EBEVEYNLİĞE GELENEKSEL VE MODERN YAKLAŞIMLAR ÖLÇEĞİ’NİN GELİŞTİRİLMESİ: GÜVENİRLİK VE GEÇERLİK

Öz

Kültürün, ebeveynlik ve çocuklarla ilgili birçok çıktıyı etkilediğini düşündüğümüz geleneksel ve eşitlikçi tutumların şekillenmesinde oldukça etkili olduğu düşünülmektedir. Alanyazında ebeveynlikle ilgili bu tutumlara odaklanan bazı ölçekler olmasına rağmen hiçbiri Türk kültürel bağlamına uygun değildir. Dolayısıyla Türk kültürü bağlamında bu tutumları ölçen bir ölçeğin, bu tutumlar ile diğer yapılar arasındaki ilişkinin doğru bir şekilde değerlendirilmesi açısından önemli olduğu düşünülmektedir. Bu nedenle, mevcut çalışmanın temel amacı, ebeveynlerin ebeveynliğe geleneksel ve modern yaklaşımlarını ölçen güvenilir ve geçerli bir ölçüm aracı geliştirmektir. Faktör analizi sonuçları, Ebeveynliğe Geleneksel ve Modern Yaklaşımlar Ölçeği’nin iki boyutu olduğunu göstermiştir: geleneksel ve modern yaklaşımlar. Ayrıca, iç tutarlılık puanları ve ölçeğin faktörleri ile diğer ilgili yapılar arasındaki anlamlı ilişkiler, Ebeveynliğe Geleneksel ve Modern Yaklaşımlar Ölçeği’nin güvenirlik ve geçerlik açısından uygun psikometrik özelliklere sahip olduğunu göstermiştir. Özetle, bu yeni ölçek, ebeveynlerin ebeveynliğe yönelik geleneksel veya modern tutumlarını değerlendirmek için kullanılabilir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Geleneksel Yaklaşım
• Modern Yaklaşım
• Ebeveynlik
• Güvenirlik
• Geçerlik
• Geleneksel Yaklaşım, Modern Yaklaşım, Ebeveynlik, Güvenirlik, Geçerlik

THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE INVENTORY OF TRADITIONAL AND MODERN APPROACHES TO PARENTING: RELIABILITY AND VALIDITY

Öz

Culture has an impact on shaping traditional and egalitarian attitudes that are essential factors affecting parenting and child outcomes. Although in the literature some scales focus on these attitudes about parenthood, none of them are appropriate for the Turkish cultural context. Thus, it is thought that the scale measuring these attitudes in the Turkish cultural context is vital for the proper evaluation of the relationship between these attitudes and other constructs. Therefore, the main aim of the current study was to develop a reliable and valid measure exploring parents’ traditional and modern approaches to parenting. Factor analysis results showed that the Inventory of Traditional and Modern Approaches to Parenting has two dimensions: traditional and modern approaches. Also, the internal consistency scores and significant associations between the factors of the scale and other related constructs demonstrated that the Inventory of Traditional and Modern Approaches to Parenting had good psychometric properties in terms of reliability and validity. In sum, this new scale can be used to assess parents' traditional or modern attitudes toward parenthood.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Traditional Approach
• Modern Approach
• Parenting
• Reliability
• Validity

Kaynakça

1. Altınbilek, E. S. (2012). Turkish translation and validity-reliability study of traditional motherhood and fatherhood scales (Unpublished Master Thesis). Near East University.
2. Anderson, H.M., Cain, J., & Bird, E. (2005). Online student course evaluations: Review of literature and a pilot study. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 69(1), 34 – 43. http://doi.org/10.5688/aj690105
3. Bartlett, M. S. (1954). A further note on the multiplying factors for various chi-square approximations in factor analysis. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 16, 296-298.
4. Bartley, S. J., Blanton, P. W., & Gilliard, J. L. (2005). Husbands and wives in dual-earner marriages: Decision-making, gender role attitudes, division of household labor, and equity. Marriage & Family Review, 37(4), 69-94.
5. Name of the author of this study. (2020). Name of the thesis. [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Name of the university.
6. Bernhardt, E., & Goldscheider, F. (2006). Gender equality, parenthood attitudes, and first births in Sweden. Vienna Yearbook of Population Research, 4, 19-39.
7. Blackstone, A. (2003). Gender roles and society. In J. R. Miller, R. M. Lerner, & L. B. Schiamberg (Eds.), Human Ecology: An Encyclopedia of Children, Families, Communities, and Environments (pp. 335–338). Springer.
8. Chen, Z., Fiske, S. T., & Lee, T. L. (2009). Ambivalent sexism and power-related gender-role ideology in marriage. Sex Roles, 60(11-12), 765-778. http://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-009-9585-9

