Postgraduate student, Russian State Social University, Moscow

---

112

Keyzerova J.V.,

postgraduate student, Russian State Social University, Moscow.

E-mail: [e-mail]

 

UDC 159.9; 316.6

 DOI: 

10.17922/2412-5466-2016-2-1-112-119

Corruption As a Social Phenomenon

Receiving date:

15.01.2016

Preprint date:

25.02.2016

Taking to print date:

28.03.2016

Annotation: the article investigates the concept of “corruption”. We consider historical and contemporary 

conditions of existence and development of this phenomenon. We describe some of the approaches to the 

understanding of corruption. Presents the different classifications of corruption. The causes of corruption and 

bribery. The question of the relationship of corruption and mentality.

Key words: corruption, bribery, classification of corruption, causes of corruption, the main approaches to 

understanding corruption, mentality.

The history of studying of corruption says that Uruinimgina – the Sumer tsar of the city-state 

of Lagash in the second half of the XXIV century was BC the first governor and the fighter against 

corruption. It cruelly punished for wastes and bribes [11]. The special attention was riveted on 

a problem of bribability of employees of court, not incidentally the religion condemns first of all 

bribery of judges, in the Koran we can read the following thought: “Don’t appropriate illegally 

property of each other and don’t bribe judges intentionally to appropriate part of property of 

other people” [16]. The law of Twelve tables provided the death penalty, to the intermediaries 

or judges convicted of bribery and bribery.

In Russia at the time of existence of orders (the XVII–XVIII centuries) “corruption” turned 

into characteristic feature of the power, under the name mandative red tape. In the XVIII 

century to petty Russian officials cancelled a state salary and replaced it with accidents. A little 

later this rule was cancelled, but monarchic servants already got used to live due to “feeding”. 

In the first half of the XIX century the bribery becomes a habit and becomes norm. At that 

time officials weren’t pursued for similar acts in any way. Such extortion generated the mass of 

sayings in this respect: “At mandative you won’t buy the truth for ruble”, “Every citizen likes hot 

bread”, “The earth loves the truth, and our head of troops hresent”, etc.

It is possible that this part of our history can be related to mentality. And here we can 

argue not on separate group of people (officials), and on all because in this to “mandative red 

tape” all segments of the population were involved. Mentality is reflected in consciousness and 

behavior of people, culture, policy, economy.

PSYCHOLOGY

---

113

VOLUME 2, No. 1, 2016

Corruption, according to most of scientists, is generated by national economy for this 

reason most often this phenomenon is studied by economists, lawyers and political scientists, 

sociologists are more rare, it turns out that from social and psychological features of the person 

it is a little studied. The successful anti-corruption policy is impossible without change of public 

and individual consciousness. Here positive changes in rules and examples of behavior, both 

public servants, and ordinary citizens are necessary. It is possible to assume that corruption is 

in certain dependence on historical development and mentality of society.

There is an opinion that the tendency of weakening of moral principles of society is at 

the moment traced. Cultural wealth and traditions pass into the background, and forward a 

careerism, aspiration of some people who are in power to material enrichment. All this denies 

common goals of the people and the nation and conducts to violation of the law.

Existence of corruption activity can be tracked in any society throughout all historical 

development. It doesn’t depend on a form of a state system or a political regime of this or that 

country. At the moment any democratic country couldn’t get rid of this harmful phenomenon 

entirely. However, same it is possible to tell and about the most rigid dictatorship.

Historical prerequisites to emergence of corruption in Russia we designated the principle of 

“feeding” in Russia. Perhaps, it isn’t enough of it, and modern corruption originates in mentality. 

Russians for long time of existence of the state reconciled to thought that it is angrily inevitable. 

Still it is possible to carry legal nihilism and absence of legal culture in society to problems of 

a mental order.

Feature of the Russian bribe during the pre-revolutionary period, was that ceased to 

be ashamed of it, bribes took everything both governors, and chairmen of civil and criminal 

chambers and others. The bribe was legalized and entered custom, and “the applicant never 

came to empty-handed offices” [10].

Corruption gains new development in the XX century. This moment is marked in the history 

by blossoming of private business and strengthening of the power of officials. It is possible to 

explain it to that businessmen in competitive fight in increasing frequency began to resort to 

“buying up of the state” [19].

Russia the multinational country, in our territory a large number of ethnoses is located. 

