-

Abstract

In this study psychometric properties of Turkish version of the Authenticity Scale were investigated. The current study was carried out in two steps. In the first step the Turkish version of the scale were administered to 165 (97 women, 68 men) undergraduate and teacher certification program students. In order to examine factor structure of the scale a confirmatory factor analysis was performed. In the second step of the current study, the data were collected from 240 (161 women, 79 men) undergraduate students to examine concurrent validity and prediction validity of the scale. Results showed that the confirmatory factor analysis provided good fit indexes (/ sd = 1.49, RMSEA = .05, CFI = .95, IFI = .95, GFI = .92). Each subscale was significantly related to subjective well-being (SWB) and need satisfaction (i.e. autonomy). Furthermore, authenticity contributed variance of subjective well-being after controlling for autonomy. In conclusion, the results provide that The Authenticity Scale is valid and reliable

Keywords

• authenticity, subjective well-being, self-determination, scale adaptation

Otantiklik Ölçeğinin Türkçe’ye Uyarlanması: Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Çalışması

Abstract

Öz: Bu çalışmada Otantiklik Ölçeği (Authenticity Scale) Türkçe formunun psikometrik özellikleri incelenmiştir. Araştırma iki aşamada gerçekleştirilmiştir. Birinci aşamada ölçeğin Türkçe formu lisans ve öğretmenlik sertifika programında eğitim gören 165 (97 kadın, 68 erkek) üniversite öğrencisine uygulanmış, toplanan veriler üzerinden doğrulayıcı faktör analizi yapılmıştır. Araştırmanın ikinci aşamasında ise 240 (161 kadın, 79 erkek) üniversite öğrencisine ulaşılmış ve Otantiklik Ölçeğinin uyum ve yordama geçerliği incelenmiştir. Doğrulayıcı faktör analizinde uyum indeksi değerleri (/ sd = 1.49, RMSEA = .05, CFI = .95, IFI = .95, GFI = .92 olarak bulunmuştur. Ölçeğin Cronbach Alpha iç tutarlılık katsayıları sırasıyla Yabancılaşma için .79, Dış Etkileri Kabullenme için .67 ve Otantik Yaşam için .62 olarak bulunmuştur. Ölçeğin uyum geçerliği için yapılan analizde ise her bir alt boyut öznel iyi oluş ve özerklik ihtiyacı doyumu ile anlamlı düzeyde ilişkili bulunmuştur. Ayrıca özerklik doyumu kontrol edilerek yapılan aşamalı regresyon analizinde, otantikliğin öznel iyi oluşa ait varyansa önemli düzeyde katkı sağladığı görülmüştür. Sonuç olarak, bulgular Otantiklik Ölçeğinin Türkçe formunun geçerlik ve güvenirliğini destekler niteliktedir. Anahtar Sözcükler: otantiklik, öznel iyi oluş, öz-belirleme, ölçek uyarlama Abstract: In this study psychometric properties of Turkish version of the Authenticity Scale were investigated. The current study was carried out in two steps. In the first step the Turkish version of the scale were administered to 165 (97 women, 68 men) undergraduate and teacher certification program students. In order to examine factor structure of the scale a confirmatory factor analysis was performed. In the second step of the current study, the data were collected from 240 (161 women, 79 men) undergraduate students to examine concurrent validity and prediction validity of the scale. Results showed that the confirmatory factor analysis provided good fit indexes (/ sd = 1.49, RMSEA = .05, CFI = .95, IFI = .95, GFI = .92). Each subscale was significantly related to subjective well-being (SWB) and need satisfaction (i.e. autonomy). Furthermore, authenticity contributed variance of subjective well-being after controlling for autonomy. In conclusion, the results provide that The Authenticity Scale is valid and reliable. Keywords: authenticity, subjective well-being, self-determination, scale adaptation

