Psychology of manipulation: phenomena, mechanisms and defense (Dotsenko E.). E

www.koob.ru
Dotsenko E. L.
Psychology of manipulation: phenomena, mechanisms and protection. - M.: CheRo, Moscow State University Publishing House, 1997. - 344 p.
ISBN 5-88711-038-4
The scientific monograph is devoted to interpersonal manipulation. The problem of psychological influence is developed at the intersection of such branches of psychology as the psychology of communication and personality psychology.
It will be, but also for psychotherapists, political scientists, philosophers. It will also be useful for teachers, managers and representatives of other professions who deal with people.
ISBN 5-88711-088-4
© E. L. Dotsenko, 1997 © CheRo, 1997
Table of contents
MANIPULATION FROM DIFFERENT SIDES.........7
Chapter 1 METHODOLOGICAL ORIENTATION..... 15 1.1. Choosing a Paradigm............... 16 1.1.1. Paradigmatic coordinates......... 17 1.1.2. Correlation of paradigms............ 22 1.1.3. Why hermeneutics? ............ 24 1.2. Hermeneutics of action......................... 29 1.2.1. Action as text............... 30 1.2.2. Availability of contexts......... 32 1.2.3. Qualification of the interpreter......... 35 1.2.4. The problem of description language......... 37
Chapter 2. WHAT IS MANIPULATION......... 42 2.1. Phenomenological description......... 42 2.1.1. Phenomenological representation or discretion?................................. 43 2.1.2. Origin of the term “manipulation” ... 44 2.1.3. Metaphor of manipulation......... 47 2.2. Psychological definition of manipulation... 48 2.2.1. Initial boundaries......................... 49 2.2.2. Feature extraction............ 60 2.2.3. Formation of criteria......... 62 2.2.4. Definition of manipulation......... 68 2.3. Psychological impact......... 60
Chapter 3. PREREQUISITES OF MANIPULATION....... 63 3.1. Cultural prerequisites for manipulation..... 65 3.2. The manipulative nature of society....... 68 3.3. Interpersonal foundations......... 73 3.3.1. Interpersonal community......... 74 3.3.2. Deformations of communication............ 77 3.3.3. Manipulative evasions......... 79 3.4. His name is legion (the Manipulator in each of us)... 84 3.4.1. The multiple nature of personality...... 86 3.4.2. Intrapersonal interaction...... 88 3.4.3. The inner world of the manipulator and his victim.................. 92 3.5. Technological requirements......... 97 3.6. The place of manipulation in the system of human relations.................................. 100
The Procurator's Premonition, or the Diligence of the Chief of the Secret Guard.............................. 105
3
Chapter 4. MANIPULATIVE TECHNOLOGIES..... 108 4.1. The main components of manipulative influence.................... 109 4.1.1. Purposeful transformation of information................................ 109 4.1.2. Concealing the impact......... 113 4.1.3. Means of coercion........... 114 4.1.4. Targets of influence........... 114 4.1.6. Robotization............... 116 4.2. Preparatory efforts of the manipulator 117 4.2.1. Contextual design........ 117 4.2.2. Selection of targets........ 122 4.2.3. Establishing contact.......... 126 4.3. Managing interaction variables... 128

www.koob.ru
4.3.1. Interpersonal space....... 129 4.3.2. Initiative............ 131 4.3.3. Direction of impact........ 132 4.3.4. Dynamics............... 136 4.4. Information and power support..... 137 4.4.1. Psychological pressure......... 137 4.4.2. Information design....... 140
Chapter 5. MECHANISMS OF MANIPULATIVE INFLUENCE............... 146 5.1. “Technology” and psychological “mechanisms” - the coincidence of reality and metaphor...... 146 5.2. Mechanisms of psychological influence. . . 148 6.2.1. Maintaining contact............ 148 5.2.2. Mental automatisms......... 150 5.2.3. Motivational support........ 163 5.3. Types and processes of manipulative influence.................... 156 5.3.1. Perceptual puppets......... 157 5.3.2. Conventional robots......... 160 5.3.325D>16 16 31 194.....
L € 0 €2a r &r@
`g– T g‘ Q ï ° @Ðò €ð ` ` `
(y –P%ðò†b \ Z pg h k ¥ %Â@ ƒ h ð&°& _ q _ o‚b _
`P yf°y
ð … Ðò €ð P0
u
W °*Pð & k o i j &P " €ò‚^ *P _ q _ rg b _
132

www.koob.ru video fragment.............. 244 7.2. Fraudster and victim:
who got more? .......... 252 7.2.1. The story of how the great strategist took control of the former leader of the nobility............
252 7.2.2. Was the great schemer a great manipulator?......... 260 7.3. Dialogue as a research method........ 262
Chapter 8. DEFENSE TRAINING
FROM MANIPULATION.............. 265 8.1. Is protection needed?........................ 266 5
8.2. Creation of a “radar”......................... 270 8.2.1. Sensory level.......... 271 8.2.2. Rational level........... 272 ​​8.3. Expansion of the peaceful arsenal........ 275 8.4. Psychotechniques of coping.......... 278 8.5. Personal potential............ 281
Chapter 9. IS IT POSSIBLE TO LEARN
DO NOT MANIPULATE?.......... 286 9.1. Control or pushing?......... 288 9.2. Education or development?......... 295 9.3. Correction or rationing?........ 303
Conclusion...................... 315
Applications................................... 318
Literature...................... 328
Subject index................... 335
Summary...................... 342
MANIPULATION FROM DIFFERENT ASPECTS
(instead of introduction)
“I work as editor-in-chief of regional television. Recently, I urgently needed one of the programs that had already aired: I wanted to refresh my memory of some details so that there would be no discrepancies...
I go into the studio and explain what I need to the director, who was busy with personal matters at the time.
It’s clear that she didn’t want to look for the film I needed, so she pretended that she didn’t remember anything like that. I'm trying to explain what that show was about. The director still continues to “not understand.” I couldn’t restrain myself - I said something rude to her and left.
In the corridor, the anger subsided and a great idea came into my head. I go into the editors’ department and, as if addressing no one, I say that we recently aired a good program about... We need to see if it can be submitted to the competition. The author of this program almost breaks out: “This is my program. I will bring it now." Before I had time to make coffee for myself, the film was already on my table.”
The story described by the television worker is noteworthy because in it the same person, within a short time, was in two situations containing successful manipulation. The only difference is that in the first he turned out to be the injured party, and in the second he himself turned into a manipulator.
The manipulator and his victim are the main roles, without which manipulation will not take place. Accordingly, these two will have different approaches to manipulation... However, if for implementation manipulative influence, the indicated two positions are sufficient, then By revising manipulation, the number of points of view increases.
To the positions of manipulator and victim included in the interaction process, many external ones are added. IN
In the context under consideration, we highlight the position of a research psychologist, psychotechnician and moral philosopher.
I give the floor to everyone whose positions have just been mentioned. Each of them will be able to explain in their own way,
why this book was written.
7
So, research psychologist.
Starting with W. Wundt, who developed separately physiological psychology and the psychology of peoples,
psychological science developed from two platforms: from the side of the individual human psyche - in the individual aspect, and from the side of culture - in the social aspect. At the same time, their gradual rapprochement took place, and the junction between them often turned out to be one of the growth points of psychology. The current state of the field of interest to us confirms this idea: in recent years, both the psychology of communication and the psychology of personality have been intensively developed, and at their junction a little-explored zone has emerged,
containing the secret of psychological interaction. Accordingly, three possible points of consideration can be identified.
Firstly, manipulation can be considered as a socio-psychological phenomenon. The main problems stem from the questions: what is manipulation, when does it occur, for what purposes is it used, under what conditions is it most effective, what are the effects it produces, is it possible to protect against manipulation, how can the latter be organized?