It is logical to assume that for each ethnos the concept of a bribe will be a miscellaneous. 

For example, in the North Caucasus such gift as the car on birthday of the big chief perhaps 

isn’t perceived as a bribe, the same approximately situation will be, we will tell for example, in 

Buryatia, only behind an exception that there it is accepted to give a horse.

Today the corruption problem for our country has nation-wide character. The president of 

the Russian Federation V. V. Putin on enlarged meeting of Ministry of Internal Affairs board of 

Russia noted on March 4, 2015: “The statistics testifies that as a result of the taken measures we 

planned a tendency to decrease in level of corruption. But the facts say also that the problem 

is still not solved …” [15].

To speak about a corruption phenomenon, we need to consider it from the point of view of 

interdisciplinary approach. Such approach to understanding of corruption will allow to define a 

role and a place of corruption in social processes and public life.

The code of behavior of officials on law enforcement adopted by the United Nations General 

Assembly on December 17, 1979 says: “Though the concept of corruption has to be defined 

according to the national right, but it is necessary to understand that it covers commission or 

not commission of any action at fulfillment of duties or because of these duties as a result of 

the demanded or accepted gifts, promises or incentives, or their illegal receiving every time 

when such action or inaction” takes place [23].

Studying of the international normative legal acts says that the international community 

doesn’t narrow the content of corruption to bribery of officials and officials, and expands 

approach to studying of this phenomenon. Official plunders, lobbyism, bribery, forms of 

---

114

CONTEMPORARY PROBLEMS OF SOCIAL WORK

unauthorized use officials of the powers, advantage of the status of one citizen over another – 

all this corruption in the international understanding. It is the extremely important that this 

definition includes lawful, lawful office behavior of officials if it was caused by the received or 

promised gifts in structure of corruption.

The domestic legislation defines corruption as follows:

“a) abuse of official position, bribery, taking of a bribe, an abuse of authority, commercial 

bribery or other illegal use by the natural person of the official capacity contrary to legitimate 

interests of society and state for obtaining benefit in the form of money, values, other property 

or services of property character, other property rights for itself or for the third parties or illegal 

granting such benefit to the specified person by other natural persons” [6].

One of the shortest modern definitions of corruption was offered by J. Senturiya in the 

1960th years: “abuse of the public power for the sake of private benefit” [25].

To speak about corruption, it needs to be classified. At the moment different authors offer 

the approaches to corruption classification. We will consider some of them.

The first approach which it is necessary to mention, is the approach offered by V.A. Shabalin 

it consists in the following: corruption forms in public authorities share depending on criterion:

1)  on corruption level: local, top, vertical;

2)  on the level of public danger: corruption offense, corruption crime. [21].

V.V. Letunovsky and A.A. Ageev subdivide corruption on single, periodic and system [12].

The following model of classification consists in differentiation household (the health care, 

education, courts, a military appeal, law enforcement agencies) and business corruption (the 

sphere of interaction of business and the power regulator concerns to her) [13].

The special place in a social and legal context of the analysis of corruption is taken 

by classification of A.I. Gurov who considers this phenomenon as one of the main signs of 

organized crime:

1.  Political corruption which appears at implementation of activity of officials, contradicting 

norms of morals and the law.

2.  The corruption connected with criminal activity, based on bribery of officials.

3.  Corruption forms of behavior which assume purposeful retraction of officials in criminal 

activity [7].

A. Haydankhaymer in turn suggested to subdivide corruption on “white”, “gray” and “black”. 

The principle of consent or disagreement of public opinion with existence of corruption behavior 

is the basis for this classification [8]. In our opinion it is necessary to stop on this classification 

in more detail.

1.  “White” corruption. Rather similar the practician in public opinion the consent is created, 

i.e. these actions are integrated into culture and aren’t considered as the reprehensible. Similar 

actions aren’t perceived as a problem or threat.

2. As “sulfur” as corruption are called those practicians concerning whom there is no 

consent in public opinion.

3. “Black” corruption represents behavior which is everywhere condemned by society. 

Concerning it like corruption in society also there is no consent.

In addition to this corruption are divided into types depending on the scope of its distribution: 

international, state and corruption in the private sector [2].

