İlkokula Hazırlık Sürecinde Birlikte Ebeveynlik: Bir Ölçek Geliştirme Çalışması

Öz

Bu çalışmada, İlkokula Hazırlık Sürecinde Birlikte Ebeveynlik Ölçeği’nin (İHBEÖ) geliştirilmesi amaçlanmıştır. Araştırmanın çalışma grubu, çocuğu ilkokula hazırlık sürecinde bulunan 506 ebeveynden (284 anne, %56.1; 222 baba, %43.9) oluşmaktadır. Araştırma kapsamında geliştirilen ölçeğin, yapı geçerliğini belirlemek için açımlayıcı faktör analizi (AFA) ve doğrulayıcı faktör analizi (DFA) tekniklerinden yararlanılmıştır. İki farklı örneklem üzerinden gerçekleştirilen analizlerde ilk olarak AFA tekniği ile İlkokula Hazırlık Sürecinde Birlikte Ebeveynlik Ölçeği’nin "Anlaşma (5 madde)", "Çatışma (5 madde)" ve "İş Bölümü (5 madde)" olmak üzere üç alt boyut ve 15 maddeden oluşan ölçek yapısı ortaya çıkarılmış ve ikinci örneklem üzerinden yapılan DFA’da üç faktörlü ölçek yapısının doğrulandığı görülmüştür. Araştırma kapsamında geliştirilen ölçeğin güvenirlik düzeyini belirlemek amacıyla hesaplanan Cronbach Alpha değerlerinin .80 ile .90 arasında değiştiği belirlenmiştir. İHBEÖ’nün kararlılık düzeyini belirlemek amacıyla test tekrar test yöntemi kullanılmıştır. Araştırma sonuçları, Türk kültüründe çocuğu ilkokula hazırlık sürecinde olan ebeveynlerin birlikte ebeveynlik ilişkilerini ölçmek için geliştirilen ölçeğin geçerli, güvenilir ve kullanışlı bir ölçme aracı olduğunu göstermiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Birlikte ebeveynlik
• ilkokula hazırlık süreci
• ölçek geliştirme
• psikometrik özellikler

Co-Parenting in Primary School Preparation Process: A Scale Development Study

Abstract

In this study, it was aimed to develop the Co-Parenting Scale in the Primary School Preparation Process (CP-S). The study group of the research consists of 506 parents (284 mothers, 56.1%; 222 fathers, 43.9%) whose children are in the process of preparing for primary school. EFA and CFA techniques were used to determine the construct validity of the scale developed within the scope of the research. In the analyzes carried out on two different samples, firstly, the scale structure of EFA and CP-S consisting of 15 items and three sub-dimensions as agreement (5 items), conflict (5 items) and division of labor (5 items) was revealed. It was seen that the three-factor scale structure was confirmed in. It was determined that the Cronbach Alpha values calculated to determine the reliability level of the scale developed within the scope of the research ranged between .80 and .90. The test-retest method was used to determine the stability level of CP-S. The results of the research showed that CP-S is a valid, reliable and useful measurement tool to measure the co-parenting relationships of parents whose children are in the process of preparing for primary school in Turkish culture.

Keywords

• Co-parenting
• primary school preparation process
• scale development
• psychometric properties

References

1. Abidin, R. R. & Brunner, J. F. (1995). Development of a Parenting Alliance Inventory. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 24(1), 31-40. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15374424jccp2401_4
2. Acar, I. H., Ece, C., Saral, B., & Gürmen, S. (2021). Evaluating psychometric properties of the Coparenting inventory with Turkish mothers and fathers of preschool children. Current Psychology, 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-020-01213-1
3. Bland, J. M., & Altman, D. G. (1997). Statistics notes: Cronbach’s alpha. British Medical Journal, 314, 570-572. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.314.7080.572
4. Block, J. H., Block, J., & Morrison, A. (1981). Parental agreement-disagreement on child-rearing orientations and gender-related personality correlates in children. Child development, 965-974. https://doi.org/10.2307/1129101
5. Brody, G. H., & Flor, D. L. (1996). Coparenting, family interactions, and competence among African American youths. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 1996(74), 77-91.
6. Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2002). Faktör analizi: Temel kavramlar ve ölçek geliştirmede kullanımı. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi, 32(32), 470-483.
7. Cabrera, N. J., Scott, M., Fagan, J., Steward‐Streng, N., & Chien, N. (2012). Coparenting and children's school readiness: A mediational model. Family process, 51(3), 307-324.
8. Clark, L. A. ve Watson, D. (1995). Constructing validity: Basic issues in objective scale development. Psychological Assessment, 7(3), 309-319. https://doi.org/10.1037/14805-012

