructed, which reflect the average subjective perception of consumer characteristics of the products under study and the vision of an ideal shampoo.

Analyzing the curves (table), it should be noted that the studied shampoo “Magic of Herbs” satisfies target consumers according to the following characteristics: pleasant smell; effect of purity and silky shine; relatively well-known brand of product and the presence of natural ingredients; price (lower than Elseve shampoo).

At the same time, consumers are not entirely satisfied with the packaging of the Magic of Herbs shampoo, in particular, its design and convenience, as well as the lack of conditioner. Therefore, we can recommend that the manufacturer pay more attention to improving packaging and combining shampoo with other components (conditioner, keratides, etc.). Attention should be paid to the availability of sufficient quantities of shampoo in the retail network as a factor in the availability of its purchase.

Thus, the use of semantic differential in marketing research provides a thorough and visual differentiation of the characteristics of the compared products. In addition, it helps to identify the needs of various categories of consumers before choosing a product’s place on the market, since the consumer perceives any product as a set of certain characteristics and, depending on their optimal set, gives preference to one product over another.

Literature

1. Kovalenko M. // Business Inform. - 1997. - No. 1. - P. 59–62.
2. Kutsachenko E. //Business.- 1999.- No. 31 (342).- P. 40–41.
3. Mnushko Z. M., Dikhtyarova N. M. Management and marketing in pharmacy. Part II. Marketing in Pharmacy: Pidr. for pharma universities and faculties / Ed. Z. M. Mnushko. - Kharkiv: Osnova, UkrFA, 1999.- P. 237–241.
4. Starostina A. O. Marketing research. Practical aspect - K.; M.; SPb: View. house "Williams", 1998.- 262 p.

Examples of instructions Report structure Semantic differential. Description.

Note source: . Survey // Social psychology. Workshop: Proc. manual for university students / Ed.

Semantic differential can be defined as a method quantitative And quality indexing values. What does it mean?

According to C. Osgood, the semantic differential (SD) method allows you to measure the states that arise between the perception of stimulus-irritant and meaningful work with them. Connotative points to something subjective, individual and value-based, is opposed to denotative - objective, interpersonal, cognitive.

Let us also recall that SD is one of ordinal scale options. According to the classification of S. Stevens, scales are divided into non-metric (nominal and ordinal) and metric (interval and ratio). Being a method of experimental semantics, SD, along with other methods (for example, associative experiment, subjective scaling) is used to construct subjective semantic spaces, is widely used in sociology, general and social psychology. Appeal to it in psychological research justified, when it comes, for example, to emotional attitude of the individual to certain objects, stereotypes, social representations, social categorization, attitudes are studied, value orientations, subjective personal meaning are considered, and implicit theories of personality are identified. SD is classified as a method case study, because it allows insight into the unique context of an individual’s life.

SD procedure

The method was developed by a group of American researchers led by Charles Osgood, who considered it as a combination of controlled association and scaling procedures. For differentiation it is proposed concept (a number of concepts), as well as a set of bipolar scales specified by adjectives. The respondent must evaluate the differentiated object on each of the proposed bipolar seven-point scales. In response to the word, the respondent has a certain reaction that reveals a certain similarity with the behavioral reaction, a kind of readiness for behavior, something mediating behavior. Associations of the respondent with the stimulus guided by specified bipolar scales.

Functions these scales are as follows: firstly, they help verbalize the reaction to one stimulus or another; secondly, they contribute concentration on certain properties of this stimulus that are of interest to the study; finally, with their help, it becomes possible to compare the assessments given by different respondents to different objects. Let's pay attention to the fact of use bipolar scales for assessing the object of interest to us. This is a simple and cost-effective way to obtain information about human reactions.

The idea of ​​using bipolar scales dates back to early research on synesthesia conducted by Osgood with T. Karwoski and G. Odbert. Osgood proposes to understand synesthesia as a phenomenon characterizing the experience of individual individuals in which certain sensations belonging to one sense or modality are combined with certain sensations of another modality and occur whenever stimulus arises, corresponding to another modality (it is worth recalling, for example, the synesthesia of A. Scriabin, V. Kandinsky, V. Nabokov).