I. Akhmedov in his work divides corruption depending on the degree of involvement of 

officials in the distribution of profits. The first type of corruption “progressive”, and the second 

type is corruption, based on the creation of barriers in front of entrepreneurs [1]. The first type 

of corruption is common in Western countries, and, according to the author, he was progressive, 

despite the fact that it is extremely harmful and dangerous. The meaning of such corruption is 

that officials involved in the distribution of the entrepreneurs profit. This occurs through the 

provision of a number of benefits that allow businesses to increase profits from their trades. 

---

115

VOLUME 2, No. 1, 2016

Another type of corruption is typical for underdeveloped countries, it is creating barriers for 

businesses and the imposition of a particular model of relationships.

Corruption varies in manifestations: bribery, favoritism, protectionism, lobbyism, nepotism, 

cronyism, appropriation of public resources for personal purposes, illegal privatization, the 

provision of services to relatives, friends, acquaintances.

In the framework of the sociological research corruption is studied as a complex social 

phenomenon which extends to all spheres of relations between the state and civil society, 

becoming the norm. This position adheres to the article by A.V. Dakhin: “Corruption is a social 

structure, that is, the set of stable and universal enough (they are adapted to existence in the 

various spheres of society) norms and the principles of human relations. In this case we have 

in mind not individual, isolated cases and persons, and social groups that support this structure 

as a master or as an integral conditions (source) of existence” [5]. In this context, corruption is 

understood as an informal system of regulation, which exists alongside the official mechanism 

of power.

According to experts of the all-Russia anticorruption public reception “Clean hands” from 

14 January 2013 to 31 August 2014 have been 9925 of citizens about corruption. According to 

statistics, the level of corruption is different for regions of the Russian Federation. First place 

in this ranking is Moscow, the level of corruption here is at the level of 34.2%. After Moscow is 

the Moscow region (17.3%) and Primorsky territory (4.8 per cent). Leningrad region is on the 

6th place with a level of corruption equal to 2.8%.

There is a percentage of complaints of corruption in various government bodies. It is 

interesting to note that the leader of the rating is the judicial system, the level of corruption 

here is 28.5%. Further with a small separation goes the police (20.4%), prosecutors (17.4%), 

the investigative Committee (15.7%) and completes the five regional authorities and local self-

government with an index of 7.1%.

Specialists reception “Clean hands” in the calculations proceeded from the division of 

the total number of requests for certain types of corruption: entrepreneurs, ordinary citizens 

interact with government officials in criminal, administrative and civil proceedings, complaints 

consumer corruption. The calculations used the total number of requests, average size of a bribe 

in separate groups according to the information obtained from cases and their percentage.

Also experts say that the average size of a bribe in 2014 decreased by 27.2% compared to 

2012 and was equal to 218 400 rubles [17].

O.V. Sergienko believes that “the liability for corruption for officials dramatically reduces, or 

actually reverses the level of critical self-evaluation” [20]. This is evidenced by the opinion of 

the majority of Russians in the understanding that corruption exists at the level of authorities, 

and has no influence on the social life of the society.

Also, according to O.V. Sergienko “the importance of the situation in public life where 

corruption is accepted as a norm of social interaction, even when legitimate contenders have 

to pay bribes in the case, if the goods owners use the rent officers order creating a deficit of 

public services” [20].

You can say that corrupt relationships included in the analysis of comprehension of social 

reality. The study of bribery suggests that the person is able to give or take bribes in certain 

situations. This implies that the perception of corruption appears at the level of individual 

choice and can be considered as a situational and forced inclusion in corrupt practices.

When people talk about the psychological characteristics of personality, which contributes 

to its corruption, then there is the psychological approach to the problem of corruption and 

bribery.

M.M. Reshetnikov defines this position as follows: “without psychologically sound approaches 

here hardly something can be done, because the corruption is only in its legal and economic 

consequences of the problem, and the original is purely psychological and human” [18].

---

116

CONTEMPORARY PROBLEMS OF SOCIAL WORK

Corrupt behavior is a type of social behavior that represents the actions of officials affecting 

the interests of individuals and groups in society. According to the studies of corrupt behavior 

is not so much determined by external circumstances, much depends on internal determinants: 

complex of certain qualities of personality, its attitudes, values and moral norms for the 

regulation of behavior, etc. [24].

In the study of personality B.D. Lyskov and T.N. Kurbatova come to a similar conclusion that 

“no external circumstances whatsoever can be grounds for a wrongful act if they are not laid 

simultaneously on the inner determinants of human activity” [14].

