Kendine Zarar Verme Tarama Envanteri Türkçe versiyonunun (KZVTE) psikometrik özellikleri

Yıl 2025, Cilt: 50 Sayı: 3, 565 - 578, 30.09.2025

Onat Yetim , Lut Tamam , Caner Yeşiloğlu

https://doi.org/10.17826/cumj.1699413

Öz

Amaç: Bu çalışma, en güncel öz bildirim envanteri olan Kendine Zarar Verme Tarama Envanterini (KZVTE) Türkçeye uyarlamak ve ölçeğin psikometrik özelliklerini değerlendirmek amacıyla gerçekleştirilmiştir.
Gereç ve Yöntem: Bu çalışma 571 ergenin katılımıyla gerçekleştirilmiştir. Klasik test teorisi ve öğe (madde) tepki teorisi yaklaşımları kullanılarak KZVTE-Türkçe (KZVTE-TR) formunun psikometrik özellikleri incelenmiştir. İstatistiksel analiz sürecinde KZVTE-TR maddelerinin faktör yapısı ve özellikleri dereceli tepki modeliyle değerlendirilmiştir. Ayrıca envanterin kriter geçerliliği, Belirti Kontrol Listesi-90-Revize (SCL-90-R) ve İntihar Ruminasyon Ölçeği (İRÖ) ile ilişkileriyle değerlendirilmiştir.
Bulgular: Çalışmamızda, KZVTE-TR'nin Cronbach alfa iç tutarlılık katsayısı .72 olarak bulunmuştur. KZVTE-TR'nin Guttman iki yarım güvenilirlik katsayısı ise .73 olarak hesaplanmıştır. KZVTE-TR; SCL-90-R'nin somatizasyon (r = .12, p < .05), kişilerarası duyarlık (r = .17, p < .01), depresyon (r = .26, p < .01), anksiyete (r = .22, p < .01) ve psikotizm (r = .22, p < .01) alt ölçekleriyle olumlu yönde anlamlı ilişkiler göstermiştir.
Sonuç: Dereceli tepki analizinin sonuçları, KZVTE-TR maddelerinin güçlük indekslerinin ölçme kalitesine sahip olduğunu göstermektedir. Bununla birlikte KZVTE-TR, içerik geçerliliği ve iç tutarlılıkta tek boyutlu bir yapı sergilemektedir. Çalışmamızda elde edilen faktör yükleme ve madde parametreleri, gençlerin kendine zarar verme düzeylerini ayırt edebilen bir ölçme aracı olarak KZVTE-TR'nin geçerliğini ve güvenilirliğini desteklemektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

kendine zarar verme davranışı , kendini yaralama davranışı , ergenler , öge (madde) tepki teorisi

Psychometric properties of the Turkish version of the Self-Harm Screening Inventory (SHSI-TR)

Öz

Purpose: This study was conducted to adapt the Self-Harm Screening Inventory, the most up-to-date self-report instrument, into Turkish and to examine its psychometric properties in a Turkish sample.
Materials and Methods: This study included 571 adolescents and examined the psychometric properties of the Self-Harm Screening Inventory-Turkish Form (SHSI-TR) scale via classical test theory (CTT) and item response theory (IRT). During the analysis process, a graded response model (GRM) was applied to analyze the factor structure and item properties of the SHSI-TR items. Additionally, the criterion validity of the scale was assessed by examining its relationship with the Symptom Control List-90-Revised (SCL-90-R) and the Suicide Rumination Scale (SRS).
Results: The Cronbach's alpha internal consistency coefficient of the SHSI-TR was .72. The Guttman two-half reliability coefficient was .73. The SHSI-TR was also positively correlated with the SCL-90-R subscales of somatization (r = .12, p < .05), interpersonal sensitivity (r = .17, p < .01), depression (r = .26, p < .01), anxiety (r = .22, p < .01), and psychoticism (r = .22, p < .01).
Conclusion: In conclusion, the GRM results demonstrated that the items of the SHSI-TR possess strong measurement properties. The scale represents a unidimensional structure in terms of content validity and statistical consistency. The obtained factor loadings and item parameters support the validity and reliability of the SHSI-TR as a measurement tool capable of distinguishing individuals' levels of self-harm.

