Turkish Adaptation of the Team Creativity Self-Efficacy Scale

Year 2025, Issue: 19, 72 - 85, 30.12.2025

Ramazan Atasoy , Ramazan Özkul , Halil Karadaş

https://doi.org/10.46628/ahu.1735494

Abstract

The aim of this study is to examine the psychometric properties of the Team Creativity Self-Efficacy Scale by conducting a validity and reliability study within the context of Türkiye. Originally developed by Bagheri et al. (2020), the Team Creativity Self-Efficacy Scale is a four-item instrument designed to assess teachers’ perceptions of team creativity in educational settings. The validity and reliability analyses were carried out with a total of 504 teachers (295 female and 209 male) working in three central districts of Şanlıurfa (Karaköprü, Haliliye, and Eyyübiye) during the 2024–2025 academic year, using two independent samples. To ensure linguistic equivalence, two online administrations were conducted with a two-week interval among a group of 24 participants, yielding a strong, positive, and statistically significant correlation. Exploratory factor analysis revealed a one-factor structure with four items, consistent with the original scale. Confirmatory factor analysis conducted with the second sample demonstrated an acceptable level of model fit for the one-factor structure [χ²(2) = 3.33 / 2 = 1.67; RMSEA = .050, CFI = .999, TLI = .997, SRMR = .004]. The test-retest correlation coefficient calculated over a two-week interval with 50 participants was .81, and the reliability coefficient was .97. These findings indicate that the Turkish version of the scale is a valid and reliable instrument for use in the Turkish cultural context.

Keywords

Team creativity , self-efficacy , scale adaptation , education

Takım Yaratıcılık Özyeterlik Ölçeği Türkçe Uyarlaması

Abstract

Bu araştırmanın amacı Takım Yaratıcılık Öz-Yeterlik Ölçeği’nin Türkiye koşullarında geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışmasını yaparak psikometrik özelliklerini belirlemektir. Bagheri vd. (2020) tarafından geliştirilen Takım Yaratıcılık Öz-Yeterlik Ölçeği, öğretmenlerin eğitim ortamlarında takım yaratıcılığına yönelik algılarını değerlendirmeye yönelik için dört maddelik bir ölçme aracıdır. Geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışmasına 2024- 2025 eğitim-öğretim yılında iki farklı örneklem için Şanlıurfa merkez üç ilçesinde (Karaköprü, Haliliye ve Eyyübiye) görev yapan toplam 504 öğretmen (295 kadın ve 209 erkek) katılmıştır. Ölçeğin dil eşdeğerliğini sağlamak için ayrıca 24 kişilik katılımcı ile çevrimiçi olarak iki hafta arayla yapılan iki uygulama arasında yüksek düzeyde, pozitif ve anlamlı bir ilişki bulunmuştur. Ölçeğin yapı geçerliğini sınamak için yapılan açımlayıcı faktör analizi sonucunda ölçeğin orijinaline benzer tek faktörlü ve 4 maddeden oluşan bir yapı gösterdiği belirlenmiştir. İkinci örneklemle yapılan doğrulayıcı faktör analizi sonucunda ölçeğin tek faktörlü yapısı için yeterli düzeyde uyum iyiliği [χ²(2) = 3.33 / 2 = 1.67; RMSEA = .050, CFI = .999, TLI = .997, ve SRMR = .004] elde edilmiştir. İki hafta ara ile 50 katılımcı ile gerçekleştirilen ölçeğin test-tekrar test korelasyon katsayısı 0.81, güvenirlik katsayısı 0.97 olarak hesaplanmıştır. Bu sonuçlar ölçeğin Türkçe formunun Türk kültürüne uygun geçerli ve güvenilir bir ölçme aracı olduğunu göstermektedir.

Keywords

Takım yaratıcılık , öz-yeterlik , ölçek uyarlama , eğitim

Ethical Statement

19.12.2023 tarih ve 2023/198 sayılı Harran üniversitesi Sosyal ve Beşeri Bilimler Etik Kurul raporu

