Empirical Indicators of Innovative Readiness of the Population: Experience of the Application of the Bogardus Scale

  • A. V. Rostova
  • Y. A. UrgalkinEmail author
Part of the Contributions to Economics book series (CE)


The study analyzes the possibilities of applying the Bogardus scale for analyzing the population’s readiness to adopt innovations. The study used Bogardus scale, which was adapted for the purpose of scientific research to study the innovative openness of the population. Theoretical and methodological principles of the value and activity approaches and the theory of everyday life and the phenomenological paradigm were used as a theoretical and methodological basis. Based on adapted Bogardus scale, the following indicators are defined and used: innovative openness, acceptability, isolation, and restraint. The index of innovative readiness of the population of the Samara region is determined, and also the socio-demographic characteristics of each of their groups of the respondents are analyzed. The dominance of innovative isolation among the inhabitants of the region and the lack of interrelation between socio-demographic characteristics and the level of openness to innovation have been revealed. The scientific novelty of the research consists in isolating four main positions in the population structure: openness, acceptability, isolation, and restraint in relation to innovations. According to the research results, in general, the population is characterized by innovative isolation, which indicates an understanding of the inevitability of changes in the life of the country and the city, but the unwillingness to accept changes in one’s own life. The weak influence of socio-demographic characteristics on the degree of openness of the population to innovation indicates, on the one hand, the homogeneity of the population’s attitudes, and on the other, on deeper mechanisms of determination. The main provisions and conclusions of the study can be used in scientific and pedagogical activity when considering questions about the openness of the population of the region to innovations.


Innovations Index of innovation readiness Innovative openness Innovative isolation Innovative acceptability Innovative isolation Innovative restraint Bogardus scale 


  1. Bass, F.M.: The Evolution of General Theory of the Diffusion of Technological Innovations. Polykarp Kusch Series. The University of Texas at Dallas (1994)Google Scholar
  2. Bogardus, E.S.: Social Distance. University of Southern California Press, Los Angeles (1959)Google Scholar
  3. Drucker, P.F.: Innovation and Entrepreneurship. Harper & Row, Publishers, New York (1985)Google Scholar
  4. Ilyinikh, S.A., Mikhailova, E.V.: Innovations in organizations: implementation and resistance. Sociol. Res. 6, 86–90 (2015) (in Russian)Google Scholar
  5. Karpova, Yu.A.: Introduction Innovation to Sociology. Peter, St. Petersburg (2004) (in Russian)Google Scholar
  6. Lapin, N.I.: Theory and Practice of Innovation: Textbook. Allowance. University Book; Logos, Moscow (2008) (in Russian)Google Scholar
  7. Malkina, M.Yu. Management of innovative development as a complex of interrelated problems. Problems Theory Practice Manage 2, 73–80 (2005) (in Russian)Google Scholar
  8. Merton, R.: Social theory and social structure. Sociol. Res. 3, 105–110 (1992) (in Russian)Google Scholar
  9. Meshkov, A.A.: The main directions of innovation research in American sociology. Sociol. Res. 5,117–128 (1996) (in Russian)Google Scholar
  10. Rogers, E.M.: Diffusion of Innovations, 4th edn, pp. 11–24. The Free Press, A Division of Simon & Schuster Inc., New York (2010)Google Scholar
  11. Russians About the USE: The All-Russian Public Opinion Research Center (2017). In URL: Accessed 13 Sept 2017
  12. Schumpeter, J.: The Theory of Economic Development. DirectMedia Publishing, Moscow (2008) (in Russian)Google Scholar
  13. Tard, G.: Laws of Imitation: Translated from French. Academic Project, Moscow (2011) (in Russian)Google Scholar
  14. Thomas, V., Znaniecky, F.: Three types of personality. In: Zdravomyslov, G., Lapin, N.I. (eds.) General Sociology, pp. 173–189. Higher School, Moscow (2006) (in Russian)Google Scholar
  15. USE-2016: Myths and reality. The All-Russian Public Opinion Research Center (2016). In: URL: Accessed on 13 Sept 2017 (In Russian)
  16. Weber, M.: Types of Domination. Selected Works. Progress, Moscow (1990) (in Russian)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Togliatti State UniversityTogliattiRussia
  2. 2.Samara State University of EconomicsSamaraRussia

Personalised recommendations