www.koob.ru
Secondly, manipulation is a knot in which the most important problems of the psychology of influence are intertwined: the transformation of information, the presence of power struggle, the problems of truth-false and secret-explicit,
dynamics of shifting responsibility, changing the balance of interests, and others. The literature on psychological influence contains many interesting empirical studies and observations that are still awaiting their theoretical understanding and revelation of the patterns behind this diversity. There is hope that solving a set of problems in relation to manipulative influence will provide means for solving similar problems for the entire range of problems in the psychology of influence.
And thirdly, interest in mechanisms of protection against manipulation moves us into the field of personality psychology,
since it involves close attention to intrapsychic dynamics associated with decision-making processes, intrapersonal communication, integration and dissociation. The study of manipulation in this aspect highlights new facets of the problem of mutual transitions between external and
8
internal activity, shifting the subject of research to the plane of general psychology.
Thus, the study of manipulation touches on a wide range of problems, ranging from fundamental theoretical ones to applied and descriptive ones.
Practical psychologist (often as a psychotechnician).
For more than ten years now, we have been witnessing a process of active participation of psychologists in carrying out direct orders “from the outside,” previously unprecedented for domestic psychology. In addition to the elusive social order, psychologists began to receive very specific, financially backed requests for work, the distinctive feature of which was organized influence on people: group trainings,
group psychotherapy, business games, training in management methods, business communication, etc. The availability of ready-made technologies for such an impact creates the possibility of using them by non-specialists.
The psychotechnical effect produced by these technologies gives the customer the impression that the technologist is highly professional. As a result, technology, having begun an independent life according to the laws of the market, allows for the possibility of its use as a means of achieving inhumane goals.
Under what conditions does the technology of psychological influence become manipulative? This is a question, the search for an answer to which is one of the tasks of this work.
Often the psychologist himself - whether he wants it or not - becomes a hired manipulator. It happens,
for example, when he is ordered to undergo a psychodiagnostic examination in order to give the appearance of a scientifically (or psychologically) justified decision to a decision already taken by the administration. A similar thing is sometimes observed when certifying personnel or forming a reserve for leadership positions - the examination becomes a means of putting pressure on subordinates or even settling scores with undesirables.
Manipulative notes are quite often heard in the very request of customers: teach how to manage, tell me how to influence, advise what I should do with him/her/them, etc. In most cases, the psychologist is in a difficult situation of choice: on the one hand, You can’t become a tool in someone else’s game, but
9
on the other hand, to refuse means to withdraw, giving way to a non-professional, and to lose the opportunity to change the customer’s ideas to more constructive and humane ones. Knowledge of the patterns of manipulation allows a specialist to more competently build his line of behavior in such conditions.
There are many cases when clients themselves expect the psychologist to manipulate them, and sometimes they directly put him in the position of a manipulator in relation to themselves. Several examples of typical manipulations in relation to a consulting psychologist are described by E. Bern. Sometimes a psychologist is asked to teach or help protect against someone’s manipulation. An example would be a client’s complaint that her husband intimidates her and makes her life unbearable. Being in a formal divorce, he does not leave; moreover, he intends to move in with her in the apartment she receives. It turned out that all the scenes begin with his “special look,” which brings this woman into a state of fear and readiness to endure all the bullying. Quite often, the problem of protection against manipulation is an integral part of other, complex problems. Therefore, knowledge of the laws of manipulation will help a practical psychologist improve his professionalism.
Moral philosopher.
The magical power of words is manifested in their “vitality” and “perseverance.”
The first means that once a concept has appeared, it cannot be destroyed - it can only be modified. On the one hand, the concept defines the existence of the designated phenomenon - it gives rise to its “life” in people’s ideas. As soon as the general public becomes aware that, say, manipulation exists in the world, then this manipulation begins to be noticed everywhere. And then the temptation arises - especially among interested researchers or science politicians - to extend this concept to the largest possible class of phenomena. If desired, manipulation -
or at least its elements - can be found in almost any fragment of interaction. But is this really so - a question that requires an answer.
On the other hand, the content of the concept flexibly adapts to the needs of new generations and the tasks of new times. With manipulation, which originally meant only dexterity
10
and qualified actions, the same thing happened - now this term is used in relation to the interaction of people. The change is striking in that in the first meaning to manipulation (for example,
medical or engineering) were respectful of the skill of the people who performed them. In the second meaning, manipulation means something reprehensible.

www.koob.ru
This is relative to "survivability". The “pusiveness” of the words reflects their amazing activity and effectiveness.
The practice of using a term over time leads to modification of other concepts, especially related ones. As soon as the same phenomenon from “Machiavellianism” was repainted as “manipulation”, it began to give new shades to such concepts as “management”, “control”, “programming”, etc.
In addition, a concept that designates a phenomenon requires that something be done with this phenomenon. IN
In the case of manipulation, there is often a desire to experience its power in its pure form - and this cannot but be alarming. At the same time, in parallel with the talk about manipulation, the problem of how to protect yourself from it also arises - and this should already be recognized as a positive result of the emergence of the term “manipulation” in this meaning. Investigating the noted points is also among the tasks of this monograph.
Manipulator.
For some reason, it is generally accepted that manipulation is bad. Do you remember why the beautiful Scheherazade told fairy tales to her formidable ruler Shahriar? With the help of manipulation, for almost three years (!) she saved not only herself, but also the most beautiful girls of her country from death. Dozens of such examples can be found in folklore alone. Not only during the fairy tales of “1001 Nights”, but also in our everyday life, manipulation plays the role of a means of soft protection against the tyranny of rulers, the excesses of leaders,
bad character of colleagues or relatives, unfriendly attacks from those with whom
I had a chance to communicate.
To a large extent, this is why manipulation is of interest not only to researchers, but also to the general public. Another reason for this interest is that
11
Many people, managers in particular, still find it difficult to imagine effective management without the use of manipulation. The views of both ideological and spontaneous manipulators turn to psychology for help in the hope of finding clues. An army of interested readers scours the masses of literature in search of information on how to influence people. It is not surprising that the appearance of books specifically devoted to this issue invariably meets with both attention and support.
Psychological knowledge really helps to manage people more effectively. For example, if it is known that fat people are usually good-natured and love to eat, then it makes sense to take this into account so that, if necessary, you can get such a person to have a favorable attitude toward you. Or vice versa - put him in a bad mood, if necessary. Another example. If, say, we accept C. Jung’s position that the gender of a person’s soul and his biological sex do not coincide, then it becomes clear how one can push a man around,
whose masculinity is beyond any doubt. It is enough to question this masculinity at the right moment - and the man will rush to prove his masculinity again and again.
In short, almost any book on psychology - as long as the latter is in its current state - helps to manipulate people more effectively. This is especially true for this book about manipulation.
Since many manipulators are just self-taught, there is no doubt that there is benefit in books that would help manipulators improve their skills. The question is not whether to manipulate or not - all people regularly do this. It is important to learn how to manipulate carefully without arousing suspicion on the part of your victims -
why cut the branch you're sitting on...
Victim of manipulation.
Almost all academic psychology is built on manipulative foundations. In it, a person is thought of as a subject, often as an object - of perception, obtaining information, influence, education,
education, etc. There are many examples: the desire to divide people into types, to identify correlations,
allowing forecasting
12
to determine human behavior depending on certain conditions, the desire to establish universal (true for all people) patterns, etc. All this leads to a stereotypical approach, to the unification of knowledge about a person.
The psychology of individual differences in this context appears as a weak exception, confirming
Big Rule.
There is no doubt - the information obtained by academic science is useful and necessary. Now we are talking about the fact that this knowledge and approaches are a great gift for manipulators. And since this has happened, then perhaps it’s time for psychology to also look into how to defend itself from the manipulators it has trained.
On the one hand, it is important to find out what is happening in the soul of a person who is under manipulative pressure. It happens, neither now nor later, when you have already been fooled, you cannot understand where this or that emotional reaction comes from, why there is a desire to explode and say stupid things, although outwardly everything looks so peaceful... A detailed analysis of internal processes, as is known, helps mastering them.
On the other hand, it is also equally important to study the experience of successful defense: how to cope with external pressure, where the strength to fight back comes from, what means and techniques people use, etc.
All this will help us learn to solve the problem of protecting against manipulation practically: where can we find support for organizing resistance to the aggressor, what means can be used for this, how such means can be created, what tactics can be used, etc.?
No less important is the problem of creating conditions in which the need for protection against manipulation would be reduced. This problem arises where psychological services are created. It is known that any psychological service, if it strives to become full-fledged, develops towards total coverage of the people on whom it is created. How to make a service serve rather than suppress -

www.koob.ru, albeit a somewhat utopian, but not without meaning (especially common sense) question.
* See, for example, [Kovalev 1987, 1989; Grof S. 1993].
13
* * *
So, dear readers, now you know the range of problems related to the topic of interpersonal manipulation.
The decisive consideration that prompted me to work on this topic was that good manipulation, which has a precisely defined and long-lasting effect, is a work of art - the art of influencing people. The manipulative performance delightfully balances a variety of elements, sometimes in rather bizarre combinations. In most cases, destroying such an artificial (as well as skillful) structure is not difficult, while coming up with and successfully implementing a good manipulation is more difficult than defending against it. Therefore, protection against manipulation is largely a technology. And as you know, technology (or craft) is easier to master than art. Therefore, a close examination of the problem of manipulation, it seems to me, gives more advantages to the victims of manipulative intrusion, rather than to the manipulators.

Dotsenko Evgeniy Leonidovich - Doctor of Psychology, Professor, Head of the Department of General and Social Psychology of the Institute of Psychology, Pedagogy, Social Management of Tyumen State University.

In 1986 he graduated from Moscow State University. Since the same year he has been working at Tyumen State University. In 1990-1993 he completed postgraduate training at Moscow State University. In 1994 he defended his PhD thesis on the topic “Personal mechanisms of defense against manipulative influence.” In February 2000, he defended his doctoral dissertation on the topic “Semantics of Interpersonal Communication” (scientific consultant Professor A.G. Asmolov).

Scientific interests: fundamental and applied aspects of psychosemantics (subjective semantics) in the field of personality psychology, communication psychology, and physicality psychology.

Books (2)

Don't be a parrot, or How to protect yourself from psychological attack

In everyday life, we often have to deal with events that, in their psychological effect, resemble military operations. They are trying to “get back at us”, “take their anger out” or “take a ride” - in short, they try to use us without asking us about it.

Therefore, each of us regularly has to solve the same problem: how to protect ourselves from unwanted influence from communication partners.