In studies of synesthesia, Charles Osgood looked for connections between synesthesia, on the one hand, and thinking and language, on the other. The results of experimental work, supported by an analysis of facts from cultural anthropology, led to the conclusion that the images found in synesthesia are closely related to metaphors of language, and all this represents semantic relations. Metaphor in language, as well as music-color synesthesia, can be described "as the parallel alignment of two or more dimensions of experience", which are defined by pairs of opposite adjectives. It is the appeal to the mechanisms of synesthesia that makes it possible to explain metaphorical transfers in statements such as “ sour face", « dark personality".

Some bipolar scales have been used to identify social stereotype profiles. Respondents in several samples were asked to rate such objects as pacifist, Russian, dictator, and neutrality on bipolar scales. During World War II, researchers documented a change in the structure of social stereotypes (or, as Charles Osgood writes, a change in the meanings of social signs) since the United States entered the war.

It also turned out that when assessing objects, bipolar scales (decent - dishonest, high - low, kind - evil, helpful - useless, Christian - anti-Christian, honest - dishonest) revealed a high correlation - 0.9 and higher, becoming an assessment factor.

The scales (strong - weak, realistic - unrealistic, happy - unhappy) did not show correlations with rating scales, which allowed the researchers to talk about existence of other dimensions of semantic space.

Semantic differentiation, according to Osgood, presupposes consistent location of a concept in a multidimensional semantic space by choosing one or another value between the poles on the scales.

The difference in the meanings of two concepts is a function of the multidimensional distance between two points corresponding to these concepts.

The scales proposed for assessing objects and the instructions may look like this (see example and instructions in paragraph 3 of this present document. document) .

The use of such a scale makes it possible to directly measure an individual’s reaction, i.e., to identify a qualitative parameter (in this case, choose between “good” or “bad”), as well as to determine the intensity of this reaction (from low to high severity).

The scales are presented in random order, i.e., scales of one factor should not be grouped into blocks. The poles of the scales should not create in the respondent an attitude that the left pole always corresponds to a negative quality, and the right pole always corresponds to a positive quality.

Space compression and factors :

Evaluation factor combined the scales bad - good, beautiful - ugly, sweet - sour, clean - dirty, tasty - tasteless, useful - useless, kind - evil, pleasant - unpleasant, sweet - bitter, cheerful - sad, divine - secular, pleasant - unpleasant, fragrant - smelly, honest - dishonest, fair - unfair.

Strength factor : big - small, strong - weak, heavy - light, thick - thin.

Activity factor : fast - slow, active - passive, hot - cold, sharp - blunt, round - angular. The evaluation factor played a major role in this study; it explained 68.6% of the total variance, while the remaining factors accounted for 15.5 and 12.7%.

These three independent factors were obtained in numerous studies conducted in different cultures, among subjects with different levels of education, on the material of various objects (concepts, as well as stories and poems, social roles and stereotypes, images, colors, sounds, etc.)

However, the procedure factor analysis is not the only way analysis of data obtained using method C also offers a formula by which to calculate distance between scaling objects, i.e. two points in semantic space. After all, scalable objects can be represented in the form semantic profiles

When scaling narrow set of concepts occurs transformation of three-dimensional space“assessment - strength - activity”, i.e. independent orthogonal factors cease to be such.

For example : C. Osgood asked respondents to evaluate 20 concepts: 10 politicians (including R. Taft, W. Churchill, I. Stalin, G. Truman, D. Eisenhower) and 10 other realities (US policy in China, socialism, state price control, the use of the atomic bomb, the UN, etc.) on 10 bipolar scales (among which: wise - stupid, clean - dirty, dangerous - safe, unfair - fair, strong - weak, idealistic - realistic, etc.). As a result, instead of the three-dimensional space “assessment - strength - activity”, a one-dimensional continuum with poles ≪ benevolent dynamism ≫ and ≪malicious impotence≫.

