Palitay Ivan Sergeevich

The article provides an analysis of the main role characteristics of a parliamentarian, as well as the theoretical foundations of the political and psychological research dealing with the personality of politicians. Based on these foundations, the research provides a model for a political and psychological analysis of the personal and professional potential of young parliamentarians. Methodologically, the research relies on the biographical analysis hand in hand with content analysis, observation, and in-depth interviews. This methodology has been applied to the analysis of the personality of all young deputies of the State Duma, defi ned by their age (under 35). The study shows that among the main traits of the young legislators prevail those related to achievement and power. On the other hand, affi liation appears as the least developed, indicating the dedication of young deputies in the direction of chosen priorities and emphasizing high ambition among their main leadership qualities. In terms of type of political leadership, the majority of young deputies can be labelled as “administrators”, while the number of extroverts exceeds the number of introverts. Most young legislators appear to have low selfesteem and a complex self-concept, factors that enhance their commitment on the one hand, and manageability by the top management on the other. Two archetypes, “Agitator — Apolitical — Motive of Power” and “Administrator — Pragmatist — Motive of Achievement” identifi ed by the research, confi rm the current request from the federal government for “speaking” and subordinated individuals.

The article presents the results of a study of the communicative image of two constituent entities of the Russian Federation (Moscow and Primorsky Krai), as well as the images of their heads in the mass consciousness of residents. The results were obtained in the course of an analysis of federal and regional media, as well as a survey of citizens. The communicative image of each region was described according to the developed model by the following indicators: improving the living environment, organizing points of attraction for citizens, infrastructure; attractiveness for investments, large companies, brands; the strategic importance of the region for the State; adequate availability of jobs and employment. The same indicators were used as the basis for the developed questionnaire.
The study revealed that the subject’s communicative image is not always a key factor in the perception of its head. In the case when the communicative image of the region is built in relation to the leader, the latter experiences his positive influence, while the negative aspects of the leader’s perception do not affect the image of the region (Moscow case). In the case when the policy of forming the communicative image of the subject and its leader are not connected with each other, the regional factor practically has no effect, and the negative aspects of the leader’s perception reduce the level of attractiveness of the image of the region (the case of Primorsky Krai).