Socio-cultural types of population in the region

A region is a specific phenomenon that fixes value guidelines, which were formed historically, types of social behavior, political attitudes and specific economic practices. Most people can understand and use only such sociocultural space as an area of their residence, the characteristics of which do not always strictly correspond to the reformation changes. Today, scientists study the reasons and consequences of the economic crisis, the prospects for stabilizing the society, the issues of stratification changes, people migration, etc. However, despite the variety of researches, there is a need for a profound sociological analysis of modern Russian processes [7], especially the processes that take place in the specific socio-cultural space of a single region [6, 8].

The search for successful models of socioeconomic behavior that are adapted to the new reality has become a condition for survival in the unstable social environment. Due to the fact that each person perceives the current changes and reacts to them in his/her own way and due to social heterogeneity, it is necessary to understand and evaluate different groups of people united by the similar types of behavior and value characteristics and find a degree of their diversity. According to the modernization tasks that are set by the Government, it is important to determine the size of the population, which you can “count” for when implementing the socio-economic transformations in the region.

The socio-cultural orientation of the population is usually estimated by the sample interviews [5], subjective self-rating and general concepts reflecting one or another sphere of social development. It is rather difficult to unambiguously define these indicators, so you need an empirical approach that allows describing the content and meaning of polysemantic terms and their simultaneous quantitative analysis, forecast and diagnostic assessment [4].

Sharing the correlation and regression methods and component methods will be able to form aggregates, select the most informative ones, find affecting or group-forming factors and the most important productive performances.

The informational basis of measuring sociocultural types in the region were the results of a successive stage of the study “Socio-cultural potential of the modernization of the Vologda Oblast”1, that was carried out in 2010 within the programme “Socio-cultural evolution of Russia and its regions”, which was initiated by the Centre for studying socio-cultural changes of the RAS Institute of Philosophy in 2005. The analysis presented in the article is the next step in studying the socio-cultural space of the Vologda Oblast. The main idea of this stage is to identify the types of socio-cultural characteristics of the population, which are formed against the backdrop of economic and social mobility of the region.

The system of indicators, which had several advantages, was selected to analyze the structure of social stratification. It was representative enough to describe the socio-cultural type, since it not only reflected the material standard of living, education level and the availability of power functions [2], but also described the important data on innovation activity, life satisfaction and confidence, etc. The indicators of value orientations were of great importance there. All of the criteria in the questionnaire were presented in the form of a scale. The six-level scale was used to evaluate the material well-being: respondents were classified from the lowest level (relatively poor) to the upper one (relatively wealthy). The ordered scale was used to fix level of education as an indicator of professional and cultural training: it graded from the category of “non-educated, primary education” up to the category of “higher education, postgraduate education”. The availability of power functions and the number of subordinates were fixed in answers to the question “Do you have subordinates at your principal place of business?”: (1) – no, I do not have; (2) – less than 5 persons; (3) – 5-10 persons; (4) – 11-50 persons; (5) – 51-100 persons; (6) – more than 100 persons. Innovative activity was measured by the question “Did you participate in creating any innovations in the last 12 months (a new company, new product, new technology, new service)?”; there were the following answers: (1) – I did not participate; (2) – I participated on a par with others; (3) – I participated as an organizer. These indicators were considered as the baselines, i.e. the base of socio-cultural personality types, which learned values, norms, attitudes and various regulators of human behavior in the process of socialization that were associated with the modernization and innovation of socialization. All in all, 36 variables were selected for the study of the Vologda Oblast.

As expected, there was a strong dependence of live improvement on the regional, city and oblast authorities and on the nationwide rate (correlation coefficients: r = 0.742; r = 0.827; r = 0.865). Less strong dependence was found among the indicators of dependence of live improvement on close relatives and friends ( r = 0.536). The statistical data proved the following dependence: the more people satisfied with their living, the more people were confident in their future ( r = 0.536). The greatest interdependence was revealed among the values, declaring the duties of state (r = 0.500) and legislation ( r = 0.534) and traditional family priorities ( r = 0.599).