9. Child, D. (2006). The essentials of factor analysis. London: Continuum International Publishing Group.
10. Çokluk, Ö., Şekercioğlu, G. ve Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2010). Sosyal Bilimler için Çok Değişkenli İstatistik: SPSS ve LISREL Uygulamaları. Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
11. Coltrane, S., Parke, R. D., & Adams, M. (2004). Complexity of father involvement in low‐income Mexican American families. Family Relations, 53(2), 179-189. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0022-2445.2004.00008.x
12. Copur, Z., Erkal, S., Dogan, N., & Safak, S. (2010). Sharing and spending time on domestic tasks: A Turkish sample. Journal of Comparative Family Studies, 41(1), 87-109. https://doi.org/10.3138/jcfs.41.1.87
13. Copur, Z., Erkal, S., Dogan, N., & Safark, S. (2007). Relationship between Gender Roles in the Family and Performing Domestic Tasks. Indian Journal of Social Work, 68(2), 259-281.
14. Corrigall, E. A., & Konrad, A. M. (2007). Gender role attitudes and careers: A longitudinal study. Sex Roles, 56(11), 847-855. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-007-9242-0
15. Cortina, J. M. (1993). What is coefficient alpha? An examination of theory and applications. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(1), 98-104. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.78.1.98
16. Costello, A. B., & Osborne, J. W. (2005) Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 10(7), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.7275/jyj1-4868
17. Erkal, S., Copur, Z., Dogan, N., & Safak, S. (2007). Examining the Relationship Between Parents' Gender Roles and Responsibilities towards Their Children (A Turkish Example). Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 35(9), 1221-1234.
18. García-Cueto, E., Rodríguez-Díaz, F. J., Bringas-Molleda, C., López-Cepero, J., Paíno-Quesada, S., & Rodríguez-Franco, L. (2015). Development of the gender role attitudes scale (GRAS) amongst young Spanish people. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology, 15(1), 61-68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijchp.2014.10.004
19. Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (1996). The ambivalent sexism inventory: Differentiating hostile and benevolent sexism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(3), 491-512. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.70.3.491
20. Goldberg, A. E., & Perry-Jenkins, M. (2004). Division of labor and working-class women's well-being across the transition to parenthood. Journal of Family Psychology, 18(1), 225-236. https://doi.org/10.1037/0893-3200.18.1.225.
21. Howard, M. C. (2016). A review of exploratory factor analysis decisions and overview of current practices: What we are doing and how can we improve?. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 32(1), 51-62. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2015.1087664
22. Ibikunle, P. O., Oladipo, S. E., Chukwu, J. N., Odole, A. C., & Okeke, A. I. (2015). Establishing the reliability and construct validity of the Igbo version of screening activity limitation and safety awareness scale in persons with Hansen disease. Leprosy Review, 86(3), 220–228.
23. Kerr, P. S., & Holden, R. R. (1996). Development of the gender role beliefs scale (GRBS). Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 11(5), 3-16.
24. Kılıç, Ç. (2010). Aile eğitim programları ve Türkiye'deki örnekleri. Abant İzzet Baysal Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 10(1), 99-111.
25. Leidy, M. S., Guerra, N. G., & Toro, R. I. (2010). Positive parenting, family cohesion, and child social competence among immigrant Latino families. Journal of Family Psychology, 24(3), 252-260. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019407
26. Marks, J. L., Lam, C. B., & McHale, S. M. (2009). Family patterns of gender role attitudes. Sex Roles, 61(3-4), 221-234. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-009-9619-3
27. Nangle, S. M., Kelley, M. L., Fals-Stewart, W., & Levant, R. F. (2003). Work and family variables as related to paternal engagement, responsibility, and accessibility in dual-earner couples with young children. Fathering, 1(1), 71-90. http://doi.org/10.3149/fth.0101.71
