Ideas of working young people about laziness in connection with their self-attitude and self-regulation

Kim Alina Eduardovna PhD in Psychology Senior lecturer, Department of Personality Psychology and Consulting Psychology, Southern Federal University 344006, Russia, Rostovskaya oblast', g. Rostov-Na-Donu, ul. Bol'shaya Sadovaya, 105/42 kim.alina.ed@yandex.ru Other publications by this author

Introduction

Laziness, being associated with self-attitude and self-regulation of the individual, affects the effectiveness and quality of human life. Laziness often has a negative impact on the success, productivity and timeliness of actions taken. Being socially disapproved (and for a reason), it is customary to "eradicate" and "overcome" this property. At the same time, everyone is familiar with the feeling of pleasure from experiencing laziness in the form of abandoning boring, uninteresting, inappropriate activities for the personality itself in a situation of reduced resource availability. The manifestation of laziness can both harm (because it is inaction) and help a person save himself.

On the portal of scientific electronic library elibrary.ru in the category "Psychology" with the key word "laziness" only from 2009 to 2013 it published 14 papers, 2014 and 2018 the number of publications has increased to 37, from 2019 to 2023 has been published 55 papers. With the keyword "Procrastination" (as a concept similar in nature), 337 works have been published over the past 5 years. Of course, the actual number of papers is significantly higher, but let's give it for comparison: 2,543 publications were posted with the keyword "Anxiety" from 2019 to 2023, and 1107 publications with the word "Aggressiveness". Thus, one can notice both the growing interest of the scientific community in a socially important topic affecting human productivity, and the insufficiency of considering this phenomenon within the scientific field.

The main part

Laziness is considered as the opposite of diligence (Ilyin E.P., 2011), personality reaction (Bogdanova D.A., 2004), a mental phenomenon manifested in a lack of desire to work (Mikhailova E.L., 2007), preventive fatigue in the form of reduced performance (Bodrov V.A., 2012), a resource for overcoming psychological vulnerability of the individual (Posokhova S.T., 2019).

Externally, laziness manifests itself in refusal or avoidance of activity ^[1], blocking activity and non-performance of activity ^[2].

Internally, laziness is experienced as a lack of desire for success; insensitivity to the circumstances of the activity; the inability to establish the necessary correspondence between the requirements of reality and its personal meaning ^[1]. It is noted that various psychological reasons may be behind the manifestation of one-dimensional behavior (refusal of activity) ^[2].

The consideration of its resource capabilities, usefulness and productivity is indicated as a trend direction of consideration of laziness.  Laziness is understood as a protective mechanism, limiting the flow of potentially negative events ^[1]; a reaction to overloads and traumatic factors ^{[3, 4]}, a means for developing imagination (thinking through options for action) and creativity, saving resources ^{[5, 6]}. That is, while maintaining external unproductivity (things are not being done), internally laziness performs an important function for a person, brings benefits.

G.V. Shukova, summarizing and analyzing the available research, draws attention to the mechanisms of rational and productive laziness, which allow reducing the burden on the subject, narrowing the area of search for solutions, applying habitual ways of behavior, restoring resources for greater efficiency later. Limiting activity in a tense situation in the form of laziness can be considered creating conditions for understanding circumstances and prospects in the form of working through experiences. So laziness seems to be a space for regulating activity in the form of saving resources in a certain situation ^[7].

 Being applied and experienced situationally or in a wide range of circumstances and spheres of life, laziness is considered as a state (laziness) or a personality trait (laziness). The authors define laziness as a person's tendency to be lazy all the time, regardless of the specific situation ^[8].

By analogy with the breeding of anxiety and anxiety ^[9], aggression and aggressiveness ^[10], it can be assumed that laziness is a state that occurs in a situation of experiencing a discrepancy between external requirements and internal readiness to invest available resources to fulfill them, lack of internal readiness to act in order to save resources. Laziness is a personality trait manifested in a person's tendency to frequent and intense experiences of a state of laziness at a low threshold of its occurrence in a wide range of situations.