The component analysis, which was performed by the RFP SPSS 15.0, allowed us to identify three factors that had a value more than unity. It should be noted that our calculations were begun with the introduction of 36 variables, which were integrated into 12 factors in modeling, explaining 66.7% of variance. Reducing the number of indicators down to 15 led to the formation of six factors and decreased the model’s explanatory ability down to 58.8%. As a result of many experimental calculations, the model, which included eight components, three factor and explanatory power of 53.5%, was developed. The first factor explained 22.7% of the total variance, the second factor – 16.9% and the third one – 13.9%.

“Life satisfaction” was the most important indicator in forming the first factor. The indicator of “confidence in future” was less important here. “Financial position” was the least important indicator there, although the value of the factor load was rather good – 0.566. Thus, on the basis of positive correlation coefficients of the variables with the factor, it is possible to choose the notation “Quality of life” as a mark for this factor. Large positive value of this factor means that a person feels the confidence in life and he/she is very optimistic about the future.

The second factor variable includes the following indicators: the availability of subordinates, participation in innovations and the level of education. “Progressiveness” was chosen as a mark for this factor. Holding authoritative resources and symbolic capital in the form of higher education symbolizes the large positive value of the factor.

The third factor combined the following variables: preferred job and recognizing respect for the established customs and traditions as the main life values. The concept of “socialization” was associated with this factor. Its large positive value indicates the predominance the sustainable system of traditional values, focused on achieving stable material benefits with a long-term social perspective.

The analysis of spread in factor values has revealed the differences between respondents with unequal socio-demographic characteristics. The comparison of the subgroups of separated components shows that the urban population (one in four persons) and men (the lowest percentage among all the characteristics of living quality accounts for 13%; the share of respondents with the high quality of life is equal to 24%) have the best quality of life indices, and there is the lowest quality of life indices among the rural population (the smallest share among all the characteristics of high quality of life – 15%; tab. 1 ).

Table 1. The share of respondents in the subgroups of identified factors (in % from the number of respondents)

Factor	Sex		Age			Type of settlement
	Men	Women	Young people aged 18 – 35	Adults aged 36 – 59	Pensioners at the age of 60 and older	Village	City
Quality if life
Low	13	21	18	16	18	17	18
Middle	64	61	59	68	59	67	58
High	24	18	23	16	23	15	25
Progressiveness
Passive	10	7	8	4	16	9	7
Neutral	77	84	82	82	77	81	81
Active	13	9	10	14	7	10	12
Socialization
Low	20	18	28	15	12	20	18
Middle	63	58	58	65	58	61	60
High	17	24	15	21	31	19	22
Sourse: Data from the survey in the Vologda Oblast in 2010 (ISEDT RAS).

As expected, men have more progressive views than women. The adults (aged from 36 to 59 years) have the most active position in life (14%) even in comparison with all the selected categories. Young people (aged from 18 to 35) focus on achieving personal financial success without long-term social prospects (28% of them have a low degree of socialization). Women and older people have a more solid system of traditional values, which is characterized by their high social expectations and striving for balanced life.

The cluster analysis was used in order to divide the respondents into the types that had similar characteristics and did not exceed the threshold values that separated one cluster from another. It was based on the indicators, which had been defined previously by factor analysis. The experiments showed that the optimal number of the clusters was equal to four. Firstly, it provided sufficient differentiation of the array and the difference between clusters according to the characteristics of the respondents, and, secondly, clusters fulness was remained: there were 6% of respondents in the smallest of them. A further increase in the number of clusters would lead to an unjustified decrease in their fulness.

According to respondents’ characteristics in the selected clusters, we can conclude that we are dealing with the social strata that differ in their places in the hierarchical social system, spatial localization, subjective characteristics, attitudes to the changing times, values and interests. Table 2 shows the dominant features of the clusters (layers).

The first cluster is the largest one (43%); it includes the people without higher education (the people, who have no associate degrees), whose financial position can be described as “poverty”. The potential, focused on the traditional norms, suggests that the growth of individualistic values, in fact, is caused by the values of survival, rather than the values of self-realization. This cluster includes “traditionalists”. There are the people in its centre, who can not estimate their future and present days; these people are not confident in assessing their life environment.

