DUYGUSAL ÖZ-YETERLİK ÖLÇEĞİNİN TÜRKÇEYE UYARLANARAK TEK VE DÖRT FAKTÖRLÜ YAPISININ PSİKOMETRİK ÖZELLİKLERİNİN İNCELENMESİ

Yıl 2010, Sayı: 28, 71 - 95, 01.12.2010

Tarık Totan Ebru İkiz Rengin Karaca

Öz

Bu araştırmanın amacı Kirk, Shutte ve Hine (2008) tarafından geliştirilen Duygusal Öz-Yeterlik Ölçeğinin Türkçeye uyarlama çalışmalarının yapılarak ölçeğin psikometrik özelliklerinin incelenmesidir. Ölçek özgün halinde tek boyutta 32 maddeden oluşan beşli Likert tipi bir ölçme aracıdır. Araştırmanın katılımcılarını Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi, Buca Eğitim Fakültesinde eğitim alan 411 üniversite öğrenci oluşturmuştur (%56,20’si kadın, n= 231;  %43,80’si erkek n= 180). Çeviri işlemleri sonrasında dil geçerliği yapılan ölçeğin hedef formu ve özgün formu arasında önemli ilişkilerin varlığı belirlenmiştir. Yapı geçerliği çalışmasında Betimleyici ve Doğrulayıcı Faktör Analizleriyle ölçeğin özgün formunu koruduğuna ulaşılmıştır. Ayrıca ölçeğin kuramsal olarak ortaya konan dört boyutlu yapıya da Duyguları Algılama, Duyguları Düşünceyi Destekleyici Olarak Kullanma, Duyguları Anlama ve Duyguları Düzenleme olarak sahip olduğu anlaşılmıştır. İç tutarlılık ve test tekrar test güvenirliği çalışmaları sonucunda ölçeğin kararlı bir ölçme aracı olduğuna ulaşılmıştır. Ayırt edici geçerlilik çalışmasında Duyguları Düzenleme, Duyguları Düşünceyi Destekleyici Olarak Kullanma ve Duygusal Öz-Yeterlikte araştırma katılımcılarının ortalamalarının onların cinsiyetlerine göre önemli farklılıklar göstermediği anlaşılmakla birlikte kadınların Duyguları Anlama ve Duyguları Algılama düzeylerinin erkeklere göre önemli düzeyde daha yüksek olduğu belirlenmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Duygusal öz-yeterlik, öz-yeterlik, duygusal zekâ, psikometri, ölçek uyarlama

THE ADATATION OF THE EMOTIONAL SELF-EFFICACY SCALE TO TURKISH UNIVESITY STUDENTS AND THE EXAMINATION OF THE PSYCHOMETRIC CHARACTERISTICS OF ITS STRUCTURE IN ONE AND FOUR FACTORS

Öz

The aim of this research is to examine the psychometric characteristics of the scale by the adaptation study of The Emotional Self-efficacy Scale which is developed by Kirk, Shutte, & Hine (2008). The scale consists of 32 items in Likert style in its original form. The sample of this study is made of 411 university students in the Buca Education Faculty of Dokuz Eylül University in the year 2008-2009 (women n= 231, 56.20% and men n= 180, 43.80%). After the translation study of the scale it is accepted that it has language validity. It means that there is statistically significant relationship between the target and the original form. It is understood that the scale has preserved its original form by the exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis in the study of construct validity. Also it is understood that the scale had perceiving emotions in self and others (Perceive), using emotions to assist thought (Assist), understanding emotions and emotional knowledge in the self and others (Understand), and regulating in the self and others (Regulate) which are the dimensions of the theory it (Mayer, Salovey, & Caruso, 2004). At the end of internal reliability and test re-test validity studies it is concluded that the scale had stability. In the discriminant validity study it is understood that there was no significant differences in the dimensions of Regulate, Assist, and Emotional Self-efficacy according to gender. But it is found that women’s' Understand and Perceive levels were higher than men’s' levels.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Emotional self-efficacy, self-efficacy, emotional intelligence, psychometry, scale adaptation

