Karmaşık Soyut Ötesi Düşünme Ölçeğini Uyarlama Çalışması

Yıl 2021, Cilt: 8 Sayı: 1, 26 - 38, 28.06.2021

Mehmet Başaran Ayşe Dilek Öğretir Özçelik

https://doi.org/10.51725/etad.797877

Cited By: 1

Öz

Soyut işlem döneminden sonra ortaya çıktığı kabul edilen soyut ötesi düşünme, yetişkinlerin soyut işlemler döneminden farklı olarak düşündüğünü ifade etmektedir. Soyut işlemler dönemiyle karşılaştırıldığında bu düşünme türünün daha karmaşık, dinamik, esnek ve bağlamsal temelli olduğu bulunmuştur. Bu doğrultuda araştırmanın amacı son zamanlarda kavramsallaştırılan soyut ötesi düşünmeyi ölçmek için Karmaşık Soyut Ötesi Düşünme Ölçeğini Türkçeye uyarlamaktır. Araştırmanın çalışma grubu 161 lisans öğrencisinden oluşmaktadır. Yapılan analiz sonucunda ölçeğin kabul edilebilir güvenilirlik katsayısına sahip olduğu (α =.88); madde toplam korelasyonlarının ise .35 ile .71 arasında değiştiği görülmüştür. Karmaşık Soyut Ötesi Düşünme Ölçeğinin ölçüt geçerliliği için kullanılan Biliş İhtiyacı Ölçeği ile pozitif yönde anlamlı bir korelasyona sahip olduğu bulunmuştur. Sonuç olarak ölçeğinin geçerli ve güvenilir olduğu görülmüştür.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Bilişsel gelişim, Soyut ötesi düşünme, Geçerlik, Güvenirlik

A Study of Adapting the Complex Postformal Thought Scale

Öz

Postformal thought, which is accepted to emerge after the formal processing period, expresses that adults think differently from the formal processing period. Compared to the period of formal operations, this type of thought is more complex, dynamic, flexible and context-based. Accordingly, the aim of the research is to adapt the Complex Postformal Thought Scale to Turkish to measure the postformal thought that has recently been conceptualized. The study group of the research consists of 161 undergraduate students. As a result of the analysis, the scale has an acceptable reliability coefficient (α = 88); item total correlations were found to vary between .35 and .71. It was found that Complex Postformal Thought Scale has a statistically significant positive correlation with the Cognitive Need Scale scale used for criterion validity. As a result, the scale was found to be valid and reliable.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Cognitive development, Post formal thought, Validity, Reliability