The causes and manifestations of laziness and laziness can be biological (psychophysiological) characteristics of a person ^[9], social factors (peculiarities of upbringing, lifestyle of the environment ^[5], external pressure as a provocateur as a protective behavior ^[3]), psychological characteristics (peculiarities of the course of mental processes, violations or lack of formation of motivational and volitional structures of personality ^{[8, 5]}, anxiety, orientation towards obtaining the final result without taking into account the achievement process, lack of existential motivation, loss of meaning ^{[5, 11]}), decrease in the value of intellectual and physical efforts in achieving the goal ^[5], as well as situational factors (situations provoking laziness) ^[12].

Another reason for the manifestation of laziness is the experienced pleasure–displeasure that a person receives during its manifestation ^{[5, 13]}. E.L.Mikhailova, presenting the structure of experiencing a state of laziness, in addition to the factors "passivity - activity", "fatigue – efficiency", "negative – positive self–attitude", indicates the factor "pleasure – suffering", denoting the emotional side of the experience of laziness and the manifestation of laziness ^[14].

Given the positive role of the manifestation of laziness (and not losing sight of the negative consequences), it seems fair to Posokhova S.T.'s assumption that in the information age a person will need laziness, and learning laziness can become part of the therapeutic process. Indeed, an increasing amount of information with a multidirectional nature of opportunities and tasks in a competitive environment can lead a person to a low-resource state ^[5]. The idea of laziness as socially disapproved, condemned by society, leading among negative and undesirable traits ^[15], as a barrier to psychological well-being ^[16], requiring unconditional regulation, can affect a person and her choice in favor of doing business, but to the detriment of herself ^[17]. At the same time, laziness can be perceived as a way to organize one's behavior in response to external and internal disorder ^[5].

Speaking about the structure of laziness, E.L. Mikhailova identifies three components of laziness (in relation to educational activities): motivational (lack or weakness of motivation), behavioral (actual non-fulfillment of activities); emotional component (indifference or positive emotions about non-fulfillment of requirements in educational activities) ^[14].

Paying attention to the cultural and social perspective of laziness that dominates in the literature, T. Madsen includes in the field of laziness consideration ideas about the real efforts and motivation of a person in a specific task. The author attributes the following to the elements of the laziness model: 1. a person's academic performance (for example, on a school test or when looking for a job), (assumed), 2. a person's abilities and/or prerequisites and/or complexity of the task in question, and 3. (perceived) motivation and/or efforts of a person in performing this task ^[18]. Each of the elements occupies one of the vertices of the triangle. O.Y. Protsenko, M.V. Roganina state similar thoughts: laziness, according to the authors, arises not when a person is deprived of the opportunity to act, but when the possibilities are wide, but there is no desire to be active ^[19].

This point of view seems to us to be potentially productive, since the manifestation of laziness probably includes motivational moments and an assessment of the labor costs to achieve the goal. Probably, if the amount of labor, estimated in accordance with past experience and level of abilities, does not correspond to the significance of the goal or task, the person will be inclined to abandon the activity, since the "price" does not correspond to the product, the person is not ready to pay how much is required or he has "nothing to pay". A full-fledged refusal to take action to solve a problem in circumstances where the conservation of resources in a particular situation comes to the fore.

Speaking of laziness and laziness, it is necessary to note their difference from procrastination.

According to S.T. Posokhova, the difference between laziness and procrastination lies in subjective feelings about postponing the task for the future ^[5].

Laziness and procrastination, being similar in nature, having common features and origins, are not identical concepts. Kurdenko A.N. gives a list of differences between these phenomena: awareness, activity, concern for one's own ego, the presence of anxiety and tension, focus on results, urgent addiction (feeling of haste, deadline), independence from the planning process, a specific orientation ^[20]. The understanding of active procrastination is similar, when there is a conscious postponement of work with the expectation of completing it in the future with greater benefit, with increased motivation ^[21]. S. Branlow and R. Risinger revealed the dependence of procrastination on external motivation, external locus of control and external attributive style ^[22].