Keywords

• otantiklik, öznel iyi oluş, öz-belirleme, ölçek uyarlama

References

1. Ahmet, W. & Bruinsma, M. (2006). A structural model of self-concept, autonomous motivation and academic performance in cross-cultural perspective. Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 10(4), 551-576.
2. Akyıldız, H. & Taşdelen, A. (1998, Eylül). Üniversite öğrencilerinin ereksel ve araçsal değer tercihleri. VII. Ulusal Eğitim Bilimleri Kongresi, Selçuk Üniversitesi, 9-11 Eylül, Konya.
3. Bacanlı, H. (2000). Üniversite öğrencilerinin değer tercihleri. Eğitim Yönetimi, 20, 597-610.
4. Barrett-Lennard, G. T. (1998). Carl Rogers’ helping system: Journey and substance. London: Sage.
5. Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative index in structural models. Psychological Bulletin,107, 238-246.
6. Chirkov, V. I., Ryan, R. M., Kim, Y. & Kaplan, U. (2003). Differentiating autonomy from individualism and independence: A self-determination theory perspective on internalization of cultural orientations and well- being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 97-110.
7. Cihangir-Çankaya, Z. & Bacanlı, H. (2003, Temmuz). İhtiyaç Doyum Ölçeğinin geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. VII. Ulusal Psikolojik Danışma ve Rehberlik Kongresi, 9-11 Temmuz, Malatya.
8. Cohen. J. C. & Cohen, P. C. (1983). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

