Temel Depresyon Ölçeği’nin Türkçe Geçerlik ve Güvenirliği

Yıl 2021, Cilt: 5 Sayı: 3, 452 - 463, 25.12.2021

Melike Tekindal Mustafa Agah Tekindal

https://doi.org/10.29058/mjwbs.906629

Cited By: 3

Öz

Amaç: Temel Depresyon Ölçeğinin Türkçe geçerlik ve güvenirliğini araştırmaktır. Kesitsel araştırma
biçiminde dizayn edilerek, metodolojik olarak gerçekleştirilmiştir.
Gereç ve Yöntemler: Yapı geçerliliği için; güvenirlik analizlerinde Cronbach alfa (α) katsayısı
kullanılmıştır. Geçerlik analizi için faktör analizi uygulanmıştır.
Bulgular: Temel Depresyon Ölçeği aracı açıklayıcı faktör analizi Kaiser Meyer Olkin (KMO) testine göre
dağılım yeterli olduğu sonucu bulunmuştur. Varyans oranları yeterli olmakla birlikte Cronbach alfa(α)
0,70’in üzerinde bulunmuştur. Temel Depresyon Ölçeği üniversite eğitimi alan gençler üzerinde geçerli
ve güvenilir olduğu sonucuna varılmıştır.
Sonuç: Ölçek dörtlü likert tipindedir. En yüksek 84, en düşük 21 puan alınabilir. Toplam puan
yükseldikçe depresyon düzeyinin yükseldiği söylenebilir. Anhedonya, düşük benlik ve üzüntü alt boyutları
bulunmaktadır. Üniversite öğrencileri grubu ile yapılmış olan geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışmasının farklı
gruplar üzerinde de yapılması gerektiği, farklı değişkenler ile sınanması gerektiği önerilmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Depresyon, Geçerlik, Güvenirlik, Ölçek

Validity and Reliability of Basic Depression Scale For Turkey

Öz

Aim: To investigate the validity and reliability of the Basic Depression Scale for Turkey. It was designed
and carried out in the form of cross-sectional research methodologically.
Material and Methods: Data analysis for structure validity; Cronbach alpha (α) coefficient used in
reliability analysis. Factor analysis applied for validity analysis.
Results: Basic Depression Scale found to have sufficient distribution based on the explanatory factor
analysis of the Kaiser Meyer Olkin test. Croncbachs alpha (α) found 0.7. Basic Depression Scale is a
reliable measurement tool for Turkey. It concluded that Basic Depression Scale was a valid and reliable
scale for young people who receive a university education in Turkey.
Conclusion: The scale is a four-point Likerttype. Max 84, min 21 points can be given. It can be said
that the higher the total score, the higher the level of depression based on total scores. There are
anhedonia, low self-esteem, and sadness sub-scales. In the end, we suggest that scale should be
tested on different groups with different variables under prospect researches in the field.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Depression, Validity, Reliability, Scale