That is, a lazy person does not think about unfulfilled tasks, refuses to act, does not seek to test himself with this inaction, is calm and relaxed at the moment, is not interested in the outcome of the "canceled" case, does not have a plan of action, spreads laziness to a wide range of actions ^[20].

And a certain middle position is occupied by passive procrastination, which implies unplanned, low activity, minimal use of effective action strategies, impairing the ability to cope with tasks, but accompanied by anxiety ^[21].

Thus, in the case of procrastination, we are talking about postponing the execution of a task, in the case of laziness, we are talking about refusing to be involved in activities in the current ratio of external and internal conditions.

If the fixation of the fact of abandonment of activity as an external manifestation of laziness and the way to define lazy and lazy is quite obvious, then the idea of laziness as a property of personality acts as a little-studied area of knowledge.

Ideas about laziness and laziness have been the subject of study in a few works concerning the attitude of future managers to laziness ^[23], studying the opinions of schoolchildren about the definition, causes and methods of regulating laziness ^[24], subjective ideas about laziness as reflecting the complex nature of the psychological mechanisms that determine it with criteria for evaluating situations of manifestation of the "image of Self", "the image of the case", "the image of conditions" and not having an unambiguously negative connotation ^{[25, 26, 27]}.

The meaning of laziness is revealed, which consists mainly in the lack of motivation, retrospective representations of emotional states during the experience of laziness are determined, the connection with the physical state is determined.

Ovcharova R.V. means that laziness has subjective (personal meaning of laziness, its subjective assessment) and objective (violations of self-regulation mechanisms) manifestations, which are confirmed by studies of ideas about laziness ^[28].

Taking into account the relationship between laziness and self-regulation, the interpretation of laziness as an emotionally assessed personal property by the subject, it seems important to study the concepts of laziness in connection with self-regulation and self-attitude.

Self-regulation plays an important role in the process of personality formation. Following V.I. Morosanova, we understand self-regulation as a systemic process of internal mental activity of a person to launch, maintain and manage various types and forms of voluntary activity ^[29].

The research examines the relationship between inability and low ability to overcome laziness with the underdevelopment of all components of self-regulation ^[28], pronounced procrastination and general self-regulation ^[30], and indicates the understanding of laziness as a violation of self-regulation ^[31]. It is determined that lazy students are characterized by low self-regulation in educational activities ^[8].

Self-regulation is considered as interrelated with a person's self-attitude ^[17]. Self-attitude is considered as the activity of the subject towards his "I", expressed in internal actions or readiness for them, characterized by emotional specificity and the objective content of the action; as a multidimensional structural-level relatively stable and personality-supported component of self-awareness ^[32]; as an indicator of the success of the self-realization of the subject as a person ^{[33, 34]}.

Given the ambivalence of the emotional assessment of laziness (a combination of pleasure from saving resources and censure for inaction), the resolution of the conflict between "need to do" and "don't want to do" in favor of the latter, while society translates the need to choose the first option, the small number of works devoted to the ideas of laziness as a personal property, the study of ideas about the content in the conditions of experiencing and regulating laziness in connection with self–attitude and self-regulation of behavior, it seems relevant and expanding the field of knowledge about the personality trait that affects the success and process of activity - laziness. It is likely that the specifics of this relationship will differ in people with different degrees of laziness.

In our opinion, it is relevant to study the ideas of laziness among working young people, whose age is approaching the upper limit of the legally defined youth age in Russia from 14 to 35 years in connection with their role in the social development of modern Russian society.

The subject of the study was the ideas of laziness, self-attitude and self-regulation of working young people.

Purpose: to establish the relationship between ideas about the content, conditions of occurrence, self-regulation of laziness and types of self-attitude, styles of self-regulation in working young people with different self-esteem of laziness.

The empirical object of the study was 110 young people aged 21 to 33 years with at least 2 years of work experience.

Hypothesis: the nature of the interrelationships between ideas about laziness and self-attitude, self-regulation in working young people with varying degrees of self-esteem of laziness will have specifics.

