K.N. Eskov

Institute of Biomedical Problems of RAS (Moscow, Russia)

The psychodiagnostic method Homeostat is based on the principle of homeostatic balance. The essence of the methodology consists in solving an operator’s task by a group of persons. Acting independently, each operator involuntarily affects the activity of their partners. At the same time, his actions can both contribute or interfere the solution of the common task. The decision process consists in finding an effective algorithm for joint actions that ensures a successful result.

The hardware base of the Homeostat is represented by a computerized device that includes a laptop, four individual consoles and a switching unit, with the help of which the signals, received from the individual consoles are transmitted to the laptop port. The information entering the laptop is processed by specially designed software.

Each individual console is equipped with a movable indicator (IL) - a scale indicating the position of the IL relative to the zero mark located in the center of the scale, and a rotary control knob that ensures free movement of the IL along the scale in both directions.

Long-term use of the Homeostat methodology in research practice has shown that the success of group solution of homeostatic tasks depends on the individual styles of the participants’ instrumental behavior. We developed a classification which includes 6 styles, or types, of instrumental behavior, differing in the features of the control knob rotation: eccentric activity and motor activity. Eccentric activity means such rotations of the control knob that move the IL away from the center of the scale, i.e. from the zero mark. Motor activity is assessed by the total number of manipulations with the control stick, regardless of the direction of rotation - the more often the control actions are performed, the higher the motor activity.

Classification indicators characterizing individual types of instrumental behavior were formed as a result of a combined assessment of the individual eccentric and motor activity. Three gradations of eccentric activity level were used: a clear eccentric, an unobvious eccentric, and a non-eccentric (pedant). Moreover, each of them could be either motor-active or motor-inactive.

As a result, the following 6 classification groups were formed, corresponding to 6 styles of activity (types of instrumental behavior):

Type I – clearly eccentric, motor-inactive;

Type II – clearly eccentric, motor-active;

Type III – unobvious eccentric, motor-inactive;

IV type – not obviously eccentric, motor-active;

V type – non-eccentric (pedant), motor-inactive;

VI type – non-eccentric (pedant), motor-active.

The aim of this work was to identify effective and ineffective styles of instrumental behavior of operators who performed the Homeostat tasks.

The method was carried out by small groups of operators consisting of 3-4 people. Within each test session, its participants were presented with 4-6 tasks of varying complexity. The successful solution of the task was that all participants simultaneously fix their IL in the central (zero) position of the scale. Each task took 3 minutes. If during this time the group did not find a solution, the task was considered unsolved.

The studies involved 38 men and 13 women in the age range from 20 to 50 years.

Analyzing the obtained data, the entire set of tasks presented for solving was divided into 2 categories of success: solved tasks and unsolved tasks. Each operator, in relation to each task presented to him, was assessed by one of 6 classification types of behavior. Thus, the total amount of estimated indicators was expressed by the multiplication of the number of participants by the number of presented tasks.

We compared the individual types of instrumental behavior with the results of group interdependent operator’s activities. It was found that high motor activity in combination with IL displacements predominantly towards the center of the scale (type VI) contributes to the successful solution of homeostatic tasks. At the same time, a low level of motor activity, along with displacements of IL in both directions - both to the center and to the periphery of the scale (type III), at least, does not contribute to, but most likely, interferes their solution. In this case, apparently, the difficulties are created not only by weak motor activity, but also by eccentric displacements of the IL. On this basis, type VI can be assessed as effective, and type III - as an ineffective style of instrumental behavior for an operator working with the Homeostat device.

Eskov K.N. Types of instrumental behavior and results of interdependent operating activities. Technologies of Living Systems. 2022.
V. 19. № 1. Р. 56-62. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18127/j20700997-202201-07 (In Russian)

1. Ross Eshbi U. Konstruktsiya mozga. M.: Izd-vo inostrannoy literatury. 1962. 398 s. (in Russian).
2. Novikov M.A. Kommunikatsionnaya struktura i effektivnost gruppovoy deyatelnosti operatorov. Voprosy psikhologii. 1970. № 4.
   S. 130–135. (in Russian).
3. Novikov M.A. Psikhofiziologicheskoye izucheniye gruppovogo vzaimodeystviya. Fiziologiya cheloveka. 1975. № 3. S. 140–149. (in Russian).
4. Eskov K.N. Vzaimosvyazannaya operatorskaya deyatelnost izolirovannoy maloy gruppy (metodika Gomeostat): Diss. … kand. biol. nauk. M.: FGBUN GNTs – Institut mediko-biologicheskikh problem RAN. 2019. 148 s. (in Russian).
5. Eskov K.N. Klassifikatsiya stiley instrumentalnogo povedeniya operatorov pri vypolnenii gomeostaticheskikh zadach. Sistemnaya psikhologiya i sotsiologiya. 2020. № 4 (36). S. 48–57. (in Russian).
6. Eskov K.N. Gendernyy faktor v realizatsii gruppovoy vzaimozavisimoy operatorskoy deyatelnosti. Tekhnologii zhivykh sistem. 2018.
   T. 15. № 5. S. 12–16. (in Russian).
7. Sarychev S.V. Sotsialno-psikhologicheskoye issledovaniye nadezhnosti malykh grupp v napryazhennykh i ekstremalnykh usloviyakh. Sotsialnaya psikhologiya i obshchestvo. 2011. № 2. S. 5–16. (in Russian).
8. Sarychev S.V., Chernyshev A.S. Eksperimentalnoye issledovaniye sovmestnoy deyatelnosti i gruppovogo povedeniya v razlichnykh sotsialnykh usloviyakh. Teoreticheskaya i eksperimentalnaya psikhologiya. 2010. T. 3. №1. S. 49–63. (in Russian).
9. Heldal F., Antonsen S. Team Leadership in a High-Risk Organization: The Role of Contextual Factors. Small Group Research. 2014.
   V. 45. Iss. 4. P. 376–399.
10. Krabberod T. Task Uncertainty and Mission Command in a Naval Context. Small Group Research. 2014. V. 45. Iss. 4. P. 416–434.