A solvency of any doctrine can be proved only by convergence of expected and actual results. There exists a paradoxical situation in psychology.  Doctrines become more and more numerous, and not each of them can prove its solvency. Therefore we have analyzed motivation of people with various personality structure, taking into account the environmental factor, and also we have compared the forecast of motivation for random chosen people with actual results of their testing. The results have turned out better, than we had expected.

The problem of personality structure in  science has not been solved yet.

Personality structure in the works of various authors:

S.L.Rubinshtejn (1946):an orientation, ability, temperament and character

R.Kettel (1950): interests, abilities, temperament

A.G.Kovalev (1963): ability, an orientation, character

K.K.Platonov (1965): socially caused inclination, experience, biologically caused inclination, some individual traits.

V.N.Mjasishchev (1969): an orientation, a level of development, temperament, personality structure.

K.Leongard (1987): an orientation of interests, will and feelings, associative-intellectual sphere:

On the bases of these works, it has been suggested to “place” all the known types into the three spheres (Polozov A., 2005):

-the sphere of “orientation of interests» which includes 16 types of the personality types (PT) (Myers-Briggs, Augustinaviche A and other).

-the sphere of «will and feelings» which includes 8 known types of character (TC) (Krechmer E, Leongard К, Louen А, Lichko A., Merton Р, Horni К, Shostrom).

-the sphere of “associative-intellectual” which includes 7 types of intellect (TI). Howard Gardner («Frames of Mind», 1983) has indentified seven such areas while doing research on people with the damage of various departments of their brain. They are responsible for analytical, linguistic, spatial, musical, bodily-kinesthetic, interpersonal and intrapersonal intelligence. We will present a short description of the known to psychology PTs and ТCs :

The following PTs are presented in this study.

ENTP. An ideas searcher, inquisitive, not rational, independent.

ISFP. An aspiration to harmony, getting pleasure

INTJ. An Analyst, a fighter for idea, being  independent.

ESFJ. A communicative. An  optimist. An enthusiast.

INFP. A romanticist, inclined to empathy. A conformist.

ESTP.  A strong-willed organizer, getting the result at any the cost.

ENFJ. An actor, capable of being carried away by an idea and inspiring others with it.

ISTJ. A person of system with the desire to systematize everything.

INTP . A person who forms the strategic forecast and follows it. A critic.

ESFP.  A person who has uncontrollable drive to be the best of the best.

ENTJ. A trailblazer, ready to overcome hardships.

ISFJ. A protector and a defender of moral values: children, traditions.

INFJ. Sensitive to people, the morals; empathic.

ESTJ A responsible manager.

ISTP An expert who is taking pleasure in work.

ENFP An Initiator who finds people with new possibilities.

In the sphere «will and feelings» 8 types of character are indentified gradually out of a number of studies by the following authors Mc-Villiams (1998), Naranho (1998), the Kind (2000), Louen (2000), Horny(1995):

  1. Schizoid types– loneliness, imagination, coldness, selectivity
  2. Narcissus types – envy, requirement for a worship, overrating one’s abilities
  3. Paranoid types – suspiciousness, neglect to others, quarrelsome.
  4. Compulsive types – doubts, pedantism, scrupulousness, interfering productivity.
  5. Psychopathic types – callousness, having the desire «to dominate everybody», neglect of other people’s interest.
  6. Hysterical types – theatricality, demonstrative behavior, attempts to attract attention.
  7. Depressive types – conformism, fear to be left by others.
  8. Masochistic types – patience in hope for the better wellbeing.

Such kind of combinations have allowed us to explain discrepancy in behavior of people. This concept of modular personality structure (ТP+ТC+ТI) has been presented earlier in works written by A. Polozov [2]. The author “has placed” the personality types (PТ), character types (ТC) and the types of dominating intellect (ТI) in these three directions of  the personality structure”. There are 600 theories of intelligence at present. Therefore the analysis of relations is given in a more truncated plane (PT+ТC). There are16×8 = 128 of such combinations. Each person has his or her own variant PT+ТC and the other 128 variants are given in the order of the decrease of positive  relations in business and other spheres (e. g. family). Such tables were created by A.A.Polozov on the basis of his works (Polozov A., 2006) and presented on a personal site www.polozov.nemi-ekb.ru.

However for further statement it is necessary to note the following:

  1. All the given names of the types of character were initially given by doctors and psychologists. These types are not “deviation” from the norm, but are regarded as a “norm”. Any combination of PT and TC has about an equal parity of merits and demerits and is not a “pathology”.
  2. The concept of model convergence. By model convergence we assume the degree of coincidence of expected and actual results. The nearest analogue of this concept is the correlation factor.

We have taken the following motives for our research:

  1. Knowledge – the aspiration to learn new laws. Interest to the internal activity content instead of getting quick results.
  2. Negative – the urge caused by comprehension of some problems, which can arise from neglecting the activity.
  3. Сommunication – the essence of affiliation consists in self-value of communication. Affiliative communication brings satisfaction; and pleasure to the person.
  4. Material – the motive of material benefit.
  5. Success – highly appreciated achievement by a society. The motive is connected with self-respect, ambition, vanity. The person tries to achieve the high status in a society.
  6. Authorities – management, domination in society. This aspiration of a person to influence other people. One of the most important motivating forces of man’s activity, is a desire to take a superior position in a group (collective),an attempt to supervise  people to define and regulate their activity.
  7. Humanistic – the ability to consider interests of other people. Motive of a debt and civil responsibility.
  8. Self-realization – realization of one’s own potential. According to A. Maslow it is a desire to full realization of one’s own abilities and a desire to feel competent.
  9. Aesthetic – the aspiration to harmony, aesthetic perfection. Aesthetic requirements are closely connected with connative and cognitive needs and consequently their accurate differentiation is impossible. For example, needs for order, symmetry, completeness, a system and a structure.
  10. Independence – freedom in decision-making.
  11. Achievement is an aspiration to achive good results and mastership in activity; it is shown in a choice of difficult tasks and aspiration to realize them.

How have these motives been measured?

It is necessary to take some number of recurring life situations with the equivalent choice of a behavior alternatives. For example, your family hopes that you enter the university according to family traditions, but your interests lie somewhere else. Will you go against the will of parents, traditions of a family for the sake of self-realisation? In this case the motive of self-realisation resists the negative motive.

Finally, we have 47 such questions. Each motive had from 8 to 9 questions focused on it. All questions are presented on a site http://www.polozov.nemi-ekb.ru

The technique of calculating the points. The rating system was used. A  simple example can show it. Let’s assume, that you are going to answer 10 questions in which the  material motive resists to the motive of authority. And in 6 of such cases out of 10 the preference is given to material motives. We  give the authority motive a rating of 2000 points. Then the material motive  will be equal to 2000 + (6-4) ×1000 / (6+4) = 2200. The difference in ratings of 200 points gives the advantage of 2 extra points  to the material motive. If we compare the authority motive and the motive of achievement, a symmetry score 7:3 in favour of the authority motive is received. In this case, as its rating is fixed on 2000 points, we receive a rating of the achievement motive as 2000 + (3-7) ×1000 / (3+7) = 1600. So, we have received for one person the material motives rating of 2200, the authority rating of 2000, the achievement rating of 1600.

What kind of relationship in sports positively affects the result? / A.A. Polozov, E.G.Shurmanov // Theory and practice of physical culture, 2012, N No. 1.-P.74-78