RECONCILING FAMILISM AND INDIVIDUALISM IN A CHANGING SOCIETY: A STUDY ON TURKISH UNIVERSITY STUDENTS

Year 2016, Volume: 16 Issue: 4, 159 - 178, 30.12.2016

Pelin Önder Erol Duygu Altınoluk Düztaş

https://doi.org/10.11616/basbed.vi.455413

Cited By: 1

Abstract

In rapidly changing societies, young people do not only experience a transition from adolescence to adulthood at the micro scale; but they also experience a transition from traditional to modern ways of life at the macro scale. Hence their tendency toward familism or individualism is one of the major indicators of such a dual transition. The aim of this study is to find an answer to the question whether Turkish university students (n=165) display any tendency toward familism or individualism, or they reconcile both as a strategy to emancipate from the enmeshment of family. The findings revealed that there is a coexistence of familistic and individualistic tendencies in terms of intrafamilial relationships. The findings also evidently show that students who are female, relatively younger, from rural origins and children of parents with lower educational level are more subjected to familistic values.

Keywords

Familism, Individualism, Social Change, Turkish University Students

References

• Akşit, B., Şen M., & Coşkun, M. K. (2000). Modernleşme ve eğitim: Ankara’daki ortaöğretim okullarindaki öğrenci profilleri. In F. Atacan, F.T. Ercan, H. Kurtuluş & M. Türkay (Ed.), Mübeccel Kıray için yazilar [Essays in honour of Mübeccel Kıray] (pp. 57-76). İstanbul: Bağlam Yayınları.
• Allık, J., & Realo, A. (2004). Individualism-collectivism and social capital. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 35 (1), 29-49.
• Baştuğ, S. (2002). Household and family in contemporary Turkey: An historical perspective. In R. Liljeström & E. Özdalga (Ed.), Autonomy and dependence in the family (pp. 99-115). Istanbul: Swedish Research Institute.
• Bauman, Z. (2001). The individualized society. Malden: Blackwell.
• Beck, U, & Beck-Gernsheim, E. (2002). Individualization: Institutionalized individualism and its social and political consequences. Gateshead: Athenaeum Press Sage Publications.
• Boratav, K. (2004). Tarımsal yapilar ve kapitalizm [Agricultural structures and capitalism]. 3rd ed. Ankara: İmge Kitabevi.
• De Beauvoir, S. (1970). Kadın: Evlilik çaği [The second sex]. 7th ed. (translated by: Bertan Onaran). İstanbul: Payel.
• Duben, A. (1990). Household formation in late Ottoman Istanbul. International Journal of Middle East Studies 22 (4): 419-435.
• Duben, A. (2012). Kent, aile, tarih [Urban, family, history]. 3rd ed. (translated by Leyla Şimşek). İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları.
• Duben, A. & Behar C. (2014). İstanbul haneleri, evlilik, aile ve doğurganlik 1880-1940 [Istanbul households, marriage, family and fertility] (translated by: Nuray Mert). İstanbul: Boğaziçi University Press.
• Durkheim, E. 2006 [1893]. Toplumsal işbölümü [Social division of labor]. (translated by: Prof. Dr. Özer Ozankaya). İstanbul: Cem Yayınevi.
• Erder, S. (2002). Urban migration and reconstruction of the kinship networks, the case of Istanbul. In R. Liljeström & E. Özdalga (Ed.), Autonomy and dependence in the family (pp. 117-136). Istanbul: Swedish Research Institute.
• Giddens, A. (1991). Modernity and self-identity in self and society in the late modern age. California: Stanford University Press.
• Güvenç, B. (1977). Sosyal değişme sürecinde aile, akrabalik ve soy ilişkileri [Family, kinship and lineage relationships throughout social change]. In B. Dikeçligil & A. Çiğdem (Ed.), Aile yazilari ii kültürel değerler ve sosyal değişme [Writings on family ii cultural values and social change] (pp. 187-201). Ankara: Başbakanlık Aile Araştırma Kurumu.
• Heller, P. L. (1970). Familism scale: a measure of family solidarity. National Council on Family Relations 32 (1), 73-80.
• Inglehart, R. & Wayne E. B. (2000). Modernization, cultural change, and the persistence of traditional values. American Sociological Review 65 (1), 19-51.
• Kağıtçıbaşı, Ç. (2002). Cross-cultural perspective on family change. In R. Liljeström & E. Özdalga (Ed.), Autonomy and dependence in the family (pp 19-38). Istanbul: Swedish Research Institute.
• Kağıtçıbaşı, Ç. & B. Ataca. (2005). Value of children and family change: A three-decade portrait from Turkey. Applied Psychology: An International Review 54 (3): 317–337.
• Kandiyoti, D. (1984). Aile yapisinda değişme ve süreklilik: Karşılaştırmalı bir yaklaşim [Change and continuity in family structure: A comparative approach], In T. Erder (Ed.), Türkiye’de ailenin değişimi: Toplumbilimsel incelemeler [The change of family in Turkey: Sociological investigations] (pp. 15-33). Ankara: Türk Sosyal Bilimler Derneği.
