Year 2020, Volume 3 , Issue 1, Pages 61 - 77 2020-06-29

The Construct Validity of the Scale of Audience Perceptions of Media and Religion
İzleyicinin Medya ve Din Algısı Ölçeği’nin Yapı Geçerliliği

Adem AL [1]


This study is part of a doctoral dissertation (Al, 2019) at the Faculty of Communication, Istanbul University, Turkey, and it intends to introduce the Scale of Audience Perceptions of Media and Religion (SAPMR) and to measure its goodness-of-fit with a separate independent sample by deploying a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). Data were collected from 150 participants, who ranged in age from 18 to 27 years, to measure whether the scale shows a good model fit. In the CFA, CMIN/DF, RMSEA, CFI, TLI, SRMR, PNFI, and PCFI fit indices were used. The fit indices obtained in the present study showed that CMIN/DF value was below 3, RMSEA value was below .06, SRMR values were below .08, CFI and TLI values were above .95, and finally PNFI and PCFI values are above .5. These results revealed that the SAPMR with six constructs –‘Media Ministers and Representation’, ‘Politics and Religion’, ‘Secularisation / Alienation from Religion’, ‘Perception of Religious Productions’, ‘Decoding in Opposition’, and ‘Religious Media Literacy’– had a good model fit; namely, its measurement model is well specified.
İstanbul Üniversitesi İletişim Fakültesi’nde yapılmış olan doktora tezinin (Al, 2019) bir parçası olan bu çalışma, İzleyicinin Medya ve Din Algısı Ölçeği’ni (İMDAÖ) tanıtmayı ve bu ölçeği farklı, bağımsız bir örneklem üzerinde uygulayarak onun uyum düzeyini doğrulayıcı faktör analizi (DFA) yoluyla ölçmeyi amaçlamaktadır. Ölçeğin iyi bir model uyumu gösterip göstermediğini tespit etmek için 18 ile 27 yaş arasında değişen 150 katılımcıdan veri toplanmıştır. Yapılan DFA’da CMIN/DF, RMSEA, CFI, TLI, SRMR, PNFI ve PCFI uyum indekslerinden faydalanılmıştır. Elde edilen uyum indeksleri, CMIN/DF değerinin 3’ün altında, RMSEA değerinin .06’nın altında, SRMR değerlerinin .08’in altında, CFI ve TLI değerlerinin .95’in üzerinde ve son olarak PNFI ve PCFI değerlerinin .5’in üzerinde olduğunu göstermiştir. Bu sonuçlar da altı boyuttan –‘Medya Vaizleri ve Temsil’, ‘Siyaset ve Din’, ‘Sekülerleşme / Dine Yabancılaşma’, ‘Dini Yayın Algısı’, ‘Muhalif Kodaçımlama’ ve ‘Dini Medya Okuryazarlığı’– oluşan Medya ve Din Algısı Ölçeği’nin iyi bir model uyumuna sahip olduğunu, yani ölçüm modelinin iyi tanımlanmış olduğunu ortaya koymuştur.
  • Al, A. (2019). Medyadaki dini içerikli yayınlarla ilgili izleyici algısı araştırması. İstanbul Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Yayımlanmamış Doktora Tezi.
  • Bentler, P. M., and Bonett, D. G. (1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88, 588-606.
  • Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2004). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı (4. bs.), Ankara, Pegem A Yayıncılık.
  • Byrne, B. M. (2010). Structural equation modeling with AMOS-Basic concepts, applications and programming (2nd ed.), New York: Taylor and Francis Group, LLC.
  • Crowley, S. L., and Fan, X. (1997). Structural equation modeling: Basic concepts and applications in personality assessment research, Journal of Personality Assessment, 68(3), 508-31.
  • Das, S., and Sahu, M. K. (2018). Measuring and validating the scale of entrepreneurial orientation: A confirmatory factor analysis approach, Journal of Entrepreneurship and Management, 7(3), 42-47.
  • Dawson, J. (2017). Analysing quantitative survey data for business and management students, Los Angeles: Sage.
  • Durmuş B., Yurtkoru, E. S., Çinko M. (2011). Sosyal bilimlerde SPSS’le veri analizi (4. bs.), İstanbul: Beta Yayınları.
  • Ferguson, E., and Cox, T. (1993). Exploratory factor analysis: A users’ guide. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 1, 84-94.
  • Gorsuch, R. L. (1983). Factor analysis (2nd ed.), Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  • Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis: A global perspective (7th ed.), New Jersey: Pearson Educational Inc.
  • Hatcher, L. (1994). A step-by-step approach to using the SAS system for factor analysis and structural equation modeling, Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc.
  • Hooper, D., Coughlan, J., Mullen, M. R. (2008). Structural equation modelling: Guidelines for determining model fit. The Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 6(1), 53-60.
  • Hu, L. T., and Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1-55. DOI:10.1080/10705519909540118
  • Joormann, J., and Stöber, J. (1997). Measuring facets of worry: A LISREL analysis of the Worry Domains questionnaire. Personality and Individual Differences, 23(5), 827-837.
  • Jöreskog, K. G. and Sörbom, D. (1993). LISREL 8: Structural equation modeling with the SIMPLIS command language, Chicago: Scientific Software International.
  • Kaiser, H. F. (1974). An index of factorial simplicity, Psychometrika, 39, 31-36.
  • Kieffer, K. M. (1999). An introductory primer on the appropriate use of exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. Research in the Schools, 6, 75-92.
  • Lance, C. E., Butts, M. M., Michels, L. C. (2006). The sources of four commonly reported cutoff criteria: What did they really say? Organizational Research Methods, 9(2), 202-220.
  • Marsh, H. W., Hau, K. T., Wen, Z. (2004). In search of golden rules: Comment on hypothesis-testing approaches to setting cutoff values for fit indexes and dangers in overgeneralizing Hu and Bentler’s (1999) findings. Structural Equation Modeling, 11(3), 320-341.
  • MacCallum, R. C., Browne, M. W., Sugawara, H. M. (1996). Power analysis and determination of sample size for covariance structure modeling. Psychological Methods, 1, 130-149.
  • McDonald, R. P. and Ho, M. H. R. (2002). Principles and practice in reporting statistical equation analyses. Psychological Methods, 7(1), 64-82.
  • Mulaik, S. A., James, L. R., Van Alstine, J., Bennett, N., Lind, S., Stilwell, C. D. (1989). An evaluation of goodness of fit indices for structural equation models. Psychological Bulletin, 105(3), 430-445.
  • Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.), New York: McGraw-Hill.
  • Özdamar, K. (1999). Paket programlar ile istatistiksel veri analizi 1, Eskişehir: Kaan Kitabevi.
  • Tabachnick, B. G., and Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics (5th ed.), New York: Allyn and Bacon.
  • Tavşancıl, E. (2005). Tutumların ölçülmesi ve SPSS ile veri analizi (2. bs.), Ankara: Nobel Yayın Dağıtım.
  • Uzgören, N. (2012). Bilimsel araştırmalarda kullanılan temel istatiksel yöntemler ve SPSS uygulamaları, Bursa: Ekin Yayınevi.
  • Zhang, M. Y., Lee, K. H., Chen, S. C. (2012). Subscriber behaviour in adopting 3G value-added services. African Journal of Business Management, 6(3), 1089-1094.
Primary Language en
Subjects Communication
Journal Section Research Articles
Authors

