Bütünleşik Davranış Model Perspektifinde Fiziksel Mesafelenme Davranışı Ölçeği: Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Çalışması

Yıl 2023, Cilt: 15 Sayı: Supplement 1, 261 - 273, 29.12.2023

Buket Unver Esin Temeloğlu Şen Nuray Öner Gücin

https://doi.org/10.18863/pgy.1281072

Öz

Bu çalışmada, Covid-19 pandemisi döneminde toplum sağlığının korunması adına önerilen ve sağlık davranışları arasında en önde gelen fiziksel mesafelenme davranışına yönelik Bütünleşik Davranış Model çerçevesinde kapsamlı bir ölçek geliştirilmesi amaçlanmıştır. Çalışma kapsamında 109 maddeden oluşan bir madde havuzu oluşturulmuş ve pilot çalışmada (n=100) ilk madde analizi gerçekleştirilmiştir. Pilot çalışmanın sonunda toplam 39 maddeden oluşan, Fiziksel Mesafelenme Davranışı Ölçeği (FMDÖ) araçsal tutum, deneysel tutum, öznel normlar, algılanan kontrol, özetkinlik, çevresel engeller, davranışa yönelik bilgi ve beceriler, alışkanlık, niyet ve davranış alt ölçeklerinden oluşmuştur. Sonrasında 322 katılımcıyla (Ortyaş= 36.48) yürütülen Açımlayıcı Faktör Analizi (AFA) FMDÖ’nün araçsal tutum, deneysel tutum, algılanan kontrol, özetkinlik ve davranışa yönelik bilgi ve becerileri içeren beş alt ölçek ve 21 madde ile sonuçlanmıştır. AFA’ya göre faktör yapıları oluşturulan ölçeğin daha sonra 472 kişi (Ortyaş= 36,99) üzerinden Doğrulayıcı Faktör Analizi (DFA) yapılmıştır. DFA sonuçları ise araçsal tutum, deneysel tutum, algılanan kontrol ve özetkinlik olmak üzere 19 maddeden oluşan dört boyutlu yapıyı doğrulamıştır (RMSEA=0.057, GFI=0.93, CFI=0.94, NFI=0.90, X2/df=2.51). Alt ölçeklerin Cronbach alfa değerleri 0.68-0.85 arasında değişmektedir. Sonuçlar, fiziksel mesafe davranışının Bütünleşik Davranış Modeli’nin araçsal tutum, deneysel tutum, algılanan kontrol ve özetkinlik yapıları aracılığıyla değerlendirildiğini ortaya koymuştur. Gelecek çalışmalarda ölçeğin farklı model çalışmalarıyla da test edilmesi gerekebilir. Bu ölçeğin kullanıldığı model çalışmalarında farklı örneklemlerin incelenmesinin ise toplum temelli müdahale programlarına yol gösterebileceği düşünülmüştür.

Anahtar Kelimeler

COVID-19 pandemisi, fiziksel mesafelenme davranışı, bütünleşik davranış modeli

Destekleyen Kurum

Istanbul University Scientific Research Projects Foundation

Proje Numarası

SBA-2020-36801

Teşekkür

Prof. Dr. Özlem Sertel Berk'e desteklerinden dolayı teşekkür ederiz.

Development and Validation of the Physical Distancing Behavior Scale: A Study Based on the Integrated Behavior Model

Öz

This paper aims to develop a comprehensive scale within the framework of the Integrated Behavior Model (IBM), which is recommended for the protection of public health during the Covid-19 pandemic period and is the leading physical distancing behavior among health behaviors. Within the scope of the study, an item pool consisting of a total of 109 items was created and the first item analysis was performed in the pilot sample (N= 100). At the end of the pilot study, Physical Distancing Behavior Scale (PDBS) was developed, comprising a total of 39 items. This scale consisted of instrumental attitude, experiential attitude, subjective norms, perceived control, self-efficacy, environmental constraints, knowledge habit, intention, and behavior structures. Af-terwards, Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) was applied to 322 participants (age: 36.48) resulting in 21 items and five structures including instrumental attitude, experiential attitude, perceived control, self-efficacy, and knowledge. After factor structures according to EFA had been formed, a Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) was conducted on 472 participants (age: 36,99). The CFA results confirmed 4 constructs consisting of 19 items which are instrumental attitude, experiential attitude, perceived control, and self-efficacy (RMSEA=0.057, GFI=0.93, CFI=0.94, NFI=0.90, X2/df=2.51), Cronbach’s alpha scores of all sub-scales varied between 0.68-0.85. The results revealed that physical distancing behavior has been evaluated through the instrumental attitude, experi-ential attitude, perceived control, and self-efficacy constructs of IBM. In future studies, the scale may also need to be tested with different model studies. As regards the modeling studies that used this scale, examining diffe-rent samples could guide community-based intervention programs.

Anahtar Kelimeler

COVID-19 pandemic, physical distancing behavior, integrated behavioral model

Proje Numarası

SBA-2020-36801

Kaynakça

• Adiyoso W, Wilopo (2021) Social distancing intentions to reduce the spread of COVID-19: The extended theory of planned behavior. BMC Public Health, 21:1836.
• Ajzen I (1991) The theory of planned behavior. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process, 50:179-211.
• Ajzen I (2015) Consumer attitudes and behavior: The theory of planned behavior applied to food consumption decisions. Italian Review of Agricultural Economics, 70:121-138.
• Alivernini F, Manganelli S, Girelli L, Cozzolino M, Lucidi F, Cavicchiolo E (2021) Physical distancing behavior: The role of emotions, personality, motivations, and moral decision-making. J Pediatr Psychol, 46:15-26.
• Armitage CJ, Conner M (2001) Efficacy of the theory of planned behaviour: A meta‐analytic review. Br J Soc Psychol, 40:471-499.
• Bandura A (1990) Perceived self-efficacy in the exercise of personal agency. J Appl Sport Psychol, 2:128-163.
• Beeckman M, De Paepe A, Van Alboom M, Maes S, Wauters A, Baert F et al, (2020) Adherence to the physical distancing measures during the COVID‐19 pandemic: A HAPA‐Based perspective. Appl Psychol Health Well Being, 12:1224–1243.
• Bicalho C, Platas MR, Rosenzweig LR (2021) If we move, it moves with us: Physical distancing in Africa during COVID-19. World Dev, 142:105379.
• Braun RE, Glasman T, Sheu J, Dake J, Jordan T, Yingling F (2014) Using the integrated behavioral model to predict binge drinking among college students. J Alcohol Drug Educ, 58:46-63.
• Briscese G, Lacetera N, Macis M, Tonin M (2023) Expectations, reference points, and compliance with COVID-19 social distancing measures. J Behav Exp Econ, 103:101983.
• Burton A, McKinlay A, Dawes J, Roberts A, Fynn W, May T et al. (2023). Understanding barriers and facilitators to compliance with UK social distancing guidelines during the COVID-19 pandemic: A qualitative interview study. Behaviour Change, 40:30-50.
• Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2022) What we know about the variants. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/variants/about-variants.html (Accessed 14.03.2022)
• Charles G, Jain M, Caplan Y, Kemp, H, Keisler A, Huang V et al. (2022) Increasing uptake of social distancing during COVID-19: Machine learning strategies for targeted interventions. Harv Data Sci Rev, 4.
• Cliff N (1988) The eigenvalues greater than one rule and the reliability of components. Psychol Bull, 103:276-279.
• