ECONOMIC DIMENSIONS AND PARADIGMATIC MECHANISMS OF PERSONAL SECURITY MANAGEMENT

The purpose of this article is a complete, comprehensive, bibliometric, doctrinal and empirical study of the general theoretical foundations of economic dimensions and par-adigmatic mechanisms for managing personal security. The methodological basis of the work is a pluralistic and complementary combination of modern general philosophical and legal approaches, general scientific and special scientific methods, techniques and principles of scientific knowledge, due to the uniqueness of the subject of research, necessary to ensure its objective study. By means of bibliometric analysis, the trends and key areas of personal security research in the context of financial and economic security are determined. For the first time, a comprehensive analysis of the general theoretical foundations of economic dimensions and paradigmatic mechanisms of personal safety management is presented using a wide range of general and special scientific methods, techniques and principles of scientific knowledge. The generalization of the paradigmatic mechanism of the empirical study of the components of personal security made it possible to distinguish the following components: motivational one – the need for security, emotional one – the sensitivity to dangers, cognitive one – the beliefs about security, and behavioural one – the forms of response to hazards. The authors proved that there is a correlation between the indicators of the personal security component "Beliefs about security". In particular, it can be assumed that the significance of a person to himself determines the degree of his self - control and, accordingly, the reaction to external factors in the context of ensuring security. Besides, the benevolence of the world directly affects the self - esteem of the individual and his ability to control the processes around him.


INTRODUCTION
In the context of the etymological content and meaning of the concept of security, it becomes obvious that this is a complex anthropological and sociocultural phenomenon that causes a significant number of intermediate states and processes to which the elements of the system are subjected in the process of its theoretical and applied implementation and reproduction.In turn, none of the systems related to management processes can be used if it does not have control mechanisms, i.e., a peculiar set of intermediate states and processes, the use of which allows to achieve the ultimate goal set for the system.Therefore, in the sense of modern achievements of national and international science, the category of security in the management aspect determines the nature and specificity of the management mechanism, excluding the possibility of recognizing the priority of the expediency of the process over formally defined procedures.The management mechanism expresses a qualitatively heterogeneous approach to solving security problems and introduces the necessary structuring into the processes related to activities in the relevant field.The mechanism of governance is the main characteristic feature of social progress.The mechanism of social governance itself can be seen as a set of several stages: setting the objectively achievable goal; creation and development of the management system, that is, methods and means of ensuring the effective organization and functioning of the management system.Therefore, the content of management is primarily related to tasks and functions, while the mechanism itself is related to the means of achieving certain goals.
At the same time, at the present stage of development and formation of state and social life, in the framework of consolidation and formation of the postulate that a person and his or her life and health are the highest social value -the security of the individual becomes the most important and necessary vector of development of public administration, which is ensured by the synthesis of various dimensions and mechanisms, where a special place is occupied by economic and administrative methods and means.

LITERATURE REVIEW
Theoretical and applied aspects of the study of the problems of management, formation and functioning of the security system in general and personal security in particular are devoted to the work of both domestic and foreign scientists such as M. Blikhar et al. [1], S. Hadzhiyski [2], J. Junaidi et al. [3], K. Kussainov et al. [4], A. Novak et al. [5], O. Savchenko & V. Svyryda [6], I. Stetsiv [7].At the same time, issues related to the definition of the general theoretical foundations of paradigmatic mechanisms for managing personal security and in the context of disclosing economic dimensions have not yet received proper theoretical and applied substantiation and analysis.
The literature review indicates the possibility to assume the existence of relationships between personal and financial security.In this context, we searched for publications in the Scopus database using the following search criteria in the title and abstracts of works: "personal security" and "financial security" or "personal safety" or "financial safety".As a result of the search, 51 works published during the last 31 years (1993-2023) were found.At the same time, it was established that the majority of documents (38 works) were published during the last 10 years (2014-2023) (Figure 1).Regarding the type of documents, 64.7 % are articles, 21.6 % are conference papers, and 7.8 % are reviews, the rest are books and book chapters.Regarding the distribution by branches of science, the largest number of works belong to social sciences (29.3 %), engineering (14.6 %), and computer sciences (13.4 %).Business, management and accounting accounted for only 2.4% of documents, which indicates the need to continue and increase the number of studies in this direction.
Among the numerous scientific works and socio-cultural, economic and public administration studies, in the most general sense, management can be defined as bringing the system in line with certain objective laws and norms operating in a particular environment.Moreover, it is worth emphasizing that defining the purpose of management as bringing the system in line with the environment of its functioning, it is not enough to take into account the peculiarities of management in the field of security, in that part of it that characterizes security as a special social form of matter movement.
Society and its subsystems, the main components of which are the subjects of human activity, actively transform the environment in accordance with the needs of their vital activity.The content of the security management mechanism is the regulation of social processes by means acceptable for the implementation of managerial influence on the objects and subjects of the security process.As a result of this kind of regulation, the compliance of systems with a certain safety goal is achieved.Consequently, this or that content of regulation consists in the directed maintenance of the object in a certain state or in its directed change in accordance with a certain security goal [11, p. 38].
Management mechanisms are divided into externally and internally directed.This focus depends on the object of their impact and no less on the objective reasons that led to the need to choose the means of environmental impact.The mechanism of external influence functions through the use of management tools, the specificity of which allows for the effective operation of the system in accordance with its external functions.They are formalized in the form of directives, and orders that enter a particular social system from a wider social system.The means of intra-system control in combination with the intermediate goal and the system-specific safety factor form a self-regulating control mechanism.Security is perceived in the process of constructing management mechanisms as a social factor arising from the nature of the joint life of people, the collective nature of their life, which is impossible without establishing appropriate links, coordination of joint actions and their relationship with the objects and tools of activity, without excluding disorganizing factors and consolidation of factors [12, p. 255].
The work of the security management mechanism can be perceived as the activity of the subjects of the relevant system aimed at strengthening, transforming or eliminating specific social relations and their organizational forms.The security management mechanism, as an integral part of social management, is an activity aimed at the development of society as a whole, and at the same time has its own regulatory and guiding mechanisms [13, p. 14].Under these conditions, we can distinguish the following types of mechanisms for managing the security of the individual in the context of economic dimensions and paradigmatic concepts, in particular: ensuring the functioning of forms of organization of social relations, their restoration, preservation; creation of new forms of organization; elimination of existing contradictions; ensuring the improvement of the organization of social relations.
The actual use of security equipment is associated with a forceful impact on the object of control and requires a specific procedure for use.Therefore, we will focus on the understanding of force in its socio-managerial and natural or primary aspects with the establishment of procedural links between the concept of force and the procedure for the use of security means [14, p. 109].The power of some subjects to coerce other subjects, in exceptional cases backed by the force of arms, is an important indicator of their social power.In this aspect, the state security system becomes an important tool, a carrier of social power, and the main element of the security mechanism [15, p. 306].
An important characteristic of procedural security measures is that they have the property of managerial influence, which makes them expedient and ensures the achievement of specific results.Through the exercise of managerial influence, procedural safety measures are included in the systems of social activities as an important factor in ensuring safety.Procedural security measures are not fundamentally different from management measures.The direct purpose of the procedural basis of security management is to create in an ideal form a social future in the right direction, and not to describe it as it may become through the spontaneous realization of objective laws operating in society.Procedural security and the use of force as a manifestation of social existence are in constant interaction and develop in mutual dependence.Each of them is so multifaceted that it is impossible to talk about an exclusively socio-engineering approach to solving procedural security issues and determining the basic principles of social activity in this area [16, p. 8].
The correlation between primitive force and procedural means of security has a complex dialectical character.Therefore, it becomes obvious that procedural means of protection and primitive force, while maintaining their specificity, are in a dialectical relationship, actively influencing each other, with procedural means of security reflecting the basic laws of management, and the experience gained as a result of their implementation is used to improve security management.The complexity of determining the procedural principles of management in the field of security can be overcome by applying the principles of public administration because they contain the basis for ensuring security in social systems [17, pp. 44-45].

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES
The purpose of this article is a complete, comprehensive, bibliometric, doctrinal and empirical study of the general theoretical foundations of economic dimensions and paradigmatic mechanisms for managing personal security.
In this regard, we propose to test the hypothesis of the presence of a correlation between heterogeneous components of personal security, which, accordingly, affects the specifics of the response of individuals to threatening factors and determines the strategy of their further behaviour.

METHODS
The methodological basis of the paper is a pluralistic and complementary combination of modern general philosophical and philosophical-legal approaches, general scientific and special scientific methods, techniques and principles of scientific knowledge, due to the uniqueness of the subject of research, necessary to ensure its objective study.In the most general worldview, the formation and transformation of the general theoretical foundations of economic dimensions and paradigmatic mechanisms for managing personal security is based on the dialectical approach.This makes it possible to study problems in the unity of their social content and form and to carry out a spectral analysis of the essence and peculiarities of the formation of individual essential characteristics and provisions.
Besides, the following methods are used in the article: R. Janoff-Bulma method -to study the beliefs about security (the cognitive component) [8; 9]; V. Maralov test questionnaire "Diagnostics of response methods in danger situations" [10] to study the forms of response to hazards (the behavioural component); correlation analysis -to detect the relationship between the components of the cognitive indicator of personal security.

RESULTS
Personal security and financial research: a bibliom etric analysis For bibliometric analysis, we formed a selection of publications based on the following search queries in the Scopus database in the title and abstracts of works: 1) "personal security" and "financial security" or "personal safety" or "financial safety" or "economic security" or finance (79 works); 2) "personal safety" and finance (31 works); 3) "personal security" and finance (12 works).For the analysis, a limit was set, according to which the term should be repeated at least five times.Thus, 33 keywords met this threshold.
Visual results in the form of a map of the bibliometric network are shown in  The second cluster (red) consists of 14 keywords and indicates a close relationship between social and psychological characteristics of personal safety, problems of people's quality of life, and their health, in particular mental health.Common to this cluster and the previous one is that here, again, one of the central categories is Covid-19.
The third cluster (blue), which unites 5 keywords, is a connecting link between the two previous clusters, indicating the study of psychological aspects of personal security.
In the next step, a network map was constructed to visualize the chronological dimension of keywords found in personal security publications and financial research (Figure 3).This map shows the network of relationships between keywords and categorizes them using a timeline.Depending on the time period, keywords vary in colour from dark blue to yellow.This makes it possible to study the peculiarities of the terminological and substantive context of research in a certain period.
The results of bibliometric analysis according to the chronological criterion show that the intensive development of research on personal security in relation to financial and economic security took place in 2018-2020, which is particularly related to the COVID-19 pandemic.This is evidenced by the keywords marked in yellow.At the same time, during 2010-2014, sociopsychological studies of the problem of personal security dominated, as evidenced by keywords marked in dark blue.(Source: built on the basis of the Scopus database using VOSviewer software) So, in the first stage of this research, we determined the trends and key areas of personal security research in the context of financial and economic security by conducting a bibliometric analysis of publications indexed in the Scopus database.

Paradigm atic mechanisms of personal security m anagem ent
Security, as well as danger, does not exist transcendently but reflects the assessment of certain criteria of a particular state of the system.These criteria are determined by security subjects taking into account the interests of security objects.
Moreover, here we should note the existence of the subject and object of security, on the one hand, and the subject and object of danger -on the other.The subject is a person, who in one case ensures the effective functioning and management of the security system, that is a source of activity aimed at the security object (security subject), and in the otheracts as a source of threat or carrier of danger (danger subject).The object of security can be both a person and the normal functioning of the security system, and social relations in the field of security, while the object of danger can be various circumstances, factors, and systems, except for a person.The source of danger is the conditions and factors that include and under certain conditions by themselves or in various combinations reveal or find hostile intentions, harmful properties, destructive nature, and real or potential actions.
The materialistic, purely consumerist attitude to the world has already undergone significant changes, and it is the complex set of scientific principles of the security theory that expands the socially significant understanding of the existence of nature, providing and recognizing its self-organization and independent existence, the constructive role of chaos.Each of the spheres is manifested in the activities of objects depending on their scale, location and operating conditions.Therefore, there is a postulate that security is a complex social phenomenon, the object of theoretical and managerial research, and the subject of social engineering, which leads to the emergence of such a pattern as the fact that security is a complex system, which is the main system-forming element.The perception of justice at the national level, its conditioning by the mentality of the nation characterizes the peculiarity, and specificity of security as a system.Consideration of theoretical and managerial principles allows to reveal of the content in the scientific and practical aspect, based on the laws and provisions of the science of social management of the proposed security theory.
When defining economic security objects, it should be taken into account that they belong to the economic sphere, including its intersection with related spheres.The latter can be considered as a military-economic sphere; the sphere of protection of the scientific, technical and intellectual potential of the country; sphere of ensuring public security (problems of the shadow economy, organized crime and corruption in the economy, economic frauds carried out within the law, etc.); the sphere of interaction between economy and nature, etc.In other words, when considering the objects of economic security, both the economic system of the country and economic activities in the military, social, environmental, and information spheres of public and state life are analyzed.If we consider the issue of the object of economic security from the standpoint of its place in the overall security system, then, in our opinion, economic interests should be the object.At the same time, economic interests are realized as a manifestation of production relations within the objective orientation of people's economic activity, which reflects their place in the system of social production.Even in the case when some authors consider the individual, society and the state as objects of security, it should be remembered that in relation to the economic system, we could talk about "person" only when this person is the embodiment of economic categories, carrier of certain relations and interests.Therefore, the object of economic security is the vital interests of the individual, society and the state, taking into account the fact that they express certain economic relations, but not the economic system of the state (the latter, for example, does not take into account the "shadow" economy, which ensures the realization of part of the vital interests of citizens, and even society and even sometimes the state, relieving social tension, eliminating deficits, etc.) Vital national economic interests are constituted as the interests of the whole society in the realization of aggregate needs.Collective economic interests express the need to meet the material needs of groups of people united by the same position in the system of social production.Personal economic interests express the need to meet the material needs of an individual and are determined by the socio-economic conditions of his/her life.
Contradictions arising in the course of the realization of economic interests determine the activities of business entities aimed at overcoming these contradictions and satisfying their needs and, as a result, the emergence of new economic relations.If these contradictions are antagonistic, they can be resolved by limiting the economic interests of some groups to others.In such conditions, there is a danger of disruption of the stable, sustainable development of society, and a threat to the economic security of a social group or individual, which is expressed in the violation of the system of economic relations and in the limitation of economic interests.
The most common opinion is that the object of economic security is: the individual, society and the state or the economic system of society.This approach confuses the object of economic policy with economic security.Although, undoubtedly, they are closely intertwined and interconnected with each other.In our opinion, the analysis of the object of economic security should be based on the methodological approach to the separation of its essence, content and forms of manifestation and implementation.It is from these positions and for a clear distinction between the theoretical and practical aspects of economic security that it is proposed to consider separately the objects of economic security and objects of economic security provision or objects of protection.In our opinion, the former reveals the content of the phenomenon under study, and the latter is just a form of manifestation and realization of this content.In this aspect, the object of economic security is economic interests as the implementation of economic relations, and the objects of ensuring economic security are the carriers (material and ideal) of economic relations, in other words, those objects that can be affected by causing damage to economic interests.This distinction is necessary because economic interests and relations as an object of economic security in theoretical terms reveal the essence of economic security, while in practical terms they are implemented in various forms of human and social life.Therefore, the allocation of objects of economic security (objects of protection) allows, both in theoretical terms, to take into account all the diversity of the functioning of economic relations and the realization of economic interests, and in practical terms, to transfer the analysis to the area of study of specific forms and manifestations of mechanisms for ensuring economic security, and from the point of view of managing the system of economic security, this approach allows to displace the necessary objects within the competence of each of the subjects of the system.