In the course of the study, the following methods were used: the questionnaire "Style of self-regulation of behavior" (Morosanova V.I.), a multidimensional questionnaire for self-attitude research (Pantileev S.R.), the method of self-assessment of laziness (Bogdanova D.A., Posokhova S.T.); self-assessment of the level of laziness. A content analysis of self-description of ideas about the content, conditions of occurrence, self-regulation of laziness was carried out; as well as methods of mathematical statistics: quartering procedure, r-Spearman rank correlation coefficient, T-Wilcoxon, Friedman criteria, Mann-Whitney U-criterion.

To study self-attitude, the respondents were offered the methodology of self-attitude research (MIS) by S.R. Pantileev. The severity of the respondents' types of self-attitude with external evaluative grounds (reflected self-attitude, internal conflict, self-confidence, self-leadership, isolation) and with internal evaluative grounds (self-attachment, self-acceptance, self-worth, self-blame) was revealed. External evaluation bases reflect the assessments of other people, the results of their own activities, evaluated by the community in accordance with the requirements of the activity. Internal evaluative bases have types of self-attitudes that are based on a person's own assessments and reflect, first of all, the self-awareness of the individual ^{[32, 33, 34]}.

Using the questionnaire "Style of self-regulation of behavior" (Morosanova V.I.), the expression of the styles of Planning, Modeling, Programming, Evaluation of results, Flexibility, independence and an integral indicator of self-regulation was established.

To study ideas about the content of laziness, the circumstances of its occurrence and self-regulation of laziness, respondents provided self-descriptions, which were further organized and processed using content analysis.

To explore ideas about the content of laziness, respondents were asked to complete the sentences "People say that laziness is; for me, laziness is."

Among the ideas about the content of laziness, categories were highlighted:

•          The category characterizing actions (CONTENT.ACTION), includes such expressions as "betraying your ideals", "spending time to please yourself", "a way to know yourself", "saving energy", "you need to fight laziness", etc.

•          A category describing motivational and characterological personality traits (CONTENT.MOTHAR), which includes such expressions as "when it is not interesting to do something", "until deadlines do not fit", "unwillingness to do what should be done", "the worst trait of my character", "terrible quality", "lack of motivation", "part of our essence".

•          A category describing the subjective emotional and ethical assessment of laziness (CONTENT.EMOTIONS) including such units as "bad", "the main enemy for committing actions", "one of the most terrible things", "a nightmare that prevents life", "a form of adaptation", "shame", "sponsor of happiness", "engine of progress", "degradation of human personality", "this a way to relax", "sweetness", etc. Note that the categories include both positive and negative ratings (35.7% positive units; 64.7% negative).

To study ideas about circumstances (a phenomenon accompanying some other phenomenon and related to it; conditions determining the position, existence of someone or something, an environment of laziness, respondents were asked to answer in free form the question: "In what situations, states, circumstances, conditions are you lazy?".

Based on the data obtained, the following were highlighted:

•          A category that includes expressions related to upcoming, past activities or the absence of such (THE SITUATION.For example, "learn something to the end", "when I have a lot of tasks", "if I have a lot of time", "when I can delay without obvious consequences", "when there is little time left", "when it does not require much effort", "after exams, deadlines, completed work, etc.

•          The category describing motivational education (THE SITUATION.MOTIVE), including such expressions as "when I have to do something that I don't want to do", "uninteresting activity", "I don't see the point in doing something", "monotonous uninteresting activity", "when I don't care and I'm not interested", etc.

•          The category characterizing the human condition (THE SITUATION.COMP), which includes expressions like "when I'm very tired", "I'm lazy when I'm not in the mood", "when I'm sleepy", "fatigue in a state of apathy, depression", "if I want to rest", etc.

To analyze ideas about the regulation of laziness, we proposed the question: "What do you do, what and/ or internal actions do you perform when you try to "regulate" your laziness?". The responses received contained references, which we grouped into the following categories:

•          A category that includes a description of human actions (REGULATION), operations to influence one's own activity, including planning actions and their execution. This category includes such referents as "I get up and do, no matter what", "I force myself to start a business", "I force myself to do what is planned", "I start with an easy one to work easier", "I wash my face", "I turn on "work music" in headphones", "I take and I do," etc.

