The Study of Developing and Validating the Union Bias Scale

Abstract

Observation of different levels and types of organizational problems, such as school principals and teachers suing each other and conflicts between teachers, caused by union bias in schools in Turkey today, is the starting point of this study. This study, therefore, aimed to develop and validate a scale that helps determine union bias in schools. Participants of the study included teachers being a union member and working at a primary, middle or high school in the 2017-2018 and 2018-2019 academic years in Düzce, Turkey. During the data analysis, firstly, the first data set was examined in terms of the assumptions of the factor analysis and then Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) was applied. Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) was performed on the second data set. Convergent validity of the scale was examined with item load values, mean-variance, and composite reliability coefficients. Discriminant validity was examined by the Fornell-Lacker criteria. Also, measurement invariance in gender groups was examined. The Cronbach Alpha and combined reliability coefficients were calculated to determine the scale's reliability. The Union Bias scale consists of 27 items and six dimensions. The explained total variance was 64%. As a result of the first and second order confirmatory factor analyses, it was revealed that the six-dimensional structure predicted Union Bias and the scale’s structure did not differ in gender groups. The Cronbach's alpha value was .90 and the composite reliability was .96. As a result, the structure of the Union Bias Scale was concluded to be valid and reliable.

Keywords

• Union bias
• Ingroup bias
• Ingroup favoritism
• Outgroup discrimination
• Social distance between groups

References

1. Akyürek, S. (2016). Türkiye’de iç grup yanlılığının toplumsal adalete ve güvenliğe etkisi [The effect of ingroup bias on social justice and security in Turkey]. The Journal of Europe-Middle East Social Science Studies, 2(2), 161 179. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/174247
2. Allport, G. W. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley.
3. Alpar, R. (2011). Çok değişkenli istatistiksel yöntemler [Multivariate statistical methods]. Detay Yayıncılık.
4. Arslan, C. (2015). Öğretmenlerin sendikal örgütlenmeye ilişkin tutumları ve sendikal örgütlenme nedenleri [Teachers' attitudes towards teachers unions and the reasons of their unionization]. [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Cumhuriyet University.
5. Asparouhov, T., & Muthén, B. (2014). Multiple-Group Factor Analysis Alignment. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 21(4), 495-508.
6. Bağcı, A. (2009). Application of total quality management in teacher unions from the perspectives of union members [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Middle East Technical University.
7. Bayar, L. S. (2015). The effect of belonging to a labour union on work values and work behaviours. [Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation]. Dokuz Eylül University.
8. Baydar, F. (2016). Analysis of teachers' opinions on the role of unions for constitution of educational policy. [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Marmara University.