As is known, threats to economic security are manifested as threats to the stable development of the economy as a whole, individual industries, enterprises, and individual entities, and therefore, in fact, the real object, the purpose of such influence is the system of relations and the system of interests.In other words, threats to economic security affect its object (economic relations and interests) through its material carriers, but they are manifested in the disruption of the functioning of the system of economic relations, deformation of interests and conditions for their implementation.Accordingly, in our opinion, when building a system of ensuring economic security, it is necessary to distinguish the object of economic security itself, and the object of influence, which, in this case, is an indirect link in the mechanism of the impact of threat on the object (interests, relations) of economic security.It should also be clarified that the object of influence in order to ensure economic security becomes the object of protection.This approach, on the one hand, highlights the social nature of economic security and on the other -allows to build a system of economic security, highlighting both its direct object and objects of influence or protection [18, p. 302].
However, when it comes to the economy, the economic system in the context of economic security, two aspects should be taken into account.The first is that the problem of economic security is distinguished by the security itself and its provision.Accordingly, the second is that in the analysis of economic security and its provision, two types of objects are distinguished -objects of direct economic security and objects of influence and provision (of protection).The former includes interests and the system of economic relations, and the latter -elements of the economic system.In addition, through the impact on the objects of security, threats to economic security objects are influenced.Therefore, when analyzing the objects of economic security, it is necessary to distinguish and consider these two groups.
In methodological terms, the formation of the system of economic security objects should be carried out in accordance with the structure of all levels of economic activity: relations within the national economy and in the field of foreign economic activity; at the level of interpersonal, subjective relations.Also, according to the forms of economic activity, production, distribution, financial and other relations are distinguished.Since the economic system is a complex and hierarchical structure, the objects of economic security are economic relations at three levels: the level of the individual -the economic interests of each individual and his/her relations with other economic entities; microeconomic level -economic interests and relations of market agents, regions and industries (sectors); macroeconomic level -the realization of national economic interests and relations within the economy of our country as a whole.
As for the objects of influence, ensuring economic security, it should be noted that it is the same object, but considered from the point of view of different subjects.The object of influence is discussed in the analysis of the mechanism of implementation of threats to economic security, which is manifested in the form of activities of entities that limit such interests.The object of security is referred to when analyzing the activities of the state, its bodies or business entities aimed at preventing the impact of threats on economic interests or economic relations.In other words, in the case when the system is considered: the threat and its subject and object of influence.Secondly, there is a subject between them, whose activity should prevent the impact of the threat on the object.This approach is appropriate, in our opinion, because it allows us to identify those elements that should be taken into account in the management system, for which the competence, functions and tasks, as well as objects of provision, should be determined.It is the distinction between the object of economic security and the object of protection that allows taking into account the place and role of government and administration in ensuring the economic security of the individual [19, p. 169].
In the most general form, objects of influence (protection or provision) should be divided into large groups: tangible (physical, material) and intangible (ideal) objects and considered in accordance with the classification of objects of direct economic security.That is, at different levels, in different areas, by types of production, financial and other activities [20, p. 106].In this case, it should be taken into account, firstly, that the economy includes three elements -material production and provision of services, which are carried out as a process of functioning of productive forces in the unity of means of labour, labour objects and human (material objects), the system of relations and economics as a branch of science (economic sciences).Accordingly, the impact on the objects can be carried out in these three directions, in each of which there are both tangible (material) and intangible (ideal) objects.Moreover, the main productive force of society is a person.In modern conditions, the human factor is becoming one of the main factors in ensuring the effective development of production.At the same time, a way to influence economic security can be, for example, the process of forming the views and perceptions of each person, his/her interests that contradict the national or state; and the creation of certain conditions.In this regard, the specificity of the object of influence (it is the object of protection) in the system of ensuring economic security is that the threat is realized through it.It appears as an element, a transmission link in the mechanism of threat implementation.Accordingly, non-material (ideal) objects differ significantly from physical objects due to the significant variety in the use of means of causing harm.For example, to influence a person as the main productive force in modern conditions, it is possible to use the latest methods of psychological, psychotropic and information warfare.This makes it necessary to consider not only "an individual", but also certain features (characteristics) of his/her consciousness as the object of threats in the sphere of economic security.Accordingly, the protection of a person as an object of the economic security system should be based on counteracting the methods used.At the same time, the impact on the physical object is more limited -for example, destruction, and damage.
The variety of methods of influencing the objects of economic security through tangible and intangible (ideal) objects necessitates a clear distinction between them and the objects of influence and objects of protection (provision).For example, in the process of the international division of labour, the relocation of scientists to foreign countries is an objective and positive trend.But from the point of view of national interests, the process of "outflow" leads to disruption of the distribution of qualified labour resources, and a reduction of scientific and technical developments, which affects the normal functioning of the economy in general and the level of technical equipment of production in particular.
Em pirical assessm ent of personal security: econom ic dim ensions In this regard, it is necessary to develop a mechanism of empirical study of the components of personal security.It is recommended to identify the following 4 personal security components: 1.
Motivational one -the need for security.

