General Political Activity Scale: A Scale Development Study in Healthcare Employees

Year 2020, Volume: 7 Issue: 2, 413 - 434, 01.07.2020

Hilal KUŞCU KARATEPE Derya ATİK

https://doi.org/10.17541/optimum.664900

Abstract

The research was carried out methodologically to develop a measurement tool for determining the level of political efficiency of health employees. 200 healthcare employees participated in the study. Surface and scope validity of scale items were provided. In the evaluation of the data, SPSS 21 and AMOS 22 programs were used to calculate the number percentage, correlation, explanatory and confirmatory factor analysis. In the explanatory factor analysis, it was determined that there were 2 sub-dimensional structures with 26 items as Internal and External. It was revealed in the confirmatory factor analysis that it met the criteria for goodness of fit values. The scale-wide Cronbach Alpha value is 0.96. For the sub-dimensions; The internal sub-dimension Cronbach Alpha value is 0.93 and the internal sub-dimension Cronbach Alpha value is 0.94. As a result, the Political Effectiveness Scale is valid and reliable. 

Keywords

Policy, Activity, Internal, External, Health Employees

Genel Politik Etkinlik Ölçeği: Sağlık Çalışanlarında Bir Ölçek Geliştirme Çalışması

Abstract

Araştırma, sağlık çalışanlarının politik etkinlik düzeylerinin belirlenmesinde bir ölçüm aracı geliştirmek amacıyla metodolojik olarak gerçekleştirilmiştir. Çalışmaya 200 sağlık çalışanı katılmıştır. Ölçek maddelerinin yüzey ve kapsam geçerliliği sağlanmıştır. Verilerin değerlendirilmesinde SPSS 21 ve AMOS 22 programları ile sayı yüzdelik hesaplama, korelasyon, açıklayıcı ve doğrulayıcı faktör analizi yapılmıştır. Açıklayıcı faktör analizinde 26 maddelik İçsel, Dışsal olmak üzere 2 alt boyutlu yapının ortaya çıktığı belirlenmiştir. Doğrulayıcı faktör analizinde uyum iyiliği değerleri ölçütlerini sağladığı ortaya çıkmıştır. Ölçek geneli Cronbach Alpha değeri 0,96’dir. Alt boyutlar için; içsel alt boyutu Cronbach Alpha değeri 0,93 ve içsel alt boyutu Cronbach Alpha değeri 0,94’tür. Sonuç olarak, Politik Etkinlik Ölçeği geçerli ve güvenilirdir.

