The Malevolent Creativity Behavior Scale: Turkish Adaptation, Validity and Reliability Study

Yıl 2024, Sayı: 61, 1810 - 1826, 27.09.2024

Gül Akben , Hamit Coşkun , Cantürk Akben

https://doi.org/10.53444/deubefd.1388714

Öz

The Malevolent Creativity Behavior Scale, developed by Hao et al. (2016), is a scale consisting of three factors: hurting people, lying, and playing tricks, with a total of 13 items. The purpose of the scale is to measure the dark and malevolent side of creativity. The absence of a suitable malevolent creativity scale in Turkish culture is a deficiency, and there is no valid and reliable measurement tool to be used with self-report methods in the hands of researchers who want to work on this subject. The aim of the current study is the adaptation of this scale, which measures malevolent creativity, into Turkish. The study consists of 555 participants. Both construct and criterion validity were examined in the context of the scale's validity. Confirmatory factor analysis was applied for construct validity, and the three-factor structure of the scale was found to be acceptable, χ2 = 222, df = 62 p < .001, TLI = .91, CFI = .93, RMSEA = .068, SRMR = .052. For criterion validity, the relationships between the sub-dimensions of the scale and various basic personality traits and dark triad personality traits were examined. The factors of the scale generally showed positive relationships with negative traits and negative relationships with positive traits. Reliability analysis included measures of internal consistency, composite reliability, and test-retest methods. The total Cronbach's alpha coefficient was .84, while the composite reliability coefficient was .90. For the test-retest, strong correlations were found between the studies conducted with 49 participants at a 15-day interval.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Confirmatory factor analysis, personality psychology, negative creativity, measurement in psychology, scale adaptation

Kötü Niyetli Yaratıcılık Ölçeği (KNYÖ): Türkçeye Uyarlama, Geçerlilik ve Güvenilirlik Çalışması

Öz

Hao ve ark. (2016) tarafından geliştirilen Kötü Niyetli Yaratıcılık Ölçeği (The Malevolent Creativity Behavior Scale); zarar verme, yalan söyleme ve kandırmaca olmak üzere üç faktörden ve 13 maddeden oluşan bir ölçektir. Ölçeğin amacı yaratıcılığın karanlık ve kötü niyetli tarafını ölçmektir. Türk kültürüne uygun bir kötü niyetli yaratıcılık ölçeğinin olmaması bir eksikliktir ve bu konuda çalışmak isteyen araştırmacıların elinde öz-bildirim yöntemiyle kullanılabilecek hiçbir geçerli ve güvenilir ölçüm aracı bulunmamaktadır. Mevcut çalışmanın amacı kötü niyetli yaratıcılığı ölçmeye yarayan bu ölçeği Türkçeye uyarlamaktır. Çalışma 555 katılımcıdan oluşmaktadır. Ölçeğin geçerlilik çalışması kapsamında yapı ve ölçüt geçerliliklerine bakılmıştır. Yapı geçerliliği için doğrulayıcı faktör analizi uygulanmıştır ve ölçeğin üç faktörlü yapısı kabul edilebilir bulunmuştur, χ2 = 222, sd = 62 p < .001, TLI = .91, CFI = .93, RMSEA = .068, SRMR = .052. Ölçüt geçerliliği için ölçeğin alt boyutlarının çeşitli temel kişilik özellikleri ve karanlık üçlü kişilik özellikleriyle ilişkilerine bakılmıştır. Ölçeğin faktörleri genel olarak olumsuz özelliklerle pozitif, olumlu özelliklerle negatif ilişkiler göstermiştir. Güvenilirlik çalışması için iç tutarlılık katsayısı, kompozit güvenilirlik katsayısı ve test-tekrar test yöntemi kullanılmıştır. Ölçeğin toplam Cronbahch alfa katsayısı .84 iken kompozit güvenilirlik katsayısı .90 bulunmuştur. Test-tekrar test için ise 15 gün arayla 49 katılımcıya yapılan uygulamalar arasında güçlü korelasyonlar tespit edilmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Doğrulayıcı faktör analizi, kişilik psikolojisi, negatif yaratıcılık, psikolojide ölçme, ölçek uyarlama