Table 2. Frequencies of variables in the selected clusters (% of respondents)

Variables	Cluster 1 «Traditionalists»	Cluster 2 «Realists»	Cluster 3 «Specialists»	Cluster 4 «Modernists»
Availability of subordinates	10	18	4	23
High income	39	45	39	53
Higher education (Associates Degree)	0	29	21	58
Innovation activity	3	2	7	9
Values (adherence to traditions, customs)	100	0	18	100
Confidence in the future	40	43	32	48
Satisfaction with life	41	47	36	56
Preference for risky work	16	43	50	55
Share of all respondents	43	11	20	26
Sourse: Data from the sociological survey in the Vologda Oblast in 2010 (ISEDT RAS).

The fourth and second clusters consist of people, who have authoritative resources and relatively high incomes. They are characterized by confidence in their future and life satisfaction. But the essential difference between these clusters is the level of education and life values. The people in the fourth cluster have higher education or associates degrees (57%); the people in the second cluster have secondary education (62%). The respondents from the fourth cluster have a solid system of traditions and respect for the established customs. This allows us to include these respondents in the groups of “Modernists” and “Realists”, respectively.

Thus, the hierarchical structure of society indicates the distance between the social types that defines the differences of their perception of all the sorts of social phenomena and their socio-cultural self-identification and value orientations [2].

The comparison of the clusters in the context of socio-demographic characteristics shows that age is an important differentiating factor: for example, there are more young people (45%) among “modernists”, whereas there are only 28% of young people among “traditionalists”. There are 12 and 32% of pensioners in these groups, respectively. The age distribution of respondents shows that the shares of men and women in all the clusters correspond to the demographic division of the population in the Vologda Oblast. Vologda and Cherepovets were selected in terms of place of residence as the regional and economic centers with the population of about 300 thousand people each. The people, who live in these cities, have a high level of education and a high degree of satisfaction with life, their incomes are significantly higher than the average income level. City dwellers predominate over “modernists” – their share is 10% more than the share of villagers. There are more rural people in the cluster of “specialists”, and city dwellers predominate over “realists” and “traditionalists”, but the difference is negligible – within 2 – 4%.

Significant differences between the layers can be observed in the analysis of selfidentification. 42% of the respondents from the first cluster have referred themselves to the lowest social class, the share of these people is 6% lower in the fourth cluster. There are less than 4% of “traditionalists” in the middle class; nobody of them refers themselves to the high society. 7 – 8% of “realists” and specialists” and almost 10% of modernists refer themselves to the high society. The majority of respondents in the selected clusters identify themselves as middle social stratum.

The analysis of clusters by occupation shows that 54% of “modernists” and 50% of “specialists” belong to intellectuals and middle management staff. There are 24% of industrial, transport and communications workers and 15% of service sphere employees among “realists”. “Traditionalists” are primarily workers (26%), pensioners (12%) and agricultural workers (11%). Complementing these data by the information about the enterprises, where the respondents work, you can see the tendency of new market relations' influence on the education level of social strata. The vast majority of “realists”, “specialists” and “modernists” are concentrated in the private sector, including a joint-stock sector.

Thus, a special class is being formed, it includes managers and intellectual workers, whose relationship with the employer are based on mutual trust and pursuing common business interests. At the same time 4% of respondents from the fourth cluster (“modernists”) and 3% of respondents from the third cluster (“specialists”) are the owners of their own enterprises (companies); whereas, there are these categories in the other clusters.

The fact that most of “traditionalists” (40%) work in state and municipal organizations, 8% of people work on the farm and 9% of respondents are unemployed (pensioners) proves that this cluster is much inferior to the other clusters in terms of compliance with the exchange rate of the market economy and intervention of specialists in the labour market.

The quality of life, working conditions and social circle of these social groups influence the differentiation of their interests and value orientations. Family and home interests are in the first place in all the groups, but the difference between “specialists” and “realists” is nearly 20% because work and income values are very important in the latter group (fig. 1) . These positions are pretty close in in all the groups, but income is in the third place in each group, which indicates the selective attitude of the people to their jobs: not every job suits them. Every fifth “modernists” is primarily interested in work: the number of these people is almost two times higher than their share among “traditionalists”; and only 2% of respondents are interested in spiritual life and culture.