Keywords

Politika, Etkinlik, İçsel, Dışsal, Sağlık Çalışanları

References

• Albright, J.J. ve Park, H.M. (2009). Confirmatory factor analysis using amos, LISREL, mplus, and SAS/STAT CALIS. Bloomington: University Information Technology Services Center for Statistical and Mathematical Computing Indiana University Press.
• Almond, G.A. ve Verba, S. (1965). The civic culture: Political attitudes and democracy in five nations. Boston, MA, USA: Little, Brown and Co.
• Alpar, R. (2012). Spor, sağlık ve eğitim bilimlerinden örneklerle uygulamalı istatistik ve geçerlik-güvenirlik, SPSS’de çözümleme adımlarıyla birlikte. Detay Yayıncılık: Ankara.
• 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.
• Balch, G.I. (1974). Multiple indicators in survey research: The concept sense of political efficacy. Political Methodology, 1(2), 1–43.
• Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191–215.
• Bandura, A. (1982). Self-efficacy mechanism ın human agency. American Psychologist 37, 122-147.
• Bandura, A. (1991). Social cognitive Theory of self-regulation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 248–287.
• Bennett, S.E. (1997). Knowledge of politics and sense of subjective political competence: The ambiguous connection. American Politics Research 25, 230–240.
• Bilge, H. (2003). İnsan kaynaklarının sürekli artan gücü. Sosyal Bilimler, 1(1), 7-17. Borsboom, D., Mellenbergh. G.J., & Heerden, J.V. (2004). The concept of validity. Psychological Review, 111(4), 1061-1.
• Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2014). Veri analizi el kitabı. Pegem Akademi: Ankara.
• Campbell, A., Gurin, G., & Miller, W.E. (1954). The voter decides. Evanston, IL, USA: Row, Peterson and Company.
• Condon, M. (2013). Holleque M. Entering politics: General self-efficacy and voting behavior among young people. Political Psychology, 34(2), 167–181.
• Converse, P.E. (1972). Change in the American electorate. In A. Campbell & PE. Converse (Eds.), The human meaning of social change. New York, NY: Russell Sage.
• Coombs, W (1988). Schroeder H. An analysis of factor analytic data. Personality and Individual Differences, 9,79-85.
• Cornfield, M. (2003). Adding ın the net: Making citizenship count ın the digital age. In D. Anderson and M. Cornnfield (Eds.), The Cıvıc Web. Oxford, UK: Woman And Littlefield Publishers.
• Craig, S.C., Niemi, R.G., & Silver, G.E. (1990). Political efficacy and trust: A report on the NES pilot study items. Political Behavior, 12, 289–314.
• Çokluk, Ö., Şekercioğlu, G., & Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2014). Sosyal bilimler için çok değişkenli istatistik: SPSS ve lisrel uygulamaları. Ankara: Pegem Akademi Yayıncılık.
• Finkel, S.E. (1985). Reciprocal effects of participation and political efficacy: A panel analysis. American Journal of Political Science, 29(4), 891–913.
• Gallego, A. ve Oberski, D. (2012). Personality and political participation: The mediation hypothesis. Political Behavior, 34(3), 425–451.
• Gasti,l J. ve Dillard, J.P. (1999). Increasing political sophistication through public deliberation. Political Communication, 16, 3–23.
• Gil de Zúñiga, H. (2006). Reshaping the digital inequality in the European union: How psychological variables affect Internet adoption rates, (İnternet), Webology 3, Article 32. Ulaşım adresi: http://www.webology.org/2006/v3n4/a32.html, (Ulaşım tarihi: 15.10.2019).
• Girgin, D. (2016). Çalgı Eğitiminde algılanan aile desteği ölçeği geliştirme çalışması. Elementary Education Online, 15(3), 778-786.
• Gist, E.M. ve Mitchell, T. (1992). Self-efficacy: A theoretical analysis of ıts determinants and malleability. The Academy Of Management Review, 17(2), 183-211.
• Grant, J.S. ve Davis, L.L. (1997). Selection and use of content experts for instrument development. Research in Nursing & Health, 20, 269-274.
• Johann, D. (2012). Specific political knowledge and citizens’ participation: Evidence from Germany. Acta Politica, 47(1), 42–66.
• Johnson, T.J., & Kaye, B.K. (2003). A Boost or a Bust for Democracy? How the Web Influenced Political Attitudes and Behaviors in the 1996 and 2000 presidential elections. Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics, 8(3), 9-34.
• Jung, N., Kim, Y., & Zúñiga, H.G. (2011). The mediating role of knowledge and efficacy in the effects of communication on political participation. Mass Communication & Society, 14(4), 407–430.
