printProfessional Well- Being of Russian Scholars:
Methodological Issues and Results of Sociological Measurements
Noskova A.V.
Dr. Sci. (Sociol.), Prof., Department of Sociology of MGIMO University, Moscow, Russia a.noskova@inno.mgimo.ru
Goloukhova D.V.
Cand. Sci. (Sociol.), Assoc. Prof., Department of Sociology, MGIMO University, Moscow, Russia. d.v.goloukhova@inno.mgimo.ru
Kuzmina E.I.
Cand. Sci. (Sociol.), Assoc. Prof., Department of Sociology, MGIMO University, Moscow, Russia. e.kuzmina@inno.mgimo.ru
Noskova A.V., Goloukhova D.V., Kuzmina E.I. Professional Well- Being of Russian Scholars: Methodological Issues and Results of Sociological Measurements. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya [Sociological Studies]. 2025. No 7. P. 80-93
The paper addresses the problem of the professional well-being of Russian scientists. The relevance of the sociological research is determined by the importance of an objective understanding of the processes occurring within the professional group of scientific workers, which becomes crucial in the context of achieving the objectives of scientific and technological development of Russia. The authors analyze existing approaches to defining and measuring professional well-being and conclude that most dominating approaches focus on the subjective and psychological measurements of professional well being. This study aims to develop and validate a methodological framework for assessing researchers’ professional well-being by combining objective and subjective measures. The authors suggest that a sociological focus should be adopted and define professional well-being of scientists as an integral characteristic combining external professional success (the objective component) and the subjective perception of the degree of realization of socio- professional opportunities (the subjective component). To validate the suggested approach a system of indicators was developed. The authors hypothesize that subjective well-being is related to the achieved professional success. To test the hypothesis authors turned to the results on the online survey conducted among Russian scientists on a purposive sample (N = 536). The results of the survey showed some gaps between the objective and subjective parameters of the professional well-being as well as between eudaemonistic and hedonistic dimensions of well being. High professional status is associated with higher job satisfaction and self-efficacy assessment, but they do not lead to high salary satisfaction and high assessment of the occupational prestige. Professional well-being is highly dependent on the employment factor. Unlike scientists working in various research institutes, university teachers have lower levels of the subjective professional well-being despite slightly higher levels of professional status.
Akimova A. Yu., Oboznova A. A., Petrovich D. L. (2020) Subjective Professional Well-being of Railway Transport Specialists (on the Example of Locomotive Drivers and Assistants). Vestnik Tverskogo gosunta. Pedagogika i psikhologiya [Bulletin of Tver State University. Pedagogy and Psychology]. No. 3 (52): 20–35. (In Russ.)
Anikin V. A., Nagernyak M. A., Voronina N. D. (2024) The Concept of Well-being in Social Sciences. Monitoring obshchestvennogo mneniya: ekonomicheskie i sotsial’nye peremeny [Monitoring of Public Opinion: Economic and Social Changes]. No. 6: 319–341. (In Russ.)
Aryanti R. D., Sari E. Y., Widiana H. S. (2020) A Literature Review of Workplace Well- Being. Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research. Vol. 477: 605–609. DOI:10.2991/assehr.k.201017.134.
Bardach L., Klassen R. M., Perry N. E. (2022) Teachers’ Psychological Characteristics: Do They Matter for Teacher Effectiveness, Teachers’ Well-being, Retention, and Interpersonal Relations? An Integrative Review. Educational Psychology Review. No. 34: 259–300.
Berezovskaya R. A. (2016) Professional Well-being: Problems and Prospects of Psychological Research. Psikhologicheskie issledovaniya [Psychological Research]. Vol. 9. No. 45. URL: https://psystudy.ru/index.php/num/article/view/489/664 (accessed 12.03.2025). (In Russ.)
Bordi L., Okkonen J. et al. (2018) Communication in the Digital Work Environment: Implications for Wellbeing at Work. Nordic Journal of Working Life Studies. Vol. 8. No. S3. URL: https://tidsskrift.dk/njwls/article/view/105275/154091 (accessed 12.03.2025).
Borodkina E. V. (2012) On the Study of Subjective Well-being in Professional and Pedagogical Activities. Psikhologiya i pedagogika: metodika i problemy prakticheskogo primeneniya [Psychology and Pedagogy: Methodology and Problems of Practical Application]. No. 28: 31–34. (In Russ.)
Czerw A. (2019) Diagnosing Well- Being in Work Context – Eudemonic Well- Being in the Workplace Questionnaire. Current Psychology. No. 38: 331–346.
Demenev A. G. (2016) Eudaimonistic and Hedonistic Theories in Modern Happiness Research. Vestnik VGU. Seriya: Filosofiya [Bulletin of Voronezh State University. Series: Philosophy]. No. 4: 15–23. (In Russ.)
Diener E. (1984) Subjective well-being. Psychological Bulletin. No 95(3): 542–575. DOI: 10.1037/0033-2909.95.3.542.
Druzhilov S. A. (2016) Professional Well-being of a Person and Psychological Aspects of Professional Adaptation and Professional Destructions. Sovremennye nauchnye issledovaniya i innovatsii [Modern Scientific Research and Innovations]. No. 12(68): 1236–1246. (In Russ.)