References

• Acosta-García, K., & Navarro-Ibañez, M. (2025). Teacher self-efficacy in Northern Chile: Challenges in instructional strategies. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 24(1). https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.24.1.16
• Amabile, T. M. (1988). A model of creativity and innovation in organizations. In B. M. Staw & L. L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 10, pp. 123–167). JAI Press.
• Atasoy, R. (2020). The relationship between school principals' leadership styles, school culture and organizational change. International Journal of Progressive Education, 16(5), 256–274. https://doi.org/10.29329/ijpe.2020.277.16
• Bagheri, A., Akbari, M., & Artang, A. (2022). How does entrepreneurial leadership affect innovation work behavior? The mediating role of individual and team creativity self-efficacy. European Journal of Innovation Management, 25(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJIM-07-2020-0281
• Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191–215. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191
• Bellibaş, M. Ş., & Liu, Y. (2017). Multilevel analysis of the relationship between principals’ perceived practices of instructional leadership and teachers’ self-efficacy perceptions. Journal of Educational Administration, 55(1), 49–69. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEA-12-2015-0116
• Brown, T. A. (2006). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research (1st ed.). Guilford Press.
• Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2005). Sosyal bilimler için veri analiz el kitabı (5. baskı). Pegem Akademi.
• Can, A. (2024). SPSS ile bilimsel araştırma sürecinde nicel veri analizi (12. baskı). Pegem Akademi.
• Chen, M. (2007). Entrepreneurial leadership and new ventures: Creativity in entrepreneurial teams. Creativity and Innovation Management, 16(3), 239–249. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8691.2007.00439.x
• Cheung, G. W., & Rensvold, R. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 9(2), 233–255.
• Çokluk, Ö., Şekercioğlu, G., & Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2025). Sosyal bilimler için çok değişkenli istatistik: SPSS ve LISREL uygulamaları (8. baskı). Pegem Akademi.
• Da’as, R. (2021). School principals’ skills and teacher absenteeism during Israeli educational reform. Journal of Educational Change, 22, 53–84. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-020-09376-3
• Da’as, R. (2022). Principals’ attentional scope and teacher creativity. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 28(3), 510–532. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603124.2022.2027525
• Dampérat, M., Jeannot, F., Jongmans, E., & Jolibert, A. (2016). Team creativity: Creative self-efficacy, creative collective efficacy and their determinants. Recherche et Applications en Marketing (English Edition), 31(3), 6–25. https://doi.org/10.1177/2051570716650164
• Elisondo, R. C. (2025). Creativity and teacher education curricula in Argentina. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 57, 101811. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2025.101811
• Ford, C. M. (1996). A theory of individual creative action in multiple social domains. Academy of Management Review, 21(4), 1112–1142.
• Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50. https://doi.org/10.2307/3151312
• Gist, M. E., & Mitchell, T. R. (1992). Self-efficacy: A theoretical analysis of its determinants and malleability. Academy of Management Review, 17(2), 183–211.
• Gong, Y., Huang, J.-C., & Farh, J.-L. (2009). Employee learning orientation, transformational leadership, and employee creativity. Academy of Management Journal, 52(4), 765–778. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMJ.2009.43670890
• Hair, J. F., Page, M., & Brunsveld, N. (2019). Essentials of business research methods. Routledge.
• Kaiser, H. F. (1974). An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika, 39, 31–36.
• Kalaycı, Ş. (2006). SPSS uygulamalı çok değişkenli istatistik teknikleri. Asil Yayın Dağıtım.
• Karwowski, M. (2016). The dynamics of creative self-concept. Creativity Research Journal, 28(1), 99–104. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2016.1125254
• Kline, R. B. (2015). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. Guilford Press.
• Leech, N. L., Barrett, K. C., & Morgan, G. A. (2005). SPSS for intermediate statistics: Use and interpretation. Lawrence Erlbaum.
• Liu, Y., Bellibaş, M. Ş., & Gümüş, S. (2021). Instructional leadership, distributed leadership, and teacher self-efficacy. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 49(3), 430–453. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143220910438
• Marsh, H. W., Hau, K. T., & Wen, Z. (2004). In search of golden rules. Structural Equation Modeling, 11(3), 320–341.
• Martin, J. J., & Kulinna, P. H. (2004). Self-efficacy theory and the theory of planned behavior. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 75(3), 288–298. https://doi.org/10.1080/02701367.2004.10609161
• Mumford, M. D., & Gustafson, S. B. (1988). Creativity syndrome. Psychological Bulletin, 103(1), 27–43. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.103.1.27
• Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). McGraw-Hill.
• Orçan, F. (2018). Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. Journal of Measurement and Evaluation in Education and Psychology, 9(4), 413–421. https://doi.org/10.21031/epod.394323
• Özer, N., & Karadaş, H. (2021). Okul müdürlerinin yönetim tarzları ile müdür-öğretmen ilişkilerinde güven. OPUS International Journal of Society Researches, 17(34), 1095–1123. https://doi.org/10.26466/opus.767321
• Özkul, R., & Atasoy, R. (2024). Adaptation of the organizational change and psychological uncertainty scale into Turkish. İnönü Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 25(3), 1220–1239. https://doi.org/10.17679/inuefd.1478457
• Özkul, R., & Dönmez, B. (2023). Teachers' self-efficacy perception and classroom management concern. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 38(1), 102–120. https://doi.org/10.16986/HUJE.2022.475
• Pan, Y. H., Chou, H. S., Hsu, W. T., Li, C. H., & Hu, Y. L. (2013). Teacher self-efficacy and teaching practices. Social Behavior & Personality, 41(2), 241–250. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2013.41.2.241
• Paulus, P. B., Dzindolet, M., & Kohn, N. W. (2012). Collaborative creativity. In M. D. Mumford (Ed.), Handbook of organizational creativity (pp. 327–357). Academic Press.
• Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879–903.
• Romero, L. D. M., del Águila, F. D., Huarcaya, M. A. C., & Ayay, N. T. T. (2024). Self-efficacy in teacher performance and educational productivity. Multidisciplinary Reviews, 8(6), 2025175. https://doi.org/10.31893/multirev.2025175
• Shin, S. J., & Zhou, J. (2007). Educational specialization heterogeneity and creativity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(6), 1709–1721. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.92.6.1709
• Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2013). Using multivariate statistics (6th ed.). Pearson.
• Tierney, P., & Farmer, S. M. (2002). Creative self-efficacy. Academy of Management Journal, 45(6), 1137–1148. https://doi.org/10.2307/3069429
• Vandenberg, R. J., & Lance, C. E. (2000). Measurement invariance literature. Organizational Research Methods, 3(1), 4–70.
• Wood, R., & Bandura, A. (1989). Impact of conceptions of ability on self-regulatory mechanisms. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56(3), 407–415. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.56.3.407
• Ye, P., Liu, L., & Tan, J. (2021). Influence of knowledge sharing on innovation behaviour. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 34(5), 894–916. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOCM-08-2020-0237