International Journal of Biomedicine. 2018;8(4):311-316.
Originally published December 15, 2018
Purpose of the research was to conduct a comparative analysis of the psychological characteristics of the inhabitants of the northern and middle latitudes, depending on their psychological sensitivity to changes in geomagnetic disturbances
Materials and Methods: The study included 78 relatively healthy volunteers (women and men, the average age of 44.2[36.7; 54.3] years) living in the polar (Tiksi), subpolar (Yakutsk) and middle (Saratov) latitudes.
Monitoring of the studied indicators was carried out during March and April 2016. To achieve this goal, the following methods were used: the Spielberger-Khanin scale for reactive (situational) and personal anxiety; E. Heim's technique for revealing individual coping strategies; the projective psycho-geometric test. Every day, during March and April 2016, the Kp-index, an integral indicator of changing geomagnetic disturbance was used. Depending on the identified matches, the peak values of the reactive anxiety by Spielberger-Khanin and Kp-index (not less than 60% of cases), all volunteers were divided into 2 groups. Group 1 included persons with similar overlap and, therefore, carriers of psychological sensitivity to changes in the action of heliogeomagnetic factors. Group 2 included persons without a specified sensitivity, (i.e., no coincidences).
Results: In the course of the study, both coinciding and latitude-related differences in the psychological characteristics of different groups of volunteers were established. In the inhabitants of the polar and subpolar latitudes, especially in Group 1, the behavioral sphere was the most vulnerable (no constructive coping strategies). In addition, their changes in the emotional sphere contributed to the manifestation of aggressiveness and suppression of emotions against the background of general concentration, purposefulness and integrity of the individual. Regardless of the latitude of residence, volunteers, psychologically sensitive to changes in heliogeomagnetic factors, were more constructive in the emotional sphere, and the least in the behavioral, which gives reason to state that, depending on the factors of space weather, the behavior of the individual is the most vulnerable.
1. Biotropic effects of space weather (based on the materials of Russian-Ukrainian monitoring "Heliomed" 2003-2010). In: M.V. Ragul'skaya, editor. M., Kiev–St. Petersburg: VVM, 2010. [In Russian].
2. Parshina SS, Samsonov SN, Manykina VI, et al. [Features of the group reaction of cardiovascular system to changes of space weather]. Materials of the International conference IT+M&Ec; New Information Technologies in Medicine, Biology, Pharmacology and Ecology. M.;2015 316-322. [Article in Russian].
3. Gromova EA. [Psychosocial risk factors for cardiovascular diseases (literature review)]. Siberian Medical Journal 2012;(2):22-29. [Article in Russian].
4. Chapala TV. Psychological risk factors in clinical dynamics of coronary heart disease. Abstract of PhD Thesis. St. Petersburg; 2012. [In Russian].
5. Kodochigova A. I. Psycho-physiological criteria of the risk of development of arterial hypertension and coronary heart disease. Abstract of ScD Thesis. Saratov; 2005. [In Russian].
6. Kirichuk VF, Kodochigova AI, Mareeva TI, Olenko ES, Demina TM, Martynova AG, et al. [Copping behavior of clinically healthy persons and patients with arterial hypertension devoting to various social groups and adaptive reserves of their cardiovascular system]. Saratov Journal of Medical Scientific Research. 2009;5(1):108-111. [Article in Russian].
7. Katsarou AL, Triposkiadis F, Panagiotakos D. Perceived stress and vascular disease: where are we now? Angiology. 2013;64(7):529-34. doi: 10.1177/0003319712458963. PubMed
8. Kirichuk VF, Olenko ES, Kodochigova AI, Barylnik YB, Deeva MA, Bazhenov VA. [Vasomotor Endothelial Function in Healthy Individuals: Contact Types of Character].Fiziol Cheloveka. 2015;41(3):106-11. [Article in Russian]. PubMed
9. Kodochigova AI, Parshina SS, Samsonov SN, Afanasyeva TN, Olenko ES. Justification for methodological approaches to assessing the impact of space weather on psycho-emotional state of volunteers. Psychosomatic and Integrative Research. 2016; 2(1): 0105.[Article in Russian].
10. Karandashev VN, Lebedev MS, Spielberger CD. Evaluation of anxiety: a guide to use. St. Petersburg; 2004. [In Russian].
11. Khanin YL. A brief guide to the use of a scale of reactive and personal anxiety by Ch.D. Spielberger. Leningrad.: LNII FC; 1976. [In Russian].
12. Heim E. [Coping and psychological adaptation: is there appropriate and inappropriate coping?]. Psychother Psychosom Med Psychol. 1988;38(1):8-18.[Article in German]. PubMed
13. Karademas EC, Tsalikou C, Tallarou MC. The impact of emotion regulation and illness-focused copying strategies on the relationship of illness-related negative emotions to subjective health. J Health Psychol. 2011;16(3):510-9. doi: 10.1177/1359105310392093. PubMed
14. Dellinger S. Psychogeomtrics. Psychogeomtrics: How to Use Geometric Psychology to Influence People. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall; 1989.
15. Garber EI, Kozacha VV. Psychogeometric testing (theoretical and practical aspects). Saratov: Scientific Book; 1999. [In Russian].
Received October 28, 2018.
Accepted December 1, 2018.
©2018 International Medical Research and Development Corporation.