The press release was prepared by Serhii Dembitskyi, Doctor of Social Sciences, Deputy Director of the Institute of Sociology of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine

During December 3-11, 2021, the Kyiv International Institute of Sociology (KIIS) conducted its own all-Ukrainian public opinion poll "Omnibus". By the method of computer-assisted telephone interviews (CATI) based on a random sample of mobile telephone numbers (with random generation of telephone numbers and subsequent statistical weighing) were interviewed 2,000 respondents living in all regions of Ukraine (except AR of Crimea). The sample is representative of the adult population (18 years and older) of Ukraine. The sample does not include territories that are temporarily not controlled by the authorities of Ukraine - the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, some districts of Donetsk and Luhansk regions.

In Luhansk and Donetsk regions, the poll was conducted only in the territory controlled by the Ukrainian authorities.

The statistical error of the sample (with a probability of 0.95 and taking into account the design effect 1.1) does not exceed: 2.4% for indicators close to 50%, 2.1% for indicators close to 25%, 1.5% - for indicators close to 10%, 1.1 % - for indicators close to 5%.

Main conclusions:

1) respondents indicate that they were more likely to experience negative emotions from potentially conflicting communication on political topics than the incorrectness of the interlocutors' behavior during such communication;

2) slightly more than half of the respondents experience low, medium or high interpersonal political and psychological tension;

3) Ukrainians and Russians are the national groups with the largest number of respondents who do not experience political and psychological tensions;

4) the most significant factor of variability in indicators of interpersonal political and psychological tension is the electoral affiliation of respondents;

5) the highest interpersonal political and psychological tension is observed among potential voters of the political parties "Yevropeiska Solidarnist" and "Syla i Chest", the lowest - among those who find it difficult to decide on their electoral choice.

Interpersonal political and psychological tension is a kind of distress (destructive stress), which arises due to excessive interest of the individual in political processes, as well as unconstructive communication on this occasion with others. Interpersonal political and psychological tensions can also affect those who have little interest in politics but are constantly interacting with people who need constant discussion of political issue.

In order to study this problem, an express version of the method "Interpersonal political and psychological tension" (hereinafter - IPPT-ED, see Annex 1) was used, which allows to assess interpersonal political and psychological tension as normal, medium or high.

Frequency of cases of interpersonal political and psychological tension; its generalized indicators

IPPT-ED includes two indicators that signal the interpersonal political and psychological tension of the respondent - his own negative emotions as a result of such communication, as well as assessment of the behavior of opponents who during the policy discussion behaved, in the opinion of the respondent, incorrectly.

In general, respondents indicated that they were more likely to experience negative emotions from such communication than incorrect behavior of opponents (Graph 1). Thus, for the first 55.4% answered that they could not remember such cases in the last 30 days. At the same time, for the second number of the corresponding group increases to 66.7%. Indicative here are the indicators of almost daily encounter with the corresponding manifestations of interpersonal political and psychological tension. Thus, 9.0% of respondents said they encountered negative emotions as a result of political disputes, and only 3.5% of them - about the unacceptable behavior of others.

Graph 1. Frequency of personal negative feelings and unacceptable behavior of interlocutors during discussions on political topics over the past 30 days, %

In the future, an aggregate indicator of interpersonal political and psychological tension is used, which is calculated as the sum of individual indicators of IPPT-ED, followed by grouping of the obtained values into four intervals. As a result of adding the indicator can take values from 0 (for the last 30 days there were no relevant cases) to 8 (according to both characteristics, the respondent chose the answer "Almost every day").

In view of this, the grouping was carried out as follows: 1) 0 corresponds to the absence of interpersonal political and psychological tension over the past 30 days; 2) values from 1 to 3 - low interpersonal political and psychological tension; 2) values from 4 to 6 - medium interpersonal political and psychological tension; 3) if at least one of the indicators was chosen as the answer "Almost every day", a conclusion was made about the high interpersonal political and psychological tension of the respondent (values from 7 to 8 also fall under this rule).

As a result, it was found that slightly more than half of respondents experience low, medium or high interpersonal political and psychological tension (Graph 2).

Graph 2. Expressiveness of interpersonal political and psychological tension among respondents, %

The level of interpersonal political and psychological tension in different socio-demographic groups

Considering respondents in the gender dimension, we can say that the expressiveness of interpersonal political and psychological tensions is slightly higher among men than among women (Graph 3).