The respondents from different groups show the significant differences in their attitude to leisure and hobby [1]. There is the largest share of the people, who have hobbies, among

“moder-nists” (39%), and the lowest share – among “realists” (26%). There are some differences in the intensity of leisure use. More than a half of respondents (56 – 67%) prefer watching television in their free time, and 39 – 56% of respondents prefer working households. These two categories have the greatest weight in the cluster of “traditionalists” (fig. 2) .

Among “modernists” there are more people, who spend their free time with their friends (50%), “sit” in the Internet (34%) and travel (11%). Raising socio-cultural modernization leads to more intensive use of free time by the respondents. “Modernists”, in contrast to “traditionalists”, are more mobile and active, they strive for success.

We investigated the relationship between the level of socio-cultural modernization and some opinions and moral values of the population. The highest value of interesting work that deserves to deal with as the main business of life was observed among “modernists” (78%). This group is also characterized by the initiative, spirit of enterprise and search for new things in work and life.

Figure 1. Distribution of answers to the question: “In what area do your main interests lay?” (in % of respondents)

Note: The diagram shows three most popular items.

Source: Data from the sociological survey in the Vologda Oblast in 2010 (ISEDT RAS).

Figure 2. Distribution of answers to the question: “How do you spend your free time?” (in % of respondents)

□ Watch TV пSocialize with friends

□Travel

□ Do housekeeping

□Surf the Internet

Source: Data from the sociological survey in the Vologda Oblast in 2010 (ISEDT RAS).

“Traditionalists” prefer such values as caring for their health and well-being (88%). Most “realists” hold the following opinion: “I become what I am, mainly through my own efforts” (70%). “specialists” think that the most valuable thing in the world is a human life and no one can deprive a person of life under any circumstances (81%).

The level of socio-cultural modernization of respondents was investigated as a factor affecting the degree of trusting the authorities and regional government. The selected groups are close enough in terms of this indicator. The most significant differences are observed only in trust to the Government Prosecutor’s Office and the regional government. Most people do not trust the local and municipal authorities, they don’t trust the media and trade unions. “Modernists” don’t trust the government as well as “traditionalists”, however, they will more likely take part in the protests against the reduction of the level and quality of life, violation of human rights and freedoms.

The values of the modern society are paradoxical: the society does not trust the government, it seeks to move away from the authorities, while the society comes out for the tightening of state control; the society welcomes the individuality and simultaneously denies freedom [3]. Another feature of the Russian mentality is traditionalism. The vast majority of people prefer traditional and eternal values, they tend to respect the established customs and traditions.

The analysis shows that the shifts, which are observed in the value orientations of respondents, are aimed at greater conformity to modern (industrial), but not a traditional society. Subjective socio-cultural orientation affects the interests, values and motivation of people, on their performance and well-being that include the level, style and quality of life. Different socio-cultural types reflect the degree of public acceptance of liberal values, market ideology, competition, economic progress, the advantages and limitations of cooperation and mutual aid.

Thus, the study of socio-cultural types has confirmed the hypothesis that there is a trend to increase the level of socio-cultural modernization in the modern society in the transition from generation to generation.

The analysis of empirical data of sociological research allowed us to identify the poles of social and cultural modernization, which demonstrate the differentiation of behavior, psychological traits of individuals and social self-identification.

The population of the region involved in the transformations is in the process of sociocultural division into the groups with dissimilar behavioral characteristics. There is a cluster of people in the Vologda Oblast, who are ready for innovations and improvements; they tend to move toward modernization and innovation development.

The trend to modernization in Russia is inseparable from the socio-historical formation of individual subjectivity. Hence, there is a social phenomenon, which characterizes the incompleteness of social transformations, searching for alternative paths of development and selecting the advanced model of the future. In order to successfully implement the modernization reforms that are conceived by the elite, it is necessary to set the social energy of society free, create the conditions for creative self-realization and return the prestige of the creative professions.