Kaynakça

• Alpar, R. (2003). Uygulamalı çok değişkenli istatistiksel yöntemlere giriş 1. (2. Baskı). Ankara: Nobel Yayınevi.
• Averill, J. R. ve Nunley, E. P. (1992). Voyages of the heart: Living an emotionally creative life. New York: Free Press
• Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W. H. Freeman and Company.
• Blunch, N. J. (2008). Introduction to structural equation modelling. Using SPSS and AMOS.
• Londra: SAGE Publication Ltd. Brackett, M. A. ve Mayer, J. D. (2003). Convergent, discriminant, and incremental validity of competing measures of emotional intelligence. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29(9), 1147–1158. doi: 10.1177/0146167203254596
• Brown, T. A. (2006). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. New York: The Guilford Press.
• Buck, R. (1984). The communication of emotion. New York: Guilford.
• Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2007). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı. İstatistik, araştırma deseni
• SPSS uygulamaları ve yorum. (7. Baskı). Ankara: Pegem A Yayıncılık. Cisrrochi, J., Chan, A. Y. C. ve Bajgar, J. (2001). Measuring emotional intelligence in adolescents. Personality and Individual Differences, 31(7), 1105-1119. doi: 10.1016 /S0191-8869(00)00207-5
• Çokluk, Ö., Şekercioğlu, G. ve Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2010). Sosyal bilimler için çok değişkenli istatistik. SPSS ve LISREL uygulamaları. Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
• Ekman, P. (1973). Darwin and facial expression: A century of research in review. New York: Academic.
• Farrell, A. M. ve Rudd, J. M. (2009). Factor analysis and discriminant validity: A brief review of some practical issues. Australia-New Zealand Marketing Academy Conference
• (ANZMAC), 30 Kasım - 2 Aralık, Melbourne, Australia. İnternetten 01.10.2010 tarihinde http://www.duplication.net.au/ANZMAC09/papers/ANZMAC2009-389.pdf adresinden alındı.
• Field, A. (2005). Statistics using SPSS. (2. Baskı). California: SAGE Publications Ltd.
• Frijda, N. H. (1988). The laws of emotion. American Psychologist, 43(5), 349–358.
• Green, S. B. ve Salkind, N. J. (2008). Using SPSS for Windows and Macintosh: Analyzing and understanding data. Upper Saddle River: Pearson, Prentice Hall.
• Gross, J. J. (1998). The emerging field of emotional regulation: An integrative review. Review of
• General Psychology, 2(3), 271–299. Jöreskog, K. G. ve Sörbom, D. (1993). LISREL 8: Structural equation modeling with the SIMPLIS command language. New York: Scientific Software International, Inc.
• Hambleton, R. K. (2005). Issues, designs, and technical guidelines for adapting tests into multiple languages and cultures. İçinde R. K. Hambleton, P. F. Merenda ve C. D. Spielberger
• (Eds.). Adapting educational and psychological tests for cross-cultural assessment. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Hoe, S. L. (2008). Issues and procedures in adopting structural equation modeling technique.
• Journal of Applied Quantitative Methods, 3(1), 76-83. Hooper, D., Coughlan, J. ve Mullen, M. (2008). Structural equation modeling: Guidelines for determining model fit. The Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 6(1), 53-60.
• Hu, L. ve 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
• Izard, C. E. (1993). Four systems for emotion activation: Cognitive and non-cognitive processes.
• Psychological Review, 100(1), 68–90. Jöreskog, K. G. ve Sörbom, D. (2006). LISREL 8.80 for Windows [Computer Software].
• Lincolnwood, IL: Scientific Software International, Inc. Kayış, A. (2008). Güvenirlik analizi. İçinde Ş. Kalaycı (Ed.). SPSS uygulamalı çok değişkenli istatistik teknikleri. (3. Baskı). Ankara: Asil Yayın Dağıtım.
• Kelloway, E. K. (1998). Using LISREL for structural equation modeling. A researcher’s guide.
• California: SAGE Publisher, Inc. Kırtıl, S. (2009). İlköğretim ikinci kademe öğrencilerinin duygusal zekâ düzeyleri ile yaşam doyumu düzeylerinin incelenmesi. Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi. Dokuz Eylül
• Üniversitesi, Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, İzmir. Kirk, B. A., Schutte, N. S. ve Hine, D. W. (2008). Development and preliminary validation of an emotional self-efficacy scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 45(5), 432-436. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2008.06.010
• Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equations modeling. (2. Baskı). New York: Guilford.
• Lane, R. D., Quinlan, D. M., Schwartz, G. E., Walker, P. A. ve Zeitlin, S. B. (1990). The Levels of Emotional Awareness Scale: A cognitive-developmental measure of emotion. Journal of
• Personality Assessment, 55(1-2), 124–134. Lei, P. ve Wu, Q. (2007). Introduction to structural equation modeling: Issues and practical considerations. Insructional Topics in Educational Measurement, 26(3), 33-43.
• Matthews, G., Zeidner, M. ve Roberts, R. (2002). Emotional intelligence: Science and myth. Cambridge: MIT Press.
• Mayer, J. D. (1998). A systems framework for the field of personality psychology. Psychological Inquiry, 9(2), 118–144.
