The dynamics of value system in 1998 and 2015: Longitudinal research in Latvia

. Values may change during life because a person obtains new life experience and competencies. In the past decade, many Latvian psychologists studied people’s values and their connections with different factors like cultural, political, social, economic changes and other factors [1–3 and other]. Since 1994 Latvia has gone through different social- economic changes like crisis, economic growth, assumption to NATO and EU, and acceptation of euro currency. These changes can inﬂuence participants’ values. The aim was to conduct a comparative longitudinal research in individuals’ values in 1998 and 2015, at the beginning of their youth and then in adulthood, in order to answer the following questions: what values were in 1998 and 2015; what differences in values had appeared comparing 1998 and 2015 in same persons. Results showed that the most important values in 1998 and 2015 were “Family”, “Love”, “Responsibility”, “Honesty” and “Cheerfulness”. Signiﬁcant changes appeared in “Health” that became signiﬁcantly important in 2015 and replaced the importance of “Love”. Most achievable values in 1998 and 2015 were “The beauty of nature and art” and “Cognition” but in 2015 also “Active life” which replaced “Self-conﬁdence” that was important in 1998. Signiﬁcant changes appeared in “Self-conﬁdence”, “Wisdom”, “Active life”, “Freedom”, “Interesting job”, “Learning” and “Friends” as well, where importance of some values increased and some decreased in 2015.


Introduction
Many studies of values and value relationships with social, political, economic, cultural and other factors were published in the past decade [1-7 and other]. Many of Latvian psychologists have been studying values since the end of the XX century and at the beginning of XXI because different socioeconomic changes appeared in Latvia between 1998 and 2015: • 1992 -1997 -financial and bank crisis, • 1998 -2007 -economic growth, • 2004 -assumption to NATO and EU, • 2014 the introduction of euro currency.
In the context of socioeconomic changes, it is important to study values because they reflect different factors like culture, social norms, experience and others in human daily life. Every Int. Conf. SOCIETY. HEALTH. WELFARE. 2016 individual has its own idea of what is important in life. Relations, behaviour and decision making is strongly connected with our values [8].
On the social level, a lot of research works were published in the last 15 years in Latvia about values of adolescents and adults, as well as value connections with political, cultural and economic factors [1-3, 5, 9]. A person must acknowledge important values and abilities to create aims and successfully integrate into society.
The problem is that there has not been longitudinal research in Latvia of value dynamics. Therefore, we put forward the aim to find out what dynamics of values in the same persons is. Two [11].
Rokeach value theory provides the idea that everyone has terminal values, which determine personal or social orientation; and instrumental values, which are morality and competences that change during the life [12]. That means that terminal values are persons' beliefs tended to personality development or social acceptance. The instrumental values determine how person will realize his or her beliefs in real life.
Fantalova value theory is more personal and determines that there are two types of values -important and achievable. Achievable values are values that person may have in real life, but important ones -that person consider to be essential. Significant difference index between achievable and important values leads to internal conflict or self-vacuum [11]. It means that balance between important and achievable values is ability to evaluate correctly what resources person has and what person needs.

Sample
This study is based on a previous empirically conducted study in 1998. Then, after 17 years, the same participants were tested in 2015. Participants came from one Riga high school. Participants of the first study were 11 th -12 th form students in 1998 at the age of 16-18 years; 66 women (57.36%) and 49 men (42.61%). In second study in 2015 (after 17 years) with the help of the Internet we tried to reach the same participants. Only 30 (25%) responded to the request -20 women (65.5%) and 10 men (34.5%); at the age of 33 to 35 (M = 33.9; SD = 0.61). In this study, data from the same 30 participants, obtained in 1998 and 2015, were compared and analyzed to receive the most reliable data.
Majority of the participants had acquired higher education 83.3%, incomplete higher education -10%, professional high school education -3.3%. The biggest part of participants -76.6% were employed, 16.7% -unemployed, 3.3% -did not work because of children in the family. As to the income level most of the participants answered that they could meet their needs -93.3% and 6.7% -could not. Also 33.3% were married, 23.3% -not married, 26.7% -had a civil marriage, 6.7% -divorced, 3.3% -free from relations, 3.3% -have a romantic relation, 3.3% -other. In this sample, 36.7% had at least 1 child, 30% were childless, 26.7% had 2 children, 6.7% had 3 or more children in their family.
Rokeach values were ranked in hierarchic division from "1" -most important to "18"less important value. There were two lists of 18 values "terminal" and "instrumental". Participant needed to range every list of values in hierarchic order.
Fantalova questionnaire is based on Rokeach value theory from which she took 12 terminal values and made two lists. Participants ranged hierarchically what values they think are most "important" -in the first list. In the second list, they checked what in their opinion the most "achievable" values are. That means that a participant compared each value to another in pairs (ex. Happy Family life -Good, reliable friends; Happy Family Life -Wisdom etc.) and chose which is more "important" and "achievable" in every pair. Results showed us which values were the most preferable for a person. Every result was ranged from "0" (less elected) to "11" (most elected) to understand what the hierarchy of "important" and "achievable" values is. The results showed us that "Mature love" and "Health" were still important in both adolescence and in adulthood. However, the value of "True friendship" lost its position and in 2015 th the importance of "Family" took the 1 st rank. The least important values in both years 1998 and 2015 were: -18 th rank -"Pleasure"; -17 th rank -"Salvation"; -16 th rank -"A world of beauty".