• Karakoç, A. ve Dönmez, P. (2014). Ölçek geliştirme çalışmalarında temel ilkeler. Tıp Eğitimi Dünyası, 13(40), 39-49.
• Kenski, K., & Stroud, N.J. (2006). Connections between Internet use and political efficacy, knowledge and participation. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 50(2), 173–192.
• Krampen, G. (2000). Transition of adolescent political action orientations to voting behavior in early adulthood in view of a social-cognitive action theory model of personality. Political Psychology, 21(2), 277–299.
• Kuşcu Karatepe, H. (2019). Hemşirelerde politik duyarlılık ve örgütsel demokrasi algısı arasındaki ilişkinin belirlenmesi, Doktora Tezi, İstanbul: İstanbul Üniversitesi-Cerrahpaşa Lisansüstü Eğitim Enstitüsü.
• Laher, S. (2010). Using exploratory factor analysis in personality research: Best-practice recommendations. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology, 36(1), 1-7.
• Lawshe, C.H. (1975). A quantitative approach to content validity. Personnel psychology, 28(4), 563-575.
• McLeod, J.M., & McDonald, D.G. (1985). Beyond simple exposure: Media orientations and their impact on political processes. Communication Research, 12, 3–33.
• Meydan, C.H. ve Şeşen, H. (2015). Yapısal eşitlik modellemesi AMOS uygulamaları. Ankara: Detay Yayıncılık.
• Mill, J.S. (1991). Considerations on representative government. In J. Gray (Ed.), On liberty and other essays. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
• Mohammed, A.K.A. (2011). Students’ exposure to political news on the ınternet and political awareness: a comparison between Germany and Egypt, Doktora Tezi, Dresden Teknik Üniversitesi İletişim Bilimleri Enstitüsü.
• Morrell, M.E. (2003). Survey and experimental evidence for a reliable and valid measure of internal political efficacy. Public Opinion Quarterly, 67, 589-602.
• Niemi, R.G., Craig, S.C., & Mattei, F. (1991). Measuring internal political efficacy in the 1988 National Election Study. The American Political Science Review, 85(4), 1407–1413.
• Öztürk, H. ve Babacan, E. (2012). Bir ölçek geliştirme çalışması: hastanede çalışan sağlık personeli için iş güvenliği ölçeği. Hemşirelikte Eğitim ve Araştırma Dergisi, 9(1), 36-42.
• Pingree, J.R. (2011). Effects of unresolved factual disputes in the news on epistemic political efficacy. Journal of Communication, 61(1), 22 – 47.
• Schulz, W., Ainley, J., Fraillon, J., Kerr, D., & Losito, B. (2010). ICCS 2009 International report: Civic knowledge, attitudes, and engagement among lower-secondary school students in 38 Countries. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: IEA.
• Şahin, N., Dişsiz, M. (2009). Sağlık çalışanlarında aile içi şiddete yönelik tutum ölçeği geliştirme çalışması. Uluslararası İnsani Bilimler Dergisi, 6(2), 263-274. Tavşancıl, E. (2010). Tutumların ölçülmesi ve SPSS ile veri analizi. Ankara: Nobel Yayıncılık.
• Tezbaşaran, A. (2008). Likert tipi ölçek geliştirme kılavuzu. Ankara: Türk Psikoloji Derneği Yayınları.
• Uyumaz, G., Mor Dirlik, E., & Çokluk, Ö. (2016). Açımlayıcı Faktör Analizinde Tekrar Edilebilirlik: Kavram ve Uygulama. Abant İzzet Baysal Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 16(2), 659-675.
• Velasquez, A., & LaRose, R. (2015). Social media for social change: Social media political efficacy and activism in student activist groups. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 59, 456–474.
• Veneziano, L., & Hooper J. (1997). A method for quantifying content validity of health-related questionnaires. American Journal of Health Behavior, 21(1), 67-70.
• Wang, S.I. (2007). Political Use of the Internet, Political Attitudes and Political Participation. Asian Journal of Communication, 17(4), 381-395.
• Westle, B. (2011). Politisches Wissen in Deutschland: Ein vergleich von bürgern mit türkischem migrationshintergrund und einheimischen Deutschen. Zeitschrift für Parlamentsfragen, 42(4), 835–850.
• Wilson, F.R., Pan, W., Schumsky, D.A. (2012). Recalculation of the critical values for Lawshe’s content validity ratio. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 45, 197–210.
• Zimmerman, B.J. (1989). A social cognitive view of self-regulated academic learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 329-339.