Of course, you can escape (for example, leaving, silence), you can attack yourself, you can hide behind defenselessness, frighten with unpredictability, etc. Or you can control the situation so that the collision energy produces useful work. Then conflicts become a means of identifying problems, polemics cease to be a disguised form of personal attacks, even anger turns into a helper, losing its destructive power.

Dotsenko E. L.
Psychology of manipulation: phenomena, mechanisms and protection. - M.: CheRo, Moscow State University Publishing House, 1997. - 344 p. ISBN 5-88711-038-4
The scientific monograph is devoted to interpersonal manipulation. The problem of psychological influence is developed at the intersection of such branches of psychology as the psychology of communication and personality psychology.
It will be of interest not only for psychologists, but also for psychotherapists, political scientists, and philosophers. It will also be useful for teachers, managers and representatives of other professions who deal with people.
ISBN 5-88711-088-4
© E. L. Dotsenko, 1997 © CheRo, 1997
Table of contents
MANIPULATION FROM DIFFERENT SIDES.........7
Chapter 1 METHODOLOGICAL ORIENTATION..... 15
1.1. Choosing a Paradigm......................... 16
1.1.1. Paradigmatic coordinates......... 17
1.1.2. Correlation of paradigms............ 22
1.1.3. Why hermeneutics? ............ 24
1.2. Hermeneutics of action......................... 29
1.2.1. Action as text............... 30
1.2.2. Availability of contexts......... 32
1.2.3. Interpreter qualifications......... 35
1.2.4. The problem of description language......... 37
Chapter 2. WHAT IS MANIPULATION......... 42
2.1. Phenomenological description......... 42
2.1.1. Phenomenological representation
or discretion?........................ 43
2.1.2. Origin of the term “manipulation” ... 44
2.1.3. Metaphor of manipulation.......... 47
2.2. Psychological definition of manipulation... 48
2.2.1. Starting lines......................... 49
2.2.2. Feature extraction............ 60
2.2.3. Formation of criteria......... 62
2.2.4. Definition of manipulation......... 68
2.3. Psychological impact......... 60
Chapter 3. PREREQUISITES OF MANIPULATION....... 63
3.1. Cultural prerequisites for manipulation..... 65
3.2. The manipulative nature of society....... 68
3.3. Interpersonal foundations........... 73
3.3.1. Interpersonal community.......... 74
3.3.2. Deformations of communication............ 77
3.3.3. Manipulative evasions......... 79
3.4. His name is Legion (Manipulator
in each of us)................ 84
3.4.1. The multiple nature of personality...... 86
3.4.2. Intrapersonal interaction...... 88
3.4.3. The inner world of a manipulator
and his victims................ 92
3.5. Technological requirements.......... 97
3.6. The place of manipulation in the human system
relations........................ 100
The procurator's premonition, or the boss's diligence
secret guard................ 105
3
Chapter 4. MANIPULATIVE TECHNOLOGIES..... 108
4.1. The main components of manipulative influence.................................... 109
4.1.1. Purposeful transformation of information................... 109
4.1.2. Concealing the impact........... 113
4.1.3. Means of coercion........... 114
4.1.4. Targets of influence........... 114
4.1.6. Robotization............... 116
4.2. Preparatory efforts of the manipulator 117
4.2.1. Contextual design........ 117
4.2.2. Selection of targets........ 122
4.2.3. Establishing contact.......... 126
4.3. Managing interaction variables... 128
4.3.1. Interpersonal space...... 129
4.3.2. Initiative............ 131
4.3.3. Direction of impact........ 132
4.3.4. Dynamics............... 136
4.4. Information and power support..... 137
4.4.1. Psychological pressure......... 137
4.4.2. Information design....... 140
Chapter 5. MECHANISMS OF MANIPULATIVE INFLUENCE.................................... 146
5.1. “Technology” and psychological “mechanisms” - the coincidence of reality and metaphor...... 146
5.2. Mechanisms of psychological influence. . . 148
6.2.1. Holding a contact............ 148
5.2.2. Mental automatisms......... 150
5.2.3. Motivational support........ 163
5.3. Types and processes of manipulative
impact......................... 156
5.3.1. Perceptual puppets......... 157
5.3.2. Conventional robots......... 160
5.3.3. Living weapons......................... 162
5.3.4. Guided inference........ 163
5.3.5. Exploitation of the addressee's identity...... 165
5.3.6. Spiritual oppression.......... 168
5.3.7. Bringing into a state of increased submission.................................. 169
5.3.8. Combination............... 170
5.4. Generalization of the model
psychological manipulation........ 172
5.5. Destructiveness of the manipulative
impact............... 175
"Making" experience
tragic Mozart............ 178
4
Chapter 6. PROTECTION AGAINST MANIPULATION....... 185
6.1. The concept of psychological defenses...... 186
6.1.1. Psychological protection
in different theoretical contexts.... 187
6.1.2. Semantic field and definition
the concept of “psychological protection” .... 191
6.2. Types of psychological defenses......... 194
6.2.1. Interpersonal defenses and
intrapersonal protection......... 195
6.2.2. Basic protective settings....... 199
6.2.3. Specific and non-specific
protection........................ 204
6.3. Mechanisms of psychological defenses...... 208
6.3.1. Nonspecific protective actions. . . 209
6.3.2- Protection of personal structures...... 210
6.3.3. Protection of mental processes...... 213
6.3.4. Towards manipulative technology. . . 215
6.4. Threat recognition problem
manipulative invasion......... 217
6.4.1. Possible indicators......... 219
6.4.2. Manipulation detection
in live communication............... 223
6.5. Do we need to protect ourselves from manipulation? .... 227
Chief of the Secret Guard
under Pontius Pilate defends........ 228
Chapter 7. RESEARCH OF MANIPULATIVE
INTERACTIONS........................ 231
7.1. Defensive actions
under conditions of manipulative influence. . . 232
7.1.1. Planning............... 232
7.1.2. Procedure......................... 238
7.1.3. Results............ 240
7.1.4. Discussion............ 242
7.1.5. Free interpretation
video fragment......................... 244
7.2. Fraudster and victim:
who got more? .......... 252
7.2.1. The story of how the great strategist took control of the former leader of the nobility.................................. 252
7.2.2. Was there a great schemer
great manipulator?......... 260
7.3. Dialogue as a research method........ 262
Chapter 8. DEFENSE TRAINING
FROM MANIPULATION............... 265
8.1. Is protection needed?........................ 266
5
8.2. Creation of a “radar” ............... 270
8.2.1. Sensual level.......... 271
8.2.2. Rational level........... 272
8.3. Expansion of the peaceful arsenal........ 275
8.4. Psychotechniques of coping.......... 278
8.5. Personal potential............ 281
Chapter 9. IS IT POSSIBLE TO LEARN
DO NOT MANIPULATE?.......... 286
9.1. Control or pushing?......... 288
9.2. Education or development?......... 295
9.3. Correction or rationing?........ 303
Conclusion...................... 315
Applications................................... 318
Literature...................... 328
Subject index................... 335
Summary...................... 342
MANIPULATION FROM DIFFERENT ASPECTS
(instead of introduction)
“I work as editor-in-chief of regional television. Recently, I urgently needed one of the programs that had already been broadcast: I wanted to refresh my memory of some details so that there would be no discrepancies... I go into the studio and explain what I need to the director, who was busy with personal affairs at the time. It’s clear that she didn’t want to look for the film I needed, so she pretended that she didn’t remember anything like that. I'm trying to explain what that show was about. The director still continues to “not understand.” I couldn’t restrain myself - I said something rude to her and left.
In the corridor, the anger subsided and a great idea came into my head. I go into the editors’ department and, as if addressing no one, I say that we recently aired a good program about... We need to see if it can be submitted to the competition. The author of this program almost breaks out: “This is my program. I will bring it now." Before I had time to make coffee for myself, the film was already on my table.”
The story described by the television worker is noteworthy because in it the same person, within a short time, was in two situations containing successful manipulation. The only difference is that in the first he turned out to be the injured party, and in the second he himself turned into a manipulator.
The manipulator and his victim are the main roles, without which manipulation will not take place. Accordingly, the approaches to manipulation for these two will be different... However, if the indicated two positions are sufficient to implement the manipulative influence, then when considering the manipulation the number of points of view increases. To the positions of manipulator and victim included in the interaction process, many external ones are added. In the context under consideration, we highlight the position of a research psychologist, psychotechnician and moral philosopher.
I give the floor to everyone whose positions have just been mentioned. Each of them will be able to explain in their own way why this book was written.
7
So, a research psychologist.
Starting with W. Wundt, who developed separately physiological psychology and the psychology of peoples, psychological science developed from two platforms: from the side of the individual human psyche - in the individual aspect, and from the side of culture - in the social aspect. At the same time, their gradual rapprochement took place, and the junction between them often turned out to be one of the growth points of psychology. The current state of the field of interest to us confirms this idea: in recent years, both the psychology of communication and the psychology of personality have been intensively developed, and at their junction a little-explored zone has been revealed that contains the secret of psychological interaction. Accordingly, three possible points of consideration can be identified.
Firstly, manipulation can be considered as a socio-psychological phenomenon. The main problems stem from the questions: what is manipulation, when does it occur, for what purposes is it used, under what conditions is it most effective, what are the effects it produces, is it possible to protect against manipulation, how can the latter be organized?
Secondly, manipulation is a knot in which the most important problems of the psychology of influence are intertwined: the transformation of information, the presence of power struggle, the problems of truth-false and secret-explicit, the dynamics of shifting responsibility, changes in the balance of interests, and others. The literature on psychological influence contains many interesting empirical studies and observations that are still awaiting their theoretical understanding and revelation of the patterns behind this diversity. There is hope that solving a set of problems in relation to manipulative influence will provide means for solving similar problems for the entire range of problems in the psychology of influence.
And thirdly, interest in mechanisms of protection against manipulation moves us into the field of personality psychology, since it involves close attention to intrapsychic dynamics associated with decision-making processes, intrapersonal communication, integration and dissociation. The study of manipulation in this aspect highlights new facets of the problem of mutual transitions between external and
8
internal activity, shifting the subject of research to the plane of general psychology.
