Metaverse Awareness Scale: A scale development and validation study

Abstract

The aim of this study is to develop a scale to measure individuals’ awareness of the Metaverse and to examine its validity and reliability. The study sample consisted of undergraduate students from various departments of the Faculty of Education at a state university. For the Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA), a total of 253 students were included in the study, of whom 134 were female (53%) and 119 were male (47%). For the Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA), 301 students were included in the study, of whom 216 were female (71.8%) and 85 were male (28.2%). Initially, a pool of 30 items was generated and reviewed by experts using the Lawshe technique. During the pilot phase, the candidate form was administered to 50 undergraduate students, and following expert evaluation and pilot testing, the number of items was reduced to 19. Subsequently, the candidate scale was applied to the study group, and EFA was conducted to examine the structure of the scale. As a result of EFA, a two-factor structure was obtained, and the scale was further refined to 17 items. This structure was then tested using CFA, and the fit indices indicated that the scale demonstrated satisfactory construct validity. Additionally, the internal consistency coefficients (Cronbach: 0.93) calculated for each dimension of the scale and the composite reliability (CR) values (0.95) demonstrate that the scale is a reliable measurement tool.

Keywords

• Metaverse
• augmented reality
• virtual world
• awareness

Ethical Statement

This study was conducted in accordance with scientific research and publication ethics. There was no conflict of interest during the study process. All data used accurately reflects reality and has not been altered in any way. Prior to data collection, ethical committee approval was obtained from the Harran University Social and Human Sciences Ethics Committee with decision number E-76244175-050.01.01-143488 dated June 30, 2022.

Metaverse Farkındalık Ölçeği: Ölçek geliştirme ve doğrulama çalışması

Abstract

Bu çalışmanın amacı, bireylerin Metaverse kavramına yönelik farkındalık düzeylerini belirlemeye yönelik bir ölçek geliştirmek ve ölçeğin geçerlik ve güvenirlik analizlerini yapmaktır. Çalışmanın örneklemi, bir devlet üniversitesindeki Eğitim Fakültesi’nin farklı bölümlerinde lisans düzeyinde eğitim gören öğrencilerden oluşmaktadır. Açımlayıcı Faktör Analizi (AFA) için toplam 253 öğrenci çalışmaya dâhil edilmiş; bunların 134’ü kadın (%53) ve 119’u erkektir (%47). Doğrulayıcı Faktör Analizi (DFA) için ise 301 öğrenci çalışmaya dâhil edilmiş; bunların 216’sı kadın (%71,8) ve 85’i erkektir (%28,2). Çalışma kapsamında öncelikle 30 maddelik bir madde havuzu oluşturulmuş ve Lawshe tekniği ile uzman görüşüne sunulmuştur. Pilot uygulama aşamasında aday ölçek formu 50 lisans öğrencisine uygulanmış ve uzman değerlendirmeleri ile pilot uygulama sonucunda madde sayısı 19’a indirilmiştir. Daha sonra, aday ölçek formu çalışma grubuna uygulanmış ve AFA ile ölçeğin yapısı incelenmiştir. AFA sonucunda iki faktörlü bir yapı elde edilmiş ve ölçek 17 maddeye düşürülmüştür. Elde edilen bu yapı, DFA ile test edilmiş ve uyum indeksleri ölçeğin yapı geçerliğini desteklemiştir. Ayrıca, ölçeğin her bir boyutu ve genel ölçümü için hesaplanan iç tutarlılık katsayıları (Cronbach:0,93) ile birleşik güvenirlik (Composite Reliability, CR) değerleri (0,95), ölçeğin güvenilir bir ölçme aracı olduğunu göstermiştir.

Keywords

• Metaverse
• artırılmış gerçeklik
• sanal dünya
• farkındalık

Ethical Statement

Bu çalışma kapsamında bilimsel araştırma ve yayın etiğine uygun hareket edilmiştir. Çalışma sürecinde herhangi bir çıkar çatışması bulunmamaktadır. Kullanılan tüm veriler gerçeği yansıtmakta olup, üzerinde hiçbir şekilde tahrifat yapılmamıştır. Veriler toplanmadan önce Harran Üniversitesi Sosyal ve Beşerî Bilimler Etik Kurulu’ndan 30.06.2022 tarihli ve E-76244175-050.01.01-143488 sayılı karar ile etik kurul izni alınmıştır.

