In this paper discusses various approaches to understanding infantilism in the philosophical and psychological studies. Is given the author's definition of psychological infantilism. Distinguished components of infantilism: the unwillingness to take responsibility for their own behavior, lack of independence, the weak development of refl ection, naivety. As well as a detailed study of risk factors for psychological infantilism in adolescence, namely, the type of family education. The methodological basis of the study are: 1) the existential approach, 2) dispositional approach, and 3) an integrated approach. In this paper, these approaches are shown in the integration of knowledge about the infantilism of different specialties and disciplines of research. In an empirical study is presented: identification of the components of infantilism in adolescence, to establish the type of family education in youth with a strong performance on the components of infantilism, and establish the relationship between the components of infantilism and the type of family education in adolescence. To solve these problems used techniques: the questionnaire, the questionnaire «The level of subjective control», the 16-factor personality questionnaire R. Kettela, the test «Parent — Adult — Child», a test of self-actualization E. Shostroma, methods Eidemiller EG, Yustitskisa B. B. «The analysis of family relationships», the correlation analysis. The study found that in a group of young people with high rates on components of infantilism in interpersonal relationships externalities prevalent type of control, low self-reliance, independence, self-control, emotional instability, the dominance of the position of «child». In the correlation analysis, it was discovered the relationship between the components of the infantile character in youth, and these types of family education as «pandering» and «giperprotektsiya».
Infantilism, psychological infantilism, refl ection, internal locus of control, external locus of control, type of family education, giperprotektsiya, gipoprotektsiya
1.Ananev B. G. Chelovek kak predmet poznania (Man as an Object of Knowledge), Saint-Petersburg, 1999.
2. Egorov I. V. 2007, in Vestnik Moskovskogo gorodskogo pedagogicheskogo universiteta, vol. 2/17, pp. 38-50.
3. Eidemiller E. G., Yustitskis B. Psihologia i psihoterapia semyi (Psychology and Psychotherapy of Family), Saint-Petersburg, 1999.
4. Fromm E. Human Soul, Moscow, 1998.
5. Garboozov V. I. Nervnie i trudnie deti (Nervous and Difficult Children), Saint Petersburg, 2008.
6. Kapustina A. N. Mnogofaktornaia lichnostnaia metodika R. Cettell (Multi-factor personality technique of R. Cattell), Saint-Petersburg, 2007.
7. Muzdybaev K. Psihologia otvetstvennosti (Psychology of Responsibility), Leningrad, 1983.
8. Shostrom E. Chelovek-manipulator. Vnutrennee puteshestvie ot manipuljacii k actualizacii (Human-Manipulator. Inner Journey from Manipulation to Actualization), Moscow, 2008.
9. Vygotsky L. S. Izbrannie psihologicheskie issledovanya (Selected Psychological Studies), Moscow, 1956.
10. Yalom I. Jekzistencial'naja psihoterapija (Existential Psychotherapy), Moscow, 2000.
11. Yermolaev O. Y. Matematicheskaya statistika dlya psihologov (Mathematical Statistics for Psychologists), Moscow, 2003.