9. Baysal, Ö., & Yücel, C. (2010). Elementary school teachers’ attitudes toward unions: sample of Uşak Province. Educational Administration: Theory and Practice, 16(3), 329-352. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/108220
10. Bentler, P. M., & Bonett, D. G. (1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88(3), 588 606. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.88.3.588
11. Berkant, H. G., & Gül, M. (2017). Union member teachers’ perceptions and expectationstowards unions. Journal of the Human and Social Sciences Researches, 6(1), 419-442.
12. Brown, T. A. (2006). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. Guilford Press.
13. Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2002). Factor analysis: basic concepts and using to development scale. Educational Administration in Theory & Practice, 8(4), 470 483. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/108451
14. Büyüköztürk, S., Kılıç Çakmak, E., Akgün, O. E., Karadeniz, S., & Demirel, F. (2011). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri [Scientific research methods]. 8. Baskı, Pegem Akademi Yayınları.
15. Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2006). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi elkitabı: İstatistik, araştırma deseni, SPSS uygulamaları ve yorum [Data analysis handbook for social sciences: Statistics, research design, SPSS applications and interpretation]. 6. Baskı, Pegem A. Yayıncılık.
16. Charlie, N. (2002). Reconciling teacher unionism's disparate identities: A View from the Field. BCTF Research Report. British Columbia Teachers' Federation, Vancouver.
17. Chou, C. P., & Bentler, P. M. (1995). Estimation and tests in structural equation modeling. In R. H. Hoyle (Ed.), Structural equation modeling: Concepts, issues, and applications (pp. 37–55). Sage.
18. Çelik, G. (2011). İlköğretim okullarında örgütsel ayrımcılık ve öğretmenlerin tükenmişlik 654 düzeylerine etkisi [Organizational discrimination in primary schools and its effects on teachers' burnout levels]. [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Sakarya University.
19. Çimendağ, F. Ş. (2013). Yüksek ve düşük statülü gruplarda iç grup ve dış grup yanlılığı [In-group and out-group favouritism in high and low status groups]. [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Mersin University.
20. Çokluk, Ö., Şekercioğlu, G., & Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2012). Sosyal bilimler için çok değişkenli istatistik: SPSS ve LISREL uygulamaları [Multivariate Statistics for Social Sciences: SPPS and LISREL Applications]. Pegem Academy Press.
21. Çoksan, S. (2016). Sosyal kimlik özdeşimi ve iç grup normunun iç grup yanlılığı ile ilişkisi [Social identity identification and the relationship of ingroup norm to ingroup bias] [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Mersin University.
22. Çoksan, S. (2019). Causal attributions of ın-group favoritism and equal allocation between in and out-group. Nesne, 7(14), 83-101. https://doi.org/10.7816/nesne-07-14-06
23. Çuhadar Gürkaynak, E. Ç. (2012). Toplumsal temas: Önyargı ve ayrımcılığı önlemek için bir sosyal değişim aracı olarak kullanılabilir mi? [Social contact: Can it be used as a tool for social change to avoid prejudice and discrimination?] Çayır, K. & Ceyhan, M. A. (derl.), Ayrımcılık çok boyutlu yaklaşımlar [Multidimensional approaches to discrimination] (255-265). İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları.
24. Demir, F. (2013). Sendikaların kuruluşu ve işleyişi. [Establishment and functioning of trade unions]. Çalışma ve Toplum, 4, 17-42.
25. Doucouliagos, H., Laroche, P., & Stanley, T. (2005). Publication Bias in Union-Productivity Research? Relations industrielles/Industrial Relations, 60(2), 320–347. https://doi.org/10.7202/011724ar
26. Dovidio, J. F., Love, A., Schellhaas, F. M. H., & Hewstone, M. (2017). Reducing intergroup bias through intergroup contact: Twenty years of progress and future directions. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 20(5), 606-620.
27. Eraslan, L. (2012). Evaluation of today’s teacher unionism. 21. Yüzyılda Eğitim ve Toplum, 1(1), 59-72. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/59603
28. Erdem M., & Meriç, E. (2012). Study on scale development about favoritism at school administration. Journal of Educational Sciences Research, 2(2), 141 154. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/697379
29. Erdem M., & Meriç, E. (2013). According to the perceptions of primary school teachers favoritism on school management. Educational Administration: Theory and Practice, 19(3), 467-498. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/108150
30. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18, 39-50.
