Keywords: civic identity, types of civic identity, factors of the civic identity formation, state, citizens.


Aim. The aim of the research is to determine the psychological peculiarities of citizens with various types of civic identity.

Methods. 190 Ukrainian citizens were interviewed about their relations with parents (or guardians) in the childhood , features of family upbringing, priority values of the parents' family, experience of interpersonal relationships with peers, participation in school/student activities, lifestyle, etc. The following psycho-diagnostic techniques were also used: questionnaire "Level and Type of Civic Identity" (Petrovska, 2018); "World Assumptions Scale" (Janoff-Bulman, adapted by Padun & Kotelnikova, 2008); "Portrait Values Questionnaire" (Schwartz, adapted by Semkiv, 2013); "Interpersonal Trust Scale" (Rotter, adapted by Dostovalov, 2000); questionnaire "Level of Social Frustration" (Vasserman, 2004); "Social Activity Scale" (Lewicka, adapted by Cholij, 2010).

Results. The typology of citizens ("devoted", "moderate", "disappointed", "indifferent" and "alienated") was created in accordance with the specificity of the formation of civic identity components (cognitive, value, affective, behavioral). Significance (value)/insignificance, positive/negative attitude towards belonging to the state and community of citizens and forms of activity/inactivity in relation to the state and citizens made up the basis of the classification. Also, psychological peculiarities of citizens with foregoing types of civic identity were determined.

Conclusions. The main factors in the formation of a certain type of civic identity are basic beliefs (in particular, the justice of the world, the ability to control the events of one's life and self-value); civic behavioral patterns of reference persons (including civic attitudes of reference persons); social integration and social acceptance (experience of interpersonal relationships with peers); subjectness activity (defending own position, wide range of interests, initiative, active participation in many events); value-semantic orientations (in particular, universalism, self-regulation, safety, tradition); prosocial focus (focus of activity on socially useful affairs); social trust; the fact of meeting the needs of physical and social existence in the state (level of social frustration); experience of interaction with the state in the form of its various agencies.

Author Biography

Inha Petrovska, Faculty of Philosophy, Department of Psychology, Ivan Franko National University of Lviv Universytetska 1, Lviv, Ukraine

Associate Professor of the Department of Psychology Ivan Franko Lviv National University, Lviv, Ukraine. Her scientific interests are focused on psychological aspects of the individual’s civic identity formation. Based on the principles of the theory of social identity and social self-categorization, the concept of the complexity of social identity and the systematic approach, the author's definition and the model of the civic identity are developed. On this subject she published 13 articles. Interested also in civic culture, civic education, multiplicity of person’s civic identity, individual psychological characteristics and emigration sentiment of students with different types of civic identity, functions of the civic identity etc.


Bellamy, R. (2008). Citizenship: A very short introduction. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Cholij, S.M. (2010). Мотиваційно-ціннісний аспект соціальної активності молоді [Motivational-value aspect of social activity of youth]. Problems of Modern Psychology, 10, 809-822.

Dostovalov, S.G. (2000). Система доверительных отношений как детерминанта восприятия индивидуальности в юношеском возрасте [The system of trust as a determinant of individual perception in adolescence]. PhD thesis, Rostov State Pedagogical University.

Hart, D., Richardson, C., & Wilkenfeld, B. (2011). Civic identity. In S. J. Schwartz, K. Luyckx, & V. L. Vignoles (Eds.), Handbook of identity theory and research (pp. 735-751). New York, NY: Springer

Konoda, I. (2007). Становление гражданской идентичности в процессе политической социализации [Formation of civic identity in the process of political socialization]. Abstract of PhD thesis, Moscow.

Lomov, B. (1996). Системность в психологии [Systemic in psychology]. Moscow: Institute of Practical Psychology.

Maksymenko, S.D. (2006). Генеза розвитку особистості [Genesis of personality development]. Kiev: TOV KMM.

Petrovska, I. R. (2017). Рівні та структура громадянської ідентичності особистості [Levels and Structure of Civic Identity]. Psychological Prospects Journal, 30, 157-171.

Petrovska, I. R. (2018). Методика визначення рівня та типу громадянської ідентичності особистості: розробка та психометричний аналіз [Method for determining Level and Type of Civic Identity: development and psychometric analysis]. Theory and Practice of Psychology, 1, 160-165.

Padun, M.A. & Kotelnikova, A.V. (2008). Модификация методики исследования базисных убеждений личности Р. Янофф-Бульман [Modification of the method for the study of basic beliefs of personality R. Yanoff-Bulman]. Psychological Journal, 29 (4), 98-106.

Roccas, S. & Brewer M. B. (2002). Social identity complexity. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 6, 88-106.

Semkiv, I. I. (2013). Адаптація методики "Портрет цінностей" Шварца українською мовою [Adaptation of Schwartz's "Portrait Values Questionnaire" in Ukrainian]. Practical Psychology and Social Work, 1, 12-28.

Tajfel, H. & Turner, J. C. (1986). The social identity theory of inter-group behavior. In S. Worchel, & W. G. Austin (Eds.), The psychology of intergroup behavior (pp. 7-24). Chicago, IL: Nelson Hall.

Vasserman, L., Iovlev, B. & Berebin, M. (2004). Методика для психологической диагностики уровня социальной фрустрированности и ее практическое применение [Methodology for the psychological diagnosis of the level of social frustration and its practical application]. Guidelines. NIPNI Bekhtereva.

How to Cite
Petrovska, I. (2019). PECULIARITIES OF VARIOUS TYPES OF CIVIC IDENTITY. Journal of Education Culture and Society, 10(2), 43-54.