Kaynakça

• Barrouillet, P. (2015). Theories of cognitive development: From Piaget to today. Development Rewiev, 38, 1-12.
• Berk, L.E. (2013). Çocuk Gelişimi. Ankara: İmge.
• Brown, T.A. (2006). Confirmatory factor analysis: For applied research. New York: Guilford.
• Byrne, B.M. ve Campbell, T.L. (1999). Cross-cultural comparisons and the presumption of equivalent measurement and theoretical structure: A look beneath the surface. Journal of Cross Cultural Psychology, 30, 555-574
• Cacioppo, J.T. ve Petty, R.E. (1982). The need for cognition. Jornal of Personality and Social Psychology. 42(1),116-131.
• Carey, S., Zaitchik, D. ve Bascandziev I. (2015). Theories of development: In dialog with Jean Piaget. Developmental Review, 38, 36-54.
• Cartwright, K.B., Galupo, M.P., Tyree, S.D. ve Jennings, J.G. (2009). Reliability and validity of the complex postformal thought questionnaire: Assessing adults’ cognitive development. Journal of Adult Development, 16(3), 183-189.
• Commons, M.L. ve Rodriguez, J.A. (1990). “Equal access” without “establishing” religion: The necessity for assessing social perspective-taking skills and institutional atmosphere. Developmental Review 10, 323–340.
• Commons, M.L. ve Ross, S.N. (2008). What postformal thought is, and why it matters. World Futures, 64(5-7) 321-329.
• Commons, M.L., Ross, S.N. ve Bresette, L.M. (2011). The connection between postformal thought, stage transition, persistence, and ambition and major scientific innovations. C. Hoare (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of reciprocal adult development and learning içinde, (s. 287-301). Oxford: Oxford Üniersitesi.
• Commons, M., Armon, C., Kohlberg, L., Richards, F., Grotzer, T. ve Sinnott, J.D. (Ed.) (1989). Beyond formal operations. Models and methods in the study of adult and adolescent thought. New York: Praeger.
• Copeland, R.W. (1979). How children learn mathematics: Teaching implications of Piaget’s research (3. Baskı). New York: Macmillan.
• Çokluk, Ö., Şekercioğlu, G. ve Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2012). Sosyal bilimler için çok değişkenli istatistik: Spss ve Lisrel uygulamaları. Ankara: Pegem.
• Galupo, M.P., Cartwright, K.B. ve Savage, L.S. (2010). Crosssocial category friendships as a context for Postformal cognitive development. Journal of Adult Development, 17, 208–214.
• Ghazi, S.R. ve Ullah, K. (2015). Concrete operational stage of Piaget’s cognitive development theory: An implication in learning general science. Gomal University Journal of Research, 31(1), 78-89.
• Griffin, J., Gooding, S., Semesky, M., Farmer, B., Mannchen, G. ve Sinnott, J. (2009). Four brief studies of relations between postformal thought and non-cognitive factors: Personality, concepts of god, political opinions, and social attitudes. Journal of Adult Development, 16(3), 173-182.
• Her, E.L.W. ve Haron, F. (2016). The association of giftedness, creativity, and postformal thinking in Malaysian adults. Advanced Development, 15, 47-60.
• Huitt, W. ve Hummel, J. (2003). Piaget's theory of cognitive development. Educational Psychology Interactive, 3(2), 1-5.
• Inhelder, B. ve Piaget, J. (1958). The growth of logical thinking from childhood to adolescence. An essay on the development of formal operational structures. New York: Basic Books.
• Johnson, L. (2004). Postformal thinking in the workplace. Stockholm: University of Stockholm.
• Jory, K., Trammell, J. ve Miller-Perrin, C. (2018). Marital satisfaction: The Role of post-formal thought and partner blame. Psi Chi Journal of Psychological Research, 23(4), 282-292.
• Kline, R.B. (2010). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York: Guilford.
• Laubouvie-Vief, G. (2006). Emerging structures of adult thought. J. J. Arnett ve J. L. Tanner (Ed.), Emerging adults in America: Coming of age in the 21st century içinde (s. 59-84). Washington, DC, US: American Psychological Association.
• Marchand, H. (2001). Some reflections on post-formal thought. The Genetic Epistemologist, 29(3), 2-9.
• Marsh, H.W., Hau, K.T., Artelt, C., Baumert, J. ve Peschar, J.L. (2006). OECD’s brief self-report measure of educational psychology’s most useful affective constructs: Cross-cultural, psychometric comparisons across 25 countrie. International Journal of Testing, 6(4), 311–360.
• McLaughlin, P.T., McMinn, M.R., Morse, M., Neff, M.A., Johnson, B., Summerer, D. ve Koskela, N. (2018). The effects of a wisdom intervention in a Christian congregation. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 13(5), 502-511.
• Nunnally, J.C. (1978). Psychometric testing. New York: McGraw-Hill.
• Pearson, S.C., Eddlemon, T., Kirkwood, M. ve Pate, A. (2018). Are fishbowl activities effective for teaching pharmacotherapy and developing postformal thought in pharmacy students? A pilot study. Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning, 10(8), 1070-1075.
• Perry, W.G. (1999). Forms of ethical and intellectual development in the college years: A scheme. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
• Santrock, J.W. (2012). Ergenlik. Ankara: Nobel.
• Senemoğlu, N. (2007). Gelişim öğrenme ve öğretim: Kuramdan uygulamaya. Ankara: Gönül.
• Sinnott, J.D. (1984). Postformal reasoning: The relativistic stage. M. Commons, F. Richards, ve C. Armon (Ed.), Beyond formal operations içinde (s. 298–325). New York: Praeger.
• Sinnott, J.D. ve Johnson, L. (1997). Brief report: Complex postformal thought in skilled research administrators. Journal of Adult Development, 4(1), 45.
• Sinnott, J.D. (1998). The development of logic in adulthood: Postformal thought and its applications. New York: Plenum.
• Sinnott, J.D. (2008). Cognitive and representational development in Adults. K. B. Cartwright (Ed.), Literacy processes: Cognitive flexibility in learning and teaching içinde (s. 42-71). NY: Guilford.
• Sinnott, J.D. (2009). Complex thought and construction of the self in the face of aging and death. Journal of Adult Development, 16(3), 155-165.
• Sinnott, J., Hilton, S., Wood, M., Spanos, E. ve Topel, R. (2016). Does motivation affect emerging adults’ intelligence and complex postformal problem solving?. Journal of Adult Development, 23(2), 69-78.
• Sinnott, J., Tobin, E., Chrzanowska, E. ve Hilton, S. (2017). The relationship between attachment style and postformal thought. Journal of Adult Development, 24(4), 239-251.
• Slavin, R.E. (2013). Eğitim psikolojisi. Ankara: Nobel.
• Strahan, D. (1983). The emergence of formal operations in adolescence. Transcendence, 11, 7-14.
• Sweller, J., Ayres, P. ve Kalyuga, S. (2011). Cognitive load theory. Londra: Springer.
• Trawick-Smith, J.W. (2013). Erken çocukluk döneminde gelişim: Çok kültürlü bir bakış açısı. Ankara: Nobel.
• Uçar, M.E. (2017). Biliş ihtiyacı benlik saygısı tamamlama ihtiyacı ve kimlik stilleri arasındaki ilişkiler. Bartın Üniversitesi Egitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 6(2), 640.
• Wu, P.L. ve Chiou, W.B. (2008). Postformal thinking and creativity among late adolescents: A Post-Piagetian approach. Adolescence, 43(170), 237-51.
• Wynn-Sr, C.T., Mosholder, R.S. ve Larsen, C.A. (2014). Measuring the Effects of problem-based learning on the development of postformal thinking skills and engagement of first-year learning community students. Learning Communities: Research ve Practice, 2(2), 1-31.
• Wynn, C.T., Mosholder, R.S. ve Larsen, C.A. (2016). Promoting postformal thinking in a US history survey course: A problem-based approach. Journal of College Teaching & Learning, 13(1), 1-20.