2  PRESENTATIONS OF THE 
MAIN RESEARCH MATERIAL  
Let's consider the main approaches to the analysis of 
the «social tension» concept and the allocation of its 
main indicators. O. Kredentser, V. Lagodzinska and 
O. Kovalchuk indicate that in Russian sociology the 
concept  of  social  tension  is  considered  within  the 
framework  of  the  theory  of  social  change  and 
acquires a subjective-activity character (Kredentser et 
al., 2016). V.Rukavishnikov defines social tension as 
a concept that characterizes a particular state of social 
life,  characterized  by  the  exacerbation  of  internal 
contradictions of an objective and subjective nature. 
In  this  aspect,  social  tension  signals  a  crisis  in  the 
social system, a violation of the homeostasis of social 
structures and social functions, on the one hand, and 
reflects  the  spiritual  and  psychological  state  of 
individuals  and  social  groups,  to  a  certain  extent 
affects the reproduction of everyday social practices 
and motive-creating functions of social behavior and 
interactions,  on  the  other  (Rukavishnikov,  1992). 
According  to  O.Chernyavskoi,  social  tension  is 
inherent, first of all, in social systems that are in the 
process  of  social  changes  and  transformations,  and 
the main manifestation is a persistent feeling of social 
dissatisfaction,  as  a  result  of  the  emergence  and 
development of social contradictions, affect the state 
of  public  consciousness  and  behavior  of  social 
subjects’ objects (Chernyavska, 2001). 
Sociologists note that the consequences of social 
tension are manifested at the socio-psychological and 
behavioral levels. So, I.Buzovsky (Buzovsky, 2008) 
says that historically the content of the social tension 
concept  was  considered  in  connection  with  such 
phenomena  as  social  disintegration,  a  crisis  of 
solidarity, deviation (in a stable society), anomie (in 
an unstable society), loss social identity, deprivation 
and frustration, class struggle, interethnic clashes and, 
finally,  social  crisis  and  social  catastrophe.  At  the 
same  time,  V.  Rukavishnikov  speaks  about  the 
«socio-psychological  piven  of  social  tension» 
(Rukavishnikov,  1992).  Its  empirical  analogue,  an 
indicator is the state of public opinion and social well-
being  of  the  population,  which  is  expressed  in 
indicators of people's subjective assessment of their 
social  position,  the  level  of  satisfaction  of  socio-
economic and spiritual needs and interests, as well as 
their  attitude  to  certain  social  life  aspects  and  is 
characterized  by  the  dissatisfaction  mood  with  the 
existing position of the right in vital spheres of public 
life. 
L.Orban-Lembrik  points  out  that  social  tension 
arises  as  a  result  of  social  maladjustment,  which 
covers such spheres and processes: 1) physiological 
maladjustment  of  certain  population  segments  to 
difficulties;  2)  psychophysiological  maladjustment, 
which is expressed in unconscious mass mental states 
(fear, anxiety, aggressiveness, apathy) in the  course 
of  adaptation  to  difficulties  and  social  changes;  3) 
socio-psychological  maladjustment,  which 
reproduces the conscious  conflict  attitude of certain 
population  segments  to  difficulties  and  changes 
(increased  politicization,  strikes,  discontent, 
migration, crime, pandemic, etc.)  (Orban-Lembrick, 
2003). 
So, the social tension of the population as a social 
quality of life, in our opinion, can be reflected in such 
indicators as: 1) the dominant social fears in society; 
2)  features  of  population  social  well-being;  3)  the 
degree of social anomie in society, which can act as a 
concretized subject of social work. 
It  should  be  noted  the  variety  of  factors  of  the 
social  tension  growth  in  society,  among  which  one 
can single out: socio-economic (economic crisis, high 
unemployment rate, low consumption capacity, high 
tariffs,  etc.),  socio-political  (failure  of  state  power, 
political  and  ideological  contradictions,  war,  civil 
conflicts and other factors), socio-cultural (change in 
the  value  system,  transformation  of  ideology, 
globalization). Currently, the COVID-19 pandemic is 
such a factor in the social tension growth in society, 
which in turn entails negative socio-economic, socio-
political and socio-psychological consequences. 
Today, many studies have already appeared aimed 
at  determining  the  negative  consequences  of  the 
pandenmia and quarantine measures associated with 
its overcoming. So, the significant pandemic impact 
was  in  the  socio-economic  sphere.  Thus,  T. 
Krushelnytska,  O.  Matveeva,  V.Naumov,  studying 
the  socio-economic  impact  of  the  COVID-19 
pandemic  in  the  context  of  the  state  policy  of 
implementing  the  global  sustainable  development 
goal  No.  5  «Gender  Equality»,  identify  five  main 
factors that negatively affect the socio-economic the 
sphere and well-being of the population: 1) reduction 
of trade operations and shutdown of certain economy 
sectors; 2) decrease in demand for services; 3) global 
interruption of value chains, primarily in production; 
4)  falling  demand  and  falling  prices  for  goods;  5) 
increasing  asymmetry  between  developed  countries 
and developing countries; an increase in the degree of 
inequality in the distribution of income between rich 
and poor people (Krushelnytska, et al., 2020). Indeed, 
in Ukrainian society there is a decline in production, 
a  reduction  in  workers  and  an  increase  in 
unemployment, a decrease in the share of small and