The
purpose of this study is to develop a scale to determine pre-service
teachers’ attitudes towards nuclear power plants. During the process of scale
development, validity and reliability studies were conducted with 233
pre-service teachers. Content validity of the scale was provided with expert
opinions. Both explanatory factor analysis and confirmatory factor analysis
were done to demonstrate the scale's construct validity. After the validity
studies, it is determined that the scale two-factor scale consisted of 21
items and 60.216% of the variance was explained by two factors. Reliability
studies of the scale were conducted with the internal consistency
coefficients for the entire scale and sub-factors. It was found that the Cronbach alpha (α)
value was 0.944 for the entire scale, 0.946 for the first factor and 0.910
for the second factor. The internal consistency coefficients calculated for
the entire scale and its sub-factors showed that scale had high reliability.
Adamantiades, A. & Kessides, I. (2009). Nuclear power for sustainable development: Current status and future prospects. Energy Policy, 37(12), 5149-5166. doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2009.07.052
Allport, G. W. (1935). Attitudes. In M. Fishbein (Ed.) (1967). Readings in attitudes theory and measurement (pp. 1-13). John Wiley & Sons: New York.
Bagozzi, R. P. & Burnkrant, R. E. (1980). Single component versus multicomponent models of attitude: Some cautions and contingencies for their use. Advances in Consumer Research, 7, 339-344. Retrieved from http://www.acrwebsite.org/search/view-conference-proceedings.aspx?Id=9694
Bagozzi, R. P., Tybout, A. M., Craig, C. M. & Sternthal, B. (1979). The construct validity of the tripartite classification of attitudes. Journal of Marketing Research, 16, 88-95. doi: 10.2307/3150879
Bhanthumnavin, V. & Bhanthumnavin, D. (2016). Path model of teacher’s normative communication and attitudes toward nuclear power plant among Thai youth. International Journal of Behavioral Science, 11(1), 77-85. Retrieved from http://www.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/IJBS/article/view/47719/pdf_27
Bhanthumnavin, D. & Bhanthumnavin, V. (2012). Factor analytic approach for constructing affective aspect of NPP attitude scale for Thai undergraduate students. International Conference on Humanity, History and Society, 34, 7-11.
Bhanthumnavin, D. & Bhanthumnavin, V. (2010, January). Norms and technical knowledge contributing to acceptance of nuclear power innovation in young Thai adults. Paper presented in the 1st International Conference on Technical Education, Bangkok, Thailand. Retrieved from http://www.ipedr.com/vol34/002-ICHHS2012-H00003.pdf
Bloom, B. S. (Ed.). (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Handbook 1: Cognitive domain. David McKay Company: New York.
Corral, S. & Calvete, E. (2000). Machiavellianism: Dimensionality of the Mach IV and its relation to self-monitoring in a Spanish sample. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 3(1), 3-13. doi: 10.1017/S1138741600005497
Culbertson, H. M. (1968). What is an attitude?. Journal of Cooperative Extension: Summer. 79-84. Retrieved from https://www.joe.org/joe/1968summer/1968-2-a2.pdf
Dawis, R. V. (1987). Scale construction. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 34(4), 481-489.
Doob, L. W. (1947). The behavior of attitudes. In M. Fishbein (Ed.) (1967). Readings in attitudes theory and measurement (pp. 1-13). John Wiley & Sons: New York.
Ercan, O., Ural, E., & Tekbıyık, A. (2015). Pre-service teachers’ attitudes towards nuclear energy and the effect of Fukushima nuclear disaster on their attitudes. The International Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities Invention, 2(11), 1669-1678. doi: 10.18535/ijsshi/v2i11.01
Fraenkel, J. R. & Wallen, N. E. (2006). How to design and evaluate research in education, (6th ed.). McGraw-Hill: New York.
Hoe, S. L. (2008). Issues and procedures in adopting structural equation modeling technique. Journal of Applied Quantitative Methods, 3(1). 76-83. Retrieved from http://jaqm.ro/issues/volume-3,issue-1/pdfs/hoe.pdf
Kline, R. B. (2011). Principal and practice of structural equation modeling. (3rd ed.). The Guilford Press: New York.