2.
Emotional one -the sensitivity to dangers.

3.
Cognitive one -the beliefs about security.

4.
Behavioural one -the forms of response to hazards.
78 students of the speciality "Extreme and crisis psychology" took part in the survey.The sex distribution of students is approximately equal: 44 people were female (56.4 %) and 34 -male (43.6 %).The study was conducted using the Google Forms platform.The age range of students varies from 18 to 23 and the average age of respondents is 20.5.The survey used 4 of the above-mentioned components to study personal security.
The first part of the study (motivational component) is devoted to identifying of the need for security.The following statements that need to be pairwise compared among themselves to determine the importance of the five leading needs were offered to respondents: material needs, security needs, social (interpersonal) needs, recognition needs, self-expression needs.

1.
Financial situation: the desire to have high wages, provide yourself with material comfort and buy beautiful things.

2.
The need for security: the desire to secure a future, to strengthen your position, avoid trouble.

3.
The need for interpersonal connections: the desire to have a warm relationship with people, to have good interlocutors, and to be understood by others.

4.
The need for respect from the outside: the desire to achieve recognition and respect, improve the level of skill and competence, and ensure influence.

5.
The need for self-realization: the desire to develop your powers and abilities, to strive for a new and unexplored thing, to do business.
The percentage of satisfaction of needs is given below in Table 1.According to the data provided, security requirements for the students are not very relevant.This is probably due to the age of respondents (18-23 years), because many young people receive help from parents, both material and intangible, they are in good physical fitness and rarely faced with the need to take on the big responsibility for something.
The next part of the study (emotional component) is devoted to identifying the sensitivity to dangers.As shown in Figure 4, the ratio of sensitivity levels is uniform (29.1 % of respondents belong to a low level of sensitivity, 32.7 % -to an average level and 38.2 % -to a high level).The beliefs about security (the cognitive component) were studied through a suggestion to respondents to agree or disagree with the following generalized categories of statements according to the R. Janoff-Bulma method [8; 9].

1.
Benevolence of the world (belief of the individual about the possibility to trust the world safely).

2.
Kindness of people (the individual's basic belief that there are more good people than bad people in the world, and the opportunity to trust them).