Anahtar Kelimeler

non-suicidal self-injury , self-harm , adolescents , item response theory (IRT)

Kaynakça

• Nock MK, Jacobson C, Batejan K. Comprehensive Theoretical Models of Nonsuicidal Self-Injury, New York, NY, Oxford University Press. 2014.
• Jacobson CM, Gould M. The epidemiology and phenomenology of non-suicidal self-injurious behavior among adolescents: a critical review of the literature. Arch Suicide Res. 2007;11:129–47.
• Barrocas AL, Giletta M, Hankin BL, Prinstein MJ, Abela JR. Nonsuicidal self-injury in adolescence: longitudinal course, trajectories, and intrapersonal predictors. J Abnorm Child Psychol. 2015;43:369–80.
• Ross S, Heath N. A study of the frequency of self-mutilation in a community sample of adolescents. J Youth Adolesc. 2002;31:67–77.
• Hawton K, Saunders KE, O’Connor RC. Self-harm and suicide in adolescents. Lancet. 2012;379:2373–82.
• Zoroğlu SS, Tüzün Ü, Şar V, Tutkun H, Savaş HA, Öztürk M et al. Suicide attempt and self-mutilation among Turkish high school students in relation with abuse, neglect and dissociation. Psychiatry Clin Neurosci. 2003;57:119–26.
• Çimen İD, Coşkun A, Nasıroğlu S, Etiler N. Ergenlerde kendine zarar verme davranışı yaygınlığı ve ilişkili faktörler. Anadolu Psikiyatri Derg. 2017;18:635–43.
• Gholamrezaei M, De Stefano J, Heath NL. Nonsuicidal self‐injury across cultures and ethnic and racial minorities: A review. Int J Psychol. 2017;52:316–26.
• Muehlenkamp JJ, Gutierrez PM. An investigation of differences between self-injurious behavior and suicide attempts in a sample of adolescents. Suicide Life Threat Behav. 2004;34:12–23.
• World Health Organization. International Classification of Diseases, 11th Revision (ICD-11). Geneva, World Health Organization (WHO), 2019.
• In-Albon T, Ruf C, Schmid M. Proposed diagnostic criteria for the DSM-5 of nonsuicidal self-injury in female adolescents: diagnostic and clinical correlates. Psychiatry J. 2013;1:159208.
• Glenn CR, Klonsky ED. Nonsuicidal self-injury disorder: an empirical investigation in adolescent psychiatric patients. J Clin Child Adolesc Psychol. 2013;42:496–507.
• American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th ed.(DSM-5). Arlington, VA, American Psychiatric Publishing. 2013.
• Zetterqvist, M. The DSM-5 diagnosis of nonsuicidal self-injury disorder: a review of the empirical literature. Child Adolesc Psychiatry Ment Health. 2015;9:31.
• Selby EA, Bender TW, Gordon KH, Nock MK, Joiner TE Jr. Non-suicidal self-injury (NSSI) disorder: A preliminary study. Personal Disord. 2012;3:167–75.
• Lloyd-Richardson EE, Perrine N, Dierker L, Kelley ML. Characteristics and functions of non-suicidal self-injury in a community sample of adolescents. Psychol Med. 2007;37:1183–92.
• Zetterqvist M, Lundh LG, Ö D, Svedin CG. Prevalence and function of non-suicidal self-injury (NSSI) in a community sample of adolescents, using suggested DSM-5 criteria for a potential NSSI disorder. J Abnorm Child Psychol. 2013;41:759–73.
• Washburn JJ, Potthoff LM, Juzwin KR, Styer DM. Assessing DSM–5 nonsuicidal self-injury disorder in a clinical sample. Psychol Assess. 2015;27:31–41.
• Muehlenkamp JJ, Brausch AM, Washburn JJ. How much is enough? Examining frequency criteria for NSSI disorder in adolescent inpatients. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2017;85:611–9.
• Nock MK, Prinstein MJ. A functional approach to the assessment of self-mutilative behavior. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2004;72:885–90.
• Edmondson AJ, Brennan CA, House AO. Non-suicidal reasons for self-harm: A systematic review of self-reported accounts. J Affect Disord. 2016;191:109–17.
• Hooley JM, Franklin JC. Why do people hurt themselves? A new conceptual model of nonsuicidal self-injury. Clin Psychol Sci. 2018;6:428–51.
• Whitlock J, Eckenrode J, Silverman D. Self-injurious behaviors in a college population. Pediatrics. 2008;117:1939–48.
• Nock MK, Kessler RC. Prevalence of and risk factors for suicide attempts versus suicide gestures: Analysis of the National Comorbidity Survey. J Abnorm Psychol. 2006;115:616–23.
• Angst F, Stassen HH, Clayton PJ, Angst J. Mortality of patients with mood disorders: follow-up over 34–38 years. J Affect Disord. 2001;68:167–81.