Oskamp, S. & Schultz, P.W. (2005). Attitudes and opinions. (3rd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers: New Jersey.
Özdemir, N. (2014). Sosyo bilimsel esaslar çerçevesinde sosyo bilimsel konuları tartışmak tutumları nasıl etkiler? Nükleer santraller. Turkish Studies- International Periodical for The Languages, Literature and History of Turkish or Turkic, 9(2), 1197-1214. http://www.turkishstudies.net/Makaleler/1832677039_66%C3%96zdemirNevin-sos-1197-1214.pdf sayfasından erişilmiştir.
Özdemir, N. & Çobanoğlu, E. O. (2008). Türkiye’de nükleer santrallerin kurulması ve nükleer enerji kullanımı konusundaki öğretmen adaylarının tutumları. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 34, 218-232. http://dergipark.ulakbim.gov.tr/hunefd/article/view/5000048484/5000045805 sayfasından erişilmiştir.
Palabıyık, H., Yavaş, H., & Aydın, M. (2010). Türkiye’de nükleer santral kurulabilir mi? Çatışmadan uzlaşıya: Türkiye’de nükleer enerji projelerinde sosyal kabul sorunu ve halkın reddetme sendromunun araştırılması. Girişimcilik ve Kalkınma Dergisi, 5(2), 175-201. http://dergipark.gov.tr/download/article-file/81596 sayfasından erişilmiştir.
Reddy, S. K. & LaBArbera, P. A. (1985). Hierarchical models of attitude. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 20, 451-471. doi: 10.1207/s15327906mbr2004_6
Schermelleh-Engel, K., Moosbrugger, H., & Müller, H. (2003). Evaluating the fit of structural equation models: Tests of significance and descriptive goodness-of-fit measurement. Methods of Psychological Research Online, 8(2), 23-74. Retrieved from https://www.dgps.de/fachgruppen/methoden/mpr-online/issue20/art2/mpr130_13.pdf
Temurçin, K. & Aliağaoğlu, A. (2003). Nükleer enerji ve tartışmalar ışığında Türkiye’de nükleer enerji gerçeği. Coğrafi Bilimler Dergisi, 1(2), 25-39. http://dergiler.ankara.edu.tr/dergiler/33/823/10456.pdf sayfasından erişilmiştir.
Thurnstone, L. L. (1931). The measurement of social attitudes. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 26(3), 249-269.
van der Pligt, J., van der Linden, J. & Ester, P. (1982). Attitudes to nuclear energy: Beliefs, values and false consensus. Journal of Enviromental Psychology, 2, 221-231. doi: 10.1016/S0272-4944(82)80018-2
van der Zwaan, B. (2008). Prospects for nuclear energy in Europe. International Journal of Global Energy Issues, 30(1), 102-121. doi: 10.1504/IJGEI.2008.019858
Venables, D., Pidgeon, N., Simmons, P., Henwood, K., & Parkhill, K. (2009). Living with nuclear power: A q-method study of local community perceptions. Risk Analysis, 8, 1089-1104. doi: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2009.01259.x
Whitfield, S. C., Rosa, E. A., Den, A., & Dietz, T. (2009). The future of nuclear power: Value orientations and perceptions. Risk Analysis, 3, 425-437. doi: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2008.01155.x
NÜKLEER SANTRALE YÖNELİK TUTUM ÖLÇEĞİNİN GELİŞTİRİLMESİ: GEÇERLİK VE GÜVENİRLİK ÇALIŞMASI
Year 2017,
Volume: 4 Issue: 1, 33 - 48, 23.06.2017
Bu çalışmanın amacı
öğretmen adaylarının nükleer santrale yönelik tutumlarını tespit etmek için
bir ölçek geliştirmektir. Ölçek geliştirme sürecinde geçerlik ve güvenirlik
çalışmaları 233 öğretmen adayı ile yürütülmüştür. Ölçeğin kapsam geçerliği
uzman görüşü ile sağlanmıştır. Ölçeğin yapı geçerliğine kanıt sağlamak için
ise hem açımlayıcı faktör analizi hem de doğrulayıcı faktör analizi
yapılmıştır. Yapılan geçerlik çalışmaları sonucunda ölçeğin iki faktörlü
toplam 21 maddeden oluştuğu ve faktörlerin birlikte varyansın %60.216’sını
açıkladığı belirlenmiştir. Ölçeğin güvenirlik çalışmaları ölçeğin tamamı ve alt
faktörleri için hesaplanan iç tutarlık katsayıları ile belirlenmiştir.