Citizens of Russia is very ambiguous, in our view, relate to corruption. A significant portion 

believes corruption is a negative phenomenon, but nevertheless, mutual service, thanks 

(material manifestation) and the gifts do not belong to corruption. This contradiction is due to 

the fact that our national culture is not defined clear boundaries between the concept of a bribe 

and what is considered to be greatly appreciated.

The society is very tolerant of the existence of corruption, and perceives bribery as an 

integral part of life. In the mass consciousness of the Russian population identify the 

following characteristics of the attitude towards corruption tolerance, the perception of 

corruption as a widespread phenomenon, not worthy of serious condemnation, condemned 

only “the exorbitant amounts of bribes”, as well as inconsistencies and contradictions [26]. 

In other words we can say that the acts of corruption themselves are not condemned, in all 

such situations are condemned only extremely large amount of bribes that some envy, and 

others bewildering.

In the papers, which talk about corruption, observed its negative sociopolitical and 

economic effects. Traditionally, corruption is considered an economic crime, but knowing the 

psychological aspects of this phenomenon, it will be easier to imagine the picture.

Psychological aspects of the phenomenon of corruption include the following positions:

1)  the psychology of corrupt behavior;

2)  psychology corrupting behavior, that is, those who give bribes, etc.;

3) the attitude of the society towards the problem of corruption and its specific 

components;

4)  socio-psychological processes that affect corruption [9].

From the foregoing it becomes clear that the causes of corrupt behavior are a complex 

phenomenon, different in nature. Among them, economic, political, social, psychological and 

those that turned into a tradition and way of life.

Let us dwell on psychological reasons. In this way you can draw attention to the work of Mr. 

Antonyan Y.M., in which he refers to as psychological reasons as follows:

• game motivation: the motives of corrupt conduct of a person not only selfish motives, but 

also the unconscious desire to participate in sharp, exciting game;

From this we can say that there are at least two causes of corruptive behavior – external 

(visible) is greed, and deeper (semantic) is the implementation’s motives. The first person 

provides material benefits, needs and ambitions. Obviously, in some cases obtaining wealth an 

end in itself without a clear idea of what these means. Interestingly, many corrupt officials are 

also players, and this passion they have not understood, it exists in the unconscious sphere of 

the psyche, and it is another semantic motif of corruption. The game brings to participants the 

psychological and moral satisfaction. They are playing with fate, the law and other people. In 

this game they build a certain relationship with their partners. These relationships also often 

have a playful character.

The existence of these motives, their relationship largely determines the prevalence of 

corruption and its acceptance by the society, as a way of life.

• alienation of the individual from state power, which people accustomed to consider that 

without bribe nothing can be done, but government control is not possible;

---

117

VOLUME 2, No. 1, 2016

• the mutual guarantee among corrupt officials, any of them helps, or even makes another, 

thus supporting and protecting itself, while “other” stores and source of income, and their own 

safety;

• long history of corruption, whereby corruption has become a tradition, fit into the 

lifestyle;

• traditional lack of solidarity of the population with laws prohibiting corruption;

• the existence of a number of posts and professions that have become desirable merely 

because give the opportunity for extortion and bribery; With the help of remuneration, the 

citizen buys the decision of your question, and this in turn raises the official self-image, because 

it has the ability to resolve this issue.

• low level of legal awareness of the population;

• psychological readiness to corrupting behavior;

• the phenomenon of mutual guilt of the giver and bribe taker: due to the fact that each 

knows that the other is wrong, this reduces the responsibility to oneself, one loses the feeling 

of guilt, because there is a possibility of shifting the guilt and on the other [3].

Foreign researchers believe that the greatest success in corruption schemes achieve creative, 

they have the ability to make unconventional decisions. It is impossible not to agree that some 

corruption fraud forced to admire their complexity and forethought.

These are the main directions towards understanding the phenomenon of corruption. Making 

a conclusion from the above, we can note the importance of the considered approaches. Each 

of them makes a significant contribution to the development and researching of corruption.

Corruption has a devastating impact on all spheres of activity of civil society institutions and 

the state. This impact is as follows:

–  corruption hinders economic and social transformation;

–  corruption increases the material inequality of citizens;

–  corruption leads to loss of moral values in society.

