Adaptation of Cyberchondria Severity Scale Short Form to Turkish, and Pre-Service Teachers’ Excessive Online Information-Seeking Behaviors

Abstract

The main goal of the current research is to adapt the short form of the Cyberchondria Severity Scale (CSS-12) by McElroy et al., (2019) to Turkish. The CSS-12 is a valid and reliable scale in a 5-point Likert structure consisting of 12-items and 4-factors (“Excessiveness”, Distress”, “Reassurance”, and “Compulsion”). The ethical clearance numbered 05/07/2021-E.61623 were granted and approved by the Inonu University Institutional Review Board of Social and Human Studies, on July 5, 2021 for this research. The forward translation and the original form of the scale was applied to bilingual participants, and statistically significant high-level correlation was found between both measurements (r> 0.70; p<.001). The Turkish form of the scale was applied via MERUZEM’s Online Learning Management System to a total of 314 participants in the Faculty of Education. According to the results achieved from Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA), it was revealed that each items in the scale had statistically significant load values under related subscale, and the model goodness of fit indices (𝓧2=100.88; df=46; 𝓧2/df=2.193; RMSEA=0.06; SRMR=0.06; IFI=0.97; NFI=0.95; NNFI=0.96; CFI=0.97; GFI=0.94) were at excellent or acceptable degrees. The t and R2 results were presented for each subscale. Besides, the model fit indices of the Turkish form and the original form were directly compared. Cronbach’s Alpha (α) results were scrutinized for reliability analysis. As a result, the original scale’s structure consisting of 4-factors and 12-items in a 5-point Likert form was verified, a valid and reliable scale was achieved and proposals for further research were presented and the limitations of the current study were discussed.

Keywords

• online well-being
• scale adaptation
• cyberchondria
• digital well-being
• excessive online information-seeking

Siberkondri Ciddiyet Ölçeği’nin Kısa Formunun Türkçeye Uyarlanması ve Öğretmen Adaylarının Aşırı Çevrim İçi Bilgi Arama Davranışları

Öz

Bu araştırmanın amacı, McElroy vd. (2019) tarafından geliştirilen Cyberchondria Severity Scale-12 (CSS-12)’nin Kısa Formunu Türkçeye uyarlamaktır. CSS-12, 12 madde ve 4 faktörden (“Zorlama”, “Sıkıntı”, “Aşırılık” ve “Güven Arayışı”) oluşan 5’li Likert yapıda geçerli ve güvenilir bir ölçme aracıdır. Bu araştırma için 05/07/2021-E.61623 numaralı etik izin 5 Temmuz 2021 tarihinde İnönü Üniversitesi Sosyal ve Beşerî Bilimler Bilimsel Araştırma Etik Kurulu tarafından onaylanmıştır. Ölçeğin Türkçeye çevirisi ve orijinal formu her iki dile hâkim bir çalışma grubuna uygulanmış ve her iki ölçüm arasında yüksek düzeyde istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bir ilişki tespit edilmiştir (r> 0.70; p<.001). Dil eşdeğerliğine ulaşan ölçek, MERUZEM’in Çevrim İçi Öğrenme Yönetim Sistemine katılan toplam 314 Eğitim Fakültesi öğrencisine uygulanmıştır. Doğrulayıcı Faktör Analizi (DFA)’nden elde edilen sonuçlar; ölçekte yer alan her bir maddenin ilgili faktör altında istatistiksel olarak anlamlı yük değerlerine sahip olduğunu, model uyum indekslerine ait istatistiksel değerlerin (𝓧2=100.88; sd=46; 𝓧2/sd=2.193; RMSEA=0.06; SRMR=0.06; IFI=0.97; NFI=0.95; NNFI=0.96; CFI=0.97; GFI=0.94) mükemmel veya kabul edilebilir düzeylerde olduğunu ortaya koymuştur. Ölçeğin her bir faktörü için t ve R2 değerleri sunulmuştur. Ayrıca, uyarlanan ölçek ve orijinal ölçeğe ait model uyum indeks değerleri kıyaslanmıştır. Güvenirlik analizi için Cronbach’s Alpha (α) değerleri incelenmiştir. Ölçeğin uyarlanma süreci sonucunda, orijinal ölçekte sunulan 5’li Likert formda, 4 faktör ve 12 maddeden oluşan yapı doğrulanmış, geçerli ve güvenilir bir ölçme aracı elde edilmiş ve ileri araştırmalar için birtakım öneriler sunularak mevcut araştırmanın sınırlılık durumları tartışılmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• çevrimiçi sağlık
• ölçek uyarlama
• siberkondri
• dijital sağlık
• aşırı çevrimiçi bilgi arama