Kaynakça

• 1. World Health Organization, (WHO). Depression and other common mental disorders global health estimates. Erişim tarihi: 18 04 2020 https://Apps.Who.İnt/İris/Bitstream/Handle/10665/254610/Who-Msd-Mer-2017.2-Eng.P.;Jsessionid=Db7102cfa4301c29008149ebfde064bb?Sequence=1
• 2. Teismann T, Forkmannb T, Brailovskaiaa J, Siegman P, Glaesmerc H, Margraf J. Positive mental healthmoderates the association between depression and suicideideation: A longitudinal study. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology 2018;18:1-7.
• 3. Morrison JR. (2016), DSM-5'i kolaylaştıran klinisyenler için tanı rehberi. Ankara: Nobel Akademik Yayıncılık.
• 4. American Psychiatric Association, APA. (2013), Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (DSM-5). American Psychiatric Pub.
• 5. Agudelo D, Buela-Casal G, Spielberger, CD. Anxiety and depression; the problem of differentiation through symptoms. Salud Mental 2007; 30(2): 33-41.
• 6. Taylor DL, Grant D M, Frosio K E, Kraft JD, White, EJ. Psychometric Properties of the Responseto Anxiety Questionnaire. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment 2018;40:550-62.
• 7. de Jonge P, Wardenaar KJ, Lim CCW, et.al. The cross-national structure of mental disorders: results from the world mental health surveys. Psychological Medicine 2017; 48:2073-84.
• 8. Pineda D, Martín-Vivar M, Sandín B, Piqueras JA. Factorial invariance and norms of the 30-item shortened-version of the Revised Child Anxiety and Depression Scale (RCADS-30). Psicothema 2017;30:232-37.
• 9. Gormez V, Kılınçaslan A, Orengul AC, Ebesutani C, Kaya İ, Ceri V, Nasıroglu S, Filiz M Chorpita B. Psychometric properties of the Turkish version of the revised child anxiety and depression scale–child version in a clinical sample. Psychiatry and Clinical Psychopharmacology 2017; 27(1):84-92.
• 10. Öy B. Child depression scale: a validity and reliability study. Türk Psikiyatri Dergisi 1991; 2(2):132-36.
• 11. Oskay G. Turkish adaptation of the Reynolds Adolescent Depression Scale (Reynolds Adolescent Depression Scale-Rads), its validity and reliability study. [Article in Turkish] Türk Psikolojik Danışma ve Rehberlik Dergisi 1997; 2(8):17-26.
• 12. Hisli N. Validity and reliability of Beck Depression Inventory for university students. Psikoloji Dergisi. 1989;7(23):3-13.
• 13. Tuncer M, Dikmen M. The validity and reliability study of the Burns Depression Scale Turkish Form. Journal of Social and Humanities Sciences Research 2019; 6(42):2848-57.
• 14. Durmaz B, Soysal P, Ellidokuz, H., Isik, A.T. Validity and reliability of Geriatric Depression Scale-15 (short form) in Turkish older adults. North Clin Istanb. 2017; 5(3):216-20.
• 15. Akın A, Çetin B. The Depression Anxiety and Stress Scale (DASS): the study of validity and reliability. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice 2007; 7(1): 260-268.
• 16. Sarıçam, H. The psychometric properties of Turkish version of Depression Anxiety Stress Scale-21 (DASS-21) in community and clinical samples. Bilişsel Davranışçı Psikoterapi ve Araştırmalar Dergisi 2018; 7:19-30.
• 17. Peñate W, Bello R, García A, Rovella A, Del Pino-Sedeno T. Psychometric characteristics of the Basic Depression Questionnaire in a sample of adolescents. Anales de Psicología. 2014; 30:143-49.
• 18. Akdemir A, Örsel S, Dağ İ, Türkçapar H M, İşcan N, Özbay H. Validity, reliability and clinical use of the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS). Psikiyatri Psikoloji Psikofarmakoloji Dergisi 1996; 4(4):251-259.
• 19. Peñate W. Presentation of a basic questionnaire to assess genuine symptoms of depression. Introducción. Análisis y Modificación de Conducta. 2001; 27:679-731.
• 20. Peñate W. Fourth study: Review of the basic depression questionnaire: Sad affect, anhedonia and low self-esteem. Análisis y Modificación de Conducta 2001a; 27:799-809.
• 21. Peñate W. First study: The Basic Depression Questionnaire (CBD): First validation data. Análisis y Modificaciónde Conducta 2001c; 27:733-61.