SD as a way to measure attitudes .

Let us consider studies in which the SD method was used to study attitudes. Let us pay special attention to how data obtained using SD is analyzed. In the work of Charles Osgood, devoted to the study of attitudes towards representatives of different races, respondents (white and black students) were asked to evaluate a number of concepts (including concepts indicating race) on 12 bipolar scales (6 scales on the factor “evaluation ", 3 scales for the factor "strength", 3 for the factor "activity"). After calculating the average values ​​for each concept on the scales of three factors and calculating the semantic distances between the scaled concepts for different groups of subjects, it turned out that white respondents have positive attitudes towards those who belong to the Caucasian race, less positive - towards representatives of other races.

An analogy was also observed in the assessments of colors by this group of respondents. The ratings changed interestingly concept of "person" "depending on the adjective, denoting color. For white respondents, the adjective dominates the noun, and “the connotative meaning of the concept of a black person is rather black man, not black Human". Black respondents gave similar color ratings. White received the most positive assessment, then yellow, red, and finally brown and black. However, concepts indicating racial identity were assessed differently by this group. The concept denoting a representative of the Negroid race received the most positive assessment, and the least positive assessment - a representative of the Caucasian race. For white students, the concept “Caucasian” showed greater similarity with the concept “citizen” rather than with the concept “foreigner”, “friend” rather than “enemy”; in the case of the concept “representative of a race” the similarity was the opposite: it was more similar to the concept of “foreigner”, and not “citizen”, with the concept of “enemy”, and not “friend”. For this group of respondents, the concept of “person” is most similar to the concept of “representative of the Caucasian race” and least similar to the concept of “representative of the Negroid race”. In the group of black respondents, the opposite results were obtained.

Now let's stop at limitations of this method . Its main limitation is that we are dealing with declared verbal reaction of the respondent. The placement of stimuli in semantic space turns out to be distorted under the influence, for example, of social desirability or other mechanisms of this kind. To overcome this drawback, you can use modifications of the SD method, for example, non-verbal SD, in which the effect of conscious correction of evaluative reactions is reduced.

Let's imagine that you are conducting a study, as a result of which you want to compare men's and women's ideas about a successful woman. The logic of your research should be built as follows:

STAGE 1: It is necessary to conduct an initial survey of subjects. A sample instruction might read as follows: “Name 10 (15 or whatever number you need) characteristics that describe a successful woman.

If you compare the views of men and women, then you need to interview the SAME number of both men and women at the first stage.

STAGE 2:

A. for each group of subjects: men and women SEPARATELY you counting the number of all mentioned characteristics. For example, “kind - 7 (occurs 7 times), beautiful - 9 (occurs 9 times), etc. After you have calculated the characteristics for men and women, you need to compare the data between groups.

B. As a result you should get list of characteristics, which are most often found in two groups of subjects: men and women. FREQUENCY characteristics are those that are found in more than 50% of questionnaires (that is, if at least half of your subjects mentioned any characteristic, it should be considered frequent). The bar for assessing the “frequency” of a trait can vary from 80% to 30% depending on the characteristics obtained. If none of your characteristics scores more than 30%, then further construction of a private SD differential is pointless. You must either add respondents or conduct an analysis of the concepts you are asking to describe.

IN. To the resulting list of characteristics, it is necessary choose antonyms. For example, you received the characteristics: kind, smart, rich, etc. Each characteristic should receive an antonym: KIND - EVIL, SMART - STUPID, RICH - POOR. It is best to select antonyms using an antonym dictionary!!!

The resulting pairs of qualities will serve as scales for evaluation. Scales can be 5-point or 7-point (rarely 9-point or 11-point):. For example:

Good 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 Evil

Smart 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 Stupid

Rich 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 Poor, etc.

Don't forget : mix the poles of the scales (so as not to create settings)

determine for yourself the poles of each scale, i.e. assign “internal” numerical values ​​that the respondent will not know, only you (for subsequent interpretation)

STAGE 3.