References

1. Adner, R., & Kapoor, R. (2010). Value creation in innovation ecosystems: How the structure of technological interdependence affects firm performance in new technology generations. Strategic Management Journal, 31(3), 306-333.
2. Aslan, M., Sağtaş, S., and Özkaynar, K. (2025). Metaverse Perception Scale Development and Validation. SAGE Open, 15(2), 1-20.
3. Baglin, J. (2014). Improving your exploratory factor analysisfor ordinal data: A demonstrationusing FACTOR. Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation, 19(5), 1-15.
4. Bernardi, R. A. (1994). Validating research results when Cronbach's alpha is below. 70: A methodological procedure. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 54(3), 766-775.
5. Bostancı, M ve Uncu, G. (2021) Metaverse: Sanal mı gerçek mi? Dijital İletişimi Anlamak-2, 58-69.
6. Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2002). Faktör analizi: Temel kavramlar ve ölçek geliştirmede kullanımı. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi, 32(32), 470-483.
7. Brown, T. A. (2006). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. Guilford Press.
8. Cain, M. K., Zhang, Z., & Yuan, K. H. (2017). Univariate and multivariate skewness and kurtosis for measuring nonnormality: Prevalence, influence and estimation. Behavior Research Methods, 49, 1716-1735.

9. Cattell, R. B. (1966). Thescree test forthenumber of factors. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 1(2), 245‐276.
10. Ceylan Dadakoglu, S., & Özsoy, V. (2020). Second Life Application for Creativity in Art and Design Education. International Journal of Educational Methodology, 6(4), 759-773.
11. Council, B. A. (2020). Blockchain Terminology: A Glossary for Beginners. NASWA Workforce Technology.
12. Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16(3), 297-334.
13. CoinMarketCap. (2025). Decentraland (MANA) price today... Retrieved from https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies
14. Çelikkol, Ş. (2022). Metaverse Dünyası’nın, tüketici satın alma davranışları açısından değerlendirilmesi. İstanbul Kent Üniversitesi İnsan ve Toplum Bilimleri Dergisi, 3(1), 64-75.
15. Çokluk, Ö., Şekercioğlu, G. ve Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2010). Sosyal bilimler için çok değişkenli istatistik. Ankara: Pegem A.
16. Damar, M. (2021). Metaverse ve eğitim teknolojisi, Eğitimde dijitalleşme ve yeni yaklaşımlar. Efe Akademi, 169-192.
17. De Gagne, J. C., Randall, P. S., Rushton, S. D., Park, H. K., Cho, E., Yamane, S. S., & Jung, D. (2023). The use of Metaverse in nursing education: An umbrella review. Nurse Educator, 48(3), E73–E78. https://doi.org/10.1097/NNE.0000000000001327
18. Demirbağ, İ. (2020). Üç boyutlu sanal dünyalar. Açıköğretim Uygulamaları ve Araştırmaları Dergisi, 6(4), 97-112.
19. Díaz, J. (2020). Virtual world as a complement to hybrid and mobile learning. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJET), 15(22), 267-274.
20. Dickey, M. D. (2005). Engaging by design: How engagement strategies in popular computer and video games can inform instructional design. Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(2), 67-83.
21. Estudante, A., & Dietrich, N. (2020). Using augmented reality to stimulate students and diffuse escape game activities to larger audiences. Journal of Chemical Education, 97(5), 1368-1374.
22. Fabrigar, L. R., Wegener, D. T., MacCallum, R. C., & Strahan, E. J. (1999). Evaluating the use of exploratory factor analysis in psychological research. Psychological Methods, 4(3), 272-299.
23. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39-50.
24. Garrido, C. C., González, D. N., Urbano, L. S., & Piera, P. J. F. (2019). Multidimensional or essentially unidimensional? A multi-faceted factor-analytic approach for assessing the dimensionality of tests and items. Psicothema, 31(4), 450-457.
25. Girvan, C. (2018). What is a virtual world? Definition and classification. Education Tech Research Dev 66(5), 1087–1100. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-018-9577-y
