Siber Zorbalık ve Siber Mağduriyet Ölçeklerinin Türkçeye Uyarlanması: Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Çalışmaları

Abstract

Bu araştırmanın amacı Türkçe uyarlaması gerçekleştirilen Siber Zorbalık ve Siber Mağduriyet ölçeklerinin yapı geçerlikleri ve güvenilirliklerinin incelenmesidir. Bu amaç doğrultusunda öncelikle ölçeklerin Türkçeye çeviri süreci tamamlanmış, daha sonra geçerlik ve güvenirlik analizleri yapılmıştır. Araştırmanın çalışma grubu 375’i (%65) kadın ve 204’ü (%35) erkek olmak üzere toplam 579 üniversite öğrencisinden oluşmaktadır. Doğrulayıcı faktör analizi sonuçlarına göre, Siber Zorbalık Ölçeği Türkçe formunun toplam 17 madde ve 3 boyuttan oluştuğu, Siber Mağduriyet Ölçeği Türkçe formunun ise toplam 23 madde ve 4 boyuttan oluştuğu belirlenmiştir. Ölçeklerin güvenirlik düzeylerini belirlemek için iç tutarlılık katsayıları ve test tekrar test güvenirlik puanları incelenmiştir. Buna göre Siber Zorbalık Ölçeğinin alt boyutları ve toplam puanı için Cronbach alfa değerlerinin .74 ile .90, test tekrar test puanlarının ise .76 ile .82 arasında olduğu belirlenmiştir. Benzer olarak Siber Mağduriyet Ölçeğinin alt boyutlar ve toplam puanı için Cronbach alfa değerlerinin .83 ile .95, test-tekrar test puanlarının ise .74 ile .82 arasında olduğu görülmüştür. Bulgular ışığında, Siber Zorbalık ve Siber Mağduriyet ölçeklerinin kavramsal ve istatistiksel açıdan yapı geçerliliklerinin bulunduğu ve yüksek güvenirlik düzeyine sahip oldukları sonucuna ulaşılmıştır.

Keywords

• siber zorbalık
• siber mağduriyet
• üniversite öğrencileri

Adaptation of the Cyberbullying and Cyber Victimization Scales into Turkish: Validity and Reliability Studies

Abstract

The main aim of this study is to examine the construct validity and reliability of the Cyberbullying and Cyber Victimization scales adapted into Turkish. For this purpose, firstly, the translation procedure of the scales into Turkish was completed, and then validity and reliability analyses were conducted. The study group consisted of 579 university students, 375 (65%) female and 204 (35%) male. The results of confirmatory factor analysis indicated that the Turkish form of the Cyberbullying Scale consisted of 17 items and a 3-dimensional structure, and the Turkish version of the Cyber Victimization Scale consisted of 23 items and a 4-dimensional structure. Internal consistency coefficients and test-retest reliability scores were also analyzed to determine the reliability of the scales. Consequently, the Cronbach alpha coefficients for internal consistency of the Cyber Bullying Scale sub-factors and total score ranged from .74 to .90, and the test-retest scores were between .76 and .82. Similarly, Cronbach's alpha values for the sub-dimensions and total score of the Cyber Victimization Scale were found to be between .83 and .95, and test-retest scores were between .74 and .82. The findings indicated that the total scores and sub-factors of the Cyberbullying and Victimization Scales is conceptually and statistically valid and highly reliable.

Keywords

• cyberbullying
• cyber victimization
• university students

References

1. Aparisi, D., Delgado, B., & Bo, R. M. (2024). Explanatory model of cyberbullying, cybervictimization, aggressiveness, social anxiety, and adaptation to university: a structural equation analysis. Journal of Computers in Education, 1-22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-023-00308-5
2. Arıcak, T., Siyahhan, S., Uzunhasanoğlu, A., Sarıbeyoğlu, S., Cıplak, S., Yılmaz, N., & Medmedov, C. (2008). Cyberbullying among Turkish adolescents. Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw 11(3), 253-261. https://doi.org/10.1089/cpb.2007.0016
3. Arıcak, O. T., Kınay, H., & Tanrıkulu, T. (2012). Siber zorbalık ölçeğinin ilk psikometrik bulguları. Hasan Ali Yücel Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 9(1), 101-114
4. Bayram, N., & Saylı, M. (2013). Üniversite öğrencileri arasında siber zorbalık davranışı. İstanbul Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Mecmuası, 71(1), 107-116 Beran, T. N., Rinaldi, C., Bickham, D. S., & Rich, M. (2012). Evidence for the need to support adolescents dealing with harassment and cyber-harassment: Prevalence, progression, and impact. School Psychology International, 33(5), 562-576. https://doi.org/10.1177/0143034312446976
5. Brown, T. A. (2006). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. The Guilford Press.
6. Chung, Y. J., & Shin, Y. J. (2020). Development and validation of adolescent cyberbullying scale. Korean Assoc. Learn. Center. Curric. Instruct, 20, 1453-1473. https://doi.org/10.22251/jlcci.2020.20.23.1453
7. Çetin, B., Yaman, E., & Peker, A. (2011). Cyber victim and bullying scale: A study of validity and reliability. Computers & Education, 57(4), 2261-2271. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.06.014
8. Dilmaç, B. (2009). Psychological needs as a predictor of cyber bullying: a preliminary report on college students. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 9(3), 1307–1325.