A. Drawing up instructions for the SD and selecting those concepts that respondents will evaluate (for example, “successful woman”, “unsuccessful woman”, “woman”, women of various professions, etc.). There can be one or several objects, depending on the purpose and topic of the study.

Additional note: if SD is a separate study, then this questionnaire must also meet the requirements applicable to the questionnaire. That is, contain: a greeting, a legend, instructions, the SD itself, a passport, Gratitude.

B. Survey of subjects using the received questionnaire. The subjects must be DIFFERENT than at the first stage.

STAGE 4: Processing of received data.

A. Entering the obtained estimates into the table. Treatments using factor analysis.

B. Determine the required number of factors. Select factors according to the obtained factor loadings.

IN. Give the factors meaningful names and psychological interpretation.

see separate file (“SD_options_instructions”)

see separate file (“Survey_report_structure”)

In addition to the denotative meaning, each object has a connotative meaning for a person. This meaning is personal, gained through direct experience. If one fine sunny day a heavy apple fell on my head, I lost consciousness, and when I woke up, I realized that I was lying in a pile of cow dung, then for the rest of my life I will stay away from clusters of large apples on trees. In the example given, the experience of “communicating” with an apple is very vivid. Usually the connotative meaning is more hidden.
I will give other examples of connotative meanings. The rector of a university can be assessed by his students as a firm and cold person. This does not mean that the rector’s body density and temperature differs from the average of other people outside normal limits.
In other words, connotative meaning is an emotion towards the object being evaluated.
What does semantics have to do with it? We introduce the definition according to Tolstoy. Semantics is a branch of linguistics and logic that studies the problems of meaning, meaning and interpretation of signs and symbolic expressions. Accordingly, psychosemantics is the study of a person’s psychological perception of the meanings and meanings of various kinds of objects. Psychosemantics includes such methods as semantic differential, repertory lattices, etc.
The task of psychosematics is very interesting - the construction of a semantic space J. I.e. system of latent factors within which a person works. Why did you walk around the puddle in front of the entrance on the right side this morning, although it was more convenient on the left?
Why does sociology need SD? For example, a sociologist might try to identify types of people with similar perceptions of objects. If the object is the advertised product, then for each individual type it is more effective to make a separate advertisement with the desired perception J
The big advantage of SD is that, using “hard” methods, it provides information about the subtle psychological structures of a person’s perception of objects.

Semantic differential technique

What did Osgood suggest? The emotion of the meaning of a concept will be revealed if a person points to the position of the concept in question in the system of connotative features. Those. will indicate the location of the object in the “emotional” coordinate system. For example, evaluate a political leader: is he warm or cold, fluffy or prickly?
So, let’s prepare several pairs of emotions (connotative features). Pairs naturally contain opposite emotional colors: sweet and sour, black and white, good and evil. Each pair contains several gradations. If you want to use factor analysis in your analysis, you need data defined by an interval scale. To do this, there must be seven gradations (the more gradations, the more your scale shifts from ordinal to interval type).

Osgood found that in most cases, any of the connotative pairs hides one of three possible options: strength, evaluation (attitude), activity. In other words, if we take an object, let respondents evaluate it based on hundreds of similar pairs, and then conduct a cluster analysis of all these pairs, we will see that all pairs are divided into three groups: strength, evaluation, activity. Those. When we perceive any object of reality, we “attribute points” to this object according to three characteristics: strength (strong-weak), assessment (bad-good) and activity (fast-slow).

Target: become familiar with the method of quantitative and qualitative indexing of values ​​and complete exercises to master the method.

Basic theoretical principles

According to Charles Osgood, the semantic differential (SD) method makes it possible to measure connotative meaning, i.e., states that arise between the perception of a stimulus stimulus and meaningful work with them. Connotative indicates something subjective, individual and valuable, contrasted denotative - objective, interpersonal, cognitive. An analogue of the concept of “connotative meaning” in Russian psychology can be considered the concept of “personal meaning” proposed by A. N. Leontyev.

