Systemic features of the formation of mental models behavior of people in socio-economic relations

The article substantiates the thesis that management of human behavior is the management of each person behavior. In turn, each person behavior depends on the individual mental model formed in his mind. It is shown that the existence of public institutions as rules of conduct and the enforcement of their execution is a systemic necessity and they are established on the basis of values and goals of those people who establish them. The article proposes a hierarchy of behavior attributes in an individual mental model that defines human behavior. It is shown that behavior style of each person is the result of a constant comparison of rules and goals of society development with individual goals. Man as a system strives for stability and self-preservation. The set of values formed in an individual mental model determines the parameters of sustainability and self-preservation in the form of a set of needs, a range of benefits and ways to obtain them. The successful development of the system is possible only with the joint directed development of each system element. It is shown that the systemic goal of socio-economic relations is to increase well-being of each person as a creator of goods and his household, as well as the comprehensive development of each person as a member of society. The systemic need for management consists in forming a set of values based on these goals, which means a set of needs, and changing the rules for the creation, distribution and exchange of goods corresponding to these goals. It is shown that only in this case the common goals underlying the formation of an individual mental model will coincide with the goals of human development as a system and ensure harmonious behavior of people. Otherwise, people use public conformity for self-preservation and stability, or nonconformism as a style of behavior aimed at realizing values in an individual mental model.

1. Aristotle (1983). Nicomachean ethics. Essays in four volumes. Vol. 4. Moscow: Misl’. Editorial offices of philosophical literature. Academy of Sciences of the USSR. Institute of Philosophy. Series «Philosophical heritage». Vol. 90 (in Russian).

2. Hartman E. von. (2014). The essence of the world process, or the philosophy of the unconscious: the unconscious in the phenomena of bodily and spiritual life. Trans. from the 2nd ed., preface. and an introd. by A.A. Kozlov. 3rd ed. Moscow: LENAND (in Russian).

3. Drogobytskiy I. N. (2019). Mental models in economics. Economics of Contemporary Russia, no. 1 (84) (in Russian).] URL: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/mentalnye-modeli-v-ekonomike

4. Lenin V. I. (1968). Complete works. Institute of Marxism-Leninism at the Central Committee of the CPSU. 5th ed. Moscow: Gospolitizdat. Vol. 12. (in Russian).

5. Lvov D. S. (1999). The future of the Russian economy. Economic Manifesto. Economics of Contemporary Russia, no. 3 (in Russian). URL: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/buduschee-rossiyskoy-ekonomiki-ekonomicheskiy-manifest

6. Marx K., Engels F. (1974). Manifesto of the Communist Party. Moscow: Politizdat (in Russian).

7. Mokiy V. S. (2015). Transdisciplinary aspects of the human worldview. Universum: Social Sciences, no. 4 (14) (in Russian). URL: http://7universum.com/ru/social/archive/item/2100

8. Mokiy M. S., Nikiforov A. L., Mokiy V. S. (2021). Methodology of scientific research: textbook for universities; ed. by M. S. Mokiy. 2nd ed. Moscow: Urait. 254 p. (Higher education) (in Russian). URL: https://urait.ru/bcode/457487

9. Mokiy V. S. (2009). Fundamentals of transdisciplinarity. Nalchik: State Enterprise KBR Republican Polygraph Combine named after Revolutions of 1905. 368 p. (in Russian).

10. North D. (1997). Institutes, institutional changes and the functioning of the economy. Transl. from English by A. N. Nesterenko; preface and sc. ed. by B. Z. Milner. Moscow: Foundation of the Economic Book “Beginnings» (in Russian).

11. Wayshank S. (2012). 100 main principles of design. St. Petersburg, Peter. Р. 91 (in Russian).

12. Denzau А., North D. (1994). Shared Mental Models: Ideologies and Institutions. Kyklos, vol. 47, no. 1, pp. 3–31.

13. Hofstede G., Neuijen B., Ohayv D. D. et al. (1990). Measuring Organizational Cultures: A ualitative and Quantitative Study across Twenty Cases. Administrative Science Quarterly, no. 35, pp. 286–316. URL: https://doi.org/10.2307/2393392

14. Johnson-Laird P.N. (1983). Mental Models: Towards a Cognitive Science of Language, Inference, and Consciousness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

15. Jones N. A., Ross H., Lynam T., et al. (2011). Mental models: an interdisciplinary synthesis of theory and methods. Ecology and Society, no. 16 (1), p. 46. URL: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol16/iss1/art46/

16. Mokiy M. S. (2022). Ontological problems of system analysis. Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems. International Conference System Analysis in Engineering and Control. April 2022, vol. 442, pp. 89–99. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-98832-6_8

17. Smuts Hon J. C. (1927). Holism And Evolution. N.Y., L.: Macmillan and Co. Ltd.