• Kandiyoti, D. (2015). Ataerkil örüntüler: Türk toplumunda erkek egemenliğinin çözümlenmesine yönelik notlar [Patriarchal patterns: Notes on the analysis of male hegemony in Turkish society]. In Ş. Tekeli (Ed.) 1980’ler Türkiyesi’nde kadin bakiş açisindan kadinlar [Women from a perspective of woman in 1980’s Turkey] (pp 367-382). 6th ed. İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları.
• Kıray, M. B. (1984). Büyük kent ve değişen aile [Big city and the changing family]. In T. Erder (Ed.) Türkiye’de ailenin değişimi: Toplumbilimsel incelemeler [the change of family in Turkey: Sociological investigations], (pp. 69-78). Ankara: Türk Sosyal Bilimler Derneği.
• Kongar, E. (1970). Türkiye’de aile: Yapısı, evrimi ve bürokratik örgütlerle ilişkileri [Family in Turkey: Its structure, evolution and relations with bureaucratic organizations]. Amme İdaresi Dergisi, 3 (2), 58-83.
• Korkut-Owen, F., Kepir D. D., Özdemir S., Ulaş Ö., & Yılmaz Ö. (2012). Üniversite öğrencilerinin bölüm seçme nedenleri [Reasons for university student’s program choice]. Mersin Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 8 (3), 135-151.
• Laslett, Peter. (2001). The world we have lost further explored. London: Routledge
• Nehring, Daniel. (2011). Negotiated familism: Intimate life and individualization among young female professionals from Mexico City. Canadian Journal of Latin American and Caribbean Studies, 36 (71), 165-196. doi:10.1080/08263663.2011.10817004.
• Neyzi, Leyla. (2001). Object or subject? Paradox of ‘youth’ in Turkey. International Journal of Middle East Studies, 33, 411-432.
• Ogburn, W. F. (1964). Social change with respect to culture and original nature. Massachusetts: The Riberside Press.
• Özbay, F. (2015). Dünden bugüne aile, kent ve nüfus [Family, urban and population from past to present]. İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları.
• Özcan, H. (2016). Öğrencilerin üniversite tercihine etki eden faktörler üzerine bir araştirma [An investigation on factors affecting students’ university choice]. Anadolu Eğitim Liderliği ve Öğretim Dergisi, 4 (1), 16-39.
• Peterson, G. W., Steinmetz S. K. &Wilson S. M. (2005). Persisting issues in cultural and cross-cultural parent-youth relations. Marriage and Family Review, 36 (3-4), 229-240. doi: 10.1300/J002v36n03_11
• Sevil, Ü. & Yanıkkerem E. (2006). Kadına yönelik şiddet [Violence against woman]. İzmir: Güven Kitabevi.
• Stein, G. L., Gonzalez, L. M., Cupito, A. M., Kiang L., & Supple, A. J. (2015). The protective role of familism in the lives of Latino adolescents. Journal of Family Issues, 36 (10), 1255–1273. doi: 10.1177/0192513X13502480
• Sunar, D. (2002). Change and continuity in the Turkish middle class family. In R. Liljeström & E. Özdalga (Ed.), Autonomy and dependence in the family (pp 217-237). Istanbul: Swedish Research Instıtute.
• Sunar, D., & Fişek G. O. (2005). Contemporary Turkish families. In U. Gielen & J. Roopnarine (Ed.), Families in Global Perspective (pp 169-183). UK: Pearson.
• Tekeli, İ. (2016). Göç ve ötesi [Migration and its beyond]. 2nd ed. İstanbul: Tarih Vakfı Yurt Yayınları.
• Timur, S. (1972). Türkiye’de aile yapisi [Family structure in Turkey]. Ankara: Hacettepe Üniversitesi Yayınları.
• Tönnies, F. (2001) [1887]. Community and civil society. In J. Harris (Ed.), (translated by Jose Harris and Margaret Hollis). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Triandis, H. C., Chan, D. K.-S., Bhawuk, D. P. S., Iwao, S., & Sinha, J. B. P. (1995). Multimethod probes of allocentrism and idiocentrism. International Journal of Psychology, 30 (4), 461-480.
• TÜİK. (2014). Adrese dayali nüfus kayit sistemi [Address based population registration system], (available online: https://biruni.tuik.gov.tr/medas/?kn=95&locale=tr).
• TÜİK. (2015). Adrese dayali nüfus kayit sistemi [Address based population registration system], (available online: https://biruni.tuik.gov.tr/medas/?kn=95&locale=tr).
• TÜİK. (2016). Population census 1955-2000, (available online: tuik.gov.tr/PreIstatistikTablo.do?istab_id=212).
• Van de Kaa, D. (1987). Europe’s Second Demographic Transition. Population Bulletin, 42 (1), 2-57.
• Vergin, N. (1985). Social change and the family in Turkey. Current Anthropology, 26, (5), 571-574.
• Vergin, N. (1987). Toplumsal değişme ve Türkiye’de aile [Social change and family in Turkey]. In B. Dikeçligil & A. Çiğdem (Ed.), Aile yazıları II: Kültürel değerler ve sosyal değişme [Writings on family II: Cultural values and social change] (pp 309-320). Ankara: Başbakanlık Aile Araştırma Kurumu.
• Yazıcıoğlu, Y. & Erdoğan, S. (2007). SPSS uygulamali bilimsel araştirma yöntemleri [SPSS applied scientific research methods]. Ankara: Detay Yayıncılık.