Being a method of experimental semantics, SD, along with other methods (for example, associative experiment, subjective scaling) is used to construct subjective semantic spaces, and is widely used in sociology, general and social psychology. Turning to it in psychological research is justified when we are talking, for example, about an individual’s emotional attitude to certain objects, studying stereotypes, social ideas, social categorization, attitudes, considering value orientations, subjective personal meaning, and also identifying implicit theories of personality .

SD is a case study method because it provides insight into the unique context of an individual's life. The method was developed by a group of American researchers led by Charles Osgood, who considered it as a combination of controlled association and scaling procedures. The SD method attracted the attention of domestic psychologists back in the late 1970s. and, as A. M. Etkind correctly noted, “has long been included in our psychological education programs.”

In order to determine the dimension of semantic space, Charles Osgood proposed using factor analysis to establish the minimum number of orthogonal dimensions, or axes. Semantic differentiation, according to Osgood, involves the sequential arrangement of a concept in a multidimensional semantic space through one or another meaning between the poles on the scales. The difference in the meanings of two concepts is a function of the multidimensional distance between two points corresponding to these concepts.

Any concept at the operational level can be represented as a point in semantic space. This point in semantic space can be characterized by two parameters: direction and distance from the reference point (in other words, quality and intensity). The direction is determined by the choice of one quality or another, and the distance depends on the selected value on the scale. The higher the intensity of the reaction, the more significant the concept being assessed is for the subject. Thus, each concept can be assessed by a set of differentiating assessments on bipolar scales.

For differentiation, the subject is offered a concept (a number of concepts), as well as a set of bipolar scales specified by adjectives. The respondent must evaluate the differentiated object on each of the proposed bipolar seven-point scales. In response to the word, the respondent has a certain reaction that reveals a certain similarity with the behavioral reaction, a kind of readiness for behavior, something mediating behavior. The respondent's associations with the stimulus are guided by given bipolar scales. The functions of these scales are as follows: firstly, they help to verbalize the reaction to a particular stimulus, secondly, they help to concentrate attention on certain properties of this stimulus that are of interest for the study, and finally, with their help, it is possible to compare assessments given by different respondents various objects.

Object being assessed

Selecting a value of 0 means neutral, 1 means lowdegree of severity of this quality in the object being assessed, 2 - medium degree, 3 - high.

The scales are presented in random order, i.e., scales of one factor should not be grouped into blocks. The poles of the scales should not create in the respondent an attitude that the left pole always corresponds to a negative quality, and the right pole always corresponds to a positive quality. The subject is presented with all scaled objects simultaneously, and then asked to sequentially evaluate them in the appropriate columns, i.e., each of them is placed on a separate page with the corresponding scales.

In a geometric representation, semantic space can be designated by axes, which are factors (there are three of them: assessment, strength and activity), and the connotative meanings of objects are coordinate points or vectors.

Osgood scaled concepts from various areas and, after conducting factor and variance analysis, identified the leading factors (evaluation, potency, activity - EPA). The evaluation factor played a major role in this study, explaining 68.6% of the total variance, while the activity factor accounted for 15.5% and the strength factor accounted for 12.7%. The factor structure “assessment - strength - activity” sets a universal semantic field with the help of which one can describe the world of a person’s subjective relations to the elements of his environment.

Evaluation factor combined the scales: bad - good, beautiful - ugly, sweet - sour, clean - dirty, tasty - tasteless, useful - useless, kind - evil, pleasant - unpleasant, sweet - bitter, cheerful - sad, divine - secular, fragrant - smelly , honest - dishonest, fair - unfair.

Strength Factor: big - small, strong - weak, heavy - light, thick - thin.

Activity factor: fast - slow, active - passive, hot - cold, sharp - blunt, round - angular.

The obtained data can be analyzed not only using the factor analysis procedure, but also the formula proposed by Charles Osgood, which calculates the distance between scaling objects, i.e., two points in semantic space. After all, scaled objects can be presented in the form of semantic profiles: broken lines connecting the subjects’ choices on each bipolar scale (Fig.).

d (x 1, y 1) - the difference between the coordinates of two points that represent the values ​​of objects X and V by factor.