9. Dursun, S., Gökçe, A., & Aytaç, S. (2020). Siber zorbalık: Üniversite öğrencileri üzerine bir araştırma. International Journal of Social Inquiry, 13(2), 465-485. https://doi.org/10.37093/ijsi.837694
10. Erdur-Baker, Ö., & Kavşut, F. (2007). New form of peer bullying: cyberbullying. Eurasian J Educ Res, 27, 31–42.
11. Faucher, C., Jackson, M., & Cassidy, W. (2014). Cyberbullying among university students: Gendered experiences, impacts, and perspectives. Education Research International, 20(14), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/698545
12. Gizir, C. A. (2012). İlişki İnançları Ölçeği’nin uyarlanması: Geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışmaları. Mersin Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 8(2), 37-45.
13. Hemphill, S. A., Kotevski, A., & Heerde, J. A. (2015). Longitudinal associations between cyberbullying perpetration and victimization and problem behavior and mental health problems in young Australians. International Journal of Public Health, 60(2), 227-237. Hinduja, S., & Patchin, J. W. (2015). Bullying beyond the schoolyard: Preventing and responding to cyberbullying. Corwin Press.
14. Kee, D. M. H., Anwar, A., & Vranjes, I. (2024). Cyberbullying victimization and suicide ideation: The mediating role of psychological distress among Malaysian youth. Computers in Human Behavior, 150, 108000. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2023.108000
15. Kline, R. B. (2010). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. Guilford Press.
16. Kokkinos, C. M., Antoniadou, N., Asdre, A., & Voulgaridou, K. (2016). Parenting and Internet Behavior Predictors of Cyber-Bullying and Cyber-Victimization among Preadolescents. Deviant Behavior, 37 (4), 439–455. https://doi.org/10.1080/01639625.2015.1060087
17. Kraft, E. M., & Wang, J. (2010). An exploratory study of the cyberbullying and cyberstalking experiences and factors related to victimization of students a public liberal arts college. International Journal of Technoethcis, 1(4), 74-91. http://dx.doi.org/10.4018/jte.2010100106
18. Küçük, S., İnanıcı, M. A., & Ziyalar, N. (2017). Siber Zorbalık Ölçeği Türkçe Uyarlaması, Adli Tıp Bülteni, 22(3), 172-176. https://doi.org/10.17986/blm.2017331584
19. Lee, J., Abell, N., & Homles, J.L. (2017). Validation of measures of cyberbullying perpetration and victimization in emerging adulthood. Research on Social Work Practice, 27(4), 456-467. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049731515578535
20. Leung, A. N. M.,Wong, N., & Farver, J. M. (2018). Cyberbullying in Hong Kong Chinese students: Life satisfaction, and the moderating role of friendship qualities on cyberbullying victimization and perpetration. Personality and Individual Differences, 133, 7–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2017.07.016
21. Mishna, F., Cook, C., Gadalla, T., Daciuk, J., & Solomon, S. (2010). Cyber bullying behaviors among middle and high school students. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 80(3), 362-374. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1939-0025.2010.01040.x
22. Nocentini, A., Calmaestra, J., Schultze-Krumbholz, A., Scheithauer, H., Ortega, R., & Menesini, E. (2010). Cyberbullying: Labels, behaviours and definition in three european countries. Australian Journal of Guidance & Counselling, 20(2), 129–142. https://doi.org/10.1375/ajgc.20.2.129
23. Patchin, J. W., & Hinduja, S. (2006). Bullies move beyond the schoolyard: A preliminary look at cyberbullying. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 4, 148-169. https://doi.org/10.1177/1541204006286288 Schumacker, R. E., & Lomax, R. G. (2010). A begginner’s guide to structural equation modeling. Taylor & Francis Group.
24. Snakenborg, J., Van Acker, R., & Gable, R. A. (2011). Cyberbullying: Prevention and intervention to protect our children and youth. Preventing School Failure: Alternative Education for Children and Youth, 55(2), 88-95. https://doi.org/10.1080/1045988X.2011.539454
25. Strohmeier, D., & Gradinger, P. (2022). Cyberbullying and Cyber Victimization as Online Risks for Children and Adolescents. European Psychologist, 27 (2), 141–150. https://doi.org/10.1027/1016-9040/a000479
26. Sümer, N. (2000). Yapısal eşitlik modelleri: Temel kavramlar ve örnek uygulamalar. Türk Psikoloji Yazıları, 3 (6), 49-74.
27. Tanrikulu, İ., & Erdur-Baker, Ö. (2021). Psychometric properties of a Cyberbullying Inventory for university students, British Journal of Guidance & Counselling, 49(3), 494-507. https://doi.org/10.1080/03069885.2020.1775174
28. Topçu, Ç., & Erdur-Baker, Ö. (2010). The revised cyber bullying inventory (CBI): Validity and reliability. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 5, 660-664. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.07.161
29. Watts, L. K., Wagner, J., Velasquez,B., & Behrens, P.I. (2017). Cyberbullying in higher education: A literature review. Computers in Human Behavior 69, 268-274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.12.038
30. Willard, N. E. (2007). Cyberbullying and cyberthreats: Responding to the challenge of online social aggression and distress. Research Press.
31. Yaman, E., Eroğlu, Y., & Peker, A. (2011). Okul zorbalığı ve siber zorbalık. Kaknüs.
32. Zhang, H., & Zhao, H. (2020). Dark personality traits and cyber aggression in adolescents: A moderated mediation analysis of belief in virtuous humanity and self-control. Children and Youth Services Review, 119(100), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.105565