28. O'Brien, M., & Peyton, V. (2002). Parenting attitudes and marital intimacy: a longitudinal analysis. Journal of Family Psychology, 16(2), 118-127. https://doi.org/10.1037/0893-3200.16.2.118
29. Pedro, M. F., Ribeiro, T., & Shelton, K. H. (2012). Marital satisfaction and partners’ parenting practices: the mediating role of coparenting behavior. Journal of Family Psychology, 26(4), 509–522. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029121.
30. Rogers, S. J., & Amato, P. R. (2000). Have changes in gender relations affected marital quality?. Social Forces, 79(2), 731-753. https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/79.2.731
31. Sabattini, L., & Leaper, C. (2004). The relation between mothers' and fathers' parenting styles and their division of labor in the home: Young adults' retrospective reports. Sex Roles, 50(3-4), 217-225. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:SERS.0000015553.82390.f7
32. Sakallı-Uğurlu, N. (2002). Çelişik duygulu cinsiyetçilik ölçeği: Geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Türk Psikoloji Dergisi, 17(49), 47-58.
33. Santos, R. D. O., Gorgulho, B. M., Castro, M. A. D., Fisberg, R. M., Marchioni, D. M., & Baltar, V. T. (2019). Principal component analysis and factor analysis: Differences and similarities in nutritional epidemiology application. Revista Brasileira de Epidemiologia, 22(2), e190041. https://doi.org/10.1590/1980-549720190041
34. Schaefer, E. S., & Edgerton, M. (1985). Parent and child correlates of parental modernity. In I. E. Sigel (Ed.), Parental belief systems: The psychological consequences for children (pp. 287–318). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
35. Scott, J. (2006). Family and gender roles: How attitudes are changing. GeNet Working Paper No. 21.
36. Shears, J., & Robinson, J. (2005). Fathering attitudes and practices: Influences on children's development. Child Care in Practice, 11(1), 63-79. https://doi.org/10.1080/1357527042000332808
37. Suni, J., & Pesonen, J. (2019). Hunters as tourists–an exploratory study of push–pull motivations. Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism, 19(2), 175-191. https://doi.org/10.1080/15022250.2017.1407668
38. Tabachnick, B., & Fidell, L. (2013). Using Multivariate Statistics (6th ed.). Boston: Pearson.
39. Tocu, R. (2014). Study on the parental beliefs and attitudes towards child rearing and education. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 137, 153-157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.05.268
40. Uludağlı, N. P. (2017). Baba katılımında etkili faktörler ve baba katılımının baba, anne ve çocuk açısından yararları. Türk Psikoloji Yazıları, 20(39), 70-92.
41. Ünlü-Çetin, Ş., & Olgan, R. (2021). The effect of perceived intergenerational paternal involvement on fathers’ involvement in the lives of their 0-to-8-year-old children. Early Child Development and Care, 191(1), 93-107. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004430.2019.1603150
42. Whatley, M., & Knox, D. (2005). Scales for measuring college student views of traditional motherhood and fatherhood. College Student Journal, 39(3), 588-596.
43. Winstead, P. C. (2013). The Relation Between Parenting Beliefs, Behaviors, and Acculturation on the Social Skills of Prekindergarten Hispanic Children (Unpublished Master Thesis) Utah State University, Logan, Utah. Retrieved from https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/etd/1452.
44. Yamaoka, Y., & Bard, D. E. (2019). Positive parenting matters in the face of early adversity. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 56(4), 530-539. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2018.11.018
45. Yurtsever Kılıçgün, M., & Kılıçkaya, A. (2016). Geleneksel Annelik Ölçeği'nin Psikometrik Özellikleri: Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Çalışması. Itobiad: Journal of the Human & Social Science Researches, 5(8), 2867-2881.
46. Yurtsever Kılıçgün, M., & Kılıçkaya, A. (2018). Geleneksel Babalık Ölçeği’nin Psikometrik Özellikleri: Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Çalışması. 1. Uluslararası Eğitimde Yeni Arayışlar Kongresi (pp.146-148). İstanbul, Turkey.