ÇOCUKLAR İÇİN ŞEMA ÖLÇEĞİ: TÜRK KÜLTÜRÜNE UYARLAMA ÇALIŞMASI

Year 2025, Volume: 26 Issue: 2, 846 - 873, 02.09.2025

Bilge Bakır Aygar , Alim Kaya

https://doi.org/10.17679/inuefd.1609911

Abstract

Bu araştırmada Rijkeboer ve Boo (2010) tarafından geliştirilen “Çocuklar İçin Şema Ölçeği’nin Tük kültüründe psikometrik özelliklerinin incelenmesi amaçlanmıştır. Araştırmanın çalışma grubunu 393 ortaokul öğrencisi oluşturmuştur. Elde edilen veriler doğrulayıcı faktör analizi ile açıklanmaya çalışılmıştır. Yapılan analizler 11 alt boyut ve 40 maddeden oluşan Çocuklar İçin Şema Ölçeği’nin faktör yapısının Türk kültüründe de benzer olduğunu göstermiştir. Ölçme aracındaki maddelerin faktör yükleri .17- .87, alt boyutlarının Cronbach alpha iç tutarlılık katsayılarının ise .44-.81 arasında değiştiği gözlenmiştir. Ölçme aracının uyum indeksleri incelendiğinde kabul edilebilir ve mükemmel uyum indekslerine yakın uyum istatistikleri olduğu görülmüştür. Bu sonuçlara göre Çocuklar İçin Şema Ölçeği’nin faktör yapısının Türk kültüründe de benzer, geçerlik ve güvenirliklerinin kabul edilebilir düzeylerde olduğu ve çocukların erken dönem uyumsuz şemalarının belirlenmesinde kullanılabileceği söylenebilir

Keywords

Çocuklar için şema ölçeği , Erken dönem uyumsuz şemalar , Geçerlik , Güvenirlik , Şema terapi

SCHEMA SCALE FOR CHILDREN: ADAPTATION STUDY TO TURKISH CULTURE

Abstract

The aim of this study was to examine the psychometric properties of the “Schema Scale for Children” developed by Rijkeboer and Boo (2010) in Turkish culture. The study group consisted of 393 secondary school students. The data obtained was tried to be explained by confirmatory factor analysis. The analyses showed that the factor structure of the Schema Scale for Children, which consists of 11 sub-dimensions and 40 items, is similar in Turkish culture. It was observed that the factor loadings of the items in the measurement tool varied between .17- .87, and the Cronbach alpha internal consistency coefficients of the sub-dimensions varied between .44-.81. When the fit indices of the measurement tool were examined, it was seen that the fit statistics were acceptable and close to perfect fit indices. According to these results, it can be said that the factor structure of the Schema Scale for Children is similar in Turkish culture, its validity and reliability are at acceptable levels, and it can be used in determining children’s early maladaptive schemas.

Keywords

Schema scale for children , Early maladaptive schemas , Validity , Reliability , Schema therapy