•          A category containing elements of internal dialogue, self-motivation, mental operations, reflections (REGULATIVE THOUGHTS). The respondents cited the following expressions: "I tell myself that "this needs to be done, then I'll rest", "I'm trying to imagine what's fraught if I don't adjust my laziness", "I scold myself", "I'm thinking that I need to fight laziness", "self-assessment", "I'm trying to see what I'll get if this task is completed", "I say to myself: get up and move on", "I convince myself that sitting on the couch will not do things by themselves", etc.

•          A category containing the translation of inaction in relation to laziness, refusal to regulate, acceptance and passivity in experiencing laziness (REGULUS.PASS). The respondents cited the following expressions: "I don't try to regulate it", "in no way", "I don't like violence against myself", "I'll just wait it out", "yes, especially none", "I accept myself as I am".

A word or phrase was taken as a unit of content analysis. The relative frequency of occurrence of categories in the text of self-descriptions was taken as a quantitative unit of content analysis.

The adequacy of the choice was checked on the basis of an expert assessment provided by 3 expert psychologists with at least 3 years of experience. Experts assessed each of the referents on a 10-point scale according to the degree of classification in the appropriate category, based on the results of expert assessments, the dictionaries of indicators were adjusted.

The respondents were also offered a method of self-assessment of laziness (Bogdanova D.A., Posokhova S.T.), in which they were asked to determine which category of people they considered themselves on a scale from 1 to 7, where "1" meant the most hardworking person, and "7" - the laziest.

At the same time, the respondents noted the level of their laziness, that is, they gave a subjective assessment of the level of laziness on a scale without numerical designations, where the left pole indicated the minimum level, and the right – the maximum level. The scale size was 10 cm, and we took 1 cm to be equal to one point, based on the Dembo-Rubinstein method.

Note that the first method of self–assessment was proposed at the beginning of the form, the second method - at the end of the form, in order to separate them in time. 

Based on the results obtained using the methods of self-assessment of laziness and assessment of the level of laziness, a total coefficient of self-assessment of the severity of laziness (from 0 to 17) was obtained. Note that the method of self-assessment of laziness suggests determining a person's "place" relative to his ideas about a hardworking and lazy person, that is, other people. The methodology for assessing the level of laziness does not imply explicit reliance on such representations and assumes an assessment relative to the subject itself.

Using the quartering procedure for the values of individual indicators, groups with varying degrees of self-assessment of laziness were identified. The group with low severity (1.5-7 points) included 29 people, the group with the severity of self-regulation of behavior below average (7.5–9.5 points) – 28 people, the group with the severity of self-regulation of behavior above average (10-11.5 points) - 26 people, high self-regulation of behavior (12-17 points) have 27 people.

Using the criteria of T-Wilcoxon and Friedman, we have ranked the types of self-attitude and styles of self-regulation. We will take these rankings into account when describing the results of the relationship analysis.

The lowly lazy are characterized by the most differentiated hierarchy of types of self-attitude. Let's give them, sorting in descending order, the rank is indicated in parentheses: Self-confidence (1), Self-worth (2), Self-acceptance (3), Self-leadership (3), Reflected self-attitude (3), Isolation (4), Internal conflict (4), Self-blame (5), Self-attachment (5)). In this group, the largest number of equally highly pronounced styles of self-regulation were revealed: Programming (1), Planning (1), Flexibility (1), Evaluation of Results (1), Modeling (2), Independence (2).

For the lazy below average, the following hierarchy is characteristic: Self-confidence (1), Self-worth (2), Self-leadership (2), Reflected self-attitude (3), Self-acceptance (3), Isolation (3), Internal conflict (3), Self-blame (4), Self-attachment (4). Styles of self-regulation are in order Decreasing: Flexibility (1), Programming (1), Planning (2), Evaluation Of Results (2), Modeling (2), Independence (2).

