SİBER ZORBALIK ÇALIŞMALARINDA SOSYAL BEĞENİRLİK ETMENİ

Yıl 2016, , 1 - 18, 27.07.2016

Onur Dönmez , Yavuz Akbulut

https://doi.org/10.17943/etku.19033

Cited By: 3

Öz

Bu araştırmada öz-bildirime dayalı siber zorbalık davranışını irdeleyen çalışmalardaki sosyal beğenirlik olasılığı iki farklı çalışma ile irdelenmiştir. İlk çalışmaya Türkiye’deki bir devlet üniversitesinden 76 öğretmen adayı katılmıştır. Sosyal beğenirliğin incelenmesi için zaman serili bir desen kullanılmış; 20 maddelik bir siber zorbalık ölçeği, ikişer haftalık aralıklarla üç kez uygulanmış, her uygulama için katılımcılara ek puan verilmiştir. İlk uygulamada, verilen davranışların ahlaki açıdan uygunluğu; ikinci uygulamada bu davranışları çevrede görme sıklığı; üçüncü uygulamada ise kendilerinin gerçekleştirme sıklıkları sorulmuştur. Ödül puanların dağıtılabilmesi için katılımcılardan ölçek formlarına kimliklerini belirten notlar eklemeleri istenmiş, böylece anonimlik algıları ihlal edilerek sosyal beğenirlik ön plana çıkartılmıştır. Bulgular, uygun bulma, gerçekleştirme ve çevrede gözlemleme ortalamaları arasında oldukça anlamlı fark olduğunu, değişkenler arasında anlamlı ilişkiler bulunduğunu, ancak uygun görme ve gerçekleştirme ortalamalarının oldukça çarpık bir dağılım sergilediğini ortaya koymuştur. İkinci çalışma çevrimiçi bir ortamda yine öğretmen adayları ile gerçekleştirilmiş (n: 76), bu kez anonim bir uygulama yapılarak siber zorbalık ölçeğinin üç formunun yanı sıra güncel bir sosyal beğenirlik ölçeği uygulanmıştır. Bulgular, ilk çalışma ile büyük ölçüde paralellik göstermiş, ayrıca siber zorbalık gerçekleştirme ile sosyal beğenirliğin izlenim yönetimi boyutu arasında anlamlı ilişki bulunmuştur. Anonim ya da kimlik bilgileri alınarak toplanan veriler arasında fark gözlemlenmezken, cinsiyet farklarının sosyal beğenirlikten etkilendiği görülmüştür.