31. Göregenli, M. (2012). Temel kavramlar: Önyargı, kalıpyargı ve ayrımcılık [Basic concepts: Prejudice, stereotype and discrimination]. Çayır, K. & Ceyhan, M. A. (derl.), Ayrımcılık çok boyutlu yaklaşımlar [Multidimensional approaches to discrimination], İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları.
32. Guthery, S. (2018). The influence of teacher unionization on educational outcomes: A summarization of the research, Popular methodologies and gaps in the literature. The William & Mary Educational Review, 5(1), 124-136.
33. Güneş, H. (2013). Sendikal haklar ve ülkemizde kamu görevlileri sendikacılığının gelişimi [Right to unionization and development of public servants trade unionism in Turkey]. ÇSGB Çalışma Dünyası Dergisi [Labour World], 1(1), 62-79.
34. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2009). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). Pearson Prentice Hall.
35. Hair, J. Hult, GTM. Ringle, C., & Sarstedt M. (2014). A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) (SAGE Publications, Incorporated).
36. Hasta, D., & Arslantürk, G. (2013). Polislik mesleğine yönelik iç-grup yanlılığı ve tutumlar [Ingroup bias and attitudes towards the policing profession]. Türk Psikoloji Yazıları, 16(31), 60 70. https://www.psikolog.org.tr/tr/yayinlar/dergiler/1031828/tpy1301996120130000m000094.pdf
37. Hooper, D., Coughlan, J., & Mullen, M. (2008). Evaluating model fit: A synthesis of the structural equation modelling literature. In 7th European Conference on research methodology for business and management studies (pp. 195-200).
38. Joreskog, K.G. (1999). How large can a standardized coefficient be. Unplublished report. SSI Central, Inc. http://www.statmodel.com/download/Joreskog.pdf
39. Kağıtçıbaşı, Ç. (2008). Günümüzde insan ve İnsanlar Sosyal Psikolojiye Giriş [Man and People Today. Introduction to Social Psychology]. 11. Basım, Evrim Yayınevi.
40. Kalaycı, Ş. (2010). SPSS uygulamalı çok değişkenli istatistik teknikleri [SPSS applied multivariate statistical techniques] (Vol. 5). Ankara, Turkey: Asil Yayın Dağıtım.
41. Kara, M. (2016). The reasons why teachers do not affiliate to unions and their expectations from them. The Journal of Academic Social Science, 4(22), 423-440.
42. Karaman, H. G., & Erdoğan, Ç. (2016). An investigation of the education unions in Turkey: goals, expectations and problems. Sakarya University Journal of Education, 6(2), 123-140. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/227590
43. Kayıkçı, K. (2013). Unionization in the public and education sector in Turkey, and Expectations of School administrators and teachers expectations from unions. Amme İdaresi Dergisi, 46(1), 99-126.
44. Keskinkılıç-Kara, (2016). Individual and organizational effects of political orientation discrimination on teachers in schools. Kastamonu Eğitim Dergisi, 24(3), 1371-1384. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/210080
45. Keskinkılıç-Kara, S. B., & Oğuz, E. (2016). Relationship between political discrimination level perceived by teachers and teachers’ organizational cynicism levels. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 63, 55-70.
46. Kline, P. (1994). An Easy Guide to Factor Analysis. Routledge.
47. Kline, T. J. (2005). Psychological testing: A practical approach to design and evaluation. Sage Publications.
48. Kostakoğlu, G. (2010). Grup kimliğine yönelik tehdit ile iç-grup yanlılığının benlik değeri üzerindeki etkileri [The Effects of Threat to Group Identity and In-Group Bias on Self-Esteem] [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Hacettepe University.
49. Küçükkömürler, S., & Sakallı-Uğurlu, N. (2017). Social contact theories to regulate intergroup relations: intergroup, extended, imagined contact. Nesne Psikoloji Dergisi (NPD), 5(9), 1-31. https://www.nesnedergisi.com/makale/pdf/1466592418.pdf
50. Mert, Ö. (2013). Organization activities and intellectual actions of teachers in Turkey(1960-1980) [Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation]. Süleyman Demirel University.
51. Mertler, C. A., & Vannatta, R. A. (2005). Advanced and multivariate statistical methods: Practical application and interpretation, (3rd ed.). Edition Taylor & Francis.
52. Myers, D. G. (2015). Sosyal Psikoloji [Social Psychology]. Onuncu basımdan çeviri, Nobel.
53. Nunnally, J., & Bernstein, I. (1994). Psychometric Theory. (3rd ed.). McGraw Hill.
54. Özkiraz, A., & Talu, N. (2008). Emergence of trade-unions: comparison between Turkey and Western European Countries. Sosyal Bilimler Araştırmaları Dergisi. 2, 108-126. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/801854
55. Pettigrew, T. F., & Tropp, L. R. (2006). Interpersonal relations and group processes A meta-analytic test of intergroup contact theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90(5), 751–783.
