Kişisel Anlam Profili: Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Çalışması

Year 2016, Volume: 2 Issue: 1, 12 - 19, 01.06.2016

Ahmet Akın Betül Düşünceli Tuğba Çolak

Abstract

Frankl’a göre, anlam arayışı temel insan güdüsüdür ve birey yaşamda anlam bulduğu ölçüde hayata tutunur. Anlam kavramı insandan insana değişen, an’a özgü bir olgudur. Bu bağlamda bireyin yaşamında anlam kaynaklarının farkında olması anlamlı bir yaşam için gereklidir. Bireye özgü anlam kaynaklarını tespit etmek amacıyla geliştirilen ölçme araçları bulunmaktadır. Bunlardan biri Wong (1998) tarafından geliştirilen Kişisel Anlam Profilidir. Çalışmanın amacı Kişisel Anlam Profili Türkçe formunun faktör yapısını incelemektir. Araştırmanın örneklemini 304 üniversite öğrencisi oluşturmaktadır. Doğrulayıcı faktör analizi sonucunda 57 madde, yedi faktörden (başarı, ilişki, din, kendini-aşma, kendinikabul, yakınlık, adil muamele/algılanan adalet) oluşan ölçekten elde edilen uyum indekslerinin kabul edilebilir (x²=3170.41, sd=1518, p=.00, x²/ sd=2.08, RMSEA=.060, NFI= .87, NNFI= .92, CFI=.93, IFI=.93, SRMR=.07) olduğu görülmüştür. Kişisel Anlam Profili Türkçe formunun faktör yükleri .30 ile .69 arasındadır. Ölçekten elde edilen Cronbach alfa katsayısı .93’dür. Ölçekteki maddelerin ayırt ediciliği, madde analizi ve % 27’lik alt-üst grup karşılaştırmaları ile incelenmiştir. Sonuçlar dikkate alındığında Kişisel Anlam Profili Türkçe formunun geçerli ve güvenilir bir ölçme aracı olduğu söylenebilir

Keywords

Kişisel Anlam Profili, Doğrulayıcı Faktör Analizi, Geçerlik, Güvenirlik

Personal Meaning Profile: Validity and Reliability Study

Abstract

According to Frankl, the basic motive of human is to search for meaning. If a person finds meaning in life, he/she hold on life. Meaning as a concept changes day by day and it is special for the moment. In this context being aware of meaning sources in the person life is essential for meaningful life. There are instruments which developed in order to determine meaning source special fort hem person. One of these instruments is Personal Meaning Profile which was developed by Wong (1998). The aim of this study is to examine factor structure of the Turkish version of the Personal Meaning Profile. The sample of this study consisted of 304 university students. The results of confirmatory factor analysis showed that the 57 items, seven factors (achievement, relationship, religion, self- transcendence, selfacceptance,
intimacy, fair treatment/perceived justice) scale has acceptable fit
(x²=3170.41, df=1518, p=.00, x²/df=2.08, RMSEA=.060, NFI= .87, NNFI= .92,
CFI=.93, IFI=.93, SRMR=.07). factor loadings of Turkish version of Personal
Meaning Profile is rank between .30 and .69. Cronbach Alpha coefficient of the
scale is .93. ıtem discrimination analysis of items in the scale was examined by
item analysis and 27% sub and top group comparison method. According to
findings it can be said that Turkish version of the Personal Meaning Profile is a
valid and reliable measurement.

