from 01.01.2019 until now
Research Institute of Criminalistics of the General Directorate of Criminalistics (Criminalistics Center) (Department of research of problems of technical-criminalistic and expert support of crime investigation, inspector)
doctoral candidate from 01.01.2019 until now
Moscow, Moscow, Russian Federation
UDC 159.99
Globalization processes, migration flows and political confrontations have contributed to the growth of criminal behavior, including among foreign citizens. The criminal behavior model begins with manifestations of hostility. Respondents with high levels of hostility exhibit either indifferent or unfriendly connotations. Respondents with medium levels of hostility are characterized by loyal connotations, reflecting hopes for successful adaptation as well as concerns about potential manifestations of discrimination. Respondents with low levels of hostility exhibit neutral or friendly connotations. Regarding their surroundings, foreign citizens may experience fear and dislike. Ethnic prejudices are formed based on expectations, which as a result of negative experiences turn into criminal behavior. Hostility represents a complex system of relations, characterized by its intensity (overall level of hostility), awareness, stability and significance for the individual. Hostility can escalate into conflict, manifesting in criminal behavior.
hostility, foreign citizens, criminal behavior, associative study, prototypical analysis
1. Sobchik L. N., Slavinskaya Yu. V. Psihodiagnosticheskie kriterii ocenki kriminal'nyh naklonnostey // Prikladnaya yuridicheskaya psihologiya. 2008. № 3. URL: https:// cyberleninka.ru/article/n/psihodiagnosticheskie-kriterii-otsenki-kriminalnyh-naklonnostey (data obrascheniya: 02.10.2025).
2. Voenkova V. A. Kriminologicheskaya harakteristika prestupnika migranta // Gosudarstvo i pravo: teoriya i praktika. 2017. № 1(6). S. 11–15.
3. Saitzhanov R. B. Kriminologicheskiy portret lichnosti prestupnika-migranta // Nauchno-prakticheskiy elektronnyy zhurnal «Alleya Nauki». 2023. № 5(80). s. 772–775. Alley-science.ru.
4. Buss, A. H. 1961, The psychology of aggression, Willey, New York.
5. Barefoot, J. C. 1992, ‘Developments in the measurement of hostility’, in H. S. Friedman (ed.), Hostility, coping, & health (pp. 13–31), American Psychological Association, Washington.
6. Smith, T. W. 1992, ‘Hostility and health: Current status of a psychosomatic hypothesis’, Health psychology, vol. 11, pp. 139–150.
7. Enikolopov S. N. Vrazhdebnost' v klinicheskoy i kriminal'noy psihologii // Nacional'nyy psihologicheskiy zhurnal. 2007. № 1(2). S. 33–39.
8. Tajfel, H. 1978, ‘The Achievement of Group Differentiation’, Differentiation Between Social Groups: Studies in the Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations, Published in cooperation with European Association of Experimental Social Psychology by Academic Press, London, New York, San Francisco.
9. Shipovskaya V. V., Guseynov A. Sh. Lichnostnye prediktory vrazhdebnosti: sub'ektno-bytiynaya interpretaciya // Gumanizaciya obrazovaniya. 2019. № 6. S. 109–124.
10. Metodiki diagnostiki emocional'noy sfery: psihologicheskiy praktikum / sost. O. V. Barkanova. Ser. Biblioteka aktual'noy psihologii. Vyp. 2. Krasnoyarsk : Litera-print, 2009. S. 197–200.
11. Goroshko E. I. Integrativnaya model' svobodnogo associativnogo eksperimenta. M., Har'kov : Izd-vo «Ra-Karavella», 2001. 320 s.
12. Vergès, P. 1992, ‘L’Evocation de l’argent: uneméthode pour la définition du noyau central d’unereprésentation’, Bulletin de psychologie, vol. XLV, iss. 405, pp. 203–209.
