1. Vienna, WCSA, November 20121 Yuri Alexandrov Institute of Psychology, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow Svetlana Kirdina Institute of Economics, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow

2.  Introduction  Social Mental Models: Main Types  Institutional Models (Matrices): Main Types  Systemic Methodology as a Basis for Multi- Disciplinary Synthesis  Complementarity of Social Mental Models and Institutional Mental Models  Conclusion Vienna, WCSA, November 20122

3. Comparative studies results of two research project in different scientific disciplines will be presented: 1) in Psychology and Cognitive Neuroscience (supervised by Yuri Alexandrov); 2) in Economics and Sociology (supervised by Svetlana Kirdina). Systemic methodology will be used as a bases to explain and synthesize the results of two independent research projects. Vienna, WCSA, November 20123

4. The notion that every nation has its own collective mental characteristics and social mental models, that are distinguish them from the other nations, is “as old, as nations themselves” (Hofstede, McCray, 2010, p.10). Is it possible to aggregate these variations? Vienna, WCSA, November 20124

5. Anthropologists, and then psychologists and neuropsychologists suggest that it is possible to aggregate variations of individual social attitudes and mental features in two types of social mental models (Holden, 1978; Tower et al., 1997; Nisbett and others,2001; Kühnen et al., 2001; Nisbett, Masuda, 2003; Alexandrov, Alexandrova, 2009; Henrich et al., 2010; Buchtel, Norenzayan, 2008, 2009; Grossmann, Varnum, 2011 etc). Vienna, WCSA, November 20125

6. 6 Two Main Types of Social Mental Models Characteristics “Non-western” type of mentality “Western” type of mentality “Dimension” of the world ContinuityDiscontinuity Perception of the world Holistic and interrelatedness Analyticity and fragmentarity Type of decision making Intuitive typeRational type Dominating among the population of countries Eastern countries and Russia Western offshoots and Europe

7. As seen from the table, the social mental models reflect particular perceptions of the social reality that is characteristic for the individual belonging to the given culture, from the point of view of its “dimension” and unity and corresponding to this perception the way of solving problems (decision making). Vienna, WCSA, November 20127

8. Institutions are formal and informal rules of social behaviour in different spheres of the society. Stable sets of institutions could be considered as institutional models, or so called “institutional matrices” (on Institutional Matrices Theory see: Kirdina, 2000; 2004; 2007; 2011 etc) Vienna, WCSA, November 20128

9. 9 Economy Politics Ideology Structure of economic, political and ideological institutions defines as an institutional matrix

10. * Redistributive economy with the Center * Market (exchange) economy mediating the movement of goods and services * Centralized political order (top-down model) * Federative political order (bottom-up model) * Communitarian ideology (We over Me) * Individualistic Ideology (I over We) Vienna, WCSA, November 201210 X Y Redistributive economy Communitarian ideology Unitary-centralized political order Federative political order Individualistic Ideology Market economy

11. Russia, China, India, Europe and Western most Asian, Middle Eastern, Offshoots: the USA, Latin American, and Canada, Australia, some other countries and New Zealand Vienna, WCSA, November 201211 Y X Y X

12. Functions of institutionsX-institutionsY-institutions 1. Regulating access to goods (property rights system) Supreme conditional ownership Private ownership 2. Transfer of goodsRedistribution (accumulation- coordination- distribution) Exchange (buying-selling) 3. Interactions between economic agents CooperationCompetition 4. Labor systemEmployed (unlimited term) labor Hired (short and medium term) labor 5. Feed-back loops (effectiveness indexes) Cost limitation (Х-efficiency) Profit maximization (Y-efficiency) 12AFIT, Houston, Texas, April 2012

13. Functions of institutionsX-institutionsY-institutions 1.Territorial administrative organization of the state Administrative system (unitarity) Federative structure (federation) 2. Governance system (decision making) Vertical hierarchical authority with Centre on the top Self-government and subsidiarity 3.Type of interaction in the order of decision making General assembly and the rule of unanimity Multi-party system and the rule of democratic majority 4. Access to governing positions AppointmentElection 5. Feed-back loopsAppeals to higher levels of hierarchical authority Legal suits 13AFIT, Houston, Texas, April 2012

14. Functions of institutionsX-institutions of communitarian ideology Y-institutions of subsidiary ideology 1. Core principle of social action CollectivismIndividualism 2. Normative understanding of social structure EgalitarianismStratification 3. Prevailing social valuesOrderFreedom 4. Labor attitudesWell-being-orientedPecuniary-oriented 5. Principles of common thinking Generalization- Integralism/Holism Specialization- Atomization/Mereism 14AFIT, Houston, Texas, April 2012

15.  The material and technological environment is a key determinant for the prevalence of either X- or Y- matrices.  The environment can be a communal, indivisible system, under which the removal of some elements can lead to the disintegration of the entire system, OR  The environment can be non-communal, that is, with opportunities for technological division and separate using.  In a communal environment the X-matrix institutions are dominant and the Y-matrix institutions are complementary. In a non- communal environment it is the opposite. Vienna, WCSA, November 201215

