Ethical Behaviour in Search and Rescue: A Scale Development Research

Yıl 2024, Cilt: 13 Sayı: 3, 682 - 693, 25.12.2024

Ömer Demirbilek , Emrah Gökkaya

https://doi.org/10.53424/balikesirsbd.1544331

Öz

Objective: The aim of this study was to develop a measurement tool with proven validity and reliability to measure ethical behavior in search and rescue. Materials and Methods: The exploratory sequential mixed method was preferred in the study. The first stage started with a qualitative study to create the item pool. Interviews with 16 search and rescue personnel were conducted through semi-structured forms. 38 Items were created. The content validity of the item pool was evaluated through expert opinion. The Lawshe technique was used to evaluate expert responses. Afterwards, the item pool, which was subjected to language and spelling checks, was piloted with 10 participants. After necessary adjustments were made, the draft scale was administered to 330 personnel. Results: As a result of the analysis, the scale showed a unidimensional structure consisting of 10 items. The obtained scale was confirmed by confirmatory factor analysis. The reliability of the scale of ethical behavior in search and rescue was evaluated by Cronbach's Alpha and it was determined that the scale had high reliability and internal consistency with 0.95. Conclusion: The developed “Ethical Behavior in Search and Rescue Scale” can be applied to all individuals operating in the field of search and rescue.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Search and Rescue, Ethics, Scale, Scale Development

Etik Beyan

Ethics committee approval was obtained to conduct the research. However, informed consent was obtained from all participants before the qualitative and quantitative research was initiated. The participants were informed that they may want to withdraw from the research and that their data would not be included in the research in line with their requests.

Destekleyen Kurum

None

Teşekkür

None

Arama Kurtarmada Etik Davranış: Bir Ölçek Geliştirme Çalışması

Öz

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı arama kurtarmada etik davranışı ölçebilecek geçerliliği ve güvenirliliği ispatlanmış bir ölçme aracı geliştirmektir. Gereç ve Yöntem: Araştırmada keşfedici ardışık karma yöntem tercih edilmiştir. İlk aşama madde havuzunun oluşturulması için nitel çalışma ile başlatılmıştır. 16 arama kurtarma personeli ile yarı yapılandırılmış formlar aracılığı ile mülakatlar gerçekleştirilmiştir. 38 madde oluşturulmuştur. Madde havuzunun kapsam geçerliliği uzman görüşü ile değerlendirilmiştir. Uzman yanıtlarını değerlendirmede Lawshe tekniği kullanılmıştır. Daha sonra dil ve yazım kontrolüne tabi tutulan madde havuzu 10 katılımcıya pilot olarak uygulanmıştır. Gerekli düzenlemeler yapılan taslak ölçek 330 personele uygulanmıştır. Bulgular: Yapılan analizler neticesinde ölçek 10 maddeden oluşan tek boyutlu bir yapı göstermiştir. Elde edilen ölçek doğrulayıcı faktör analizi ile doğrulanmıştır. Arama kurtarmada etik davranış ölçeğinin güvenirliliğini Cronbach's Alpha değerlendirilmiş ve 0.95 ile ölçeğin yüksek güvenirliğe ve iç tutarlılığa sahip olduğunu belirlenmiştir. Sonuç: Geliştirilen “Arama Kurtarmada Etik Davranış Ölçeği” arama kurtarma alanında faaliyet gösteren bütün bireylere uygulanabilir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Arama Kurtarma, Etik, Ölçek, Ölçek Geliştirme.