Ölçeğin tamamına ait Cronbach alfa (α) değeri 0.944 iken; birinci faktöre ait
α değeri 0.946 ve ikinci faktöre ait α değeri 0.910 olarak bulunmuştur.
Hesaplanan bu değerler ölçeğin güvenirliğinin oldukça yüksek olduğunu
göstermektedir.
Adamantiades, A. & Kessides, I. (2009). Nuclear power for sustainable development: Current status and future prospects. Energy Policy, 37(12), 5149-5166. doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2009.07.052
Allport, G. W. (1935). Attitudes. In M. Fishbein (Ed.) (1967). Readings in attitudes theory and measurement (pp. 1-13). John Wiley & Sons: New York.
Bagozzi, R. P. & Burnkrant, R. E. (1980). Single component versus multicomponent models of attitude: Some cautions and contingencies for their use. Advances in Consumer Research, 7, 339-344. Retrieved from http://www.acrwebsite.org/search/view-conference-proceedings.aspx?Id=9694
Bagozzi, R. P., Tybout, A. M., Craig, C. M. & Sternthal, B. (1979). The construct validity of the tripartite classification of attitudes. Journal of Marketing Research, 16, 88-95. doi: 10.2307/3150879
Bhanthumnavin, V. & Bhanthumnavin, D. (2016). Path model of teacher’s normative communication and attitudes toward nuclear power plant among Thai youth. International Journal of Behavioral Science, 11(1), 77-85. Retrieved from http://www.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/IJBS/article/view/47719/pdf_27
Bhanthumnavin, D. & Bhanthumnavin, V. (2012). Factor analytic approach for constructing affective aspect of NPP attitude scale for Thai undergraduate students. International Conference on Humanity, History and Society, 34, 7-11.
Bhanthumnavin, D. & Bhanthumnavin, V. (2010, January). Norms and technical knowledge contributing to acceptance of nuclear power innovation in young Thai adults. Paper presented in the 1st International Conference on Technical Education, Bangkok, Thailand. Retrieved from http://www.ipedr.com/vol34/002-ICHHS2012-H00003.pdf
Bloom, B. S. (Ed.). (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Handbook 1: Cognitive domain. David McKay Company: New York.
Corral, S. & Calvete, E. (2000). Machiavellianism: Dimensionality of the Mach IV and its relation to self-monitoring in a Spanish sample. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 3(1), 3-13. doi: 10.1017/S1138741600005497
Culbertson, H. M. (1968). What is an attitude?. Journal of Cooperative Extension: Summer. 79-84. Retrieved from https://www.joe.org/joe/1968summer/1968-2-a2.pdf
Dawis, R. V. (1987). Scale construction. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 34(4), 481-489.
Doob, L. W. (1947). The behavior of attitudes. In M. Fishbein (Ed.) (1967). Readings in attitudes theory and measurement (pp. 1-13). John Wiley & Sons: New York.
Ercan, O., Ural, E., & Tekbıyık, A. (2015). Pre-service teachers’ attitudes towards nuclear energy and the effect of Fukushima nuclear disaster on their attitudes. The International Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities Invention, 2(11), 1669-1678. doi: 10.18535/ijsshi/v2i11.01
Fraenkel, J. R. & Wallen, N. E. (2006). How to design and evaluate research in education, (6th ed.). McGraw-Hill: New York.