9. Choi, J. K., & Becher, E. H. (2019). Supportive coparenting, parenting stress, harsh parenting, and child behavior problems in nonmarital families. Family process, 58(2), 404-417. https://doi.org/10.1111/famp.12373
10. Comrey, A. L., & Lee, H. B. (1992). A first course in factor analysis. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 1, 245-276.
11. Çokluk, Ö., Şekercioğlu, G., & Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2018). Sosyal bilimler için çok değişkenli istatistik: SPSS ve LISREL uygulamaları (5. Baskı). Pegem Akademi.
12. Dana, R. H., & Back, R. (1977). Examiner sex bias and Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children scores. url: https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1013&context=rri_facpubs
13. Cummings, E. M., Davies, P. T., & Simpson, K. S. (1994). Marital conflict, gender, and children's appraisals and coping efficacy as mediators of child adjustment. Journal of Family psychology, 8(2), 141.
14. Deal, J. E., Halverson Jr, C. F., & Wampler, K. S. (1989). Parental agreement on child-rearing orientations: Relations to parental, marital, family, and child characteristics. Child Development, 1025-1034. https://doi.org/10.2307/1130776
15. DeVellis, R. F. (2003). Scale Development Theory and Applications (Second Edition). SAGE Publications International Educational and Professional Publisher, chapter 5: 60-96.
16. Dopkins Stright, A., & Neitzel, C. (2003). Beyond parenting: Coparenting and children's classroom adjustment. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 27(1), 31-40.
17. Erkuş, A. (2015). Psikolojide Ölçme ve Ölçek Geliştirme-1 temel kavramlar ve işlemler (2. Baskı). Pegem Akademi.
18. Erkuş, A., Sünbül, Ö., Sünbül, S. Ö., Yormaz, S., & Aşiret, S. (2017). Psikolojide ölçme ve ölçek geliştirme-II ölçme araçlarının psikometrik nitelikleri ve ölçme kuramları. Pegem Akademi.
19. Fakeye, D. O. (2014). Parenting style and primary school pupils’ reading achievement in South-Western Nigeria. African Research Review, 8(2), 280-293. http://dx.doi.org/10.4314/afrrev.v8i2.16
20. Feinberg, M. E. (2002). Coparenting and the transition to parenthood: A framework for prevention. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 5(3), 173-195.
21. Feinberg, M. E. (2003). The internal structure and ecological context of coparenting: A framework for research and intervention. Parenting: Science and Practice, 3(2), 95-131. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327922PAR0302_01
22. Feinberg, M. E., Brown, L. D., & Kan, M. L. (2012). A multi-domain self-report measure of coparenting. Parenting, 12(1), 1-21. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/15295192.2012.638870
23. Feinberg, M. E., & Kan, M. L. (2008). Establishing family foundations: intervention effects on coparenting, parent/infant well-being, and parent-child relations. Journal of Family Psychology, 22(2), 253.
24. Gliner, J. A., Morgan, G. A., & Leech, N. L. (2017). Chapter 1: Definitions, purposes, and dimensions of research. Research methods in applied settings: An integrated approach to design and analysis, 3-20.
25. Jacobvitz, D., Hazen, N., Curran, M., & Hitchens, K. (2004). Observations of early triadic family interactions: Boundary disturbances in the family predict symptoms of depression, anxiety, and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in middle childhood. Development and psychopathology, 16(3), 577-592.
26. Jean, Q., & Elizabeth, N. (2022). Parent child directed speech in dyadic and triadic interaction: Associations with co-parenting dynamics and child language outcomes. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 58, 125-135.
27. Kline, R.B. (2016). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (Fourth Edition). The Guilford Press.