Kaynakça

• AFAD (2014). Dictionary of Disaster Management Terms. Ankara.
• AFAD (2023). Annotated Dictionary of Disaster Management Terms. Ankara.
• Akgül, A. (1997). Statistical Analysis Techniques in Medical Researches SPSS Applications (2 bs.). Ankara: Emek Ofset.
• Alexander, D. E. (2019). L’Aquila, central Italy, and the “disaster cycle,” 2009-2017. Disaster Prevention and Management: An International Journal, 28(4), 419-433.
• Alpar, R. (2020). Applied Statistics and Validity and Reliability with Examples from Sports, Health and Education Sciences (6 bs.). Ankara: Detay Publishing.
• Battistuzzi, L., Recchiuto, C.T. & Sgorbissa, A. (2021). Ethical concerns in rescue robotics: a scoping review. Ethics Inf Technol 23, 863–875. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-021-09603-0
• Bilgin, M. S. (2013). Development of open data model and institutional analysis bodies for disaster management: The example of landslide and flood (Master's Thesis). Istanbul Technical University, Institute of Informatics, Istanbul.
• Browne, M. W. ve Cudeck, R. (1989). Single sample cross-validation ındices for covariance structures. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 24(4), 445–455. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327906mbr2404_4 Bursal, M. (2019). Basic Data Analysis with Spss (2 bs.). Ankara: Anı Publishing.
• Can, A. (2022). Quantitative Data Analysis in Scientific Research Process with SPSS (10 bs.). Ankara: Pegem Akademi Publishing.
• Castillo, C. (2005). Disaster preparedness and business continuity planning at Boeing: An integrated model. Journal of Facilities Management, 3(1), 8-26.
• Coppola, D. (2011). Introduction to international disaster management, Amsterdam, ButterworthHeinemann. Creswell, J. W. (2021). Introduction to Mixed Method Research (M. Sözbilir, Çev.) (3 bs.). Ankara: Pegem Akademi Publishing.
• DeVellis, R. F. (2017). Scale Development Theory and Applications (T. Totan, Transl.) (3 bs.). Ankara: Nobel Academic Publishing.
• Doğan, İ. ve Doğan, N. (2019). An overview evaluation of the content validity used in scale development studies. Turkiye Klinikleri Journal of Biostatistics, 11(2), 143–151.
• Drew, D. S. (2021). Multi-agent systems for search and rescue applications. Current Robotics Reports, 2(2), 189–200. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43154-021-00048-3
• Erkorkmaz, Ü., Etikan, İ., Demir, O., Özdamar, K. ve Sanisoğlu, S. Y. (2013). Confirmatory factor analysis and fit ındices: review. Turkiye Klinikleri Journal of Medical Sciences, 33(1), 210–223. https://doi.org/10.5336/medsci.2011-26747
• Eryiğit, U., Saraç, E., Sayar, S., Yetim, Ö., Furuncu, H., Ocak, Z., ... & Çakıroğlu, E. (2012). Van Ercis earthquake operation of NMRT and Trabzon NMRT/UMKE and Trabzon UMKE in Van-Ercis earthquake. Eurasia Journal of Emergency Medicine, 11 (1), 55.
• Fischbacher-Smith, D. (2014). Organisational ineffectiveness: Environmental shifts and the transition to crisis. Journal of Organizational Effectiveness: People and Performance, 1(4), 423-446. GFDRR, (2016). The making of a riskier future: How our decisions are shaping future disaster risk. Washington, DC: GFDRR, World Bank
• Gökkaya, E. and Dinç, A. (2020). Investigation of umke employees' ethical approaches in disaster situation; the case of south Marmara. Gümüşhane University Journal of Health Sciences, 9(1), 17-24.
• Gustavsson, M. E., Arnberg, F. K., Juth, N., & von Schreeb, J. (2020). Moral distress among disaster responders: what is it?. Prehospital and disaster medicine, 35(2), 212-219.
• Hatcher, R. (1998). Class Differentiation in Education: rational choices? British Journal of Sociology of Education, 19(1), 5–24. https://doi.org/10.1080/0142569980190101
• Holgersson, A., Sahovic, D., Saveman, B. and Björnstig, U. (2016), “Factors influencing responders’ perceptions of preparedness for terrorism”, Disaster Prevention and Management: An International Journal, Vol. 25 No. 4, pp. 520-533.
• Jenkins, W. (2006), Emergency Preparedness and Response: Some Issues and Challenges Associated with Major Emergency Incidents, United States Government Accountability Office GAO-06-467T, Washington, DC, pp. 1-20.