Graph 3. The expressiveness of interpersonal political and psychological tensions depending on the gender of the respondent, %

From the point of view of age division, several interesting points can be noted (Graph 4). In general, more expressive interpersonal political and psychological tension is characteristic of respondents aged 40 to 69 years. At the same time, the youngest group (18-29 years old) has the lowest number of people with no political and psychological tension, i.e. involvement in conflict communication on political issues is quite common among them. A significant weakening of the negative effects of communication on political issues is observed in the oldest age group.

Graph 4. Expressiveness of interpersonal political and psychological tension depending on the age of respondents, %

According to the regional division (Graph 5), interpersonal political and psychological tensions are least common in eastern Ukraine (almost two thirds of respondents are characterized by its absence), and the most common - in the center and south of Ukraine.

Graph 5. Expressiveness of interpersonal political and psychological tensions depending on the region of residence of respondents, %

The level of interpersonal political and psychological tension in different national and political groups

The national groups with the largest number of respondents who do not feel political and psychological tension are Ukrainians and Russians (Graph 6). At the same time, with a slightly larger number of respondents who do not experience communicative political distress among Russians, the latter has a larger number of those who do not experience communication-related political distress among Russians, in the latter the number of those who are characterized by medium or high interpersonal political and psychological tension is greater than in Ukrainians. In the other three groups (Ukrainian and Russian by self-determination, other nationalities combined and those who have not decided) the number of respondents who do not feel interpersonal political and psychological tension decreases, as well as the number of those who have medium or high level.

Graph 6. Expressiveness of interpersonal political and psychological tension depending on the nationality of the respondent, %

Finally, the most noticeable factor of variability in indicators of interpersonal political and psychological tension is the electoral affiliation of respondents (Graph 7; Political forces that were mentioned in the responses of less than 95 respondents were removed from the relevant graph due to potential fluctuations due to accidental errors).

In the presented graph, political parties are presented in ascending order of the number of respondents who do not have interpersonal political and psychological tensions (except for those who would not go to the elections or hesitate to answer - they are placed at the end of the graph).

Representatives of the political parties "Syla i Chest" and "Yevropeiska Solidarnist" feel the most tangible interpersonal political and psychological tension. Among the former, the number of respondents with medium and high interpersonal political and psychological tension exceeds 30%, among the latter there is the smallest number of those who do not feel politically induced psychological distress.

The electorates of the "Batkivshchyna", "Opozytsiina Platforma – Za zhyttia", and "Sluha Narodu" political parties are quite similar in terms of indicators of interpersonal political and psychological tension, as well as close to the general sample.

Respondents seem to be the least involved in real conflict communication on political issues, for whom it was difficult to decide on the electoral choice at the time of the poll.

Graph 7. Expressiveness of interpersonal political and psychological tension depending on the electoral preferences of the respondent, %

Annex 1

IPPT-ED indicators

ppn1. Discussing politicians and political events with people who are advocating the opposite point of view can lead to negative emotions and impressions (for example, feelings of dissatisfaction with the interlocutor, irritation, impulse to speak in high tones, etc.).

How often in the last 30 days have you had similar feelings during or immediately after the relevant communication (no matter in real life or on the Internet)?

1. Can not remember such cases.
2. Once or twice.
3. Several times a month.
4. Several times a week.
5. Almost every day.

ppn2. Speaking about your interlocutors during such communication, how often in the last 30 days you encountered that your interlocutor behaved unconstructively (for example, violated the rules of decency in communication, stubbornly refused to understand you, was hostile, etc)?

1. Can not remember such cases.
2. Once or twice.
3. Several times a month.
4. Several times a week.
5. Almost every day.

Annex 2

Tables

Table 1

Frequency of personal negative feelings and unacceptable behavior of interlocutors during discussions on political topics over the past 30 days, %

Table 2

Expressiveness of interpersonal political and psychological tension among respondents, %

Table 3

Expressiveness of interpersonal political and psychological tension depending on the gender of the respondent, %

Table 4

Expressiveness of interpersonal political and psychological tension depending on the age of respondents, %

Table 5

Expressiveness of interpersonal political and psychological tension depending on the region of residence of respondents, %

Table 6

Expressiveness of interpersonal political and psychological tension depending on the size of the settlement of respondents, %

Table 7

Expressiveness of interpersonal political and psychological tension depending on the nationality of the respondent, %

Table 8

Expressiveness of interpersonal political and psychological tension depending on the electoral preferences of the respondent, %

For comments, please contact Serhiy Dembitsky, e_forge@me.com