For lazy people above average, the following order of types of self-attitude is characteristic in descending order of severity: Self-confidence (1), Self-worth (1), Self-acceptance (2), Self-leadership (2), Internal conflict (2), Isolation (2), Reflected self-attitude (3), Self-blame (3), Self-attachment (4). This group has an individual expression of self-regulation styles.

For the highly lazy, the following sequence of types of self-attitude is inherent: Self-worth (1), Self-confidence (1), Self-acceptance (1), Internal conflict (1), Self-leadership (2), Isolation (2), Self-blame (2), Reflected self-attitude (3), Self-attachment (3). Styles of self-regulation in this The group is arranged as follows: Flexibility (1), Independence (1), Programming (2), Planning (2), Modeling (2), Evaluation of results (2).

Let's characterize the most preferred types of self-attitude and styles of self-regulation for each group (Table 1).

The lowly lazy and those with below-average laziness are characterized by high self-confidence (a view with an external evaluative basis), that is, they treat themselves as a confident, independent, strong-willed and reliable person who has something to respect, feel the power of their "I". Both groups have inherent styles of self-regulation, Flexibility and Programming, that is, they are able to make adjustments to the system of self-regulation in the event of changes in conditions, and also have the need to think through their behavior and actions in detail and in detail to achieve goals.

The lowly lazy are also distinguished by the use of Planning and Evaluation of Results styles. These people are able to consciously plan their actions, design realistic, detailed and sustainable plans to achieve their own goals.

Young people with above-average laziness are distinguished by both Self-confidence and Self-worth. They differ in their sense of the value of their own personality, show interest in their inner world. They have an individual expression of self-regulation styles.

The highly lazy can be characterized primarily as feeling their own value, self-confident, accepting their own characteristics and, at the same time, experiencing doubts and disagreement with themselves. Interestingly, among other things, they have the least idea of a positive attitude from other people. That is, highly lazy people, accepting and appreciating themselves, at the same time believe that their personality will not be appreciated by society. The most preferred styles among highly lazy young people are Flexibility and Independence. That is, they are able to rebuild, make adjustments to the self-regulation system when external and internal conditions change, and are also autonomous in organizing their activity.

Table 1

The severity of types of self-rejection in young people

Let's move on to the analysis of the interrelationships between ideas about the content of laziness, the circumstances of its occurrence and types of self-attitude (Table 2).

Lowly lazy people with a low Reflected self-attitude, i.e. those who believe that they are not able to arouse respect, sympathy, approval and understanding from others, are not inclined to interpret laziness as committing actions; those who are not prone to Internal conflict regulate laziness using internal dialogue, self-persuasion techniques, self-criticism.

Young people with a lower-than-average self-esteem of laziness and low Self-acceptance tend to interpret laziness from the point of view of emotional and ethical assessments, rather than as active actions, and, if necessary, regulate laziness, take a wait-and-see position. People with low Self-attachment (a strong desire for change, dissatisfaction with themselves) tend to associate laziness with the circumstances of the activity, rather than with their own condition. Those with low Isolation (deep self-awareness, inner honesty and openness), on the contrary, consider their condition as a circumstance of laziness, do not designate motives of activity as a circumstance. High self-worth is accompanied by the designation of one's condition as a condition for the manifestation of laziness.

Thus, in lazy and lazy below average young people, an increase in reflected self-attitude, self-acceptance and self-attachment, a decrease in internal conflict, high openness and self-worth can lead to the interpretation of the experience of laziness as a process related to the human condition, rather than a static external phenomenon for evaluation, to take a more proactive position in relation to the regulation of laziness.

Young people with a self-esteem of laziness above average and having Self-worth represent laziness as some actions, are not inclined to interpret it from an emotional and ethical point of view, and motivational education is also indicated as the circumstances of the manifestation of laziness. Those with high Self-guidance regulate laziness with the help of thinking tools, and also do not consider laziness from a motivational and characterological perspective, a low Reflected self-attitude is also associated with such a vision of laziness.