Thus, the study of manipulation touches on a wide range of problems, ranging from fundamental theoretical ones to applied and descriptive ones.
Practical psychologist (often as a psychotechnician).
For more than ten years now, we have been witnessing a process of active participation of psychologists in carrying out direct orders “from the outside,” previously unprecedented for domestic psychology. In addition to the elusive social order, psychologists began to receive very specific, financially backed requests for work, the distinctive feature of which is an organized impact on people: group trainings, group psychotherapy, business games, training in management methods, business communication, etc. Availability of ready-made technologies Such impact creates the possibility of their use by non-specialists. The psychotechnical effect produced by these technologies gives the customer the impression that the technologist is highly professional. As a result, technology, having begun an independent life according to the laws of the market, allows for the possibility of its use as a means of achieving inhumane goals. Under what conditions does the technology of psychological influence become manipulative? This is a question, the search for an answer to which is one of the tasks of this work.
Often the psychologist himself - whether he wants it or not - becomes a hired manipulator. This happens, for example, when he is ordered to undergo a psychodiagnostic examination in order to give the appearance of a scientifically (or psychologically) justified decision to a decision already taken by the administration. A similar thing is sometimes observed when certifying personnel or forming a reserve for leadership positions - the examination becomes a means of putting pressure on subordinates or even settling scores with undesirables. Manipulative notes are quite often heard in the very request of customers: teach how to manage, tell me how to influence, advise what I/we should do with him/her/them, etc. In most cases, the psychologist is in a difficult situation of choice: on the one hand, You can’t become a tool in someone else’s game, but
9
on the other hand, to refuse means to withdraw, giving way to a non-professional, and to lose the opportunity to change the customer’s ideas to more constructive and humane ones. Knowledge of the patterns of manipulation allows a specialist to more competently build his line of behavior in such conditions.
There are many cases when clients themselves expect the psychologist to manipulate them, and sometimes they directly put him in the position of a manipulator in relation to themselves. Several examples of typical manipulations in relation to a consulting psychologist are described by E. Bern. Sometimes a psychologist is asked to teach or help protect against someone’s manipulation. An example would be a client’s complaint that her husband intimidates her and makes her life unbearable. Being in a formal divorce, he does not leave; moreover, he intends to move in with her in the apartment she receives. It turned out that all the scenes begin with his “special look,” which brings this woman into a state of fear and readiness to endure all the bullying. Quite often, the problem of protection against manipulation is an integral part of other, complex problems. Therefore, knowledge of the laws of manipulation will help a practical psychologist improve his professionalism.
Moral philosopher.
The magical power of words is manifested in their “vitality” and “perseverance.”
The first means that once a concept has appeared, it cannot be destroyed - it can only be modified. On the one hand, the concept defines the existence of the designated phenomenon - it gives rise to its “life” in people’s ideas. As soon as the general public becomes aware that, say, manipulation exists in the world, then this manipulation begins to be noticed everywhere. And then the temptation arises - especially among interested researchers or science politicians - to extend this concept to the largest possible class of phenomena. If desired, manipulation - or at least elements of it - can be detected in almost any fragment of interaction. But is this really so - a question that requires an answer.
On the other hand, the content of the concept flexibly adapts to the needs of new generations and the tasks of new times. With manipulation, which originally meant only dexterity
10
and qualified actions, the same thing happened - now this term is used in relation to the interaction of people. The change is striking in that in the first sense, manipulations (for example, medical or engineering) were treated with respect for the skill of the people performing them. In the second meaning, manipulation means something reprehensible.
This is relative to "survivability". The “pusiveness” of the words reflects their amazing activity and effectiveness. The practice of using a term over time leads to modification of other concepts, especially related ones. As soon as the same phenomenon from “Machiavellianism” was repainted as “manipulation”, it began to give new shades to such concepts as “management”, “control”, “programming”, etc.
In addition, a concept that designates a phenomenon requires that something be done with this phenomenon. In the case of manipulation, there is often a desire to experience its power in its pure form - and this cannot but be alarming. At the same time, in parallel with the talk about manipulation, the problem of how to protect yourself from it also arises - and this should already be recognized as a positive result of the emergence of the term “manipulation” in this meaning. Investigating the noted points is also among the tasks of this monograph.
Manipulator.
For some reason, it is generally accepted that manipulation is bad. Do you remember why the beautiful Scheherazade told fairy tales to her formidable ruler Shahriar? With the help of manipulation, for almost three years (!) she saved not only herself, but also the most beautiful girls of her country from death. Dozens of such examples can be found in folklore alone. Not only during the fairy tales of “1001 Nights,” but also in our everyday life, manipulation plays the role of a means of gentle protection from the tyranny of rulers, the excesses of leaders, the bad character of colleagues or relatives, and unfriendly attacks from those with whom we happen to communicate.
To a large extent, this is why manipulation is of interest not only to researchers, but also to the general public. Another reason for this interest is that
11
Many people, managers in particular, still find it difficult to imagine effective management without the use of manipulation. The views of both ideological and spontaneous manipulators turn to psychology for help in the hope of finding clues. An army of interested readers scours the masses of literature in search of information on how to influence people. It is not surprising that the appearance of books specifically devoted to this issue invariably meets with both attention and support.
Psychological knowledge really helps to manage people more effectively. For example, if it is known that fat people are usually good-natured and love to eat, then it makes sense to take this into account so that, if necessary, you can get such a person to have a favorable attitude toward you. Or vice versa - put him in a bad mood, if necessary. Another example. If, say, we accept C. Jung’s position that the gender of a person’s soul and his biological sex do not coincide, then it becomes clear how one can push around a man whose masculinity is beyond any doubt. It is enough to question this masculinity at the right moment - and the man will rush to prove his masculinity again and again.
In short, almost any book on psychology - as long as the latter is in its current state - helps to manipulate people more effectively. This is especially true for this book about manipulation. Since many manipulators are just self-taught, there is no doubt that there is benefit in books that would help manipulators improve their skills. The question is not whether to manipulate or not - all people regularly do this. It is important to learn how to manipulate carefully, without arousing suspicion on the part of your victims - why cut the branch on which you are sitting...
Victim of manipulation.
Almost all academic psychology is built on manipulative foundations. In it, a person is thought of as a subject, often as an object in general - perception, receiving information, influence, education, upbringing, etc. There are many examples: the desire to divide people into types, to identify correlations that allow forecasting12
to determine human behavior depending on certain conditions, the desire to establish universal (true for all people) patterns, etc. All this leads to a stereotypical approach, to the unification of knowledge about a person. The psychology of individual differences in this context appears as a weak exception confirming the Big Rule.
There is no doubt - the information obtained by academic science is useful and necessary. Now we are talking about the fact that this knowledge and approaches are a great gift for manipulators. And since this has happened, then perhaps it’s time for psychology to also look into how to defend itself from the manipulators it has trained.
On the one hand, it is important to find out what is happening in the soul of a person who is under manipulative pressure. It happens, neither now nor later, when you have already been fooled, you cannot understand where this or that emotional reaction comes from, why there is a desire to explode and say stupid things, although outwardly everything looks so peaceful... A detailed analysis of internal processes, as is known, helps mastering them.
On the other hand, it is also equally important to study the experience of successful defense: how to cope with external pressure, where the strength to fight back comes from, what means and techniques people use, etc. All this will help us learn how to solve the problem of protecting against manipulation practically : where can one find support for organizing resistance to the aggressor, what means can be used for this, how such means can be created, what tactics can be used, etc.?
No less important is the problem of creating conditions in which the need for protection against manipulation would be reduced. This problem arises where psychological services are created. It is known that any psychological service, if it strives to become full-fledged, develops towards total coverage of the people on whom it is created. How to ensure that the service serves and does not suppress is a somewhat utopian, but not without sense (especially common sense) question.
* See, for example, [Kovalev 1987, 1989; Grof S. 1993].
13
* * *
So, dear readers, now you know the range of problems related to the topic of interpersonal manipulation. The decisive consideration that prompted me to work on this topic was that good manipulation, which has a precisely defined and long-lasting effect, is a work of art - the art of influencing people. The manipulative performance delightfully balances a variety of elements, sometimes in rather bizarre combinations. In most cases, destroying such an artificial (as well as skillful) structure is not difficult, while coming up with and successfully implementing a good manipulation is more difficult than defending against it. Therefore, protection against manipulation is largely a technology. And as you know, technology (or craft) is easier to master than art. Therefore, a close examination of the problem of manipulation, it seems to me, gives more advantages to the victims of manipulative intrusion, rather than to the manipulators.