And that’s not all indicators of the adverse impacts of corruption. Currently expanding 

the object of corruption. Corrupt deals are not limited to the purchase of something material. 

Now are bought and sold, and positions and titles and awards and diplomas. “The country is 

absolutely and completely mired in corruption” [4].

There is an opinion that the roots of corruption rooted in the mentality of the Russian person, 

“when to be of service to one’s neighbor (family member, friend, work colleague, “a senior 

officer”) is correct and decent, even contrary to the norms of the law” [22]. Russian man sees 

this as support and gratitude, not as the abuse of official powers. And hence another feature of 

the Russian character: help is always tedious to thank, because otherwise “inconvenient”. And 

there is quid Pro quo, and as a consequence of mutual responsibility.

Having analyzed various approaches to the study of the phenomenon of corruption, we can 

draw the following conclusions:

–  public authorities corruption are classified according to the level of public danger and the 

level of manifestation of this phenomenon (V. A. Shabalin);

–  depending on the scope of manifestations of corruption are divided into consumer and 

business (M. Levin, G. Satarov);

–  corruption of differentiate depending on the degree of involvement of officials in the 

distribution of profit (I. Ahmedov);

–  corruption can be considered as one of the main features of organized crime, in which case 

it is classified into political, corruption-related criminal activities and corrupt behavior (A. I. 

Gurov);

–  corruption is classified, depending on its distribution (N. A. Akhmetova);

–  there are also a classification depending on the periodicity (or frequency) of its occurrence 

(V.V. letunovskiy, A. A. Ageev);

---

118

CONTEMPORARY PROBLEMS OF SOCIAL WORK

–  corruption is classified on the basis of agreement or disagreement of public opinion with 

the existence of corrupt behavior (A. Heidenheimer).

These classifications are complementary and versatile describe the phenomenon under study, 

that allows to consider it from many points of view.

The modern reality is that giving a bribe is very often a guarantor of the provision of services 

for the average citizen. The acceleration of the receipt of any benefits or the avoidance of 

punishment.

In our opinion a significant disadvantage in the measures to combat corruption at present 

in Russia is that all of these measures are offered exclusively in a legal manner. Together with 

these many sources suggests that legislative measures alone to combat corruption is not 

enough, they must be supplemented by other non-legal measures, the development of which 

are also sociologists, and psychologists. As a consequence, the fight against corruption is not 

enough recovery and the growing influence of regulatory bodies, it is necessary to investigate 

the person, norms and values of his consciousness, the degree of motivation in such act. Because 

in corruption schemes involved do not separate the institutions of civil society, not political 

parties in General, not robots, and people, who have their own needs and feelings. That is why in 

the study of corruption cannot be ignored psychological aspects of personality.

Mass propaganda is necessary to combat corruption, which will be developed with the 

psychological side including with use of mass media and social advertising. These measures should 

be aimed at developing attitude to corruption, to large, substantial, but not insurmountable evil, 

and triumph over social stereotypes that have developed over the years in the mass consciousness.

The formation of anti-corruption policy requires the state to serious socio-cultural analysis 

taking into account all ethnic groups and nationalities. In Western countries the main 

instrument in the fight against corruption is the law in Eastern countries, it is tradition. In 

both cases the content is different from the mentality of our country. Therefore in Russia it is 

necessary to pay great attention to the study of mentality for the fight against corruption. First 

and foremost, it is necessary to change the attitude of society towards corruption, as something 

every day and ordinary. But changes are needed in relation of state and civil society institutions 

to this problem.

References

1.  Akhmedov I. Corruption. Monitor. 2003. No. 14.

2.  Akhmetova N.A. The problem of typology of corruption. Bulletin of Volgograd state University. 

Series 5. Jurisprudence. 2011. No. 2 (15). P. 32.

3.  Antonyan Y.M. Criminology. Selected Lectures. M. 2004. P. 270– 271; 277–278.

4.  Boldyrev Y.Y. Corruption As a Systemic Defect Of Russian Capitalism. Non-Economic Facts of 

the Economy: unknown interference. M. 2010. P. 460.

5.  Dakhin A.V. Corruption: Elements of a Sociological Model. Corruption in Public Authorities: 

Nature, Counter-Measures, International Cooperation: collection of articles edited by 

Panchenko P.N., Chuprova A., Junk, A.I. N. Novgorod. 2001. P. 192.

