MOSCOW, 28 July 2025. The VCIOM Analytical Center presents the results of a monitoring study on friendship.
It is logical to assume that people by nature are drawn to their own kind, build connections with those who share similar social status, values and views. However, everything is more complicated: findings show that there is no place for prejudices and stereotypes when it comes to friendships. Making friends with those who share different values has become a new norm: over the recent 12 years the number of Russians whose friends are people of the opposite gender, another generation, religion, social status and ethnicity has doubled. The data obtained show that there has been a big shift in the perceptions of the “Another” making us believe that the Russian society is becoming more open and tolerant compared to the past.
Gender- and age-related barriers are easiest to overcome to build friendships, whereas confessional differences remain to be significant obstacles to making new friends (despite positive dynamics). However, this is not true with regard to ethnicity. According to the findings, respondents pay as much attention to friends’ ethnicity as to their social status. Remarkably, residents of the Northern Caucasian district, with its huge variety of ethnicities and cultural specifics, are more likely to have interethnic friends than friendship between different genders.
More than one-third of Russians (a three-fold increase compared to 2013) report to have friends with various backgrounds; they are friends with literally everyone and take no account of any differences. Such rich social capital is often typical of Russians with higher and incomplete higher education diplomas, male respondents and Odler Millennials. The oldest generation (Thaw generation) are the most selective with friends, which is not only due to prejudices but also a narrowed circle of communication.
All-Russian VCIOM-Sputnik telephone survey was conducted July 18, 2025. A total of 1,600 respondents aged 18 and older took part in the survey. Survey method: telephone interview, stratified random sample based on a complete list of mobile phone numbers in use in Russia. The data are weighted for socio-demographic characteristics. The margin of error at a 95% confidence level does not exceed 2.5%. In addition to sampling error, minor changes to the wording of questions and different circumstances arising during the fieldwork can introduce bias into the survey.
Key effectiveness indicators, survey of July 18, 2025: cooperation rate (CR)* = 0.7508; minimum response rate (MRR)** = 0.0155; response rate (RR)*** = 0.0821. Calculations are based on corporate standard:
* CR: the number of complete interviews divided by the sum of: а) complete interviews and b) non-interviews with eligible respondents.
** MRR: the number of complete interviews divided by the sum of: а) complete interviews, b) interrupted interviews after successful screening and c) all the respondents where it is unknown whether they meet the selected criteria or not.
** RR is calculated in the same way as MRR, with the only difference that the number of respondents with unknown eligibility decreases proportional to the percentage of eligible cases in the total number of respondents with identified eligibility or non-eligibility.
Do you have… among your friends, or not? (close-ended question, one answer, % of respondents) | |||
| 2013* | 2019 | 2025 |
People of another generation: considerably younger or older than you | |||
Yes | 50 | 84 | 87 |
No | 49 | 15 | 12 |
Don’t know | 1 | 1 | 1 |
People of the opposite sex | |||
Yes | 43 | 82 | 85 |
No | 56 | 18 | 14 |
Don’t know | 1 | 0 | 1 |
People of another ethnicity | |||
Yes | 39 | 64 | 70 |
No | 59 | 35 | 28 |
Don’t know | 2 | 1 | 2 |
People whose income substantially differs from yours | |||
Yes | 45 | 69 | 69 |
No | 53 | 29 | 27 |
Don’t know | 2 | 2 | 4 |
People who have another belief | |||
Yes | 30 | 52 | 58 |
No | 67 | 46 | 39 |
Don’t know | 3 | 2 | 3 |
* Before 2017, surveys were conducted through household face-to-face interviews (Express project); stratified multi-stage sample, with quotas based on socio-demographic parameters; representative of the Russian population aged 18+, according to type of settlement, gender, age, education and federal district. Sample size: 1,600 respondents.
Selectiveness in friendship* (in %) | |||
| 2013** | 2019 | 2025 |
Having friends despite any differences (out of 5 things that were tested) | 13 | 34 | 37 |
The remainder (those who are selective with choosing friends/ undecided) | 87 | 66 | 63 |
* Calculation based on the question: “Do you have... among your friends, or not?”
** Before 2017, surveys were conducted through household face-to-face interviews (Express project); stratified multi-stage sample, with quotas based on socio-demographic parameters; representative of the Russian population aged 18+, according to type of settlement, gender, age, education and federal district. Sample size: 1,600 respondents.
Selectiveness in friendship* (in %) | |||
| Total | Men | Women |
Having friends despite any differences (out of 5 things that were tested) | 37 | 41 | 34 |
The remainder (those who are selective with choosing friends/ undecided) | 63 | 59 | 66 |
* Calculation based on the question: “Do you have... among your friends, or not?”
Selectiveness in friendship* (in %) | |||||||
| Total | Digital generation (Zoomers, 2001 and later) | Younger Millennials (1992—2000) | Older Millennials (1982—1991) | Reform generation (1968—1981) | Stagnation generation (1948—1967) | Thaw generation (before 1947) |
Having friends despite any differences (out of 5 things that were tested) | 37 | 36 | 38 | 47 | 42 | 32 | 13 |
The remainder (those who are selective with choosing friends/ undecided) | 63 | 64 | 62 | 53 | 58 | 68 | 87 |
* Calculation based on the question: “Do you have... among your friends, or not?”
Author: Lyudmila Bogomazova