Chapter 1 METHODOLOGICAL ORIENTATION
Reflection on the ways of generating knowledge, the means of transforming it and ways of using it is the subject of methodological concern for a researcher in any field of knowledge. Psychology is especially sensitive to methodological problems. This feature can be explained by its dual position in the status of either natural or humanitarian. The debate about whether psychology should be classified as the humanities or the natural sciences still seems to be ongoing. As in any long-term dispute, many reasons can be given for making one decision or another. Apparently, as often happens, the dispute is being conducted on the basis of different, still unreflected, grounds. Due to this state of our science, psychologists have a lot of trouble deciding on their own logic of work. The problem arises with particular urgency when the subject of psychological research becomes communication between people and deep or apex intrapersonal processes. “As a result, we have to admit that the living reality of human relations is either inaccessible to scientific and psychological analysis in general, or requires a different methodology” [Smirnova 1994, p. 8].
The desire to define one’s own logic of research brought this chapter to life. The scope of the stated provisions and the conclusions drawn is limited only by this study. This is not about proposing a new methodology or calling on colleagues to change the logic of psychological research, but only about clarifying convenience in work for the sake of one’s own position. The beginning of this chapter is devoted to the search for reasons to explain the choice of the methodological platform within which this work was carried out. Then the attention of readers will be 15
is aimed at justifying the adequacy of the chosen methodological paradigm in relation to the assigned research tasks.
1.1. Choice of Paradigm
The difficulty that a research psychologist faces is that he has to maneuver between general scientific norms and the inner essence of the reality being studied.
On the one hand, there are the traditions of university psychological education, which (in terms of programs) reflect the values ​​and requirements of experimental science, clearly oriented towards physics as an “exemplary” science. Examples of postulates of the natural scientific way of thinking:
facts come first
laws of nature are stable trends or factors discovered by researchers that actually exist where we find them - in nature,
the truth is the same for everyone,
any judgment is either true or false - there is no third option, etc.
On the other hand, the psychologist comes into contact with several classes of mental phenomena that stubbornly refuse to obey the logic of natural science: facts arise as a result of the desire to have them; almost every statement turns out to be relative and allows for multiple interpretations; both facts and judgments change when the context changes; the interconnectedness of everything with everything is so great that it is possible to “establish the existence of a dependency” between anything...
Scientific norms require detailed analysis, which, by dissecting and killing the living tissue of life, leads to a more detailed description - and in this sense, understanding - of the reality being studied. But you have to pay for this by losing the integrity of understanding [Gadamer 1988; Huizinga 1992; Grof 1993; Krippner and de Carvalho 1993; Bateson and Bateson 1994; Fedorov 1992, 1995]. Progressive fragmentation of the subject of research leads to a narrow specialization
socialization, resulting in a loss of context. The essence of psychological phenomenology, on the contrary, requires the ability to restore this context, moreover, to include it in the work, literally “keep it at hand.” Otherwise, the very quality of the psyche eludes us.
In natural science logic, the ideal is the ability to predict a certain phenomenon based on the law to which this phenomenon obeys. Mental reality is such that it expresses its main essence in unpredictability [Nalimov 1990]. The desire to predict inevitably shifts the researcher to studying the consequences of this essence, its more superficial manifestations.
Psychologists also have to give up the habit of thinking in terms of the dichotomy “either true or false.” In return comes the judgment “everything is true and everything is false at the same time,” which involves careful reflection of the initial grounds when making value judgments.
1.1.1. Paradigmatic coordinates
One of the attempts to comprehend such difficulties was made by A. Bochner. The author begins by questioning the following basic assumptions of social psychology:
1. The purpose of science is to represent reality.
2. Science establishes general laws that “reveal” or “explain” connections between observed phenomena.
3. Science focuses on stable and reliable connections between observed phenomena.
4. Scientific progress is linear and cumulative.
At the end of the polemical part of his article, he states that none of these claims are satisfied and as a result we have to admit *that:
a) ahistorical laws of social interaction are still not discovered;
b) with the help of theoretical concepts it is not possible to unambiguously grasp the essence of the observed phenomena;
c) not a single method has been discovered that could resolve theoretical battles.
17
The author introduces the idea of ​​three levels of scientific methodology in the social sciences, in particular in psychology, corresponding to the three goals of science. Table 1 provides the author's summary, taken from the indicated source.
Table 1 Three levels of scientific methodology
Perspective: Empiricism Hermeneutics Criticism Purpose: Prediction and control Interpretation and understanding Criticality and
social
changesLooking at phenomena: Facts
(non-historical) Meanings (contextual) Values ​​(historical) Functions: Bring under the law Place in
explainable
frameworkEnlightenment and emancipationHow knowledge is produced:Objectification (mirror)By
instructions
(conversations)Reflection
(critical
assessment) On the basis of which a judgment is made about the truth: Falsification (Popper) Expert
confirmation
(Ricoeur) Free
consensus
(Habermas) The natural scientific level of methodology is designated here as empiricism. The most suitable paradigm for the social sciences at this historical stage, according to A. Bochner, is hermeneutics. It is obvious that these “levels” do not line up into levels: within each criterion, the change of characteristics does not obey a single logic, it remains unclear which level should occupy the leading position, etc. They look more like different ways of scientific thinking, none of which can claim to status regardless of preference.
A different classification of methods of explanation existing in psychological science was proposed by M. S. Poole and
18
r_ D. McPhee. They proceed from the following scheme of the relationship between theory and methodology:

The classification of methods of explanation and understanding, called by the authors causal conventional and dialectical, is derived from 1) assumptions about the nature of the relationship between the researcher and the object of study, 2) the proposed forms of explanation and the criteria by which they are evaluated, 3) assumptions about further guidelines for the study.
The causal method of explanation is based on the assumption that the researcher is an independent observer of the phenomena being studied. The explanation is given in the form of a grid of statements like *X is the cause of Y in conditions A, B, C...”, where X and Y are variables or constructs identified by the researcher. Causal explanation provides the researcher with an advantage in defining constructs, isolating causal relationships, and testing causal hypotheses. In the future, the researcher must adequately describe the world he is studying.
The conventional method of explanation also proceeds from the assumption of the independence of the researcher from the object of study. At the same time, it is also based on the assumption that the world is a social product, and a person in it is considered as its starting point. The explanation consists of demonstrating how subjects adapt their behavior to the appropriate conditions: norms, rules, algorithms. Dissection of these latter is also the goal of the study. As a result, there is no longer a need to establish causality and generality; subsuming the observed phenomena under one of the already known explanatory or behavioral schemes is considered sufficient. These schemes can be verified: a) model - comparison
19
the behavior that follows from them, with the real behavior of people, b) practically - by checking whether a person trained from the outside can really act on them, c) expertly - by directly questioning the subjects whether the highlighted rules or schemes apply.
The dialectical method of explanation, like the conventional one, is based on the assumption that the objects of study are given socially. At the same time, however, the researcher does not consider himself independent of the reality under study, as in the causal approach, but views scientific research as mediating the views of the researcher and the subject, without providing advantages to either of them. Dialectical explanation combines aspects of causality and convention. On the one hand, it examines how causal forces create the conditions for action: rules, patterns, structures, and how to apply them are determined. And on the other hand, how do people, within the limits of this determination, modify its manifestations: they form the grounds and direction of the action of causal forces. The researcher cannot treat the rules as given (which is done in the conventional approach), but must study what this set of rules and forces provides. Historical evidence often plays an important role in this process because causes are embedded in previous, often established systems of action. Causality does not follow a direct "X-Y" relationship, but rather resembles something like "X influences the conventions A, B, C, which lead to Y in the context of the action system W." Reasons and conventions, as we see, interact in this explanation.
Thus, the causal approach emphasizes objective forces, the conventional approach focuses on subjectivity (or intersubjectivity), and the dialectical approach emphasizes the conditionality of subjectivity (or intersubjectivity).
In Russian psychology, G. A. Kovalev (1987, 1989) proposed to distinguish between the following types of paradigms:
"1. “Objective” or “reactive” paradigm, according to which the psyche and the person as a whole are considered as a passive object of influence of external conditions and a product of these conditions.
20
2. “Subjective” or “actional” paradigm, based on the statement about the activity and individual selectivity of mental reflection of external influences, where the subject himself rather exerts a transformative effect on the psychological information coming to him from the outside.
3. Finally, the “subject-subject” or “dialogical” paradigm, where the psyche acts as an open and constantly interacting system that has internal and external regulatory loops. The psyche in this case is considered as a multidimensional and “intersubjective” formation in nature” [Kovalev 1989, p. 9].
These types of paradigms correspond, according to the author, with types of scientific abstraction at the levels of general (objective), specific (subjective) and individual (dialogical). Theoretical explanations are formulated in the form of laws, rules or actual hypotheses, respectively.
Thus, we discover several grounds on which to guide the choice of research method:
The attitude towards phenomena is the class to which the researcher classifies them: to facts, to the result of the interpretation of reality, to timeless meanings, to transitory or stable values, etc.
The goals that the researcher focuses on are what the acquired knowledge will be used for: for explanation, prediction and control, for interpretation and understanding, or for evaluating and making changes to the reality being studied.
The nature of the knowledge that the researcher intends to obtain - general laws, particular patterns, limited explanatory schemes, barely outlined trends or isolated unique information.
The method of establishing the truth of knowledge is hardware (extra-subjective) verification, careful planning of experiments, expert judgments, personal participation, direct experience of the relevant experience, etc.
Initial assumptions (ideas, beliefs, convictions) about how this world works - that is, ideological
21
researcher's attitudes. Ultimately, they are the result of his philosophical preferences, the basic provisions of which are often axiomatic in nature and based on barely reflected beliefs.
1.1.2. Paradigm Correlation
All the grounds on which we could decide what methodological position to take ultimately turn out to be derived precisely from the ideological attitudes that guide the researcher or practitioner. This dependence is clearly indicated by V. S. Bibler (1991) when comparing different types of logics of knowledge. Modern rationalizing knowledge (to which the natural sciences are oriented) presupposes the desire to objectively - that is, detachedly, “non-contactably” - penetrate into the essence of things. The initial philosophical premise says: “I” and the World stand on opposite sides of the ontological abyss. The main task of science is the desire to epistemologically overcome this gap - to “cognize” the objective reality given to us in the senses.
Other logics are ancient and medieval. The first is the desire to capture the primal essence of things in a concept that is akin to an image, no matter how polysyllabic, as long as it allows one to somehow formulate a vague feeling (prediction) of a mystery. In other words, this logic comes from the identification of “I” and the World, the identity of the microcosm with the macrocosm. Medieval logic, in turn, is expressed in the desire to partake of the super-existent, to understand the world through revelation. The initial premise: “I” is only an insignificant part of the omnipresent - this is the whole “pathos of understanding things as tools and emanations of subjective forces, the only super-existent ones” [Bibler 1991, p. 5].
Thus, the dispute about which research logic is better, at the level of initial assumptions, turns out to be a dispute about whose idea of ​​the world order is more correct. As the foreseeable historical retro- and perspective testifies, there is no hope for a quick solution to worldview problems: this problem, fortunately, will always remain unresolved and will be inherited by subsequent generations22
leniya as an eternal tempter and incentive to philosophical quests. Therefore, one of the possible solutions to the problem of choosing a research paradigm is to consciously remove it from current ideological positions, agreeing that other scientists are free to build a different research platform.
However, as soon as different specialists try to exchange the results of their research, it can - and always does - become difficult to understand each other. As long as we are talking about the results of the description, we can still put up with this situation. However, what for a researcher is only a methodological difficulty, for a practicing psychologist becomes a problem of choosing the method of professional implementation. Then the difficulty grows to the level of “what to do?” and “how should we proceed?”, since, despite the difference in worldview, both specialists have to act in the same World. Discrepant worldview systems begin to collide again, but at the level of practice. As a consequence, disputes about the method of the humanities sometimes reach the intensity of a struggle for survival.
G. Allport, A. Maslow and K. Rogers believed that the experimental and experimental methods of cognition do not constitute opposition, they complement each other. The specific decision was that “the starting point of psychological research should be a return “back to the objects themselves.” The study of human nature must begin with phenomenological knowledge and only then put on the yoke of objective, experimental and laboratory methods" [Krippner and de Carvalho 1993, p. 119-120]. The experimental method proves worthwhile in completing the process of acquiring knowledge. It is preceded by immersion in the phenomena being studied, “absorption of direct experience” until the moment is reached when “some things just come to mind.” After this, more long-term work is required to refine ideas to a level where they can be tested experimentally or quasi-experimentally.
The key idea of ​​V. S. Bibler is that we live in a period of change in the logic that guides humanity23
humanity in its quest to understand the world order. Namely, from one logic (rational at this stage) we move to dialogics - a dialogue of different logics. The logic of the coming 21st century - dialogics - is capable of combining various logics: both those that existed in previous historical eras and new ones that are just emerging. Similar or completely identical statements are found in many authors: “There is no need to prove that one method of explanation is better than another. Each approach has its defenders and each has its own advantages and weaknesses compared to the others."
This idea of ​​the fundamental compatibility of different logics seems very attractive for moral and environmental reasons. In addition, it already has its own operational concretizations: firstly, it is necessary to start with an acquaintance with phenomenology, in the first step trying to penetrate the richness of its connections, and secondly, this should be a dialogue of divergent logics. Not fighting, not arrogant (or anxious) ignorance, but a comprehensive discussion of common problems in various languages. To do this, the researcher will need to master several languages, and the practitioner will need to rethink eclecticism as multi-resource.
1.1.3. Why hermeneutics?
The time has come to decide on your own logic of research, already relying on the identified paradigmatic coordinates.
The starting points regarding the ideological position within the framework of the task are stated only sketchily (and only in that part that relates to the subject of conversation). I do this for the sake of clarity regarding my position, but not as a point of discussion.
The human psyche and the world are ontologically fused together: they were initially (if there was such a beginning) packed into each other. The confrontation between materialism and idealism is a dispute between the ways of describing this unity. It seems to be a consequence of an incorrectly formulated problem.
24
That part of the world with which a person deals is, to a large extent, a product (including actual) of the activity of the person himself. It is produced in the process of describing the world - its semantic (sign, linguistic, symbolic) doubling. And since any description is always selective, the subject of the description is selectively unfolded (unpacked) in this doubling. Having created the next portion of himself and the world, a person acts in accordance with his new understanding and turns out to be one of the leading transformative forces of the universe.
Any description, no matter how paradoxical it may seem, always has its foundations, its ontological roots - and in this sense, any description, any way of seeing is correct in its own way. Their lack of understanding lies in the lack of access to the context in which they are signified.
Attitude to phenomena. The phenomena that psychology deals with are events (co-existence - completed, true existence) that have a dual justification: from the side of causes and from the side of result. Therefore, their understanding is built in both causal and teleological concepts. In Z. Freud, this duality of phenomena is captured by the dichotomy of libido and symbol [Ricoeur 1995-6, p. 405-408]. P. Ricoeur also gives other pairs of concepts: motivation and focus, desire to be and sign, desire and effort to exist, etc.
The goals of scientific research are to understand how reasons are linked to intentions in real human activity, to interpret the meaning of this connection in relation to specific people and/or all of humanity. In this perspective, a person’s desire to understand himself coincides with self-design and development.
The nature of the knowledge that is expected to be obtained is particular patterns, limited by the contexts in which they make sense, down to the unique individual characteristics of an individual.
The method of establishing the truth of knowledge is expert judgments, personal participation, direct experience of relevant experience, etc.
The methods of scientific thinking described in the first section, both by name and by content, by various authors
25
do not match. However, if we correlate the just stated positions with the content of the mentioned paradigms, then in terms of the sum of provisions they could approximately correspond to the hermeneutic (A. Bochner), dialectical (M. S. Poole and R. D. McPhee) or subject-subject (G. A Kovalev) paradigms. At the same time, the hermeneutic way of thinking and research method was chosen as the most adequate paradigmatic guideline within the framework of this work. I'll explain why.
I have to move away from the natural science logic of the research - the reality being studied does not accept it. The subject of this study is obviously a subject, a bearer of the psyche, a living being. In it, you can isolate individual fragments and make a non-living preparation from them for laboratory work - instructive, visual, but... with a loss of quality. Natural scientific logic proceeds from the initial separation of subject and object, and then strives to bridge this gap. In this logic, a person must first be mentally transformed into an object, and then try to look for subjectivity in him.
As an alternative, therefore, the opposite course of thought is chosen: initially to assume the existential packagedness of the world and man in each other. The cognitive activity of the latter lies in the desire to unpack oneself - to transform potency into actuality (to actualize oneself). Language is a means of unpacking—semantic doubling—by man both of himself and of the world. Methods of unpacking - understanding, highlighting the essential (that which is hidden, but constitutes the essence of the world and the person himself), rearranging the resulting material - together constitute one method: interpretation. In this understanding, interpretation turns out to be a means of human development of himself and the world. The most complete development of interpretation as a method is found in hermeneutics. Thus, with the help of hermeneutics there is hope to find a way out of these methodological difficulties. And most importantly, stop fighting the subjectivity of the researcher in the desire to turn it into a measuring device, and vice versa, the desire to use its unique capabilities in the most complete way.
26
For me, the hermeneutic approach is also a method of joint (with my colleagues acting as competent experts) research into a given problem area. In work of this type, it seems permissible to engage in free modeling with the expectation of constructive discussion, which in itself is already a method of research. The specificity of the reality being studied is that it is presented in its entirety in the same subjective space as the qualifications of experts - we are all immersed in the mental and social elements, rooted in them with our deep spiritual layers. In order to step back from this reality and take the position of an “objective” researcher, one would have to kill one’s subjectivity. Direct experimental verification - in the natural scientific, instrumental understanding - of manipulative influence (as well as psychological influence in general) is hardly possible, since it is difficult to imagine what kind of objective instrument can record what, in principle, can only be recorded by a mental instrument. And if we cannot avoid subjectivity, then it would be correct to conceptualize subjectivity itself as a specific research tool. Therefore, the central method is the issuance of expert opinions: subjective reality can be studied in such a distance (in relation to one researcher) as transferring the judgments made to other expert researchers.
The methodological position of A. Giorgi, shared by many humanistic psychologists, is based on the following basic characteristics of a person:
1) all people belong to society;
2) all people are participants in linguistic communication;
3) all people express direct experience in a system of meanings;
4) all people are capable of transforming the perceived structures of direct experience;
5) all people unite in commonwealths, for example, in groups or communities.
27
Psychological research may include "phenomenological research, hermeneutic interpretation of meaning, life course and historical case studies, and many other studies using qualitative data and/or reconceptualized quasi-experimental procedures" [cit. after Krippner and de Carvalho 1993, p. 124]. As we see, in this series, hermeneutics stands almost at the very beginning of scientific research. Therefore, at the initial stage of development of this problem area, this approach seems to me to be the most correct.
The attractive side of hermeneutics is its environmental friendliness. It consists, firstly, in a careful attitude towards all components of the subject of study: nothing can be considered superfluous, everything is recognized as necessary and useful, you just need to indicate under what conditions it is true. Secondly, in understanding the naturalness of such a situation when there is not uniformity, but diversity - ideas, opinions, images, events... Thirdly, in tolerance for the polarization of opposites, contradictory points of view, in the desire to organize a productive dialogue between them .
It remains for me to briefly outline some provisions of hermeneutics that will serve as starting positions and at the same time guidelines for this study. The hermeneutic approach is characterized by:
1.