• 22. Peñate W, Almeida A. Fifth study: Discriminating validity of CBD-rev between different types of depressive disorders. Análisis y Modificación de Conducta 2001; 27:811-829.
• 23. Peñate W, Pitti CT, García A, Perestelo L. Treatment validity of the basic depression questionnaire. Primerosdatos. Análisis y Modificación de Conducta 2005; 31:379-403.
• 24. Beck AT. An inventory for measuring depression. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1961; 4(6):561-71.
• 25. Guy W. Clinical Global Impressions: ECDEU Assessment Manual for Pharmacology, revised edition. National Institute of Mental Health, Dept. of Health, Education and Welfare Publication (ADM). 1976; 218-22.
• 26. Tegin B. (1980). Depresyonda bilişsel bozukluklar: Beck modeline göre bir inceleme. (Yayınlanmamış doktora tezi). Hacettepe Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitusü, Ankara.
• 27. Durutürk N, Tonga E, Gabel PC, Acar M, Tekindal A. Cross-cultural adaptation, reliability and validity of the Turkish version of the Lower Limb Functional Index, Disability and Rehabilitation 2015; 37(26):2439-44.
• 28. Çınar Özdemir Ö, Tonga E, Tekindal A, Bakar Y. Cross‑cultural adaptation, reliability and validity of the Turkish version of the Chronic Venous Disease Quality of Life Questionnaire (CIVIQ‑20). Springer Plus 2015;5:381.
• 29. Karahan A, Toruner EK, Ceylan A, Abbasoglu A, Tekindal A, Buyukgonenc L. Reliability and Validity of a Turkish Language Version of the Bates-Jensen Wound Assessment Tool, Journal Of Wound Ostomy and Continence Nursing 2014; 41(4):340-4.
• 30. Obuchowski NA, Zhou XH. Prospective studies of diagnostic test accuracy when disease prevalence is low. Biostatistics 2002; 3(4):477-92.
• 31. Lachin JM. (2000), Biostatistical methods. John Wiley & Sons. New York.
• 32. Balci O. Principles and techniques of simulation validation, verification, and testing. In Proceedings of the 27th conference on Winter simulation, 1995: 147-54.
• 33. Dempsey PA, Dempsey AD. (2000), Using nursing research: Process, critical evaluation, and utilization. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
• 34. Kaiser HF. The varimax criterion for analytic rotation in factor analysis. Psychometrika 1958; 23(3):187-200.
• 35. Kaiser HF. An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika 1974; 39(1): 31-6.
• 36. Cerny BA, Kaiser HF. A study of a measure of sampling adequacy for factor-analytic correlation matrices. Multivariate behavioral research 1977; 12(1):43-7.
• 37. Tezbasaran A. (1997), Guide to develop likert type scales. Turkish Psychological Association. Ankara.
• 38. Field, A. (2005), Discovering statistics using SPSS. Thousand Oaks, CA, US.
• 39. Allen MJ, Yen WM. (2002), Introduction to measurement theory. 4. printing ed. Long Grove, IL.
• 40. Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistics notes: Cronbach's alpha. Bmj. 1997; 314(7080):572.
• 41. Bonett, DG. Sample size requirements for estimating intraclass correlations with desired precision. Statistics in medicine 2002; 21(9):1331-5.
• 42. Bonett, DG. Sample size requirements for comparing two alpha coefficients. Applied Psychological Measurement 2003; 27(1):72-74.
• 43. Bonett DG. Varying coefficient meta-analytic methods for alpha reliability. Psychological methods 2010; 15(4):368.
• 44. Cronbach LJ, Shavelson RJ. My current thoughts on coefficient alpha and successor procedures. Educational and psychological measurement 2004; 64(3):391-418.
• 45. Tuğut N, Gölbaşı Z. The validity and reliability study of the Sexual Quality of Life Scale-Female Turkish version. Cumhuriyet Medical Journal (CMJ). 2010; 32(2):172-80.
• 46. Churchill Jr, GA. A paradigm for developing better measures of marketing constructs. Journal of marketing research. 1979; 16(1):64-73.
• 47. Peñate W, Ibáñez I, González M. Sixth study: The final structure of CBD-rev. Implications for the differential diagnosis with anxiety disorders. Análisis y Modificación de Conducta. 2001; 27(115):831-49.