References

• Ayre, C., & Scally A. J. (2014). Critical values for Lawshe’s content validity ratio: revisiting the original methods of calculation. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 47(1), 79–86.
• Ball, S. A., & Cecero, J. J. (2001). Addicted patients with personality disorders: Traits, schemas, and presenting problems. Journal of Personality Disorders, 15(1), 72-83.
• Bandalos, D. L., & Finney, S. J. (2010). Factoranalysis: Exploratory and confirmatory. In G. R. Hancock& R. O. Mueller (Eds.), Thereviewer's guide to quantitative methods in the social sciences, 93-114, Routledge.
• Beckley, K. (2002). Factor structure of the Young Schema Questionnaire (short form) in a non-clinical adolescent sample. [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Southampton University.
• Brown, C. M. (2007). An empirical test of the nontraditional undergraduate student attrition model using structural equation modeling (Doctoral dissertation, Ohio University).
• Cecero, J. J., Nelson, J. D., & Gillie, J. M. (2004). Tools and tenets of schema therapy: toward the construct validity of the early maladaptive schema questionnaire–research version (EMSQ‐R). Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy: An International Journal of Theory & Practice, 11(5), 344-357.
• Cicchetti, D. (1991). Fractures in the crystal: Developmental psychopathology and the emergence of self. Developmental Review, 11(3), 271-287.
• Cohen, R. J., Swerdlik, M. E., & Phillips, S. M. (1996). Psychological testing and assessment: An introduction to test sand measurement. Mayfield Publishing Co.
• Güner, O. (2013). 10-16 yaş çocuk ve ergenler için erken dönem uyumsuz şema ölçekler takımı (Çeşöt)’nın geçerlik, güvenirlik ve norm çalışması. [Doktora tezi, Marmara Üniversitesi]. YÖK Ulusal Tez Merkezi.
• Hooper, D., Coughlan, J. ve Mullen, M.R. (2008). Structural equation modelling: Guidelines for determining model fit. Journal of Business Research Methods, 6, 53-60.
• Hu, L. T. ve Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1-55.
• Kankaraš, M., & Moors, G. (2009). Measurement equivalence in solidarity attitudes in Europe: Insights from a multiple-group latent-class factor approach. International Sociology, 24(4), 557-579.
• Karaman, M. (2023). Keşfedici ve doğrulayıcı faktör analizi: Kavramsal bir çalışma. Uluslararası İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 9(1), 47-63.
• Kim, J., & Cicchetti, D. (2004). A longitudinal study of child maltreatment, mother–child relationship quality and maladjustment: The role of self-esteem and social competence. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 32, 341- 354.
• Kline, R. B. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (3rd ed.). Guilford Press.
• Lawshe, C. H. (1975). A quantitative approach to content validity. Personal Psychology, 28(4), 563-575.
• Lee, C. W., Taylor, G., & Dunn, J. (1999). Factor structure of the schema questionnaire in a large clinical sample. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 23(4), 441-451.
• Lumley, M. N., & Harkness, K. L. (2007). Specificity in the relations among childhood adversity, early maladaptive schemas, and symptom profiles in adolescent depression. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 31(5), 639-657.
• Maughan, A., & Cicchetti, D. (2002). Impact of child maltreatment and interadult violence on children’s emotion regulation abilities and socioemotional adjustment. Child Development, 73(5), 1525-1542.
• Muris, P. (2006). Maladaptive schemas in non‐clinical adolescents: Relations to perceived parental rearing behaviours, big five personality factors and psychopathological symptoms. Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy: An International Journal of Theory & Practice, 13(6), 405-413.
• Petrocelli, J. V., Glaser, B. A., Calhoun, G. B., & Campbell, L. F. (2001). Early maladaptive schemas of personality disorder subtypes. Journal of Personality Disorders, 15(6), 546-559.
• Rijkeboer, M. M., & de Boo, G. M. (2010). Early maladaptive schemas in children: Development and validation of the schema inventory for children. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 41(2), 102-109.
• Rijkeboer, M. M., van den Bergh, H., & Van den Bout, J. (2005). Stability and discriminative power of the Young Schema-Questionnaire in a Dutch clinical versus non-clinical population. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 36(2), 129-144.
• Rogosch, F. A., & Cicchetti, D. (2004). Child maltreatment and emergent personality organization: Perspectives from the five-factor model. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 32, 123-145.
• Schmidt, N. B., Joiner, T. E., Young, J. E., & Telch, M. J. (1995). The schema questionnaire: Investigation of psychometric properties and the hierarchical structure of a measure of maladaptive schemas. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 19, 295-321.
• Simard, V., Moss, E., & Pascuzzo, K. (2011). Early maladaptive schemas and child and adult attachment: A 15‐year longitudinal study. Psychology and Psychotherapy: Theory, Research and Practice, 84(4), 349-366.
• Stallard, P. (2007). Early maladaptive schemas in children: Stability and differences between a community and a clinic referred sample. Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy, 14(1), 10-18.
• Stallard, P., & Rayner, H. (2005). The development and preliminary evaluation of a schema questionnaire for children (SQC). Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy, 33(2), 217-224.
• Stopa, L., Thorne, P., Waters, A., & Preston, J. (2001). Are the short and long forms of the Young Schema Questionnaire comparable and how well does each version predict psychopathology scores?. Journal of Cognitive Psychotherapy, 15(3), 253.
• Sümer, N. (2000). Yapisal Eşitlik Modelleri: Temel Kavramlar ve Örnek Uygulamalar. Türk Psikoloji Yazıları.
• Tabachnick, B.G. ve Fidell, L.S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics. (4th edition). Allyn & Bacon.
• Van Vlierberghe, L., Braet, C., Bosmans, G., Rosseel, Y., & Bögels, S. (2010). Maladaptive schemas and psychopathology in adolescence: On the utility of young’s schema theory in youth. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 34, 316-332.
• Uzun, B, N., Gelbal, S., & Öğretmen, T. (2010). Tımss-r fen başarısı ve duyuşsal özellikler arasındaki ilişkinin modellenmesi ve modelin cinsiyetler bakımından karşılaştırılması. Kastamonu Education Journal, 18(2), 531-544.
• Van Vlierberghe, L., & Braet, C. (2007). Dysfunctional schemas and psychopathology in referred obese adolescents. Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy, 14(5), 342-351.
• Veneziano L. & Hooper J. (1997). A method for quantifying content validity of health-related questionnaires. American Journal of Health Behavior, 21 (1), s. 67-70.
• Wilson, F. R., Pan, W., & Schumsky, D. A. (2012). Recalculation of the critical values for Lawshe’s content validity ratio. Measurement and Evaluation in Counselingand Development, 45, 197–210.
• Yalçın, S. (2025, Nisan 17). Ölçek geliştirme ve uyarlama süreci bilgi notu [PDF]. Erişim linki. https://egitim.ankara.edu.tr/wp-content/uploads/sites/347/2021/06/Olcek-Gelistirme-ve-Uyarlama.Bilgi-notu.-Doc.-Dr.-Seher-Yalcin.pdf
• Young, J. E., Klosko, J. S., & Weishaar, M. E. (2003). Schema therapy: A practitioner's guide. Guilford Press.
• Young, J. E. (1994). Cognitive therapy for personality disorders: A schema-focused approach. Professional Resource Press/Professional Resource Exchange.
• Yurdugül, H. (2005). Ölçek geliştirme çalışmalarında kapsam geçerliği için kapsam geçerlik indekslerinin kullanılması. XIV. Ulusal Eğitim Bilimleri Kongresi, Denizli, Türkiye.