Psychology of manipulation: phenomena, mechanisms and protection. - M.:, Moscow State University Publishing House, 1997. - 344 p. ISBN 5-88711-038-4

The scientific monograph is devoted to interpersonal manipulation. The problem of psychological influence is developed at the intersection of such branches of psychology as the psychology of communication and personality psychology.

It will be of interest not only for psychologists, but also for psychotherapists, political scientists, and philosophers. It will also be useful for teachers, managers and representatives of other professions who deal with people.

ISBN 5-88711-088-4

© E. L. Dotsenko, 1997 © CheRo, 1997

MANIPULATION FROM DIFFERENT ASPECTS

(instead of introduction)

“I work as editor-in-chief of regional television. Recently, I urgently needed one of the programs that had already been broadcast: I wanted to refresh my memory of some details so that there would be no discrepancies... I go into the studio and explain what I need to the director, who was busy with personal affairs at the time. It’s clear that she didn’t want to look for the film I needed, so she pretended that she didn’t remember anything like that. I'm trying to explain what that show was about. The director still continues to “not understand.” I couldn’t restrain myself - I said something rude to her and left.

In the corridor, the anger subsided and a great idea came into my head. I go into the editors’ department and, as if addressing no one, I say that we recently aired a good program about... We need to see if it can be submitted to the competition. The author of this program almost breaks out: “This is my program. I will bring it now." Before I had time to make coffee for myself, the film was already on my table.”

The story described by the television worker is noteworthy because in it the same person, within a short time, was in two situations containing successful manipulation. The only difference is that in the first he turned out to be the injured party, and in the second he himself turned into a manipulator.

The manipulator and his victim are the main roles, without which manipulation will not take place. Accordingly, these two will have different approaches to manipulation... However, if for implementation manipulative influence, the indicated two positions are sufficient, then By revising manipulation, the number of points of view increases. To the positions of manipulator and victim included in the interaction process, many external ones are added. In the context under consideration, we highlight the position of a research psychologist, psychotechnician and moral philosopher.

I give the floor to everyone whose positions have just been mentioned. Each of them will be able to explain in their own way why this book was written.

So, research psychologist.

Starting with W. Wundt, who developed separately physiological psychology and the psychology of peoples, psychological science developed from two platforms: from the side of the individual human psyche - in the individual aspect, and from the side of culture - in the social aspect. At the same time, their gradual rapprochement took place, and the junction between them often turned out to be one of the growth points of psychology. The current state of the field of interest to us confirms this idea: in recent years, both the psychology of communication and the psychology of personality have been intensively developed, and at their junction a little-explored zone has been revealed that contains the secret of psychological interaction. Accordingly, three possible points of consideration can be identified.

Firstly, manipulation can be considered as a socio-psychological phenomenon. The main problems stem from the questions: what is manipulation, when does it occur, for what purposes is it used, under what conditions is it most effective, what are the effects it produces, is it possible to protect against manipulation, how can the latter be organized?

Secondly, manipulation is a knot in which the most important problems of the psychology of influence are intertwined: the transformation of information, the presence of power struggle, the problems of truth-false and secret-explicit, the dynamics of shifting responsibility, changes in the balance of interests, and others. The literature on psychological influence contains many interesting empirical studies and observations that are still awaiting their theoretical understanding and revelation of the patterns behind this diversity. There is hope that solving a set of problems in relation to manipulative influence will provide means for solving similar problems for the entire range of problems in the psychology of influence.

And thirdly, interest in mechanisms of protection against manipulation moves us into the field of personality psychology, since it involves close attention to intrapsychic dynamics associated with decision-making processes, intrapersonal communication, integration and dissociation. The study of manipulation in this aspect highlights new facets of the problem of mutual transitions between external and internal activity, shifting the subject of research to the plane of general psychology.

Thus, the study of manipulation touches on a wide range of problems, ranging from fundamental theoretical ones to applied and descriptive ones.

Practical psychologist (often as a psychotechnician).

For more than ten years now, we have been witnessing a process of active participation of psychologists in carrying out direct orders “from the outside,” previously unprecedented for domestic psychology. In addition to the elusive social order, psychologists began to receive very specific, financially backed requests for work, the distinctive feature of which is an organized impact on people: group trainings, group psychotherapy, business games, training in management methods, business communication, etc. Availability of ready-made technologies Such impact creates the possibility of their use by non-specialists. The psychotechnical effect produced by these technologies gives the customer the impression that the technologist is highly professional. As a result, technology, having begun an independent life according to the laws of the market, allows for the possibility of its use as a means of achieving inhumane goals. Under what conditions does the technology of psychological influence become manipulative? This is a question, the search for an answer to which is one of the tasks of this work.

Often the psychologist himself - whether he wants it or not - becomes a hired manipulator. This happens, for example, when he is ordered to undergo a psychodiagnostic examination in order to give the appearance of a scientifically (or psychologically) justified decision to a decision already taken by the administration. A similar thing is sometimes observed when certifying personnel or forming a reserve for leadership positions - the examination becomes a means of putting pressure on subordinates or even settling scores with undesirables. Manipulative notes are quite often heard in the very request of customers: teach how to manage, tell me how to influence, advise what I/we should do with him/her/them, etc. In most cases, the psychologist is in a difficult situation of choice: on the one hand, You cannot become a tool in someone else’s game, and on the other hand, to refuse means to withdraw yourself, giving way to a non-professional, and lose the opportunity to change the customer’s ideas to more constructive and humane ones. Knowledge of the patterns of manipulation allows a specialist to more competently build his line of behavior in such conditions.

There are many cases when clients themselves expect the psychologist to manipulate them, and sometimes they directly put him in the position of a manipulator in relation to themselves. Several examples of typical manipulations in relation to a consulting psychologist are described by E. Bern. Sometimes a psychologist is asked to teach or help protect against someone’s manipulation. An example would be a client’s complaint that her husband intimidates her and makes her life unbearable. Being in a formal divorce, he does not leave; moreover, he intends to move in with her in the apartment she receives. It turned out that all the scenes begin with his “special look,” which brings this woman into a state of fear and readiness to endure all the bullying. Quite often, the problem of protection against manipulation is an integral part of other, complex problems. Therefore, knowledge of the laws of manipulation will help a practical psychologist improve his professionalism.

Moral philosopher.

The magical power of words is manifested in their “vitality” and “perseverance.”

The first means that once a concept has appeared, it cannot be destroyed - it can only be modified. On the one hand, the concept defines the existence of the designated phenomenon - it gives rise to its “life” in people’s ideas. As soon as the general public becomes aware that, say, manipulation exists in the world, then this manipulation begins to be noticed everywhere. And then the temptation arises - especially among interested researchers or science politicians - to extend this concept to the largest possible class of phenomena. If desired, manipulation - or at least elements of it - can be detected in almost any fragment of interaction. But is this really so - a question that requires an answer.

On the other hand, the content of the concept flexibly adapts to the needs of new generations and the tasks of new times. The same thing happened with manipulation, which originally meant only dexterity and skilled actions - now this term is used in relation to the interaction of people. The change is striking in that in the first sense, manipulations (for example, medical or engineering) were treated with respect for the skill of the people performing them. In the second meaning, manipulation means something reprehensible.

This is relative to "survivability". The “pusiveness” of the words reflects their amazing activity and effectiveness. The practice of using a term over time leads to modification of other concepts, especially related ones. As soon as the same phenomenon from “Machiavellianism” was repainted as “manipulation”, it began to give new shades to such concepts as “management”, “control”, “programming”, etc.

