During the study, the reconstruction of the respondents' ideas about the three main preventive measures to combat the COVID-19 pandemic was carried out: self-isolation, mask regimen and vaccination, using a questionnaire, interview, association experiment, as well as a private semantic differential. As we have found, students consider self-isolation to be the most effective measure to combat coronavirus (71% of respondents). The mask regimen was considered ineffective. The survey showed a very ambiguous attitude of young people to vaccination against coronavirus. As it was found out, in case of a conflict of motives, even if they are convinced of the effectiveness of this or that protective measure, many students are not ready to sacrifice their freedom of movement, communications and contact with the outside world, even for their own safety. Comfort is often considered more important than safety. The attitude towards restrictive measures was influenced by such values of the younger generation as the desire for comfort, love of freedom and the value of one's own life. This system of values corresponds to the influence of society. The interviews demonstrated that there are two groups in the youth environment that differ in their personal characteristics, life position and strategies for solving health problems. The first, "active" group is characterised mainly by a passive attitude towards health issues. The acceptance of the vaccine was carried out by this group under pressure from the state and the employer. The second group of young people is characterised by an active position, rationalism, and personal maturity. This also determines more rational strategies for solving health problems. The second group operates a wider and more scientific range of information sources. We believe that both social influence and personal characteristics of the respondents play an important role in the choice of behavioural strategies in this situation. The application of the association experiment method allowed to determine the characteristics of ideas about the state policy to counter the pandemic in the minds of students at the figurative, emotional and affective level. The categories of perception of the phenomenon were also defined, such as freedom, comfort, efficiency and safety.

performance, pandemic, COVID-19, self-isolation, mask regimen, vaccination, psychosemantics, Primorsky Region

1. Gricenko V. V., Reznik A. D., Konstantinov V. V. et al. Fear of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) and basic beliefs of the individual.  Klinicheskaya i spetsial'naya psikhologiya, 2020: 9 (2): 99–118 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.17759/cpse.2020090205.
2. Zalyaev A. R., Mukharyamova L. M., Shammazova E. Yu. COVID-19 Vaccination in the Context of Public Trust. Social’naya politika i sociologiya, 2020: 19: 4 (137): 127–135 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.17922/2071-3665-2020-19-4-127-135.
3. Kuhtevich E. V., Martynov Ju. V., Kulagina M. G. et al. Immunoprophylaxis: positive and negative trends. Infektsionnyye bolezni: novosti, mneniya, obucheniye, 2018: 7 (2): 84–91 (in Russ.).
4. Levinson A. R. Citizens and the state in the conditions of covid. Vestnik obshchestvennogo mneniya, 2021: 3–4 (133): 18–28 (in Russ.).
5. Petrenko V. F. Osnovy psihosemantiki [Fundamentals of Psychosemantics]. 2^nd ed. St. Petersburg, Piter, 2005: 435 (in Russ.).
6. Rjaguzova E. V. Cognitive aspects of student youth's attitude to vaccination against COVID-19. Rossiyskiy psikhologicheskiy zhurnal, 2021: 187: 2: 109–121 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.21702/rpj.2021.2.7.
7. Serkin V. P. Metody psihologii sub’ektivnoj semantiki i psihosemantiki [Methods of psychology of subjective semantics and psychosemantics: Textbook. manual for universities]. Moscow, PChELA, 2008: 378 (in Russ.).
8. Ahorsu D. K., Lin C.-Y., Imani V. et al. The fear of COVID-19 scale: Development and initial validation. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction, 2020: 20: 1537–1545. DOI: 10.1007/s11469-020-00270-8.
9. Detoc M., Bruel S., Frappe P. Intention to participate in a COVID-19 vaccine clinical trial and to get vaccinated against COVID-19 in France during the pandemic. Vaccine, 2020: 38 (45): 7002–7006. DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2020.09.041.
10. Giubilini A., Savulescu J., Wilkinson D. COVID-19 vaccine: Vaccinate the young to protect the old? Journal of Law and the Biosciences, 2020: 7 (1). Accessed 12.04.2022. URL: https://academic.oup.com/jlb/article/7/1/lsaa050/5860822
11. Hornsey M. J., Harris E. A., Fielding K. S. The psychological roots of anti-vaccination attitudes: A 24-nation investigation. Health Psychology, 2018: 37 (4): 307–315. DOI: 10.1037/hea0000586.
12. Lazarus J. V., Ratzan S. C., Palayew A. et al. A global survey of potential acceptance of a COVID-19 vaccine. Nature Medicine, 2021:  27: 225–228. DOI: 10.1038/s41591-020-1124-9.
13. Malik A. A., McFadden S. M., Elharake J., Omer S. B. Determinants of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance in the US. eClinicalMedicine, 2020: 26. Accessed 12.04.2022.  URL: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/eclinm/article/PIIS2589-5370(20)30239-X/fulltext. DOI: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2020.100495.
14. Motta M., Callaghan T., Sylvester S. Knowing less but presuming more: Dunning-Kruger effects and the endorsement of anti-vaccine policy attitudes. Social Science & Medicine, 2018: 211: 274–281. DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2018.06.032.
15. Peretti-Watel P., Seror V., Cortaredona S. et al. A future vaccination campaign against COVID-19 at risk of vaccine hesitancy and politicization. Lancet Infectious Diseases, 2020: 20 (7): 769–770. DOI: 10.1016/S1473-3099(20)30426-6.