26. Gorsuch, R. L. (1983). Factor analysis (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
27. Gömleksiz, M. N., ve Kan, A. Ü. (2012). Eğitimde duyuşsal boyut ve duyuşsal öğrenme. Turkish Studies, 7(1), 1159–1177.
28. Hahs-Vaughn, D. L. (2024). Applied multivariate statistical concepts. Routledge.
29. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2014). Multivariate data analysis: Pearson new international edition. Pearson Education Limited.
30. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. (2006). Multivariate data analysis. Uppersaddle River.
31. Hollensen, S., Kotler, P., & Opresnik, M. O. (2022). Metaverse–thenew marketing universe. Journal of Business Strategy, 44(3), 119-125.
32. Horn, J. L. (1965). A rationaleand test forthenumber of factors in factoranalysis. Psychometrika, 30(2), 179‐185.
33. Hu, L. T., & 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.
34. Hubbard, R., & Allen, S. J. (1987). An empirical comparison of alternative methods for principal component extraction. Journal of Business Research, 15(2), 173-190.
35. Huynh-The, T., Pham, Q. V., Pham, X. Q., Nguyen, T. T., Han, Z., & Kim, D. S. (2023). Artificial intelligence for the metaverse: A survey. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence, 117, 105581.
36. Hülsheger, U. R., & Alberts, H. J. (2021). Assessing facets of mindfulness in the context of work: The mindfulness@ work scale as a work‐specific, multidimensional measure of mindfulness. Applied Psychology, 70(4), 1728-1783.
37. Ibm, C. (2012). IBM SPSS statistics for Windows. Armonk (NY): IBM Corp.
38. İlhan, E. L. ve Esentürk, O. K. (2014). Zihinsel engelli bireylerde sporun etkilerine yönelik farkındalık ölçeği (ZEBSEYFÖ) geliştirme çalışması. CBÜ Beden Eğitimi ve Spor Bilimleri Dergisi, 9(1), 19-36
39. Jeon, J. E. (2021). The effects of user experience-based design innovativeness on user-metaverse platform channel relationships in South Korea. Journal of Distribution Science, 19(11), 81-90.
40. Jeong, S. H., & Kim, H. K. (2023). Effect of trust in metaverse on usage intention through technology readiness and technology acceptance model. Tehnički Vjesnik, 30(3), 837-845.
41. Jun, G. (2020). Virtual reality church as a new mission frontier in the metaverse: Exploring theological controversies and missional potential of virtual reality church. Transformation, 37(4), 297-305.
42. Kaiser, H. F. (1960). The application of electronic computers to factor analysis. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20(1), 141-151.
43. Karasar, N. (2007). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemi: kavramlar, ilkeler, teknikler. Nobel yayın dağıtım.
44. Kim, J. H., Lee, B. S., & Choi, S. J. (2022). A study on metaverse construction and use cases for non-face-to-face education. The Journal of the Convergence on Culture Technology, 8(1), 483-497.
45. Kliene, P. (1994). An Easy Guide toFactor Analysis. New York: Routledge.
46. Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling 2nd ed. New York: Guilford, 3.
47. Kye, B., Han, N., Kim, E., Park, Y., & Jo, S. (2021). Educational applications of metaverse: possibilities and limitations. Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions, 18, 32.
48. Lawshe, C. H. (1975). A quantitative approach to content validity. Personnel Psychology, 28(4), 563–575.
49. Lee, L. H., Lin, Z., Hu, R., Gong, Z., Kumar, A., Li, T., ... & Hui, P. (2021). When creators meet the metaverse: A survey on computational arts. arXiv preprint arXiv:2111.13486.
50. Lessick, S., & Kraft, M. (2017). Facing reality: The growth of virtual reality and health sciences libraries. Journal of the Medical Library Association, 105(4), 407–412
51. Locurcio, L. L. (2022). Dental education in the metaverse. British Dental Journal, 232(4), 191-191.
52. Mardia, K. V. (1970). Measures of multivariate skewness and kurtosis with applications. Biometrika, 57(3), 519-530.