• Karagöz, Y. and Bardakçı, S. (2020). Measurement Tools Used in Scientific Research and Scale Development. Ankara: Nobel Academic Publishing.
• Kline, R. (2011). Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling (3 bs.). New York: The Guilford Press. Lawshe, C. H. (1975). A Quantitative Approach To Content Validity. Personnel Psychology, 28(4), 563–575. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.17446570.1975.tb01393.x
• Maxwell, J. A. (2018). Qualıtatıve Research Desıgn - An Interactive Approach (M. Çevikbaş, Çev.) (3 bs.). Ankara: Nobel Akademik Publishing.
• Merin, O., Ash, N., Levy, G., Schwaber, M. J., & Kreiss, Y. (2010). The Israeli field hospital in Haiti—ethical dilemmas in early disaster response. New England Journal of Medicine, 362(11), e38.
• Moore, T. (2008). Disaster and emergency management systems. London: BSI. Moore, T., & Lakha, R. (2006). Tolley's Handbook of Disaster and Emergency Management: Principles and Practices.
• Morgado, F. F. R., Meireles, J. F. F., Neves, C. M., Amaral, A. C. S. ve Ferreira, M. E. C. (2017). Scale development: Ten main limitations and recommendations to improve future research practices. Psicologia, Reflexao E Critica : Revista Semestral Do Departamento De Psicologia Da UFRGS, 30(1), 3. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41155-016-0057-1
• Nojavan, M., Salehi, E., & Omidvar, B. (2018). Conceptual change of disaster management models: A thematic analysis. Jàmbá: Journal of Disaster Risk Studies, 10(1), 1-11.
• O’Mathúna, D. P., Gordijn, B., & Clarke, M. (Eds.). (2013). Disaster bioethics: Normative issues when nothing is normal (Vol. 2). Springer Science & Business Media.
• Özbek, Ö. (2011). Modeling and evaluation of disaster management with bayes networks in terms of effective intervention (Master's Thesis). Erciyes University, Institute of Science and Technology, Kayseri.
• Özkar, Y. (2019). AFAD Istanbul search and rescue unit employees' predisposition to teamwork. Unpublished master's thesis, Bezmi Alem Vakıf University, Istanbul.
• Öztürk, M. H., & Kuday, A. D. (2024). Psychometric evaluation of the Turkish version of the Work-Related Stress Scale: A study among search and rescue workers responding to the 2023 Kahramanmaraş earthquakes. Journal of Health Psychology, 13591053241287675. https://doi.org/10.1177/13591053241287675
• Patton, M. (2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating Theory and practice (4. bs). Thousand Oaks California: SAGE Publications Inc.
• Pauchant, T. C., & Mitroff, I. I. (1988). Crisis Prone Versus Crisis Avoiding Organizations Is your company's culture its own worst enemy in creating crises?. Industrial crisis quarterly, 2(1), 53-63.
• Pireur, M. (2011), European and Mediterranean Major Hazards Agreement (EUROPA), Strasbourg; Council of Europe. Son, J., Aziz, Z., & Peña‐Mora, F. (2008). Supporting disaster response and recovery through improved situation awareness. Structural survey, 26(5), 411-425.
• Statheropoulos, M., Agapiou, A., Pallis, G. C., Mikedi, K., Karma, S., Vamvakari, J., Dandoulaki, M., Andritsos, F., & Thomas, C. L. P. (2015). Factors that affect rescue time in urban search and rescue (USAR) operations. Natural Hazards, 75(1), 57–69. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-014-1304-3
• Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2001). Using Multivariate Statistics (4th ed.). Pearson.
• Tabachnick, B. ve Fidell, L. (2013). Using Multivariate Statistics (6th Edition) (6 bs.). Boston: Pearson. UNISDR (2009). Terminology on for Disaster Reduction. Geneva: United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction.
• Usta, E., & Yükseler, M. (2021). Social media use and ethical dilemmas in disasters: The case of Izmir Seferihisar earthquake. Journal of Disaster and Risk, 4(2), 249-269.
• Weisæth, L. (1989). Importance of high response rates in traumatic stress research. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica, 80, 131-137.
• Zack, N. (2009) “Ethics for Disaster”, Plymouth, United Kingdom; Rowman & Littlefield Publishers Inc.