References

1. Barrett, P. (2007). Structural equation modelling: Adjudging model fit. Personality and Individual differences, 42(5), 815-824. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2006.09.018
2. Barut Tugtekin, E., & Koc, M. (2020). Understanding the relationship between new media literacy, communication skills, and democratic tendency: Model development and testing. New Media & Society, 22(10), 1922-1941. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1461444819887705
3. Byrne, B. M. (2006). Structural equation modeling with EQS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming (2nd Ed.). New York: Psychology Press.
4. Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2012). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı. Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
5. Cheng, S. (2011). Comparisons of competing models between attitudinal loyalty and behavioral loyalty. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 2(10), 149-166.
6. Çokluk, Ö., Şekercioğlu, G., & Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2012). Sosyal bilimler için çok değişkenli istatistik: SPSS ve LISREL uygulamaları (2. Baskı). Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
7. Costello, A.B., & Osborne, J.W. (2005). Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: Four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis. Practical Assessment, Research and Evaluation, 10(7), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.7275/jyj1-4868
8. Durak-Batıgün, A., Gör, N., Kömürcü, B., & Şenkal-Ertürk, I. (2018). Cyberchondria Scale (CS): Development, validity and reliability study. The Journal of Psychiatry and Neurological Sciences, 31, 148-162. https://doi.org/10.5350/DAJPN2018310203