Highly lazy young people with pronounced Self-guidance (the belief that the main source of activity and results is themselves) tend to interpret laziness as a motivational and characterological trait, rather than a phenomenon for emotional and ethical assessment. High Self-acceptance turns out to be associated with the idea that the manifestations of laziness are conditioned by the conditions of activity, and not by the human condition.

It can be noted that for the most part, rather highly pronounced types of self-attitude are associated with the ideas of laziness among the above-average and high lazy. That is, the subjects' ideas about laziness turn out to be connected and probably supported by their accepting attitude towards themselves as a value and a source of activity. At the same time, their idea of laziness is associated with a reflected attitude towards themselves. It can be assumed that young people are less focused on what is meaningful to others, have accepted the disapproval of society ("I am like that and what can I do"). Such a vision can have an impact on their perception of themselves as lazy (with a negative connotation), but meaningful to themselves. This is confirmed by the high degree of internal conflict in lazy people. Perhaps constructive interaction with the environment, openness to feedback from the world and willingness to change in the name of goals that are meaningful to the person himself can change the situation.

Table 2

The values of the r-Spearman rank correlation coefficient between ideas about laziness and types of self-attitude

Let's move on to the description of the interrelationships between ideas about laziness and styles of self-regulation (Table 3).

Among the lowly lazy, a connection has been revealed between Modeling and ideas about their condition as conditioning laziness: inadequately assessing significant internal conditions and external circumstances, prone to fantasy, consider their condition as a condition of laziness. Perhaps in this case, the subjects overlook the assessment of external circumstances in favor of explaining laziness by fatigue. Interestingly, with the greatest variety of highly pronounced styles of self-regulation, the lowest number of relationships with ideas about laziness were revealed in the lowly. Perhaps this is due to the individual combinations of styles used equally.

Lazy people below average with a low degree of Evaluation of results, i.e. not noticing their mistakes, uncritical of their actions tend to consider the circumstances of their activity as a condition for laziness, and not their condition.

In the group of lazy above average, it was revealed that with pronounced Modeling, subjects do not interpret laziness from an emotional and ethical point of view, with Flexibility (the ability to adjust when conditions change) and Independence, they take into account the circumstances of the activity in which laziness manifests itself. High independence is also associated with the low use of actions to regulate laziness (force yourself, get up and start, etc.).

Highly lazy people with low Programming severity tend to interpret laziness as an action, and not from an emotional and ethical point of view. Perhaps a pronounced consideration of the ways of action and consequences can lead to the experience of evaluating oneself as lazy from the outside. Low-level Modeling is associated with the translational regulation of laziness through actions, without taking into account motivational formations as circumstances of the manifestation of laziness.

Table 3

The values of the r-Spearman rank correlation coefficient between ideas about laziness and styles of self-regulation

It also seemed interesting to establish differences in the severity of types of self-attitude and styles of self-regulation among those who rate themselves as lazy (high and above average in self-esteem) and lazy (low and below average). To do this, we used the Mann-Whitney U-test (Table 4).

Lazy young people have a greater degree of Self-confidence, Self-guidance, Reflected self-attitude, and less Self-blame. Interestingly, the differences relate for the most part to types of self-relationship with external evaluative grounds, i.e. reflection of assessments of the environment, the results of one's own activities, evaluated by the company in accordance with the requirements of the activity. Lazy young people are more likely to Plan, Model, Program, and Evaluate results that correlate with ideas about laziness.

Table 4

The results of the assessment of differences between indicators of types of self-attitude and styles of self-regulation in lazy and lazy young people

Conclusion

Laziness is considered as a phenomenon that reduces the external effectiveness of activity, at the same time performing a positive function in the form of saving resources, abandoning activities that do not correspond to the interests of the individual. Laziness is considered as a condition that arises in a situation of experiencing inconsistency between external requirements and internal willingness to invest available resources to fulfill them, lack of internal readiness to act in order to save resources. Laziness is interpreted as a personality trait manifested in a person's tendency to frequent and intense experiences of a state of laziness at a low threshold of its occurrence in a wide range of situations.

