Two Dimensional Social Desirability Scale: The Study Of Validity and Reliability

Öz

The aim of this research is to examine the validity and reliability of the Two-dimensional Social Desirability Scale. This study was conducted on 851 university students from Sakarya, Marmara, and Anadolu Universities. Exploratory factor analysis demonstrated that the scale yielded 2 factors, as self-deception and impression management. The fit index values which obtained from confirmatory factor analysis showed that the two-dimensional social desirability model fitted well. Cronbach Alpha internal consistency coefficients were .96 for impression management and .95 for self-deception and test-retest reliability coefficients were .79 for self-deception and .83 for impression management. According to these results this scale can be used as a valid and reliable instrument in education and psychology.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Social desirability, validity, reliability, confirmatory factor analysis.

İki Boyutlu Sosyal İstenirlik Ölçeğinin Geliştirilmesi ve Psikometrik Özelliklerinin Araştırılması

Öz

Bu araştırmanın amacı İki boyutlu Sosyal İstenirlik Ölçeği\'nin geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışmasını yapmaktır. Araştırma Sakarya, Marmara ve Anadolu Üniversitesi\'nde öğrenim gören 851 üniversite öğrencisi üzerinde yürütülmüştür. Açımlayıcı faktör analizi sonucunda 29 maddeden oluşan 2 faktörlü bir ölçme aracı elde edilmiştir. Bu faktörler öz-aldatma ve izlenim yönetimi olarak adlandırılmıştır. Doğrulayıcı faktör analizinden elde edilen uyum indeksi değerleri iki boyutlu sosyal istenirlik modelinin iyi uyum verdiğini göstermektedir. Ölçeğin faktör yükleri .34 ile .97 arasında sıralanmaktadır. Cronbach Alpha iç tutarlılık güvenirlik katsayıları izlenim yönetimi için .96, öz-aldatma için .95, test-tekrar test güvenirlik katsayıları ise izlenim yönetimi için

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Sosyal istenirlik, geçerlik, güvenirlik, doğrulayıcı faktör analizi.

Kaynakça

1. Barger, S. (2002). The Marlowe-Crowne affair: Short forms, psychometric structure, and social desirability. Journal of Personality Assessment, 79, 286–305.
2. Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2004). Veri analizi el kitabı. Ankara: Pegem A Yayıncılık.
3. Crowne, C. P. ve Marlowe, D. (1960). A new scale of social desirability independent of psychopathology. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 24, 349–354.
4. Edmonds, V. H. (1967). Marital conventionalization: Definition and measurement. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 29, 681–688.
5. Edwards, A. L. (1957). The social desirability variable in personality assessment and research. New York: Dryden.
6. Ellingson, J. E., Smith, D. B. ve Sackett, P. R. (2001). Investigating the influence of social desirability on personality factor structure, Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 122–133.
7. Heine, S. J. ve Lehman, D. R. (1995). Social desirability among Canadian and Japanese students. The Journal of Social Psychology, 136(6), 777–779.
8. Hough, L. M. (1998). Effects of intentional distortion in personality measurement and evaluation of suggested palliatives. Human Performance, 11, 209–244.

9. Hu, L. T. ve Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structural analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1-55.
10. Jackson, D. N. ve Messick, S. (1962). Response styles on the MMPI: Comparison of clinical and normal samples. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 65, 285–299.
11. Krysan, M. (1998). Privacy and the expression of white racial attitudes. Public Opinion Quarterly, 62, 506–544.
12. Lautenshlager, G. J. ve Flaherty, V. L. (1990). Computer administration of questions: More desirable or more social desirability. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 310–314.
13. Loving, T. J. ve Agnew, C. R. (2001). Socially desirable responding in close relationships: a dual-component approach and measure. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 18(4), 551–573.
14. Mick, D. G. (1996). Are studies of dark side variables confounded by socially desirable responding? The case of materialism. The Journal of Consumer Research, 23(2), 106–119.
15. Millham, J. ve Jacobson, L. I. (1978). The need for approval. In H. London ve L. E. Exner (Eds.), Dimensions of personality (s. 365–390). New York: Wiley.
16. Paulhus, D. L. (1984). Two components of socially desirable responding. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 598–609.
17. Paulhus, D. L. (1991). Measurement and control of response bias. In J. P. Robinson, P. R. Shaver ve L. S. Wrightsman (Eds.), Measures of personality and social psychological attitudes (s. 17–59). San Diego, CA: Academic.
18. Pauls, C. A. ve Stemmler, G. (2003). Substance and bias in social desirability responding. Personality and Individual Differences, 35, 263–275.
19. Sackeim, H. A. ve Gur, R. C. (1978). Self-deception, self-confrontation, and consciousness. In G. E. Schwartz ve D. Shapiro (Eds.), Consciousness and self- regulation: Advances in Research (s. 139–197). New York: Plenum Press.
20. Smith, S. T. ve Smith, K. D. (1993). Social desirability of personality items as a predictor of endorsement: A cross-cultural analysis, Journal of Social Psychology, 133, 43–52.
21. Tabachnick, B. G. ve Fidell, L. S. (1996). Using multivariate statistics. New York: HarperCollins College Publishers.
22. Tezbaşaran, A. (1996). Likert tipi ölçek geliştirme kılavuzu. Ankara: Türk Psikologlar Derneği Yayınları.
23. Wiggins, J. S. (1973). Personality and prediction: Principles of personality assessment. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.