Adaptation and Psychometric Properties Testing of the Turkish Perception of Loneliness in Isolation Scale in COVID-19 Patients

Abstract

The study was aimed to adapt the Perception of Loneliness in Isolation Scale (ISOLA) into Turkish and to examine the psychometric properties of the scale. The sample of the methodological and cross-sectional study consisted of 154 patients who were in isolation due to COVID-19. The psychometric characteristics of the scale were analyzed by using language equivalence, content validity, confirmatory factor analysis, criterion-related validity, internal consistency, and test-retest methods. The UCLA Loneliness Scale was used for criterion-related validity. As a result of the confirmatory factor analysis of the scale, the three-dimensional structure of 14 items was confirmed and the fit index values (χ2=90.874; χ2/sd=1.317; RMSEA=0.046; AGFI=0.88; CFI=0.97; GFI=0.92; NFI=0.90) were interpreted as "good fit" or "acceptable fit". It can be said that the Turkish version of ISOLA, which is thought to contribute to understanding the loneliness of patients in isolation and solving their problems, is a valid and reliable measurement tool.

Keywords

• COVID-19
• Isolation
• Nursing
• Loneliness
• Psychometric properties
• Validation

References

1. Aksu G, Eser MT, Güzeller CO. 2017. Structural equation model applications with exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis, 1st ed., Detay Yayıncılık, Ankara, Türkiye, pp. 128.
2. Ayre C, Scally AJ. 2014. Critical values for Lawshe’s content validity ratio: revisiting the original methods of calculation. Meas Eval Counsel Devel, 47(1): 79-86. DOI: 10.1177/0748175613513808.
3. Banerjee D, Rai M. 2020. Social isolation in Covid-19: The impact of loneliness. Int J Soc Psychiat, 66(6): 525-527. DOI: 10.1177/0020764020922269.
4. Biagioli V, Piredda M, Annibali O, Iacorossi L, D'Angelo D, Matarese M, De Marinis MG. 2017. Being in protective isolation following autologous haematopoietic stem cell transplantation: A phenomeno‐ logical study. J Clin Nurs, 26: 4467-4478. DOI: 10.1111/jocn.13777.
5. Biagioli V, Piredda M, Annibali O, et al. 2019a. Development and initial validation of a questionnaire to assess patients’ perception of protective isolation following haematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Eur J Cancer Care, 28(2): e12955. DOI: 10.1111/ecc.12955.
6. Biagioli V, Piredda M, Annibali O. 2019b. Factors influencing the perception of protective isolation in patients undergoing haematopoietic stem cell transplantation: A multicentre prospective study. Eur J Cancer Care, 28(6): e13148. DOI: 10.1111/ ecc.13148.
7. Both LM, Zoratto G, Calegaro VC, Ramos-Lima LF, Negretto BL, Hauck S, Freitas LHM. 2021. COVID-19 pandemic and social distancing: economic, psychological, family, and technological effects. Trends Psychiat Psychot, 43(2): 85-91. DOI: 10.47626/2237-6089-2020-0085.
8. Brooks SK, Webster RK, Smith LE, Woodland L, Wessely S, Greenberg N, Rubin GJ. 2020. The psychological impact of quarantine and how to reduce it: rapid review of the evidence. Lancet, 395: 912-20. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30460-8.