• Mayer, J. D. (2001). Primary divisions of personality and their scientific contributions: From the trilogy-of-mind to the systems set. Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior, 31(4), 449
• Mayer, J. D. ve Mitchell, D. C. (1998). Intelligence as a subsystem of personality: From
• Spearman’s g to contemporary models of hot processing. İçinde W. Tomic ve J. Kingma (Eds.), Advances in cognition and educational practice (Cilt. 5, syf. 43–75). Connecticut: JAI. Mayer, J. D. ve Salovey, P. (1990). The Intelligence of Emotional Intelligence. Intelligence, (4), 433-442
• Mayer, J. D. ve Salovey, P. (1997). What is emotional intelligence? İçinde P. Salovey ve D. J.
• Sluyter (Eds.), Emotional development and emotional intelligence (syf. 396–420). New York: Basic Books. Mayer, J. D., Salovey, P. ve Caruso, D. R. (1999). Emotional intelligence meets traditional standarts for an intelligence. Intelligence, 27(4), 267-298.
• Mayer, J. D., Salovey, P. ve Caruso, D. R. (2004). Emotional intelligence: Theory, Şndings, and implications. Psychological Inquiry, 15(3), 197–215.
• Mulaik, S. A. (2009). Linear causal modeling with structural equations. Florida: Taylor ve Francis Group.
• Muthén, L. K. ve Muthén, B. O. (2002). How to use a Monte Carlo study to decide on sample size and determine power. Structural Equation Modeling, 9(4), 599-620.
• Ortony, A., Clore, G. L. ve Collins, A. M. (1988). The cognitive structure of emotions.
• Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Özdamar, K. (2004). Paket programlar ile istatistiksel veri analizi 1. (5. Baskı). Eskişehir: Kaan Kitabevi.
• PAWS (2009). PASW Statistics 18 core system user’s guide. Chicago, IL: SPSS Inc.
• Parrott, W. G. (2002). The functional utility of negative emotions. İçinde L. F. Barrett ve P.
• Salovey (Eds.), The wisdom in feeling: Psychological processes in emotional intelligence (syf. 341–359). New York: Guilford Press. Petrides, K. V. ve Furnham, A. (2000). On the dimensional structure of emotional intelligence.
• Personality and Individual Differences, 29(2), 313–320. Petrides, K. V. ve Furnham, A. (2001). Trait emotional intelligence: Psychometric investigation with reference to established trait taxonomies. European Journal of Personality, 15(6), –448. doi: 10.1002/per.416
• Petrides, K. V. ve Furnham, A. (2003). Trait emotional intelligence: Behavioral validation in two studies of emotion recognition and reactivity to mood induction. European Journal of
• Personality, 17(1), 39–57. doi: 10.1002/per.46
• Petrides, K. V., Sangareasu, Y., Furnham, A. ve Fredrickson, N. (2006). Trait emotional intelligence and children’s peer relations at school. Social Development, 15(3), 537–547.
• Raykov, T. ve Marcoulides, G. A. (2006). A first course in structural equation modeling. (2. Baskı). New Jersey: Lawrance Erlbaum Ass.
• Roseman, I. (1984). Cognitive determinants of emotions: A structural theory. İçinde P. Shaver
• (Ed.), Review of personality and social psychology: Cilt 5. Emotions, relationships, and health (syf. 11–36). California: Sage Publications. Schermelleh-Engel, K., Moosbrugger, H. ve Müller, H. (2003). Evaluating the fit of structural equation models: Tests of significance and descriptive goodness-of-fit measures. Methods of Psychological Research Online, 8(2), 23-74.
• Scherer, K. R. (1993). Studying the emotion-antecedent appraisal process: An expert system approach. Cognition and Emotion, 7(3-4), 325–355.
• Scherer, K. R., Banse, R. ve Wallbott, H. G. (2001). Emotion inferences from vocal expression correlate across languages and cultures. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 32(1), 76–
• Schutte, N. S. ve diğ. (1998). Development and validation of a measure of emotional intelligence.
• Personality and Individual Differences, 25(2), 167–177. Schutte, N. S., Malouff, J. M., Simunek, M., McKenley, J. ve Hollander, S. (2002). Characteristic emotional intelligence and emotional well-being. Cognition and Emotion, 16(6), 769–785. doi: 10.1080/02699930143000482
• Schutte, N. S., Malouff, J. M., Thorsteinsson, E. B., Bhullar, N. ve Rooke, S. (2007). A meta- analytic investigation of the relationship between emotional intelligence and health.
• Personality and Individual Differences, 42(6), 921–933. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2006.09.003
• Shevlin, M. ve Miles, J. N. V. (1998). Effect of sample size, model specification and factor loadings on the GFI in confirmatory factor analysis. Personality and Individual Differences, , 85-90.
• Sümer, N. (2000). Yapısal eşitlik modelleri. Türk Psikoloji Yazıları, 3(6), 49-74.
• Şimşek, Ö. F. (2007). Yapısal eşitlik modellemesine giriş: Temel ilkeler ve LISREL uygulamaları.
• Ankara: Ekinoks Yayıncılık. Tran, T. V. (2009). Developing cross-cultural measurement. New York: Oxford University Press.
• Van Rooy, D. L. ve Viswesvaran, C. (2004). Emotional intelligence: A meta-analytic investigation of predictive validity and nomological net. Journal of Vocational Behavior, (1), 71–95. doi:10.1016/S0001-8791(03)00076-9
• Wessinger, H. (1998). Emotional intelligence at work. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Inc.
• Yılmaz, V. ve Çelik, H. E. (2009). LISREL ile yapısal eşitlik modellemesi 1. Temel kavramlar, uygulamalar, programlama. Ankara: Pegem Akademi.