16. If “non-western” social mental model prevails in nation-states, the institutional X-matrix prevails accordingly. If “western” social mental model prevails in nation-states, the institutional Y-matrix prevails accordingly. Vienna, WCSA, November 201216

17. Social mental models of both types (“non-western” and “western”) are presented in each country population, but one of them permanent prevails. Institutional models (matrices) of both types (X-matrix and Y-matrix) coexist in each country, but one of them historically prevails. Vienna, WCSA, November 201217

18. Systemic approach has been used in each above mentioned independently carried out research project: Theory of functional systems and concept of systemogenesis (Anokhin, P.K., 1963. Systemogenesis as a General Regulator of Brain Development, Progress in Brain Research, Vol. 9, The Developing Brain, Amsterdam, Elsevier) in the psychological research project. System paradigm in economic theory (Kornai J., 1998. The System Paradigm. W.D. Institute Working Papers 278 : William Davidson Institute at the University of Michigan) and systemic approach for the analysis of complex social phenomena (Zaslavskaya T.I., works of 1970-1980 th, in Russian) in the economic and sociological research project. Vienna, WCSA, November 201218

19. The prevailing social attitudes (mentality), on the one hand, and the structure of institutions, on the other hand, are related to their rootedness in the social consciousness and social practice. This, in turn, is due to the mechanisms of mental and institutional structures folding (Alexandrov Yu., Kirdina S, 2012. Mentality, Institutions and “Effect of Increasing Returns”. Psychology and Economics, vol. 4, № 2). The similarity of the reproduction mechanisms of mental models and institutions is related to the fact that they reflect the common ways of self-organization of living systems. Setting connections in the human brain between neurons, as well as institutions in the social system, are a sort of “instructions”, which define the rules of activity and ensure the development both mental models and institutional structures. Vienna, WCSA, November 201219

20. Active interactions of population with the environment are resulted in the creation and fixing of prevailing mental and institutional structures, which use as a means of goals’ achieving for different types of societies. Type of environment (communal or non- communal) could be considered as a key factor of differentiation. Vienna, WCSA, November 201220

21. Vienna, WCSA, November 201221 Material environment Material environment Institutions Mentality

22.  Historical research shows that the prevalence of one or the other type of social mental models as well as institutional matrices has a steady character. Even if, by virtue of external pressures or under influence of distorted internal reasons, attempts are made to replace one dominant social mental model or institutional matrix with the other subordinanted one, such a situation of outright reversal is, as a rule, short-lived (in historical time). Attempts at systematic institutional and mental change in Eastern Europe under influence of the USSR or in the countries of Latin America under pressure of the USA were vivid examples. Vienna, WCSA, November 201222

23. Beijing, China, October 201223

24.  Александров Ю. И. Введение в системную психофизиологию // Психология XXI века / Под ред. В. Н. Дружинина. М.: Пер Се, 2004.  Александров Ю. И., Александрова Н. Л. Комплементарность культур // От события к бытию. Грани творчества Г. В. Иванченко. Сб. научных статей и воспоминаний. М., Изд. дом Государственного университета Высшей школы экономики. 2010.  Александров Ю. И., Александрова Н. Л. Субъективный опыт, культура и социальные представления. Москва : Издательство « Института психологии РАН », 2009.  Александров Ю. И., Кирдина С. Г. Типы ментальности и институциональные матрицы : мультидисциплинарный подход. // СОЦИС, 2012. № 7.  Институциональных матриц теория. / Социологический словарь. / Отв. редакторы Г. В. Осипов, Л. Н. Москвичев. М : ИНФРА - М, 2010.  Кирдина С. Г. Институциональные матрицы и развитие России. М : ТЕИС. 2000; 2- е изд. Новосибирск : ИЭиОПП СО РАН, 2001.  Матрица институциональная в социологии / Социологическая энциклопедия, М : Мысль, 2003, т. 1.  Alexandrov Yu., Kirdina S. Mentality, Institutions and “Effect of Increasing Returns”. // Психология и экономика (Psychology and Economics). 2011. Т.4, № 2.  Kirdina S. Prospects of Liberalization for S&T Policies in Russia: Institutional Analysis // Sociology of Science and Technology, 2010, vol. 1, № 2. Vienna, WCSA, November 201224

25.  Using a systemic approach we built the classifications of countries by the dominated types of mentality defined on the basis of psychological research, and types of institutional matrices, that defined on the basis of economic and sociological research. There are concurring classifications.  Global challenges ask for finding an optimal balance of predominant and alternative (or complementary) types of institutions and types of mentality as well for today’s nation-states. Vienna, WCSA, November 201225

26. yuraalexandrov@yandex.ru kirdina@bk.ru www.kirdina.ru Vienna, WCSA, November 201226 Thank you for your attention!