Meaning in Life Questionnaire (MLQ): The Study of Adaptation to Turkish, Validity and Reliability

Year 2015, , - , 04.12.2015

Seyithan Demirdağ , Sezai Kalafat

https://doi.org/10.17679/iuefd.16250801

Cited By: 27

Abstract

This study examined the validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the Meaning in Life Questionnaire (MLQ). The original instrument was developed by Steger, Frazier, Oishi, and Kaler (2006). The study included 322 teacher candidates, who were in primary school education, Turkish education, religious studies, and special education in a public university. The findings about language equivalency showed that the correlation coefficients between Turkish and English forms ranged from .74 to .91. Results of exploratory factor analysis indicated that the 10 items loaded on two factors. Results showed that 68.2% of the variances were explained and factor loadings ranged from .65 to .88. Fit index values were RMSEA= .068, NFI= .93, CFI= .95, GFI= .93, AGFI= .89, RFI= .92. The correlations between MLQ and Positive and Negative Affect Scale (PANAS) were calculated to determine concurrent validity as they were found to be significant. The internal consistency reliability coefficients of the subscales of MLQ were found as .81 and .85. before test-retest, and as .72 and .76. after test-retest. These findings suggest that the scale is valid and reliable.

Keywords

Meaning in life; validity; reliability; adaptation

Yaşamın Anlamı Ölçeği (YAÖ): Türkçeye Uyarlama, Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Çalışması

Abstract

Bu araştırmada, Yaşamın Anlamı Ölçeği’nin (YAÖ) Türkçe formunun geçerliği ve güvenirliği incelenmiştir. Ölçek Steger, Frazier, Oishi ve Kaler (2006) tarafından geliştirilmiştir.  Araştırma Zihin Engelliler Öğretmenliği, Sınıf Öğretmenliği, Türkçe Öğretmenliği, Din Kültürü Öğretmenliği ve Psikolojik Danışmanlık ve Rehberlik Bölümü alanında öğrenim görmekte olan 322 lisans öğrencisi üzerinde yürütülmüştür. Dilsel eşdeğerlik çalışmasında, YAÖ’nün Türkçe ve İngilizce formlarında bulunan maddeler arasındaki korelasyon katsayıları ,74 ile ,91 arasında bulunmuştur. Açımlayıcı faktör analizi sonucunda 10 maddeden oluşan ölçeğin iki boyutlu bir yapıdan oluştuğu ve bu maddelerin toplam varyansın %68,2’sini açıkladığı görülmüştür. Ölçeğin faktör yükleri ,65 ile ,88, madde toplam korelasyonu katsayıları ise ,44 ile ,78 arasında sıralanmaktadır. Doğrulayıcı faktör analizinde iki boyutlu modelin iyi uyum verdiği görülmüştür (RMSEA= ,068, NFI= ,93, CFI= ,95, GFI= ,93, AGFI= ,89, RFI= ,92). Uyum geçerliği çalışmasında YAÖ ile Pozitif ve Negatif Duygu Ölçeği (PNDÖ) arasında bir ilişki olduğu saptanmıştır. YAÖ’nün iç tutarlılık güvenirlik her alt ölçek için sırasıyla ,81 ve ,85 olarak bulunmuştur. Test-tekrar test sonucunda ise bu değerler sırasıyla ,72 ve ,76 olarak saptanmıştır. Bu bulgular YAÖ’nün Türkçe formunun geçerli ve güvenilir bir ölçme aracı olduğunu göstermektedir.