This formula allows you to estimate the distances between the meanings of different concepts for the same individual or group of individuals, compare the assessments of the same object by respondents, and finally, identify changes in the assessments of an object by one subject or group.

SD is a method that makes it possible to obtain the required information without using standard objects and standard scales. This implies that “there is no “DM test” as such”, and depending on the goals of a particular study, certain objects and certain scales are selected that are representative and relevant to the goals. In addition, the researcher is encouraged to select scales that appear to be adequate in each individual case. For example, it is more difficult to evaluate a person on the “sweet - sour” scale, but more accessible on the “useful - useless” scale. And for respondents who do not have special knowledge in the field of psychology or psychiatry, the “talkative - silent” scale will be more understandable than the “manic - depressive” scale. Each factor should be represented by several pairs of scales.

When scaling a narrow set of concepts, the three-dimensional space “assessment - strength - activity” is transformed and becomes one-dimensional or two-dimensional, i.e. the number of independent factors is reduced to two or one. It is also possible to increase the factors that describe the semantic multidimensional space of an individual or group in relation to the assessment of an object.

Such variants of SD are called private, in contrast to the universal one - three-dimensional, formed by three factors “assessment - strength - activity”. If the universal SD allows us to obtain generalized emotional-evaluative forms of classification, then the private SD allows us to obtain classifications on a narrower (denotative) basis. Using universal SD on different populations, we will get three independent factors “assessment - strength - activity”, and when using private SD we need to build private semantic spaces every time we deal with a new group of respondents.

A variant of private SD is personal SD, when bipolar or unipolar scales are specified in terms of personal characteristics (personality and character traits). The procedure for personal SD is similar to the procedure for universal SD: a number of objects are assessed on a number of scales. The object of assessment in this case may be the respondent or other people. The obtained data are subjected to factor analysis, as a result, factors are identified that reflect the ordinary theory of the individual’s personality.

Security questions

What basic mental phenomena are subject to study by the semantic differential?

What other methods of experimental psychosemantics do you know?

What is the semantic space of the subject?

What three orthogonal directions are used to study the semantic field of subjects in the semantic differential?

Is it possible to study the similarities or differences in semantic profiles of different people using SD?

What other types of semantic differential method exist besides the universal one?

To practice using a one-dimensional partial semantic differential, complete the following exercises in the order suggested below.

Exercise 1. Carrying out the first stage of the study. The purpose of this stage of research is to select a research topic. To do this, using a group discussion method, select one object or mental manifestation, students’ opinions about which need to be studied. For example, 1) characteristics of a typical scientist, 2) basic properties of consciousness, etc.

Using elements of the focus group method, highlight the main characteristics or properties of the object. To do this, everyone writes down 7-9 characteristics for 5 minutes, then they are spoken out loud in the group and added to the general list. Characteristics (at least 7) ​​that have received a greater number of repetitions become the basis for creating SD scales.

In the case of studying the opinions of respondents from various samples (and not just students of a given group) about the object being studied, interviews or questionnaires can be conducted to collect data that allows the formation of SD scales.

Exercise 2. The purpose of the second stage is to compile a private SD to study respondents’ assessments of the characteristics or properties of the object being studied. A. Create bipolar scales of private DM based on the characteristics obtained in the first stage. B. Use the standard instructions (the full version of Charles Osgood’s instructions is given in the appendix) or formulate your own based on it. B. Conduct an assessment of the characteristics of the created private SD yourself. D. Draw lines connecting your choices across all characteristics - create an individual semantic profile.

Exercise 3. The third stage of the study serves to create a group semantic profile. To do this, calculate the average group scores (by group) for each characteristic, write them on the board, and then transfer these values ​​into your notebooks and overlay them on your individual semantic profile.

Exercise 4. Assess the degree of similarity or difference between the individual and group semantic profiles. To do this, use the formula from the theoretical provisions. Explain the results obtained and draw conclusions about the degree of similarity or difference between group opinions and yours about the object being studied.