53. Marshall, M. N. (1996). Sampling for qualitative research. Family Practice, 13(6), 522-526.
54. McDonald, R.P. (1999). Test theory: A unified treatment (1st ed.). Psychology Press. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410601087
55. McNeish, D. (2018). Thanks coefficient alpha, we’ll take it from here. Psychological Methods, 23(3), 412-433.
56. Meta. (2021, Ekim). TheMetaverseand How We’ll Build It Together – Connect 2021. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uvufun6xer8 adresinden Aralık 20, 2021 tarihinde alınmıştır.
57. Murray, J. H. (2020). Virtual/reality: how to tell the difference. Journal of Visual Culture, 19(1), 11-27.
58. Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (1998). Mplus user’s guide . Los Angeles, CA: Author.
59. Müller, W., Richter, S., Leyer, M., & Richter, A. (2024, January). Metaverse, ubi es? A transaction cost-based analysis of the state of the art of smart contracts in the Metaverse. In HICSS (pp. 5038-5047).
60. Mystakidis, S. (2022). Metaverse. Encyclopedia, 2(1), 486-497.
61. Narin, N. G. (2021). A content analysis of the metaverse articles. Journal of Metaverse, 1(1), 17-24.
62. Netemeyer, R. G., Bearden, W. O., & Sharma, S. (2003). Scaling procedures: Issues and applications. Sage Publications.
63. Nevelsteen, K. J. (2018). Virtual world, defined from a technological perspective and applied to video games, mixed reality, and the Metaverse. Computer Animation and Virtual Worlds, 29(1), 1-36.
64. NFT nedir? NFT ne işe yarar? Timeturk (2021, Ekim 07). https://www.timeturk.com/ekonomi/nft-nedir-nft-ne-ise-yarar/haber-1704817 adresinden Aralık 25, 2021 tarihinde alınmıştır.
65. Nguyen, A., Huynh, L., Dang, B., Pohjolainen, S., Mattila, J., Paajala, I. J., ... & Karppinen, P. (2025). Conceptualizing and enhancing metaverse literacy for education. Education and Information Technologies, 1-21.
66. Park, D. Who are the biggest players in the metaverse today?. (2022, Şubat 28). https://forkast.news/biggest-players-in-the-metaverse/ adresinden Aralık 26, 2021 tarihinde alınmıştır.
67. Park, S. M., & Kim, Y. G. (2022). A metaverse: Taxonomy, components, applications, and open challenges. IEEE Access, 10, 4209-4251.
68. Park, S., Kim, S. P., & Whang, M. (2021). Individual’s social perception of virtual avatars embodied with their habitual facial expressions and facial appearance. Sensors, 21(17), 1-18.
69. Patton, M. Q. (2014). Nitel araştırma ve değerlendirme yöntemleri. (M. Bütün ve S. Beşir Demir, Çev. Ed.). Ankara: Pegem.
70. Polyportis, A. (2024). A longitudinal study on artificial intelligence adoption: understanding the drivers of ChatGPT usage behavior change in higher education. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence, 6, 1-10. https://doi.org/10.3389/frai.2023.1324398
71. Polys, N. F., Knapp, B., Bock, M., Lidwin, C., Webster, D., Waggoner, N., & Bukvic, I. (2015, June). Fusality: an open framework for cross-platform mirror world installations. In Proceedings of the 20th international conference on 3D web technology (pp. 171-179).
72. R Core Team. (2018). R: A language and environment for statistical computing.
73. Rennie, K. M. (1997). Exploratory and confirmatory rotation strategies in exploratory factor analysis. Austin, TX: University of Texas at Austin.
74. Ruscio, J., & Roche, B. (2012). Determining the number of factors to retain in an exploratory factor analysis using comparison data of known factorial structure. Psychological Assessment, 24(2), 282–292.
75. Selke, S. (Ed.). (2016). Lifelogging: Digital self-tracking and Lifelogging-between disruptive technology and cultural transformation. Springer. Sezer, H., & Gül, A. (2024). Health sciences students’ perspectives on metaverse and digital technology use: Cross-sectional descriptive study. BMC Nursing, 23(1), 1–8.
76. Sheehy, K., Ferguson, R., & Clough, G. (2008). Learning in the panopticon: ethical and social issues in building a virtual educational environment. International Journal of Social Science. Special Edition: Virtual Reality in Distance Education, 2(2), 25-32.