Keywords

Yaşamın anlamı; geçerlik; güvenirlik; uyarlama

References

• Adler, A., ve Brett, C. (1997). Understanding life. Oneworld Publications Limited.
• Battista, J., ve Almond, R. (1973). The development of meaning in life. Psychiatry, 36, 409–427.
• Beck, A. T., Ward, C., ve Mendelson, M. (1961). Beck depression inventory (BDI). Arch Gen Psychiatry, 4(6), 561-571.
• Beck, A. T., ve Steer, R. A. (1988). Beck anxiety inventory (BAI). BiB 2010, 54.
• Bonebright, C. A., Clay, D. L., ve Ankenmann, R. D. (2000). The relationship of workaholism with work-life conflict, life satisfaction, and purpose in life. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 47(4), 469–477.
• Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2004). Veri analizi el kitabı. Ankara: Pegem A Yayıncılık.
• Crumbaugh, J. C. (1977). The Seeking of Noetic Goals Test (SONG): a complementary scale to the Purpose in Life Test (PIL). Journal of Clinical Psychology, 33, 900–907.
• Crumbaugh, J. C., ve Maholick, L. T. (1964). An experimental study in existentialism: The psychometric approach to Frankl's concept of noogenic neurosis. Journal of clinical psychology, 20(2), 200-207.
• Chamberlain, K., ve Zika, S. (1988). Measuring meaning in life: An examination of three scales. Personality and Individual Differences, 9(3), 589–596.
• Feldman, D. B., ve Snyder, C. R. (2005). Hope and the meaningful life: Theoretical and empirical associations between goal–directed thinking and life meaning. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 24(3), 401-421.
• Frankl, V. E. (1963). Man’s search for meaning: An introduction to logotherapy. New York: Washington Square Press.
• Gençöz, T. (2000). Pozitif ve negatif duygu ölçeği: Geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Türk Psikoloji Dergisi, 15(46), 19-26.
• Harlow, L. L., ve Newcomb, M. D. (1990). Towards a General Hierarchical Model of Meaning and Satisfaction in Life. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 25(3), 387–405.
• Harlow, L. L., Newcomb, M. D., ve Bentler, P. M. (1986). Depression, self‐derogation, substance use, and suicide ideation: Lack of purpose in life as a mediational factor. Journal of clinical psychology, 42(1), 5-21.
• Hicks, J. A, ve King, L. A (2007). Meaning in life and seeing the big picture: Positive affect and global focus cognition and emotion, Xp Psychology Press, 21(7), 1577-1584.
• 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.
• Leontiev, D. A (2005). Three facets of meaning. Journal of Russian And East European Psychology, 43(6), 45-72.
• Lindeman, M., ve Verkasalo, M. (1996). Meaning in life for Finnish students.The Journal of social psychology, 136(5), 647-649.
• Kegan, R. (1982). The Evolving Self: Problem and Process in Human Development. Cambridge: Harvard University.
• Marcia, J. E. (1980). Identity in Adolescence. In J. Adelson (Ed.), Handbook of Adolescent Psychology (Vol. 9, pp. 159–187). New Jersey: Wiley.
• Reker, G. T., ve Peacock, E. J. (1981). The Life Attitude Profile (LAP): A multidimensional instrument for assessing attitudes toward life. Canadian Journal of Behavioral Science, 13, 264–273.
• Ryan, R. M., ve Deci, E. L. (2001). On happiness and human potentials: a review of research on hedonic and eudaimonic well-being. Annual Review of Psycholog, 52, 141–166.
• Ryff, C. D., ve Singer, B. (1998). The contours of positive human health.Psychological inquiry, 9(1), 1-28.
• Seligman, M. E. P., ve Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2000). Positive psychology: An Introduction. American Psychologist, 55, 5–14.
• Steger, M. F. (2012). Making Meaning in Life. Psychological Inquiry, 23(4), 381–385.
• Steger, M. F., Frazier, P., Oishi, S., ve Kaler, M. (2006). The meaning in life questionnaire: Assessing the presence of and search for meaning in life. Journal of counseling psychology, 53(1), 80-93.
• Steger, M. F., ve Kashdan, T. B. (2013). The unbearable lightness of meaning: Well-being and unstable meaning in life. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 8(2), 103–115.
• Steger, M. F., Kashdan, T. B., Sullivan, B. A., ve Lorentz, D. (2008). Understanding the search for meaning in life: personality, cognitive style, and the dynamic between seeking and experiencing meaning. Journal of Personality, 76(2), 199–228.
• Steger, M. F., Oishi, S., ve Kesebir, S. (2011). Is a life without meaning satisfying? The moderating role of the search for meaning in satisfaction with life judgments. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 6(3), 173–180.
• Watson, D., Clark, L. A., ve Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: the PANAS scales. Journal of personality and social psychology, 54(6), 1063.
• Wong, P. T. (1998). Implicit theories of meaningful life and the development of the personal meaning profile. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
• Yalom, I. D. (2001). Varoluşçu Psikoterapi. Kabalcı Yayınevi (3rd ed.). İstanbul: Kabalcı Yayınevi.
• Zika, S., ve Chamberlain, K. (1992). On the relation between meaning in life and psychological well-being. British Journal of Psychology, 83, 133-145.