The interrelationships between ideas about the content, conditions of occurrence, self-regulation of laziness and types of self-attitude, self-regulation in working young people with different degrees of self-esteem of laziness (low, below average, above average and high) have been established, the specifics of these relationships have been established.

As a result of ranking the types of self-attitude, it was revealed that the leading type of self-attitude among the low-lazy and lazy below average is the type of self-attitude with an external evaluative basis, while the lazy above average and the highly lazy have a high degree of types of self-attitude with both external and internal evaluative grounds.

In lazy young people, high Reflected self-attitude and low Internal conflict, as well as low expression of the Modeling style of self-regulation, were associated with pronounced ideas about the content and regulation of laziness.

Young people with a lower-than-average self-esteem of laziness demonstrated the relationship between high self-acceptance, self-attachment, isolation, self-worth and the predominance of emotional and ethical assessments of laziness, circumstances related to the condition of the subject. The high severity of the styles of Evaluation of results and Flexibility in them is accompanied by a lack of passivity in relation to the regulation of laziness and an indication of one's own condition as a circumstance of the manifestation of laziness.

In persons with a self-esteem of laziness above average, Self-worth, Self-guidance and Reflected self-attitude are interrelated with ideas about laziness, the high severity of which is accompanied by the idea of an actively effective interpretation of laziness, motivational formations as circumstances of laziness, the use of mental operations and reflections as a tool for regulating laziness. Also, the concepts of laziness were associated with styles of self-regulation Modeling, Flexibility and Independence, with high severity of which subjects convey ideas about the specifics of activity and condition as conditions of laziness, low severity of emotional and ethical assessments and regulation through actions.

Lazy young people are characterized by the relationship between ideas about laziness and Self-guidance, Self-acceptance. The high severity of the latter is accompanied by the idea of laziness as a motivational and characterological trait, rather than an emotional and ethical assessment; assessment of activity, rather than a condition as a condition for the manifestation of laziness; lack of passivity in relation to laziness. The pronounced styles of self-regulation of Programming and Modeling in lazy young people are interrelated with the interpretation of laziness from an emotional and ethical perspective, rather than from the point of view of performing actions; the definition of motivational insufficiency as a condition for the manifestation of laziness; the low representation of instantaneous performance of actions to regulate laziness.

It is shown that lazy young people have a greater degree of self-attitude with external evaluative grounds and a lesser degree of self-accusation. It is likely that focusing on the assessments of others supports the desire for socially approved behavior, which includes a low manifestation of laziness. Lazy young people are more likely to Plan, Model, Program, and Evaluate results that correlate with ideas about laziness.

Thus, it can be concluded that laziness as a personal property is not unambiguously negative or positive. Laziness is considered by us as having its own positive meaning for a person, accompanied by positive experiences at the moment, but in an uncontrolled version, distancing a person from achieving goals. If the subject focuses on the social desirability of his behavior, it is likely that his laziness will manifest itself to a lesser extent. This will also be facilitated by the development of a variety of self-regulation styles used.

At the same time, possible excessive pressure on oneself in a competitive, full of information and tasks environment, ignoring the signal from the psyche (which is "for us") about the need to restore the resource, inconsistency of external and internal requirements can lead to adverse consequences. The tendency to experience a state of laziness is considered as a personality trait formed on the basis of biological, social and personal factors that distinguish one person from another, formed in accordance with the lifestyle that brought a person to the present moment.

If the manifestation of this property reduces the quality of human life, probably by increasing psychological literacy in this area through removing the stigma of laziness in ideas, expanding knowledge about the interpretation of laziness, its causes and methods of regulation (including work on the motivational and semantic aspect, expanding the arsenal of ways to change the meaning of action), a person's life situation can be qualitatively improved.

We have attempted to study the concepts of laziness, but it seems important in the future to also study the issue in connection with objective and subjective success in a wider sample, taking into account the professional orientation, the study of laziness from the point of view of its component structure.

You can simply select and copy link from below text field.