3.
Justice of the world (belief of the individual in the just distribution of the good and bad events between people).

4.
Control of the world (the belief of a person that he controls what is happening).

5.
Randomness as an event distribution principle.

6.
The value of my own "Me" (the belief of the individual that he is worthy of respect and the love that "he is good").

7.
Degree of self-control (belief that all surrounding events are a greater extent subject to control).

8.
Degree of luck (belief of the individual that he is generally a "lucky person").
The criteria for assessing the severity of basic beliefs depending on the test parameters are not given in the author's version of the method.Therefore, for the purpose of interpretation of the survey results the conditional values of ranges were adopted (Table 2).To diagnose the forms of response to hazards (the behavioural component), the V. Maralov test questionnaire "Diagnostics of response methods in danger situations" [10] was used.The questionnaire includes a description of the behavior of a person in dangerous situations and behavior variants that will respond to different types of hazards: 1) adequate one; 2) alarming one; 3) ignoring one; and 4) undefined one.In general, according to the results of Figure 5, the percentage of respondents with different trends to react in a certain way are approximately the same (34.9% of respondents show an adequate type, 32.4 % -an alarming type and 32.7 % -ignoring type).Finally, taking into account the results of the survey, a correlation analysis of the relationship between the components of the cognitive indicator of personal security was made.The correlation analysis was performed using the Analysis Package add-in in the Microsoft Excel spreadsheet system.The results of the correlation analysis are given in Table 3. Table 3 demonstrates that the closest relationship is between indicators "Degree of self-control" and "Value of my own "Me" (correlation coefficient is 0.97).In fact, it can be assumed that the significance of a person to himself determines the degree of his self-control and, accordingly, the reaction to external factors in the context of ensuring security.Besides, there is a close relationship between "Control of the world" and "Benevolence of the world" (correlation coefficient is 0.95), as well as between "Value of my own "Me" and "Benevolence of the world" (correlation coefficient is 0.95 too).Based on this, we can conclude that the "Benevolence of the world" significantly affects the "Value of my own "Me" and, accordingly, "Control of the world".In fact, this indicates that the benevolence of the world directly affects the self-esteem of the individual and his ability to control the processes around him.

DISCUSSION
Achieving personal and financial security becomes one of the main tasks of the government, enterprise management, investors and people.However, at the same time, the very understanding of the essence of such security is ambiguous, as is the understanding of the mechanism of its achievement.The identification of trends and key directions in the study of financial security by conducting a bibliometric analysis of scientific publications indexed by the scientometric database Scopus showed that the keywords of these directions are the following: employment security, financial efficiency and stability, livelihood security, financial risks, social security, financial technologies, psychological state of a person, economic security, family and personal security, financial literacy, covid-19 pandemic [21].In contrast to this study, we carried out a bibliometric and theoretical analysis of economic research on personal security.Personal security, like financial security and well-being, is a multifaceted concept that is considered by representatives of various sciences.Economists and politicians focus on finance, prosperity, gross product per capita and jobs.Social professionals focus on poverty, education, personal safety, quality of life, equality and inequality [22].The study of the general theoretical foundations of economic dimensions and paradigmatic mechanisms of personal safety management confirms the selection of such types of mechanisms in the context of economic dimensions and paradigmatic concepts.The results of the comparative analysis of our results with existing studies [1; 2; 6; 10] are the basis for the following conclusion: for the first time, at the general theoretical and scientific level, a comprehensive analysis of the general theoretical foundations of economic dimensions and paradigmatic mechanisms of personal safety management is presented using a wide range of general scientific and special scientific methods, techniques and principles of scientific knowledge.
Discussing the empirical results of our study, it should be noted that the revealed relationships between the components of personal security can be useful in the context of the formation of social capital.In this context, we agree with the recommendation that there is a need to create new informal institutions that can change people's attitudes towards agreements, state laws and security regulations [23].The obtained results can be useful for monitoring factors, risks and threats to personal and financial security at different levels of the social hierarchy, the importance of which is emphasized by other scientists [24].
Thus, the division in the structure of economic security objects -economic interests and relations -and objects of influence and their attribution to the concept of economic security, in our opinion, is not only appropriate but also necessary.This distinction allows in the analysis of economic security: firstly, to identify specific mechanisms for the implementation of threats to economic security, in which the objects of influence are elements; secondly, to reveal direct and indirect impacts on economic security objects and, accordingly, to determine the most complete list of threats that must be prevented to protect national, public, state and individual economic interests; thirdly, to create the methodological basis for the clearer delimitation of the competence of state authorities and governance bodies in the field of national economic security, as not only the objects of protection are distinguished, but it becomes possible to distribute the functions of economic security entities in detecting, preventing and suppressing threats to one object, but by different bodies.