9. Ejder Apay, S., Gürol, A., Özdemir, S., & Uslu, S. (2020). The reliability and validity of the cyberchondria severity scale for the Turkish students. Çukurova Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 49(1), 430-450.
10. Fergus, T. A. (2014). The cyberchondria severity scale (CSS): An examination of structure and relations with health anxiety in a community sample. Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 28, 504-510. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.janxdis.2014.05.006
11. Fergus, T. A., & Dolan, S. L. (2014). Problematic internet use and internet searches for medical information: The role of health anxiety. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 17(12), 761-765. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2014.0169
12. Fergus, T. A., & Russell, L. H. (2016). Does cyberchondria overlap with health anxiety and obsessive–compulsive symptoms? An examination of latent structure and scale interrelations. Journal of anxiety disorders, 38, 88-94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.janxdis.2016.01.009
13. Hooper, D., Coughlan, J., & Mullen, M. R. (2008). Structural equation modelling: Guidelines for determining model fit. The Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 6(1), 53-60.
14. Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indices in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1-55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
15. Kaas, R. A., & Tinsley, H. E. A. (1979). Factor analysis. Journal of Leisure Research, 11, 120-138.
16. Kline, R. B. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (3rd Ed.). New York: The Guilford Press.
17. Koc, M., & Barut, E. (2016). Development and validation of New Media Literacy Scale (NMLS) for university students. Computers in Human Behavior, 63, 834-843. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.06.035
18. Lewis, T. (2006). Seeking health information on the internet: Lifestyle choice or bad attack of cyberchondria?. Media, Culture & Society, 28(4), 521-539. https://doi.org/10.1177/0163443706065027
19. Loos, A. (2013). Cyberchondria: too much information for the health anxious patient?. Journal of Consumer Health on the Internet, 17(4), 439-445. https://doi.org/10.1080/15398285.2013.833452
20. McElroy, E., & Shevlin, M. (2014). The development and initial validation of the cyberchondria severity scale (CSS). Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 28(2), 259-265. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.janxdis.2013.12.007
21. McElroy, E., Kearney, M., Touhey, J., Evans, J., Cooke, Y., & Shevlin, M. (2019). The CSS-12: Development and validation of a short-form version of the cyberchondria severity scale. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 22(5), 330-335. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2018.0624
22. Muse, K., McManus, F., Leung, C., Meghreblian, B., & Williams, J. (2012). Cyberchondriasis: Fact or fiction? A preliminary examination of the relationship between health anxiety and searching for health information on the internet. Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 26, 189-196. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.janxdis.2011.11.005.
23. Nancy, B., & Grove, S. K. (2001). The practice of nursing research: Conduct, critique, and utilization (4th Ed.). New York: W.B. Saunders Company.
24. Norr, A. M., Allan, N. P., Boffa, J. W., Raines, A. M., & Schmidt, N. B. (2015). Validation of the Cyberchondria Severity Scale (CSS): Replication and extension with bifactor modeling. Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 31, 58-64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.janxdis.2015.02.001
25. Pallant, J. (2007). SPSS survival manual: A step by step guide to data analysis using SPSS for Windows (Version 15). New York, NY: Open University Press, McGraw Hill.
26. Schermelleh-Engel, K., Moosbrugger, H., & Müller, H. (2003). Evaluating the fit of structural equation models: Tests of significance and descriptive goodness of fit measures. Methods of Psychological Research Online, 8(2), 23-74.
27. Schumacker, R. E., & Lomax, R. G. (1996). A beginner’s guide to structural equation modeling. New York: Routledge.
28. Selvi, Y., Turan, S. G., Sayin, A. A., Boysan, M., & Kandeger, A. (2018). The Cyberchondria Severity Scale (CSS): Validity and reliability study of the Turkish version. Sleep and Hypnosis (Online), 20(4), 241-246. https://dx.doi.org/10.5350/Sleep.Hypn.2018.20.0157
29. Sousa, V. D., & Rojjanasrirat, W. (2011). Translation, adaptation and validation of instruments or scales for use in cross‐cultural health care research: A clear and user‐friendly guideline. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 17(2), 268-274. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2753.2010.01434.x
30. Starcevic, V., & Aboujaoude, E. (2015). Cyberchondria, cyberbullying, cybersuicide, cybersex: “New” psychopathologies for the 21st century? World Psychiatry, 14(1), 97-100. https://doi.org/10.1002/wps.20195
31. Starcevic, V., & Berle, D. (2013). Cyberchondria: Towards a better understanding of excessive health-related internet use. Expert Review of Neurotherapeutics, 13(2), 205-213. https://doi.org/10.1586/ern.12.162
32. Stone, J., & Sharpe, M. (2003). Internet resources for psychiatry and neuropsychiatry. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry, 74(1), 10-12. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/jnnp.74.1.10
33. Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2013). Using multivariate statistics. Boston: Pearson.
34. Tanaka, J. S., Panter, A. T., Winborne, W. C., & Huba, G. J. (1990). Theory testing in personality and social psychology with structural equation models. In C. Hendrick, & M. S. Clark (Eds.),. Research methods in personality and social psychology. Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 217–243.
35. Taylor, S., & Asmundson, G. J. G. (2004). Treating health anxiety: A cognitive-behavioral approach. New York: Guilford Press.
36. Thompson, B. (2004). Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis: Understanding concepts and applications. Washington: American Psychological Association.
37. Tugtekin, U., Barut Tugtekin, E., Kurt, A. A., & Demir, K. (2020). Associations between fear of missing out, problematic smartphone use, and social networking services fatigue among young adults. Social Media+ Society, 6(4), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305120963760
38. Tuğtekin, U. (2020). Sosyal bilimler için açık kaynak istatistik yazılımı: JAMOVI. Odabaşı, H.F., Akkoyunlu, B., & İşman, A. (Ed). Eğitim teknolojileri okumaları 2020 içinde, (ss. 613-628). Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
39. Uzun, S. U., Akbay, B., Özdemir, C., & Zencir, M. (2017). Siberkondria ciddiyet ölçeğinin ve kısa formunun üniversite öğrencilerinde geçerlilik-güvenilirliği 19. Ulusal Halk Sağlığı Kongresi, Kongre Kitabı, 241.
40. Wang, L., Wang, J., Wang, M., Li, Y., Liang, Y., & Xu, D. (2012). Using internet search engines to obtain medical information: A comparative study. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 14(3), e74. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.1943
41. We are Social (2021). Digital in 2021: Global overview report. 24 Haziran 2021 tarihinde https://wearesocial.com/digital-2021 adresinden erişilmiştir.
42. Worthington, R. L., & Whittaker, T. A. (2006). Scale development research: A content analysis and recommendations for best practices. The Counseling Psychologist, 34(6), 806-838. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000006288127
43. Zhu H., Wei L., & Niu, P. (2020). The novel coronavirus outbreak in Wuhan, China. Global Health Research and Policy, 5(6), 1-3. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41256-020-00135-6