9. Çuhadaroğlu, F. (1985). Gençlerde benlik saygısı ile ilgili bir araştırma. XXI. Ulusal Psikiyatri ve Nöroloji Bilimleri Kongresi, Mersin.
10. Çuhadaroğlu, F. (1986). Adölasanlarda benlik saygısı Hacettepe Üniversitesi Psikiyatri Anabilim Dalı, Ankara.
11. Deci, E. L. & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self- determination in human behavior. New York: Plenum Press.
12. Deci, E. L. & Ryan, R. (1991). A motivational approach to self: Integration in personality. In R. A. Dienstbier (Ed.), Nebraska symposium on motivation: Perspectives on motivation (pp. 237–288). Lincoln, NE, US: University of Nebraska Press.
13. Deci, E. L. & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The ‘‘ what’’ and ‘‘why ’’ of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11, 227–268.
14. Diener, E., Emmons R. A., Larsen, R. J. & Griffin, S. (1985). The Satisfaction With Life Scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49(1), 71-75.
15. Fromm, E. (1965). Escape from freedom. New York: Avon.
16. Gençöz, T. (2000). Pozitif ve Negatif Duygu Ölçeği: Geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Türk Psikoloji Dergisi, 15(46), 19–26.
17. Goldman, B. M. & Kernis, M. H. (2002). The role of authenticity in healthy psychological functioning and subjective well-being. Annals of the American Psychotherapy Association, 5(6), 18–20.
18. Gül, A. (2010). Benlik düzenleme odakları, otantiklik ve ilişkisel/özerk benlik ketlenmesi. Yayımlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Mersin Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Mersin.
19. Hambleton, R. K. (2001). The next generation of the ITC Test Translation and Adaptation Guidelines. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 17(3), 164-172.
20. Hambleton, R. K. & de Jong J. (2003). Advances in translating and adapting educational and psychological tests. Language Testing, 20, 127-134.
21. Harter, S. (2002). Authenticity. In C. R. Snyder & S. J. Lopez (Eds.), Handbook of positive psychology (pp. 382–394). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
22. Harter, S., Marold, D. B., Whitesell, N. R. & Cobbs, G. (1996). A model of the effects of perceived parent and peer support on adolescent false self-behavior. Child Development, 67, 360 –374.
23. Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications, Inc.
24. Horney, K. (1951). Neurosis and human growth. London: Routledge.
25. Hu, L. T. & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cut off criteria for fit indices in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1–55.
26. Hu, L.T. & Bentler, P. M. (1998). Fit indices in covariance structure modeling: Sensitivity to under parameterized model misspecification. Psychological Methods, 3, 421-453.
27. Ilardi, B.C., Leone, D., Kasser, R. & Ryan, R.M. (1993). Employee and supervisor ratings of motivation: Main effects and discrepancies associated with job satisfaction and adjustment in a Factory setting. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 23, 1789–1805.
28. Iyengar, S. S. & Lepper, M. R. (1999). Rethinking the value of choice: A cultural perspective on intrinsic motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 349–366.
29. İlhan, T. (2009). Üniversite öğrencilerinin benlik uyum modeli: Yaşam amaçları, temel psikolojik ihtiyaçlar ve öznel iyi oluş.Yayımlanmamış Doktora Tezi, Gazi Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara.
30. İmamoğlu, E. O., Günaydın, G. & Selçuk, E. (2011). Özgün benliğin yordayıcıları olarak kendileşme ve ilişkililik: Cinsiyetin ve kültürel yönelimlerin ötesinde. Türk Psikoloji Dergisi, 26(67), 27-48.
31. İmamoğlu, E. O. & Karakitapoğu-Aygün, Z. (1999). 1970’lerden 1990’lara değerler: Üniversite düzeyinde gözlenen zaman, kuşak ve cinsiyet farklılıkları. Türk Psikoloji Dergisi, 14(44), 1-17.
32. Jöreskog, K. & Sörbom, D. (1996). LISREL 8: User’s reference guide, Scientific Software International, Chicago.
33. Kağıtçıbaşı, Ç. (1998). Kültürel psikoloji: Kültür bağlamında insan ve aile. İstanbul: Yapı Kredi Yayınları.
34. Kağıtçıbaşı, Ç. (2005). Autonomy and relatedness in cultural context: Implications for self and family. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 36, 403–422.
35. Kernis, M. H. (2003). Toward a conceptualization of optimal self-esteem. Psychology Inquiry, 14, 1–26.
36. Köker, S. (1991). Normal ve sorunlu ergenlerin yaşam doyumu düzeylerinin karşılaştırılması. Yayımlanmamış Yüksek lisans tezi, Ankara Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Ankara.
37. Lopez, F. G. & Rice, K. G. (2006). Preliminary development and validation of a measure of relationship authenticity. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 53, 362–371.
38. Markus, H. R. & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review, 98, 224–253.
39. Markus, H. R., Kitayama, S. & Heiman, R. J. (1996). Culture and “basic” psychological principles. In E. T. Higgins & A. W. Kruglanski (Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles (pp. 857-913). New York: Guilford Press.
40. Neff, K. D. & Harter, S. (2002). The role of power and authenticity in relationship styles emphasizing autonomy, connectedness, or mutuality among adult couples. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 19, 835-857.
41. Neff, K. D. & Suizzo, M. A. (2006). Culture, power, authenticity and psychological well-being within romantic relationships: A comparison of European American and Mexican Americans. Cognitive Development 21, 441–457.
42. Oishi, S. & Diener, E. (2001). Goals, culture, and subjective well-being. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27(12), 1674-1682.
43. Robinson, O.C., Lopez, F. R. & Ramos, K. (2012, April). Should you bother being yourself at work? Relationships between social context, authenticity and wellbeing. presented at British Psychological Society Annual Conference.
44. Rogers, C. R. (1980). A way of being. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
45. Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and the adolescent self- image. Princeton University Press: New Jersey
46. Rudy, D., Sheldon, K. M., Awong, T. & Tan, H. H. (2007). Autonomy, culture, and well-being: The benefits of inclusive autonomy. Journal of Research in Personality, 41, 983-1007.
47. Ryan, R. M. & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55, 68–78.
48. Ryan, R. M., LaGuardia, J. G. & Rawsthome, L. J. (2005). Self-Complexity and the authenticity of self-Aspects: Effects on well-being and resilience to stressful events. North American Journal of Psychology, 7(3), 431-448.
49. Sheldon, K. M., Ryan, R. M., Rawsthorne, L. J. & Ilardi, B. (1997). Trait self and true self: Cross-role variation in the big-five personality traits and its relations with psychological authenticity and subjective well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 1380 –1393.
50. Şimşek, O. F. (2007). Yapısal eşitlik modellemesine giriş: Temel ilkeler ve LISREL uygulamaları. Ankara: Ekinos Yayınları.
51. Theran, S. A. (2011). Authenticity in relationships and depressive symptoms: A gender analysis. Personality and Individual Differences, 51, 423-428.
52. Watkins, D. (1989). The role of confirmatory factor analysis in cross-cultural research. International Journal of Psychology, 24(6), 685-701.
53. Watson, D., Clark, L. A. & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scale. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 1063-1070.
54. Wheaton, B., Muthen, B., Alwin, D., F. & Summers, G. (1977). Assessing reliability and stability in panel models. Sociological Methodology, 8(1), 84-136.
55. Wood, A., Linley, P., Maltby, J., Baliousis, M. & Joseph, S. (2008). The authentic personality: A theoretical and empirical conceptualization and the development of the authenticity scale. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 55,385–399.
56. Yalom, I. D. (1980). Existential psychotherapy. New York: Basic Books.
57. Turkish Psychological Counseling and Guidance Journal / 2013, 5 (40)