CONCLUSIONS
By means of bibliometric analysis, the trends and key areas of personal security research in the context of financial and economic security are determined.Using the program VOSviewer, keywords were grouped into three clusters.Each of the clusters symbolizes the direction of research in the field of personal security in relation to financial issues.The results of bibliometric analysis according to the chronological criterion show that the intensive development of research on personal security in relation to financial and economic security took place in 2018-2020, which is particularly related to the COVID-19 pandemic.The obtained results show that in the last post-Covid years, new directions of research on personal security in the context of financial problems did not appear.It should be noted that we made this conclusion based on the analysis of publications according to the Scopus database.It is clear that there may be publications that are not indexed in this database, but this alone is beyond the scope of this study.
The study of the general theoretical foundations of economic dimensions and paradigmatic mechanisms of personal security management shows that the following types of mechanisms for managing personal security in the context of economic dimensions and paradigmatic concepts are identified, in particular: ensuring the functioning of forms of organization of social-economic relations, their restoration, preservation; creation of new forms of organization; elimination of existing contradictions; ensuring the improvement of the organization of social-economic relations.As for society in general, the creation, improvement or elimination of various forms of organization of social-economic relations can be defined as one of the forms of social-economic engineering development.Social-economic activity is a material process and has material and energy impact in its special form.That is why socioeconomic activity can be a factor in social development, influence relationships for people and be an object of construction.The subjects of management processes in the field of security are the individual and society, both those who consciously participate in them and those who are not aware of their role, predetermined by the system.In view of this, security requires an appropriate implementation mechanism, and the security governance mechanism itself is a holistic form of action for the participants.
Finally, there is an opportunity to conclude that the hypothesis of the presence of a correlation between heterogeneous components of personal security, which, accordingly, affects the specifics of the response of individuals to threatening factors and determines the strategy of their further behaviour can be proved.In particular, the results of the development of a paradigmatic mechanism of empirical study of the components of personal security demonstrate that a significant correlation is between some of them.Consequently, respondents demonstrate satisfaction with the need for security, positive beliefs about favourable peace and reliability of other people, and high sensitivity to threats, which, accordingly, indicates that they often use adequate or uncertain means of response to threatening factors trying to avoid disturbing and ignoring strategies.
The results of research can be used in further scientific development of problems of management of economic security, as well as related topics of social and management spheres of the state and society.In the conditions of full-scale armed aggression of the russian federation, new challenges have appeared that require research, in particular, issues related to personal security in the context of its consideration through the prism of financial and economic factors.Given the longterm continuation of hostilities, this should become one of the promising areas of research.Ключові слова: парадигмальний механізм, механізм соціального управління, людський фактор, безпека особистості, економічна безпека, фінансова безпека JEL Класифікація: G00, G40, H00

Figure 1 .
Figure 1.Dynamics of the number of publications indexed in Scopus, whose titles, abstracts and keywords contain the terms "personal security" and "financial security" or "personal safety" or "financial safety".(Source: built on the basis of the Scopus database)

Figure 2 .
This map displays the frequency of use of terms by circle size and intensity of interconnection and allows us to track variants of combinations of terms both within and between clusters.Using the computer program VOSviewer, keywords were grouped into three clusters.Each of the clusters symbolizes the direction of scientific research in the field of personal security in relation to financial issues.

Figure 2 .
Figure 2. A network map of the relationship between keywords regarding personal security and financial research.(Source: built on the basis of the Scopus database using VOSviewer software)

Figure 3 .
Figure 3.A chronological network map of the relationship between keywords regarding personal security and financial research.

Figure 4 .
Figure 4.The results of the study of the sensitivity to dangers.

Figure 5 .
Figure 5.The results of the study of the forms of response to hazards.