In addition, a concept that designates a phenomenon requires that something be done with this phenomenon. In the case of manipulation, there is often a desire to experience its power in its pure form - and this cannot but be alarming. At the same time, in parallel with the talk about manipulation, the problem of how to protect yourself from it also arises - and this should already be recognized as a positive result of the emergence of the term “manipulation” in this meaning. Investigating the noted points is also among the tasks of this monograph.

Manipulator.

For some reason, it is generally accepted that manipulation is bad. Do you remember why the beautiful Scheherazade told fairy tales to her formidable ruler Shahriar? With the help of manipulation, for almost three years (!) she saved not only herself, but also the most beautiful girls of her country from death. Dozens of such examples can be found in folklore alone. Not only during the fairy tales of “1001 Nights,” but also in our everyday life, manipulation serves as a means of gentle protection from the tyranny of rulers, the excesses of leaders, the bad character of colleagues or relatives, and unfriendly attacks from those with whom we happen to communicate.

To a large extent, this is why manipulation is of interest not only to researchers, but also to the general public. Another reason for this interest is that many people, managers in particular, still find it difficult to imagine effective management without the use of manipulation. The views of both ideological and spontaneous manipulators turn to psychology for help in the hope of finding clues. An army of interested readers scours the masses of literature in search of information on how to influence people. It is not surprising that the appearance of books specifically devoted to this issue invariably meets with both attention and support.

Psychological knowledge really helps to manage people more effectively. For example, if it is known that fat people are usually good-natured and love to eat, then it makes sense to take this into account so that, if necessary, you can get such a person to have a favorable attitude toward you. Or vice versa - put him in a bad mood, if necessary. Another example. If, say, we accept C. Jung’s position that the gender of a person’s soul and his biological sex do not coincide, then it becomes clear how one can push around a man whose masculinity is beyond any doubt. It is enough to question this masculinity at the right moment - and the man will rush to prove his masculinity again and again.

In short, almost any book on psychology - as long as the latter is in its current state - helps to manipulate people more effectively. This is especially true for this book about manipulation. Since many manipulators are just self-taught, there is no doubt that there is benefit in books that would help manipulators improve their skills. The question is not whether to manipulate or not - all people regularly do this. It is important to learn how to manipulate carefully, without arousing suspicion on the part of your victims - why cut the branch on which you are sitting...

Victim of manipulation.

Almost all academic psychology is built on manipulative foundations. In it, a person is thought of as a subject, often as an object in general - perception, obtaining information, influence, education, upbringing, etc. There are many examples: the desire to divide people into types, to identify correlations that make it possible to predict human behavior depending on certain conditions, the desire to establish universal (true for all people) patterns, etc. All this leads to a stereotypical approach, to the unification of knowledge about a person. The psychology of individual differences in this context appears as a weak exception confirming the Big Rule.

There is no doubt - the information obtained by academic science is useful and necessary. Now we are talking about the fact that this knowledge and approaches are a great gift for manipulators. And since this has happened, then perhaps it’s time for psychology to also look into how to defend itself from the manipulators it has trained.

On the one hand, it is important to find out what is happening in the soul of a person who is under manipulative pressure. It happens, neither now nor later, when you have already been fooled, you cannot understand where this or that emotional reaction comes from, why there is a desire to explode and say stupid things, although outwardly everything looks so peaceful... A detailed analysis of internal processes, as is known, helps mastering them.

On the other hand, it is also equally important to study the experience of successful defense: how to cope with external pressure, where the strength to fight back comes from, what means and techniques people use, etc. All this will help us learn how to solve the problem of protecting against manipulation practically : where can one find support for organizing resistance to the aggressor, what means can be used for this, how such means can be created, what tactics can be used, etc.?

No less important is the problem of creating conditions in which the need for protection against manipulation would be reduced. This problem arises where psychological services are created. It is known that any psychological service, if it strives to become full-fledged, develops towards total coverage of the people on whom it is created. How to ensure that the service serves and does not suppress is a somewhat utopian, but not without sense (especially common sense) question.

So, dear readers, now you know the range of problems related to the topic of interpersonal manipulation. The decisive consideration that prompted me to work on this topic was that good manipulation, which has a precisely defined and long-lasting effect, is a work of art - the art of influencing people. The manipulative performance delightfully balances a variety of elements, sometimes in rather bizarre combinations. In most cases, destroying such an artificial (as well as skillful) structure is not difficult, while coming up with and successfully implementing a good manipulation is more difficult than defending against it. Therefore, protection against manipulation is largely a technology. And as you know, technology (or craft) is easier to master than art. Therefore, a close examination of the problem of manipulation, it seems to me, gives more advantages to the victims of manipulative intrusion, rather than to the manipulators.

MANIPULATION FROM DIFFERENT ASPECTS
Chapter 1 METHODOLOGICAL ORIENTATION
1.1. Choice of Paradigm
1.1.1. Paradigmatic coordinates
1.1.2. Paradigm Correlation
1.1.3. Why hermeneutics?
1.2. Hermeneutics of action
1.2.1. Action as text
1.2.2. Availability of contexts
1.2.3. Interpreter qualifications
1.2.4. Description language problem
Chapter 2. WHAT IS MANIPULATION
2.1. Phenomenological description
2.1.1. Phenomenological representation or discretion?
2.1.2. Origin of the term "manipulation"
2.1.3. Metaphor of manipulation
2.2. Psychological definition of manipulation
2.2.1. Initial lines
2.2.2. Feature extraction
2.2.3. Formation of criteria
2.2.4. Definition of manipulation
2.3. Psychological impact
Chapter 3. PREREQUISITES OF MANIPULATION
3.1. Cultural background to manipulation
3.2. The manipulative nature of society
3.3. Interpersonal grounds
3.3.1. Interpersonal community
3.3.2. Deformations of communication
3.3.3. Manipulative evasions
3.4. His name is Legion (The Manipulator in each of us)
3.4.1. The Multiple Nature of Personality
3.4.2. Intrapersonal interaction
3.4.3. The inner world of the manipulator and his victim
3.5. Technological requirements
3.6. The place of manipulation in the system of human relations
The Procurator's Premonition, or the Diligence of the Chief of the Secret Guard
Chapter 4. MANIPULATIVE TECHNOLOGIES
4.1. The main components of manipulative influence
4.1.1. Purposeful transformation of information
4.1.2. Hiding the impact
4.1.3. Means of coercion
4.1.4. Targets of influence
4.1.6. Robotization
4.2. Preparatory efforts of the manipulator
4.2.1. Contextual design
4.2.2. Selection of targets
4.2.3. Making contact
4.3. Managing Interaction Variables
4.3.1. Interpersonal space
4.3.2. Initiative
4.3.3. Direction of impact
4.3.4. Dynamics
4.4. Information and power support
4.4.1. Psychological pressure
4.4.2. Information design
Chapter 5. MECHANISMS OF MANIPULATIVE INFLUENCE
5.1. “Technology” and psychological “mechanisms” - a coincidence of reality and metaphor
5.2. Mechanisms of psychological influence
6.2.1. Hold contact
5.2.2. Mental automatisms
5.2.3. Motivational support
5.3. Types and processes of manipulative influence
5.3.1. Perceptual puppets
5.3.2. Conventional robots
5.3.3. Living guns
5.3.4. Guided inference
5.3.5. Exploitation of the addressee's identity
5.3.6. Spiritual Punishment
5.3.7. Bringing into a state of increased submission
5.3.8. Combination
5.4. Generalization of the psychological manipulation model
5.5. Destructiveness of manipulative influence
The experience of “making” the tragic Mozart
Chapter 6. PROTECTION AGAINST MANIPULATION
6.1. The concept of psychological defenses
6.1.1. Psychological defense in different theoretical contexts
6.1.2. Semantic field and definition of the concept of “psychological protection”
6.2. Types of psychological defenses
6.2.1. Interpersonal protection and intrapersonal protection
6.2.2. Basic protective settings
6.2.3. Specific and non-specific protections
6.3. Psychological defense mechanisms
6.3.1. Nonspecific protective actions
6.3.2- Protection of personal structures
6.3.3. Protection of mental processes
6.3.4. Towards manipulative technology
6.4. Threat recognition problem
manipulative intrusion
6.4.1. Possible indicators
6.4.2. Manipulation detection
in live communication
6.5. Do we need to protect ourselves from manipulation?
The head of the secret guard under Pontius Pilate defends himself
Chapter 7. RESEARCH OF MANIPULATIVE INTERACTION
7.1. Protective actions under manipulative influence
7.1.1. Planning
7.1.2. Procedure
7.1.3. results
7.1.4. Discussion
7.1.5. Free interpretation of the video fragment
7.2. Fraudster and victim: who got more?
7.2.1. The story of how the great schemer took control of the former leader of the nobility
7.2.2. Was the great schemer a great manipulator?
7.3. Dialogue as a research method
Chapter 8. TRAINING PROTECTION AGAINST MANIPULATION
8.1. Do you need protection?
8.2. Creation of "radar"
8.2.1. Sensual level
8.2.2. Rational level
8.3. Expansion of the peaceful arsenal
8.4. Psychotechniques of coping
8.5. Personal potential
Chapter 9. IS IT POSSIBLE TO LEARN NOT TO MANIPULATE?
9.1. Control or pushing around?
9.2. Education or development?
9.3. Correction or normalization?
Conclusion
Applications
Literature
Subject index
Summary