Keywords

Personal Meaning Profile, Confirmatory Factor Analysis, Validity Reliability

References

• Akın, A. ve Taş, İ. (2015). Yaşamın Anlamı Ölçeği: Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Çalışması. Turkish Studies, 10(3), 27-36.
• Alper, Y., Bayraktar, E. ve Karaçam, Ö. (2001). Herkes için psikiyatri. İstanbul: Gendaş Kültür Yayınları.
• Altıntaş, E. ve Gültekin, M. (2005). Psikolojik Danışma Kuramları. İstanbul: Alfa Akademi.
• Auhagen, A. E. (2000). On the Psychology of Meaning of Life. Swiss Journal of Psychology, 59(1), 34-48.
• Barnes, R. C. (2005). Logotherapy and the human spirit. İçinde G. E. Rice (Ed.), Franklian psychology: An introduction to logotherapy (pp.31-48). Teksas: Viktor Frankl Institute of Logotherapy.
• Brassai, L., Piko, B.F. ve Steger, M.F. (2011). Meaning in Life: Is It a Protective Factor for Adolescents’ Psychological Health? International Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 18, 44-51. DOI 10.1007/s12529- 010-9089-6
• Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2010). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı (11. Baskı). Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
• Corey, G. (2008). Psikolojik danışma, psikoterapi kuram ve uygulamaları (Çev. Tuncay Ergene). Ankara: Mentis Yayıncılık.
• Crumbaugh, J.C. (1971). Frankl’s Logotherapy: A New Orientation in Counseling. Journal of Religion and Health, 10(4), 373-386.
• Crumbaugh, J. C., &Maholick, L. T. (1964). An experimental study on existentialism:The psychometric approach to Frankl’s concept of noogenic neurosis. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 20, 200–201.
• Dezutter, J., Casalin, S., Wachholtz, A., Luyckx, K., Hekking, J. ve Vandewiele, W. (2013). Meaning in life: An important factor fort he psychological well-being of chronically ill patients? Rehabil Psychol, 58(4): 334–341. doi: 10.1037/a0034393
• Fabry, J. (2005). The Frontiers of Logotherapy. İçinde G. E. Rice (Ed.), Franklian psychology: An introduction to logotherapy (116-122). Teksas: Viktor Frankl Institute of Logotherapy.
• Frankl, V. (1967). The philosophical foundations of logotherapy. İçinde J. C. Crumbaugh, H. O. Gerz ve L. T. Maholick ( Ed.), Psychotherapy and Existentialism. Selected Papers on Logotherapy. (pp.1-18). New York: Simon & Schuster.
• Frankl, V.E. (2009). İnsanın Anlam Arayışı.İstanbul: Okyanus Yayınları.
• Frankl, V.E. (2014). Hayatın Anlamı ve Psikoterapi. (Birinci baskı) (Çev. Veysel Ataman). İstanbul: Say Yayınları.
• Graber, A. (2004). Viktor Frankl’s Logotherapy: Method of choice in ecumenical pastoral psychology. USA: Wyndham Hall Press.
• Güleç, C. (2003). Psikiyatri ve psikoterapilerin ABC’si. Ankara: HYB Yayıncılık.
• Hambleton, R. K. ve Kanjee, A. (1995). Increasing the validity of cross-cultural assessments: Use of improved methods for test adaptations. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 11, 147–157.
• Hu, L. T. ve Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structural analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1-55.
• Krok, D. (2015). The Role of Meaning in Life Within the Relations of Religious Coping and Psychological Well-Being. Journal of Religion and Health, 54 (6), 2292-2308. doi: 10.1007/s10943-014-9983-3
• Kline, P. (2000). Handbook of psychological testing (2. Baskı). London: Routledge Pub.
• Lindeman, M. ve Verkassalo, M. (1996). Meaning in life for Finnish students. Journal of Social Psychology, 136, 645-649.
• Maddi, S.R. (1967). The existential neurosis.Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 72(4), 311-325.
• Maddi, S.R. (2012). Creating Meaning through Making Desicions. In P.T.P. Wong (Eds.), The human quest for meaning: Theories, research and applications (s.57-80). New York, NY: Taylor & Francis Group.
• Scannel, E. D., Felicity, C. L. Allen, ve Janet, B. (2002). Meaning in life and positive and negative well-being. North American Journal of Psychology, 4(1), 93-112.
• Schnell, T. (2009). The sources of meaning in life questionnaire (some): Relations to demographics and well- being. The Journal of Psitive Psychology, 4(6), 483-499.
• Steger, M. F., Frazier, P., Oishi, S., ve Kaler. M. (2006). The meaning in life quetionnaire: Assesing the presence of and search for meaning in life. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 53(1), 80-93.
• Steger, M.F. (2012). Experiencing Meaning in Life: Optimal Functioning at the Nexus of Well Being, Psychopathology, and Spirituality. İçinde P.T.P. Wong (Ed.), The Human Quest for Meaning: Theories, Research and Applications (p.165-184). New York, NY: Taylor & Francis Group.
• Wong, P. T. P. (1997). Meaning-centered counseling: A cognitive-behavioral approach to logotherapy. The International Forum for Logotherapy, 20, 85-94.
• Wong, P. T. P. (1998). Implicit theories of meaningful life and the development of the Personal Meaning Profile (PMP). İçinde P.T.P. Wong & P.S. Fry (Ed.), The human quest for meaning: A handbook of psychological research and clinical applications (s.111-140). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
• Zaiser, R. (2005). Working on the Noetic Dimension of Man: Philosophical Practice, Logotherapy, and Existential Analysis.Philosophical Practice, 1 (2), 83-88.
• Zika, S., ve Chamberlain, K. (1992). On the relation between meaning in life and psychological well-being. British Journal of Psychology, 83, 133-145.