9. Campagne DM. 2019. Stress and Perceived Social Isolation (loneliness). Arch Gerontol Geriat, 82: 192-199. DOI: 10.1016/j.archger.2019.02.007.
10. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2020. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). URL: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/prevent-getting-sick/how-covid-spreads.html (access date: July 10, 2021).
11. Civelek ME. 2018. Structural equation modeling methodology, 1st ed. Beta Basım Yayım İstanbul, Türkiye, pp. 118.
12. Clair R, Gordon M, Kroon M, Reilly C. 2021. The effects of social isolation on well-being and life satisfaction during pandemic. Humanit Soc Sci Commun, 8(28): 1-6. DOI: 10.1057/s41599-021-00710-3.
13. Çapık C. 2014. Use of confirmatory factor analysis in validity and reliability studies. Anadolu Hemş Sağlık Bil Derg, 17(3): 196-205.
14. Çokluk Ö, Şekercioğlu G, Büyüköztürk Ş. 2010. Multivariate statistics SPSS and LISREL applications for social sciences. Pegem.Net, Ankara, Türkiye.
15. Demir A. 1989. Validity and reliability of the UCLA loneliness scale. Psikol Derg, 7: 14-18.
16. Erefe İ. 2012. Research principles, processes and methods in nursing, 4th ed. Hemar-Ge Yayıncılık, Istanbul, Türkiye.
17. Erkorkmaz Ü, Etikan İ, Demir O, Özdamar K, Sanisoğlu SY. 2013. Confirmatory factor analysis and fit indices. Turkiye Klin J Medic Sci, 33(1): 210-223.
18. Evci N, Aylar F. 2017. Use of confirmatory factor analysis in scale development studies. J Soc Sci, 4(10): 389-412.
19. Hwang TJ, Rabheru K, Peisah C, Reichman W, Ikeda M. 2020. Loneliness and social isolation during the COVID-19 pandemic. Intl Pychogeriat, 32(10): 1217-1220. DOI: 10.1017/S1041610220000988.
20. İlhan M, Çetin B. 2014. Comparing the analysis results of the structural equation models (SEM) conducted using LISREL and AMOS. J Measur Eval Educ Psychol, 5(2): 26-42.
21. Karakoç FY, Dönmez D. 2014. Basic principles in scale development studies. Tıp Eğit Dünyası, 40: 39-49.
22. Karasar N. 2016. Scientific research method. Nobel Akademik Yayıncılık, Ankara, Türkiye, pp. 368.
23. Kaya N, Kaya H, Atar NY, Turan N, Eskimez Z, Palloş A, Aktaş A. 2012. Anger and loneliness characteristics of nursing and midwifery students. J Educ Res Nurs, 9(2): 18-26.
24. Kline RB. 2015. Principles and practice of structural equation modeling, 4th ed. Guilford Press, New York, US, pp. 534.
25. Lim MH, Rodebaugh TL, Zyphur MJ, Gleeson JF. 2016. Loneliness over time: the crucial role of social anxiety. J Abnormal Psychol, 125(5): 620-630.
26. Martoncik M, Loksa J. 2016. Do world of Warcraft (MMORPG) players experience less loneliness and social anxiety in online world (virtual environment) than in real world (offline)?. Comput Human Behav, 56: 127-134.
27. Meydan CH, Şeşen H. 2015. Structural equation modeling Amos applications, 2nd ed. Detay Yayıncılık, Ankara, Türkiye, pp. 144.
28. Murthy S, Gomersall CD, Fowler RA. 2020. Care for critically ill patients with COVID-19. JAMA, 323(15): 1499-1500. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2020.3633.
29. Özdamar K. 2013. Statistical data analysis with package programs, 9th ed. Nisan Kitabevi, Ankara, Türkiye, pp. 603.
30. Pietrabissa G, Simpson SG. 2020. Psychological consequences of social isolation during COVID-19 outbreak. Front Psychol, 11: 2201. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.02201.
31. Rubin GJ, Wessely S. 2020. The psychological effects of quarantining a city. BMJ, 368: m313. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.m313.
32. Russell D, Peplau LA, Ferguson ML. 1978. Developing a measure of loneliness. J Personal Asses, 42(3): 290-294. DOI: 10.1207/s15327752-jpa4203_11.
33. Sümbüloğlu V, Sümbüloğlu K. 2017. Biostatistics, 17th ed. Hatipoğlu Yayınevi, Ankara, Türkiye, pp. 107.
34. Şencan H. 2005. Reliability and validity in social and behavioral measures. Seçkin Yayıncılık., Ankara, Türkiye, pp. 244.
35. Şimşek ÖF. 2007. Introduction to structural equation modeling, basic principles and LISREL applications. Ekinoks, Ankara, Türkiye, pp. 165.
36. Waltz CF, Strcikland OL, Lenz E.R. 2010. Measurement in nursing and health research. Springer Publishing Company, New York, US, pp. 632.
37. Wang C, Pan R, Wan X, Tan Y, Xu L, Ho CS, Ho RC. 2020. Immediate psychological responses and associated factors during the initial stage of the 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) epidemic among the general population in China. Int J Environ Res Pub Health, 17(5): 1729. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph17051729.
38. World of Healt Organization. 2020. Director-General’s remarks at the media briefing on 2019-nCoV on 11 February 2020. URL: https://www.who.int/dg/speeches/detail/who-director-general-s-remarks-at-the-media-riefing-on-2019ncov-on-11-february-2020 (access date: April 04, 2020).
39. Yanguas J, Pinazo-Henandis S, Tarazona-Santabalbina FJ. 2018. The complexity of loneliness. Acta Biomed, 89(2): 302-314. DOI: 10.23750/abm.v89i2.7404.
40. Yeşilyurt S, Çapraz C. 2018. A roadmap for content validity used in scale development studies. J Erzincan Univ Fac Educ, 20(1): 251-264.