Orcid: 0000-0001-5119-1036
Author: Adem AL (Primary Author)
Institution: İSTANBUL ÜNİVERSİTESİ, YABANCI DİLLER YÜKSEKOKULU
Country: Turkey


Dates

Publication Date : June 29, 2020

Bibtex @other { mediad744776, journal = {Medya ve Din Araştırmaları Dergisi}, issn = {2636-8811}, eissn = {2636-8811}, address = {mediam@erciyes.edu.tr}, publisher = {Erciyes University}, year = {2020}, volume = {3}, pages = {61 - 77}, doi = {}, title = {The Construct Validity of the Scale of Audience Perceptions of Media and Religion}, key = {cite}, author = {Al, Adem} }
APA Al, A . (2020). The Construct Validity of the Scale of Audience Perceptions of Media and Religion . Medya ve Din Araştırmaları Dergisi , 3 (1) , 61-77 . Retrieved from https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/mediad/issue/55331/744776
MLA Al, A . "The Construct Validity of the Scale of Audience Perceptions of Media and Religion" . Medya ve Din Araştırmaları Dergisi 3 (2020 ): 61-77 <https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/mediad/issue/55331/744776>
Chicago Al, A . "The Construct Validity of the Scale of Audience Perceptions of Media and Religion". Medya ve Din Araştırmaları Dergisi 3 (2020 ): 61-77
RIS TY - JOUR T1 - The Construct Validity of the Scale of Audience Perceptions of Media and Religion AU - Adem Al Y1 - 2020 PY - 2020 N1 - DO - T2 - Medya ve Din Araştırmaları Dergisi JF - Journal JO - JOR SP - 61 EP - 77 VL - 3 IS - 1 SN - 2636-8811-2636-8811 M3 - UR - Y2 - 2020 ER -
EndNote %0 Medya ve Din Araştırmaları Dergisi The Construct Validity of the Scale of Audience Perceptions of Media and Religion %A Adem Al %T The Construct Validity of the Scale of Audience Perceptions of Media and Religion %D 2020 %J Medya ve Din Araştırmaları Dergisi %P 2636-8811-2636-8811 %V 3 %N 1 %R %U
ISNAD Al, Adem . "The Construct Validity of the Scale of Audience Perceptions of Media and Religion". Medya ve Din Araştırmaları Dergisi 3 / 1 (June 2020): 61-77 .
AMA Al A . The Construct Validity of the Scale of Audience Perceptions of Media and Religion. MEDİAD. 2020; 3(1): 61-77.
Vancouver Al A . The Construct Validity of the Scale of Audience Perceptions of Media and Religion. Medya ve Din Araştırmaları Dergisi. 2020; 3(1): 61-77.