Grachev A. A., Russalinova A. A. (2007) Social “Self-feeling” of the Person at an Organization. Izvestiya RGPU im. A. I. Gertsena [Herald of the Herzen University]. No. 8(30): 7–11. (In Russ.)
Harter J. K., Schmidt F. L., Keyes C. L. (2002). Well- Being in the Workplace and its Relationship to Business Outcomes: A Review of the Gallup Studies. In: Keyes C. L., Haidt J. (eds) Flourishing: The Positive Person and the Good Life. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association: 205–224.
Helliwell J. F., Huang H. (2011) Well- Being and Trust in the Workplace. Journal of Happiness Studies. No. 12: 747–767.
van Horn J. E., Taris T. W. et al. (2004) The Structure of Occupational Well-being: A Study among Dutch Teachers. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology. No. 77(3): 365–375.
Jinghui Si. (2023) Higher Education Teachers’ Professional Well-being in the Rise of Managerialism: Insights from China. Higher Education. No. 87(4): 1–187.
Karapetyan L. V. (2016) Theoretical and empirical approaches to the creation of a model of emotional and personal well-being. Izvestiia UrFU. Ser. 1. Problemy obrazovaniia, nauki i kultury [Herald of the Ural Federal University. Ser. 1. Issues in education, science and culture]. Vol. 22. No. 4(156): 100–107. (In Russ.)
Keyes C. L.M. (1998) Social Well-being. Social Psychology Quarterly. No. 61(2): 121–140.
Khrachenko V. S. (2022). Social well-being of the organization’s personnel: methods for studying the main HR indicators. Upravlenie kulturoi [Managing culture]. No. 2: 4–15. (In Russ.)
Klimenko L. V., Skachkova L. S. (2020) Subjective Well-being of Russian University Teachers: An Empirical Study. Voprosy obrazovaniya [Educational Studies]. No. 4: 37–63. (In Russ.)
Kot A. S., Kachina A. A. (2024) Professional Well-being of IT Specialists. Organizatsionnaya psikhologiya [Organizational Psychology]. Vol. 14. No. 1: 134–157. (In Russ.)
Lisovskaya A. Yu., Kosheleva S. V. et al. (2021) Main Approaches to Understanding Employee Well-being: From Theory to Practice. Organizatsionnaya psikhologiya [Organizational Psychology]. Vol. 11. No. 1: 93–117. (In Russ.)
Martinsone B., Jensen M. T. et al. (2024) Wellbeing in the Teachers’ Profession: Theoretical Considerations and Multi- Cultural Research in Europe. In: Teachers’ Professional Wellbeing. A Digital Game Based Social- Emotional Learning Intervention. Bad Heilbrunn: Verlag Julius Klinkhardt: 9–31.
Noskova A. V., Goloukhova D. V., Kuzmina E. I. (2024) Status Positions and Scientific Capital of Scientists in Russian Science. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya [Sociological Studies]. No. 2: 88–99. DOI: 10.31857/S0132162524010087. (In Russ.)
Rut E. I., Avgustova L. I. (2017) Professional Well-being of Employees of Commercial Organizations: Criteria and Assessment Methodology. Nauchnye issledovaniya vypusknikov fakul’teta psikhologii SPbGU [Scientific Research of Graduates of the Faculty of Psychology of St. Petersburg State University]. No. 5: 72–78. (In Russ.)
Ryff C. D., Keyes C. L.M. (1995) The Structure of Psychological Well-being Revisited. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. No. 69: 719–727.
Sato W. (2016) Scientists’ personality, values, and well-being. SpringerPlus. No 5. URL: https://springerplus.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s40064-016-2225-2 (accessed 10.03.2025). DOI: 10.1186/s40064-016-2225-2.
Sen A. (2003) Development as Capability Expansion. In: Readings in Human Development. New Delhi; New York: Oxford University Press: 41–58.
Tatarova G. G., Bessokirnaya G. P., Kuchenkova A. V. (2021) Subjective Well- Being at Work: Research Practices of Sociological Measurement. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya [Sociological Studies]. No. 10: 37–49. DOI: 10.31857/S013216250015546-3. (In Russ.)
Temnitskiy A. L., Bessokirnaya G. P. (2018) Work and life satisfaction in modern Russia: models of interrelation. Vestnik Omskogo gosun-ta. Ekonomika [Bulletin of Omsk University. Economics]. No. 4(64):138–152. DOI: 10.25513/1812-3988.2018.4.138-152. (In Russ.).
Warr P. (1999) Well-being and the Workplace. In: Well-being: The Foundations of Hedonic Psychology. Russell Sage Foundation: 392–412.
Warr P., Cook J., Wall T. (1979) Scales for the Measurement of Some Work Attitudes and Aspects of Psychological Well-being. Journal of Occupational Psychology. No. 52(2): 129–148.
Yildirim K. (2014) Main Factors of Teachers’ Professional Well-being. Educational Research and Reviews. No. 9(6): 153–163.
Zdravomyslov A. G., Yadov V. A. (2003) Man and His Work in the USSR and After. Moscow: Aspekt Press. (In Russ.)