77. Siyaev, A., & Jo, G. S. (2021). Neuro-symbolic speech understanding in aircraft maintenance metaverse. IEEE Access, 9, 154484-154499.
78. Sparkes, M. (2021). What is a Metaverse. New Scientist, 251(3348), 18.
79. Sripan, T., & Jeerapattanatorn, P. (2025). Metaverse-based learning: A comprehensive review of current trends, challenges, and future implications. Contemporary Educational Technology, 17(3), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/16434
80. Suh, W., & Ahn, S. (2022). Utilizing the metaverse for learner-centered constructivist education in the post-pandemic era: An analysis of elementary school students. Journal of Intelligence, 10(1), 1-15.
81. Süleymanoğulları, M., Özdemir, A., Bayraktar, G., and Vural, M. (2022). Metaverse ölçeği: Geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Anatolia Sport Research, 3(1), 47-58.
82. Sen, S., Acar, S., & Cetinkaya, C. (2014). Development of the Person–Environment Fit Scale (PEFSC): A new measure of creativity. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 8(4), 433-445.
83. Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (1996). Using multivariate statistics, (3rd ed.). Harper Collins. New York.
84. Thompson, B. (2002). Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis: Understanding concepts and applications. Washington, DC. American Psychological Association
85. Token Minds. (2024). Top 10 Upcoming Metaverse Events You Should Attend in 2024. Token Minds. https://tokenminds.co/blog/web3-marketing/top-10-upcoming-metaverse-events-you-should-attend-in-2024 adresinden Mart 14, 2024 tarihinde alınmıştır.
86. Tunca, S., Sezen, B. ve Balcıoğlu, Y. S. (2022, January). Twitter analysis for metaverse literacy. In International New York Academic Research Congress. Erişim adresi: https://www.newyorkcongress2022.com adresinden Ocak 14, 2023 tarihinde alınmıştır.
87. Tutgun-Ünal, A., & Tarhan, N. (2022). Metaverse awareness and generation to transform education. International Journal of Academic Research in Education, 8(1), 64-73.
88. Türk, G. D., Bayrakcı, S. ve Akçay, E. (2022). Metaverse ve benlik sunumu. The Turkish Online Journal of Design Art and Communication, 12(2), 316-333.
89. Veneziano, L. (1997). A method for quantifying content validity of health-related questionnaires. American Journal of Health Behavior, 21(1), 67-70.
90. Wang, Q., Li, R., Wang, Q., & Chen, S. (2021). Non-fungible token (NFT): Overview, evaluation, opportunities and challenges. Tech Report, 1-22.
91. Wyss, J. Barbados Is Opening a Diplomatic Embassy in the Metaverse (2021, Aralık 14). https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-12-14/barbados-tries-digital-diplomacy-with-planned-metaverse-embassy adresinden Mart 14, 2022 tarihinde alınmıştır.
92. Xiong, J., Hsiang, E. L., He, Z., Zhan, T., & Wu, S. T. (2021). Augmented reality and virtual reality displays: emerging technologies and future perspectives. Light: Science & Applications, 10(1), 1-30.
93. Yuan, K. H., & Bentler, P. M. (2000). Three likelihood-based methods for mean and covariance structure analysis with nonnormal missing data. Sociological Methodology, 30(1), 165–200.
94. Yeganeh, L. N., Fenty, N. S., Chen, Y., Simpson, A., & Hatami, M. (2025). The future of education: A multi-layered metaverse classroom model for immersive and inclusive learning. Future Internet, 17(2), 1-55. https://doi.org/10.3390/fi17020063
95. Zwick, W. R., & Velicer, W. F. (1986). Comparison of five rules for determining the number of components to retain. Psychological Bulletin, 99(3), 432-442
96. Zhang, X., Chen, Y., Hu, L., & Wang, Y. (2022). The metaverse in education: Definition, framework, features, potential applications, challenges, and future research topics. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 1-18. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1016300