Kaynakça

• Aguilar-Alonso, A. (1996). Personality and creativity. Personality and Individual Differences, 21(6), 959–969. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(96)00162-6
• Akben, C. ve Coskun, H. (2019). Reintroduction of odor combined with cognitive stimulation supports creative ideation via memory retrieval mechanisms. Creativity Research Journal, 31(3), 309-319. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2019.1641686
• Akben, C. ve Coşkun, H. (2018). Mizah tarzlarının ve çeşitli kişilik özelliklerinin yaratıcılığa etkisi. Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi, Abant İzzet Baysal Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü.
• Amabile, T. M. (1983). The social psychology of creativity: A componential conceptualization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45(2), 357–376. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.45.2.357
• Amabile, T. M. (1989). Growing up creative: Nurturing a lifetime of creativity. New York: Crown.
• Anderson, N., De Dreu, C. K. W. ve Nijstad, B. A. (2004). The routinization of innovation research: A constructively critical review of the state-of-the-science. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25(2), 147–173. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.236
• Beaussart, M. L., Andrews, C. J., & Kaufman, J. C. (2013). Creative liars: The relationship between creativity and integrity. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 9, 129–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2012.10.003
• Browne, M. W. ve Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. K. A. Bollen ve J. S. Long (Eds), Testing structural equation models içinde (s.136–162). Sage.
• Coskun, H. ve Şenyurt, A. Y. (2015). Kişilik ve yaratıcılık ilişkisini inceleyen çalışmaların kullanılan ölçme araçlarına göre değerlendirilmesi. Kalem Uluslararası Eğitim ve İnsan Bilimleri Dergisi, 5(2), 35-65.
• Cropley, A. (2010). The dark side of creativity: what is it? The Dark Side of Creativity (1. baskı) içinde (s. 1-14). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
• Cropley, A. ve Cropley, D. (2011). Creativity and lawbreaking. Creativity Research Journal, 23(4), 313-320. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2011.621817
• Cropley, D. H., Kaufman, J. C. ve Cropley, A. J. (2008). Malevolent creativity: A functional model of creativity in terrorism and crime. Creativity Research Journal, 20(2), 105-115. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400410802059424
• Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2013). Creativity: The Psychology of Discovery and Invention (1. baskı). New York, NY: Harper Perennial Classics.
• Eisenman, R. (2008). Malevolent creativity in criminals. Creativity Research Journal, 20(2), 116-119. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400410802059465
• Furnham, A. ve Chamorro-Premuzic, T. (2004). Personality, intelligence, and art. Personality and Individual Differences, 36(3), 705-715. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(03)00128-4
• Gençöz, T. ve Öncül, Ö. (2012). Examination of personality characteristics in a Turkish sample: Development of basic personality traits inventory. The Journal of general psychology, 139(3), 194-216. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221309.2012.686932
• Gill, P., Horgan, J., Hunter, S. T. ve D. Cushenbery, L. (2013). Malevolent creativity in terrorist organizations. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 47(2), 125-151. https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.28
• Gino, F. ve Ariely, D. (2012). The dark side of creativity: Original thinkers can be more dishonest. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102(3), 445-459. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026406
• Guilford, J. P. (1950). Creativity. American Psychologist, 5(9), 444–454. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0063487
• Hao, N., Tang, M., Yang, J., Wang, Q. ve Runco, M. A. (2016). A new tool to measure malevolent creativity: The malevolent creativity behavior scale. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 1-7. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00682
• Harris, D. J. ve Reiter-Palmon, R. (2015). Fast and furious: the influence of implicit aggression, premeditation, and provoking situations on malevolent creativity. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 9(1), 54-64. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0038499
• Harris, D. J., Reiter-Palmon, R. ve Kaufman, J. C. (2013). The effect of emotional intelligence and task type on malevolent creativity. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 7(3), 237-244. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032139
• Hayduk, L. A. (1987). Structural equation modeling with LISR EL: Essentials and advances. Hopkins University Press.
• Hayduk, L. A. (1996). LISREL issues, debates, and strategies. Johns Hopkins University Press.
• Hu, L. ve Bentler, P. M. (1998). Fit indices in covariance structure modeling: Sensitivity to under parameterized model misspecification. Psychological Methods, 3, 424–453. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.3.4.424
• 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, 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