6.  Federal Law of 25 December 2008 № 273-FL “On Combating Corruption” (as amended on 

October 5, 2015). Electronic resource. URL: http://base.consultant.ru/cons/cgi/online.cgi

?req=doc;base=LAW;n=187058;fld=134;from=172553334;rnd=177853.42009897134266794

;;ts=01778533234612469095737.

7.  Gurov A.I., Organized Crime is Not a Myth but a Reality. M.: Znanie. 1992. P. 21–22.

8.  Heidenheimer A. Political Corruption: a handbook / A. Heidenheimer, M. Johnston. New 

Brunswick: Transaction Publishers. 1989. P. 23–24.

9.  Kamneva E.V., Annenkova N.I. Psychological Aspects of Corruption. Psychology. Humanities. 

2013. No. 4(12). P. 68.

10.  Kataev I.M. The Pre-Reform Bureaucracy. According to the Notes, Memoirs and Literature. 

SPb. 1914. P. 18.

11.  Kobzar E.V. Corruption As Social Phenomenon and One of the Systemic Threats to the Security 

of the Russian Federation. Training manual. Noginsk. 2013. P. 16.

12.  Letunovskiy V.V., Ageev A.A. On Combating Corruption. Russian Justice. M. 2010. No. 1.

---

119

VOLUME 2, No. 1, 2016

13.  Levin M.I., Satarov G.A. Corruption in Russia: Classification and Dynamics. The Issues of the 

Economy. 2012. No. 10. P.6.

14.  Lyskov D.B., Kurbatova T.N. The Concept of the Identity of the Criminal. Legal Psychology. 

SPb. 2001. P. 77.

15.  Meeting with Commissioner for entrepreneurs’ Rights B. Titov (26 March 2015). The Official 

Website of the President of the Russian Federation. Electronic resource. URL: http://www.

kremlin.ru.

16. Quran 2:188.

17.  Report: Corruption in Russia: Independent Annual Report of the All-Russia Anticorruption 

Public Reception “Clean Hands” (January 14, 2013–August 31, 2014). Electronic resource. 

URL: http://corrupcia.net/aboutnews/item-1348.html.

18.  Reshetnikov M.M. Psychology of Corruption: Utopia and Anti-Utopia. SPb., 2008. P. 107.

19.  Rose-Ackerman S. Corruption and Government: Causes, Consequences, reform. (translated 

from English O. Alyakrinskaya). M., 2003. P. 8.

20.  Sergienko O.V. Corrupt Practices in the Russian Society: Influence and Involvement in the 

Social Position of the Population. Synopsis...on competition of a scientific degree of the 

candidate of sociological sciences. Rostov-on-Don, 2013. P. 5.;28.

21.  Shabalin V.A. Politics and Crime. The State and Law. 1994. No. 4. P. 43.

22. Sheremetyeva M.V. Corruption in Russia. Legal Means of Corruption Counteraction in the 

Russian Federation. Materials of all-Russian Scientific-Practical Conference. M., 2014. P. 147.

23.  The Code of Conduct of Officials on Maintaining Law and Order (resolution 34/169 adopted by 

the UN General Assembly of 17 December 1979) Article 7. Electronic resource. URL: http://

www.un.org/ru/documents/decl_conv/conv1970.shtml.

24.  Vanovska O.V. Substantiation of the Concept of Corruption Behavior of Civil Servants. Bulletin 

of Moscow State Regional University. Series 12: Psychology. Sociology. Pedagogy. 2009. No. 

3–2. P. 54–62.

25.  Wewer G. Politische Korruption. Politic-Lexicon. hsrg. von E. Holtmann unter Mitarbeit von 

Heinz Ulrich Brinkmann und Heinrich Pehle. Zweite, Erweiterte und Uberarbetete Aufiage. 

Munchen-Wein: R. Oldenbourg Verlag, 1994. P. 481.

26.  Zhuravlev A.L., Yurevich A.V. Corruption in Contemporary Russia: the Psychological Aspect. 

Knowledge. Understanding. Skill. 2012. No. 2. P. 56–65.

REFERENCE TO ARTICLE

 

Keyzerova, J.V. (2016) Corruption As a Social Phenomenon, Contemporary Problems of 

Social Work. Vol. 2. No. 1 (5). P. 112–119. DOI: 10.17922/2412-5466-2016-2-1-112-119 

(International bibliographic description).