• Kochanek KD, Murphy SL, Anderson RN, Scott, C. Deaths: Final data for 2002. Natl Vital Stat Rep. 2004;53:1–116.
• CDC. CDC WONDER: About multiple causes of death, 2018-2022. Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Center for Health Statistics, National Vital Statistics System, CDC; 2024. Available online: https://wonder.cdc.gov/mcd-icd10-expanded.html (accessed on 7 April 2025).
• Fox KR, Franklin JC, Ribeiro JD, Kleiman EM, Bentley KH, Nock MK. Meta-analysis of risk factors for nonsuicidal self-injury. Clin Psychol Rev. 2017;56:13–32.
• Valencia-Agudo F, Burcher GC, Ezpeleta L, Kramer T. Nonsuicidal self-injury in community adolescents: A systematic review of prospective predictors, mediators and moderators. J Adolesc. 2018;65:25–38.
• Sansone RA, Wiederman MW, Sansone LA. The Self-Harm Inventory (SHI): Development of a scale for identifying self-destructive behaviors and borderline personality disorder. J Clin Psychol. 1998;54:973–83.
• Gratz KL. Measurement of deliberate self-harm: Preliminary data on the Deliberate Self-Harm Inventory. J Psychopathol Behav Assess. 2001;23:253–63.
• Lim S, Han CE, Uhlhaas PJ, Kaiser M. Cross-cultural and linguistic challenges in adapting psychological measures: A call for methodological improvements. Psychol Assess. 2019;31:731–42.
• Tabachnick BG, Fidell LS, Ullman JB. Using multivariate statistics, (6th ed.). Boston, US. Pearson; 2013. p. 497–516.
• Kim KL, Galione J, Davila M, Telzer E, Spirito A. Development and validation of the Self-Harm Screening Inventory (SHSI) for adolescents. Assess. 2022;29:1012–26.
• Rogers ML, Law KC, Houtsma C, Tucker RP, Anestis MD, Joiner TE. Development and initial validation of a scale assessing suicide-specific rumination: The suicide rumination scale. Assess. 2022;29:1777–94.
• Erdem M, Akıncı H, Uyanık Negiz Z. İntihar Ruminasyon Ölçeği’nin Türkçeye Uyarlanması: Geçerlilik ve Güvenirlilik Çalışması. Turkiye Klinikleri J Health Sci. 2024;9:202–9.
• Derogatis LR. Symptom Checklist-90-R. (SCL-90-R) Administration, Scoring, and Procedures Manual, 3rd Ed., Minneapolis, NCS Pearson, 1994.
• Şahin NH, Durak A. Kısa Semptom Envanteri: Türk gençleri için uyarlanması. Turk Psikoloji Derg. 1994;9:44–56.
• Chalmers RP. mirt: A multidimensional item response theory package for the R environment. J Stat Softw. 2012;48:1–29.
• DeVellis RF. Scale Development: Theory and Applications, 4th Ed., Thousand Oaks, California, SAGE Publications. 2017.
• Embretson SE, Reise SP. Item Response Theory for Psychologists, Mahwah Township, NJ, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. 2000.
• Hawton K, Cole D, O’Grady J, Osborn M. Motivational aspects of deliberate self- poisoning in adolescents. Br J Psychiatry. 1982;141:286–91.
• St. Germain SA, Hooley JM. Direct and indirect forms of non-suicidal self-injury: Evidence for a distinction. Psychiatry Res. 2012;197:78–84.
• Muehlenkamp JJ. Self-injurious behavior as a separate clinical syndrome. Am J Orthopsychiatry. 2005;75:324–33.
• Klonsky ED, Glenn CR. Assessing the functions of non-suicidal self-injury: Psychometric properties of the Inventory of Statements About Self-injury (ISAS). J Psychopathol Behav Assess. 2009;31:215–9.
• Fox KR, Toole KE, Franklin JC, Hooley JM. Why does nonsuicidal self-injury improve mood? A preliminary test of three hypotheses. Clin Psychol Sci. 2017;5:111–21.
• Whitlock J, Muehlenkamp J, Eckenrode J. Variation in nonsuicidal self-injury: Identification and features of latent classes in a college population of emerging adults. J Clin Child Adolesc Psychol. 2008;37:725–35.
• Borschmann R, Hogg J, Phillips R, Moran P. Measuring self-harm in adults: a systematic review. Eur Psychiatry. 2012;27:176–80.
• Hooley JM, Fox KR, Boccagno C. Nonsuicidal self-injury: diagnostic challenges and current perspectives. Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat. 2020;16:101–12.
• Baker FB. The Basics of Item Response Theory, 2nd Ed., Washington, DC, ERIC Clearinghouse on Assessment and Evaluation, 2001.
• Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Guillemin F, Ferraz MB. Guidelines for the process of Cross-Cultural adaptation of Self-Report measures. Spine. 2000;25:3186–91.