• James, K. ve Drown, D. (2008). Whether “malevolent” or “negative,” creativity is relevant to terrorism prevention: Lessons from 9/11 and hazardous material trucking. Creativity Research Journal, 20(2), 120-127. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400410802059648
• James, K., Brodersen, M. ve Jacob, E. (2004). Workplace affect and workplace creativity: A review and preliminary model. Human Performance, 17(2), 169–194. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327043hup1702_3
• James, K., Clark, K. ve Cropanzano, R. (1999). Positive and negative creativity in groups, institutions, and organizations: A model and theoretical extension. Creativity Research Journal, 12(3), 211-226. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326934crj1203_6
• Jia, X., Wang, Q. ve Lin, L. (2020). The relationship between childhood neglect and malevolent creativity: The mediating effect of the dark triad personality. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 1-11 https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.613695
• Jonason, P. K., Richardson, E. N. ve Potter, L. (2015). Self-reported creative ability and the Dark Triad traits: An exploratory study. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 9(4), 488-494. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000037
• Jones, D. N. ve Paulhus, D. L. (2014). Introducing the short dark triad (SD3) a brief measure of dark personality traits. Assessment, 21(1), 28-41. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191113514105
• Kapoor, H. ve Khan, A. (2016). The measurement of negative creativity: Metrics and relationships. Creativity Research Journal, 28(4), 407-416. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2016.1229977
• Kapoor, H. ve Khan, A. (2018). Creators and presses: The person–situation interaction in negative creativity. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 54(1), 75-89. https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.346
• Keith, Z. K. (2015). Multiple Regression and Beyond: An Introduction to Multiple Regression and Structural Equation Modeling (2. Baskı). Routledge
• King, L. A., Walker, L. M. ve Broyles, S. J. (1996). Creativity and the Five-Factor Model. Journal of Research in Personality, 30(2), 189–203. https://doi.org/10.1006/jrpe.1996.0013
• Kline, R. B. (1998). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. Guilford Press.
• Lebuda, I., Figura, B. ve Karwowski, M. (2021). Creativity and the Dark Triad: A meta-analysis. Journal of Research in Personality, 92, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2021.104088
• Lee, S. A. ve Dow, G. T. (2011). Malevolent creativity: Does personality influence malicious divergent thinking?. Creativity Research Journal, 23(2), 73-82. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2011.571179
• Loehlin, J. C. (2004). Latent variable models: An introduction to factor, path, and structural equation analysis. Lawrence Erlbaum
• Mayer, R. E. (1999). Fifty Years of Creativity Research. Handbook of Creativity (içinde). New York, NY: Macmillan.
• McLaren, R. B. (1993). The dark side of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 6(1-2), 137-144. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419309534472
• Meshkova, N., Enikolopov, S., Kudryavtsev, V., Kravtsov, O., Bochkova, M. ve Meshkov, I. (2020). Age and Gender Characteristics of Personality Predictors for Antisocial Creativity. Psychology. Journal of Higher School of Economics, 17(1), 60-72. https://doi.org/10.17323/1813-8918-2020-1-60-72
• Özsoy, E., Rauthmann, J.F., Jonason, P.K., ve Ardıç, K. (2017). Reliability and validity of the Turkish versions of Dark Triad Dirty Dozen (DTDD-T), Short Dark Triad (SD3-T), and Single Item Narcissism Scale (SINS-T). Personality and Individual Differences, 117, 11-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2017.05.019
• Paulus, P. ve Nijstad, B. (2003). Group creativity: An introduction. Group creativity: Innovation through collaboration içinde (3-11). New York: Oxford University Press.
• Rogers, C. R. (1954). Toward a theory of creativity. Institute of General Semantics, 11(4), 249-260.
• Runco, M. A. (1993). Creative morality: Intentional and unconventional. Creativity Research Journal, 6(1-2), 17-28. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419309534463
• Spooner, M. T. (2008). Commentary on malevolent creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 20(2), 128-129. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400410802059689
• Sternberg, R. J. ve Lubart, T. (1996). Investing in creativity. American Psychologist, 51(7), 677–688. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.51.7.677
• Torrance, E. P. (1965). Scientific views of creativity and factors affecting its growth. Creativity and Learning, 94, 663-681. 27 Ekim 2021, http://www.jstor.org/stable/20026936.
• Torrance, E. P. (1967). The Minnesota studies of creative behavior: National and international extensions. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 1(2), 137-154. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2162-6057.1967.tb00021.x
• Ullman, J. B. (2007). Structural equation modeling. B. G. Tabachnick ve L. S. Fidell (Ed.), Using multivariate statistics içinde. Pearson.
• Wuthrich, V. ve Bates, T. C. (2001). Schizotypy and latent inhibition: non-linear linkage between psychometric and cognitive markers. Personality and Individual Differences 30(5), 783–798. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(00)00071-4