28. Malhotra, N. K. (2006). Questionnaire design and scale development. R. Grover & M. Vriens (Eds), The handbook of marketing research: uses, misuses, and future advances (1st edition, pp. 83-94). Sage Publications.
29. McConnell, M. C., & Kerig, P. K. (2002). Assessing coparenting in families of school-age children: Validation of the Coparenting and Family Rating System. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science/Revue canadienne des sciences du comportement, 34(1), 44. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0087154
30. McHale, J. P. (1997). Overt and covert coparenting processes in the family. Family Process, 36(2), 183-201. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1545-5300.1997.00183.x
31. McHale, J. P., & Lindahl, K. M. (2011). Coparenting: A conceptual and clinical examination of family systems (pp. xii-314). American Psychological Association.
32. Meleis, A. I. (2010). Transitions theory: Middle range and situation specific theories in nursing research and practice. Springer publishing company.
33. Moghaddam, M. F., Validad, A., Rakhshani, T., & Assareh, M. (2017). Child self-esteem and different parenting styles of mothers: a cross-sectional study. Archives of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, 19(1), 37-42.
34. Negrini, L. S. (2020). Coparenting supports in mitigating the effects of family conflict on infant and young child development. Social Work, 65(3), 278-287.
35. Nisbett, R. E., Aronson, J., Blair, C., Dickens, W., Flynn, J., Halpern, D. F., & Turkheimer, E. (2012). Intelligence: new findings and theoretical developments. American psychologist, 67(2), 130. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026699
36. Özdemir, Y., Sağkal, A. S., Salman-Engin, S., Şakiroğlu, M., & Çevik, A. Ç. (2021). Birlikte ebeveynlik ölçeği: Ölçek geliştirme, geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Türk Psikoloji Yazıları, 24(47), 40-58. https://doi.org/10.31828/tpy1301996120201201m000031
37. Pekdoğan, S. (2017). Sınıf öğretmenlerinin ilkokula hazırlık sürecinde okul öncesi eğitimden beklentileri. Yaşadıkça Eğitim, 31(2), 11-22.
38. Pilkington, P., Rominov, H., Brown, H. K., & Dennis, C. L. (2019). Systematic review of the impact of coparenting interventions on paternal coparenting behaviour. Journal of advanced nursing, 75(1), 17-29. https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.13815
39. Pinquart, M., & Teubert, D. (2015). Links among coparenting behaviors, parenting stress, and children’s behaviors using the new German coparenting inventory. Family Science, 6(1), 201-210. https://doi.org/10.1080/19424620.2015.1065284
40. Rakhshani, T., Hamid, S., Kamyab, A., Kashfi, S. M., & Jeihooni, A. K. (2022). The effect of parenting style on anxiety and depression in adolescent girls aged 12–16 years. Heliyon, 8(11), 1-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e11478
41. Ren, J., Li, X., Chen, S., Chen, S., & Nie, Y. (2020). The influence of factors such as parenting stress and social support on the state anxiety in parents of special needs children during the COVID-19 epidemic. Frontiers in psychology, 11(2020), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.565393
42. Schiffrin, H. H., & Liss, M. (2017). The effects of helicopter parenting on academic motivation. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 26, 1472-1480.
43. Sullivan, M. J. (2008). Coparenting and the parenting coordination process. Journal of Child Custody, 5(1-2), 4-24. https://doi.org/10.1080/15379410802070351
44. Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2013). Using multivariate statistics (Vol. 6, pp. 497-516). Boston, MA: pearson.
45. Van Egeren, L. A. (2001). Le rôle du père au sein du partenariat parental. Santé mentale au Québec, 26(1), 134-159. https://doi.org/10.7202/014515ar
46. Van Egeren, L. A., & Hawkins, D. P. (2004). Coming to terms with coparenting: Implications of definition and measurement. Journal of Adult Development, 11, 165-178.