Hoe, S. L. (2008). Issues and procedures in adopting structural equation modeling technique. Journal of Applied Quantitative Methods, 3(1). 76-83. Retrieved from http://jaqm.ro/issues/volume-3,issue-1/pdfs/hoe.pdf
Kline, R. B. (2011). Principal and practice of structural equation modeling. (3rd ed.). The Guilford Press: New York.
Oskamp, S. & Schultz, P.W. (2005). Attitudes and opinions. (3rd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers: New Jersey.
Özdemir, N. (2014). Sosyo bilimsel esaslar çerçevesinde sosyo bilimsel konuları tartışmak tutumları nasıl etkiler? Nükleer santraller. Turkish Studies- International Periodical for The Languages, Literature and History of Turkish or Turkic, 9(2), 1197-1214. http://www.turkishstudies.net/Makaleler/1832677039_66%C3%96zdemirNevin-sos-1197-1214.pdf sayfasından erişilmiştir.
Özdemir, N. & Çobanoğlu, E. O. (2008). Türkiye’de nükleer santrallerin kurulması ve nükleer enerji kullanımı konusundaki öğretmen adaylarının tutumları. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 34, 218-232. http://dergipark.ulakbim.gov.tr/hunefd/article/view/5000048484/5000045805 sayfasından erişilmiştir.
Palabıyık, H., Yavaş, H., & Aydın, M. (2010). Türkiye’de nükleer santral kurulabilir mi? Çatışmadan uzlaşıya: Türkiye’de nükleer enerji projelerinde sosyal kabul sorunu ve halkın reddetme sendromunun araştırılması. Girişimcilik ve Kalkınma Dergisi, 5(2), 175-201. http://dergipark.gov.tr/download/article-file/81596 sayfasından erişilmiştir.
Reddy, S. K. & LaBArbera, P. A. (1985). Hierarchical models of attitude. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 20, 451-471. doi: 10.1207/s15327906mbr2004_6
Schermelleh-Engel, K., Moosbrugger, H., & Müller, H. (2003). Evaluating the fit of structural equation models: Tests of significance and descriptive goodness-of-fit measurement. Methods of Psychological Research Online, 8(2), 23-74. Retrieved from https://www.dgps.de/fachgruppen/methoden/mpr-online/issue20/art2/mpr130_13.pdf
Temurçin, K. & Aliağaoğlu, A. (2003). Nükleer enerji ve tartışmalar ışığında Türkiye’de nükleer enerji gerçeği. Coğrafi Bilimler Dergisi, 1(2), 25-39. http://dergiler.ankara.edu.tr/dergiler/33/823/10456.pdf sayfasından erişilmiştir.
Thurnstone, L. L. (1931). The measurement of social attitudes. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 26(3), 249-269.
van der Pligt, J., van der Linden, J. & Ester, P. (1982). Attitudes to nuclear energy: Beliefs, values and false consensus. Journal of Enviromental Psychology, 2, 221-231. doi: 10.1016/S0272-4944(82)80018-2
van der Zwaan, B. (2008). Prospects for nuclear energy in Europe. International Journal of Global Energy Issues, 30(1), 102-121. doi: 10.1504/IJGEI.2008.019858
Venables, D., Pidgeon, N., Simmons, P., Henwood, K., & Parkhill, K. (2009). Living with nuclear power: A q-method study of local community perceptions. Risk Analysis, 8, 1089-1104. doi: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2009.01259.x
Whitfield, S. C., Rosa, E. A., Den, A., & Dietz, T. (2009). The future of nuclear power: Value orientations and perceptions. Risk Analysis, 3, 425-437. doi: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2008.01155.x
Üner, S., Kan, A., & Akkuş, H. (2017). NÜKLEER SANTRALE YÖNELİK TUTUM ÖLÇEĞİNİN GELİŞTİRİLMESİ: GEÇERLİK VE GÜVENİRLİK ÇALIŞMASI. Eğitim Ve Toplum Araştırmaları Dergisi, 4(1), 33-48.