Kaynakça

• Aboujaoude, E., Savage, M. W., Starcevic, V. ve Salame, W. O. (2015). Cyberbullying: review of an old problem gone viral. Journal of Adolescent Health, 57(1), 10-18.
• Akbulut, Y. ve Çuhadar, C. (2011). Reflections of preservice information technology teachers regarding cyberbullying. Turkish Online Journal of Qualitative Inquiry, 2(3), 67-76.
• Akbulut, Y. ve Eristi, B. (2011). Cyberbullying and victimization among Turkish university students. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 27(7), 1155-1170.
• Akbulut, Y., Sahin, Y. L. ve Eristi, B. (2010a). Cyberbullying victimization among Turkish online social utility members. Educational Technology & Society, 13(4), 192–201.
• Akbulut, Y., Şahin, Y. L. ve Erişti, B. (2010b). Development of a scale to investigate cybervictimization among online social utility members. Contemporary Educational Technology, 1(1), 46-59.
• Akın, A. (2010). İki boyutlu sosyal istenirlik ölçeğinin geliştirilmesi ve psikometrik özelliklerinin araştırılması. Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, (30)3, 771-784.
• Ang, R. P. ve Goh, D. H. (2010). Cyberbullying among adolescents: The role of affective and cognitive empathy, and gender. Child Psychiatry & Human Development, 41(4), 387-397.
• Ang, R. P., Tan, K. A. ve Mansor, A. T. (2011). Normative beliefs about aggression as a mediator of narcissistic exploitativeness and cyberbullying. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 26(13), 2619-2634.
• Arıcak, O. T. (2009). Psychiatric symptomatology as a predictor of cyberbullying among university students. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 34, 167–184.
• Arnold, H. J. ve Feldman, D. C. (1981). Social desirability response bias in self-report choice situations. Academy of Management Journal, 24(2), 377-385.
• Bauman, S. (2010). Cyberbullying in a rural intermediate school: An exploratory study. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 30(6), 803-833.
• Bauman, S. ve Newman, M. L. (2013). Testing assumptions about cyberbullying: Perceived distress associated with acts of conventional and cyber bullying. Psychology of violence, 3(1), 27-38.
• Beran, T. ve Li, Q. (2005). Cyber–harassment: a study of new method for an old behavior. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 32(3), 265–277.
• Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2015). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı: İstatistik, araştırma deseni, SPSS uygulamaları ve yorum (Genişletilmiş 21. Baskı). Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
• Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioural sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale , NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.
• Çelik, S., Atak, H. ve Erguzen, A. (2012). The effect of personality on cyberbullying among university students in Turkey. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 49, 129-150.
• DeVellis, R.F. (2003). Scale development: Theory and applications (2nd ed). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
• Dickson, J. P. (1997). Improving survey questions: Design and evaluation. Journal of Marketing Research, 34(2), 296.
• Doane, A., Kelley, M.L., Chiang, E.S. ve Padilla, M.A. (2013).Development of the Cyberbullying Experiences Survey. Emerging Adulthood, 1(3), 207-218.
• Edwards, A. L. (1957). The social desirability variable in personality assessment and research. New York: Dryden
• Espinoza, G., ve Juvonen, J. (2013). Methods used in cyberbullying research. İçinde Bauman, S., Cross, D. ve Walker, J. (Ed.), Principles of cyberbullying research: Definitions, measures, and methodology (112-124). New York: Routledge
• Feinberg, T. ve Robey, N. (2008). Cyberbullying. Principal Leadership, 9 (1), 10-14.
• Field, A. (2009). Discovering statistics using SPSS. London: Sage.
• Groves, R. M., Singer, E. ve Corning, A. (2000). Leverage-Saliency Theory of survey participation: Description and an illustration. The Public Opinion Quarterly,64(3), 299–308.
• Huck, S. (2012). Reading statistics and research (6.baskı). Boston: Pearson.
• Hutcheson, G. and Sofroniou, N. (1999). The multivariate social scientist introductory statistics using generalized linear models. London Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage Publications.
• Krumpal, I. (2013). Determinants of social desirability bias in sensitive surveys: a literature review. Quality & Quantity, 47(4), 2025-2047.
• King, M. F. ve Bruner, G. C. (2000). Social desirability bias: A neglected aspect of validity testing. Psychology and Marketing, 17(2), 79-103.
• Kline, P. (1999). The handbook of psychological testing (2nd Ed.). Routledge, London.
• König, A., Gollwitzer, M. ve Steffgen, G. (2010). Cyberbullying as an act of revenge? Australian Journal of Guidance & Counselling, 20(2), 210-224.
• Lee, C. (2004). Preventing bullying in schools: A guide for teachers and other professionals. London: Paul Chapman Publishing.
• Lee, R. M. ve Renzetti, C. M. (1990). The problems of researching sensitive topics an overview and introduction. The American Behavioral Scientist (1986-1994), 33(5), 510.
• Menesini, E. ve Nocentini, A. (2009). Cyberbullying definition and measurement: Some critical considerations. Zeitschrift für Psychologie/Journal of Psychology, 217(4), 230-232.
• Miller, A. L. (2012). Investigating social desirability bias in student self-report surveys. Educational Research Quarterly, 36(1), 30.
• Merydith, S. P., Prout, H. T. ve Blaha, J. (2003). Social desirability and behavior rating scales: An exploratory study with the child behavior checklist/4–18. Psychology in the Schools, 40(2), 225-235.
• Navarro, R., Yubero, S., Larranaga, E. ve Martínez, V. (2012). Children’s cyberbullying victimization: Associations with social anxiety and social competence in a Spanish sample. Child indicators research, 5(2), 281-295.
• Pallant, J. (2001). SPSS survival manual. Maidenhead, PA: Open University Press.
• Patchin, J. W. ve Hinduja, S. (2010). Cyberbullying and self-esteem. Journal of School Health, 80 (12), 614-621.
• Paulhus, D. L. (1984). Two-component models of socially desirable responding. Journal of personality and social psychology, 46(3), 598-609.
• Phillips, D. L. ve Clancy, K. J. (1972). Some effects of social desirability in survey studies. American Journal of Sociology, 77(5), 921-940.
• Poulou, M. (2001) The role of vignettes in the research of emotional and behavioural difficulties, Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties, 6(1), 50-62.
• Randall, D. M. ve Fernandes, M. F. (1991). The social desirability response bias in ethics research. Journal of Business Ethics,10(11), 805-817.
• Rasinski, K. A., Baldwin, A. K., Willis, G. B. ve Jobe, J. B. (1994). Risk and loss perceptions associated with survey reporting of sensitive behaviors. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Statistical Association, Toronto, Canada
• Singer, E. (2004). Confidentiality, risk perception, and survey participation. Chance, 17(3), 30-34.
• Singer, E., Mathiowetz, N. ve Couper, M.P. (1993). The role of privacy and confidentiality as factors in response to the 1990 census. Public Opinion Quarterly, 57, 465-82.
• Singer, E., Van Hoewyk, J. ve Neugebauer, R.J. (2003). Attitudes and behavior: The impact of privacy and confidentiality concerns on survey participation: The case of the 2000 census. Public Opinion Quarterly, 67, 368-84.
• Sontag, L. M., Clemans, K. H., Graber, J. A., & Lyndon, S. T. (2011). Traditional and cyber aggressors and victims: A comparison of psychosocial characteristics. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 40(4), 392-404.
• Stocke, V. (2010). The interdependence of determinants for the strength and direction of social disirability bias in racial attitude surveys. Journal of Official Statistics, 23(4), 493-514.
• Tabachnick, B. ve Fidell, L. (2007). Using multivariate statistics. Boston: Pearson/Allyn & Bacon.
• Topçu, Ç., Erdur-Baker, Ö. ve Çapa-Aydın, Y. (2008). Examination of cyberbullying experiences among Turkish students from different school types. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 11(6), 643-648.
• Topcu, Ç. ve Erdur-Baker, Ö. (2012). Affective and cognitive empathy as mediators of gender differences in cyber and traditional bullying. School Psychology International, 33(5), 550-561.
• Tourangeau, R. ve Yan, T. (2007). Sensitive questions in surveys. Psychological bulletin, 133(5), 859.
• Vigil-Colet, A. V., Ruiz-Pamies, M., Anguiano-Carrasco, C. ve Lorenzo-Seva, U. (2012). The impact of social desirability on psychometric measures of aggression. Psicothema, 24(2), 310-315.
• Walrave, M. ve Heirman, W. (2011). Cyberbullying: Predicting victimisation and perpetration. Children & Society, 25(1), 59-72.
• Worthington, R.L. ve Whittaker, T. A. (2006). Scale development research: A content analysis and recommendations for best practices. The Counseling Psychologist, 34, 806-838.
• Zweig, J. M., Dank, M., Yahner, J. ve Lachman, P. (2013). The rate of cyber dating abuse among teens and how it relates to other forms of teen dating violence. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 42, 1063-1077.