56. Pettigrew, T. F. (2016). In pursuit of three theories: Authoritarianism, relative deprivation, and intergroup contact. Annual Review of Psychology, 67, 1–21.
57. Polat, S., & Kazak, E. (2014). The correlation between school principals’ favoritist behaviors and attitudes and teachers’ perception of organizational justice. Educational Administration: Theory and Practice, 20(1), 71 92. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/108137
58. Polat, S., & Hiçyılmaz, G. (2017). Discrimination behaviors that classroom teachers are exposed and the causes of these behaviors. Journal of Qualitative Research in Education, 5(2), 47-66. http://enadonline.com/public/assets/catalogs/0838411001544185376.pdf
59. Popiel, K. (2013). Teacher union legitimacy: Shifting the moral center for member engagement. J Educ Change, 14, 465–500.
60. Schermelleh-Engel, K., Moosbrugger, H., & 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.
61. Seat, A. A., Joyce, N., Harwood, J., & Arroyo, A. (2015). Necessary and sufficient conditions for positive intergroup contact: A fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis approach to understanding ıntergroup attitudes. Communication Quarterly, 63(2), 135–155.
62. Seçer, B. (2009). The effect of women’s union attitudes and perceived gender discrimination on the willingness to join a union. Çalışma ve Toplum, 4, 27 60. https://calismatoplum.org/Content/pdf/calisma-toplum-1317-fcee87fe.pdf
63. Sokolov, B. (2019). Sensitivity of Goodness of Fit Indices to Lack of Measurement Invariance with Categorical Indicators and Many Groups. Higher School of Economics Research Paper No. WP BRP, 86.
64. Sürekli, D. (1998). Kimya sektörüne bağlı bir sendikada sendikaya bağlılık ve sendikal faaliyetlere katılım arasındaki ilişkinin incelenmesi [Investigation of the relationship between union commitment and participation in union activities in a union affiliated to the chemical industry] [Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation]. Marmara University.
65. Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using Multivariate Statistics. Person Education Inc.
66. Tajfel, H., Billig, M., Bundy, R. P., & Flament, C. (1971). Social categorization and intergroup behavior. European Journal of Social Psychology, 1, 149 177. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2420010202
67. Tavşancıl, E. (2014). Tutumların ölçülmesi ve SPSS ile veri analizi [Measuring attitudes and data analysis with SPSS]. (5.basım). Nobel Yayıncılık.
68. Taylor, S. E., Peplau, L. A., & Sears, D. O. (2007). Sosyal Psikolojiye Giriş [Introduction to Social Psychology]. (1. Baskı). Çev.: Ali Dönmez, İmge Kitabevi Yayınları.
69. TDK. Güncel Türkçe Sözlük [Current Turkish Dictionary]. www.tdk.gov.tr (Erişim tarihi: 20 Eylül 2019).
70. Tucker, L. R., & Lewis, C. (1973). A reliability coefficient for maximum likelihood factor analysis. Psychometrika, 38(1), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02291170
71. Uyumaz, G., & Çokluk, Ö. (2016). An investigation of item order and rating differences in likert-type scales in terms of psychometric properties and attitudes of respondents. Journal of Theoretical Educational Science, 9(3), 400 425. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/304330
72. Uyumaz, G., & Sırgancı, G. (2020). What is the required sample size for confirmatory factor analysis?: Bayesian Approach and maximum likelihood estimation. International Journal of Society Researches, 16(32), 5302-5340. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/1400546
73. Widaman, K. F., & Reise, S. P. (1997). Exploring the measurement invariance of psychological instruments: Applications in the substance use domain. In K. J. Bryant, M. Windle, & S. G. West (Eds.), The science of prevention: Methodological advances from alcohol and substance abuse research (p. 281–324). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/10222-009
74. Yalçın Durmuş, G. (2018). Öğretmenlerin sendikal örgütlenmelerinin okulda karar verme ve iletişim süreçleriyle ilişkisinin analizi [Analysis of the correlation between unionization of teachers and decision making and communication processes at the school] [Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation]. Inönü University.
75. Yurdigül, Y., & İspir, N. (2015). Ötekinin inşa edildiği sorunlu bir alan olarak Oscar ödül törenleri (85. Akademi Ödülleri ve “Argo” Filmi Örneği) [Other being built, as a problem area: Oscar award ceremonıes (85th Academy Awards and the “Argo” Movie Example)]. 1. Ulusal Toplumsal ve Kurumsal Çatışmalar/Çözümler Kongresi. Bildiriler Kitabı, Düzce Üniversitesi Gölyaka Meslek Yüksekokulu, Düzce.