Rokeach "terminal" and "instrumental" values
Analyzing significant changes between 1998 and 2015 we found out that in terminal values, in 2015, increased importance of values: "Family" (z = −2.06, p = 0.04) and "Interesting job" (z = −2.3, p = 0.02); and importance decreased only in "True friendship" (z = −2.64, p = 0.008), but other value ranks did not change significantly. The importance of "Family" increased from 4 th rank to 1 st ; importance of "Interesting job" increased from 11 th rank to 5 th rank; importance of "True friendship" decreased from 2 nd rank to 6 th rank. Secondly, the same structure was used to find out what instrumental values were the most important in 1998 and 2015 (Fig. 2). Rokeach  Significant changes between 1998 and 2015 instrumental values appeared only in "Intellect" (z = −2.16, p = 0.03) which significantly decreased in 2015, importance of other instrumental value did not change significantly. The importance of "Intellect" decreased from 5 th rank to 11 th .

Fantalova "important" and "achievable" values
To answer the question what values were the most "important" and the least "important" (Fig. 3), the most "achievable" and least "achievable" (Fig. 4)  Results showed us that the values of "Health" replaced the "True friendship" in 2015. Other values did not change or changed insignificantly. Important values that significantly changed comparing 1998 and 2015: increased in adults: "Health" (z = −3.21, p = 0.001), "A sense of accomplishment" (z = −3.25, p = 0.001) and importance decreased in "Wisdom" (z = −2.02, p = 0.04), other values were permanent. The importance of "Health" increased from 6 th rank to 2 nd ; "A sense of accomplishment" from 7 th rank to 4 th rank and "Wisdom" decreased from 4 th rank to 7 th rank. Comparing 1998 and 2015 achievable values significantly increased in adults: "Productive life" (z = −2.63, p = 0.009), "Interesting job" (z = −2.35, p = 0.02), "A world of beauty" (z = −1.99, p = 0.05), and significantly decreased "A sense of accomplishment" (z = −2.51, p = 0.01) and "Freedom" (z = −2.14, p = 0.03). "Productive life" increased from 5 th rank to 3 rd rank, "Interesting job" from 8 th rank to 5 th rank, "A world of beauty" from 4 th to 1 st rank, and decreased "A sense of accomplishment" from 2 nd rank to 6 th rank in adulthood.

Fantalova index of difference between "important" and "achievable" values
Other . That means that in 1998 the difference between "important" and "achievable" was significantly higher than in 2015, and it leads us to the result that "important" and "achievable" values became more common in 2015 than in 1998.

Discussion
Few main conclusions were made according to the results of the study. It is important to note that in secondary data collection very specific sample participated -only 25% of initial sample, other 75% could not be found by personal information or have not responded to the request about the participation in research. We discovered that in the second wave of research participated people with only average incomes -neither very poor nor rich people participated possibly because they were unable to respond to the request about the research. Results showed us few important findings. The findings of this research showed us that some values change during life but some stay the same. Other studies of adolescents' values in Latvia [1-3, 5, 9] showed us that they all are mostly the same.
Firstly, both tests showed us the importance of family and mature love in both adolescence and in adulthood that let us discuss that these values may have been established in childhood. As we can see from sample description, majority of the participants was married or was in civil marriage, as well as majority has one or more children. That let us think that in their adulthood participants follow their values of love and family. Results generally were concurrent with M. Rokeach (1973) theory where he discussed that values are mostly persistent in time and determine peoples' choices [10].
Secondly, importance of health, interesting job and a sense of accomplishment significantly increased in adulthood comparing to adolescence. That let us think how people feel about their physical and mental comfort by the age of 30-33. The increase in these values shows us that participants started to care about their physical and mental health. The same results appeared in other studies [14][15][16] where important role was played by physical ageing as a motivational factor.

Int. Conf. SOCIETY. HEALTH. WELFARE. 2016
Thirdly, importance of true friendship, intellect and wisdom decreased in adulthood. As well, majority of our participants finished higher education and were employed, which let us think about external social relationships that may have lost their value. These results may relate to overall self-content, which tends to appear in adulthood and makes desire for social acceptance and social contacts less important [17,18].
Fourthly, the achievability of values like productive life, a world of beauty and interesting job increased in adulthood that let us consider that in elder life the productivity was evaluated by time. That may relate to biological ageing and a desire for mental well-being [14][15][16].
Fifthly, the achievability of freedom and a sense of accomplishment decreased in adulthood that may relate to Latvian socio-economic changes like crisis when a lot of work places disappeared, the salaries decreased. That may have influenced people who wanted an interesting job but could not get it because of lack of vacancies or small payments.
Sixthly, the index of difference between important and achievable values shows us that this index significantly changed comparing 1998 and 2015. The difference between important and achievable values in 2015 was significantly lower than in 1998, that let us consider that a person by the age of 30-33 becomes more realistic possibly because of getting cognitive maturity and getting it with his permanent values established in childhood. These results let us think that in adulthood people are more tended to self-control [19], which may relate to balancing of important and achievable values in their lives.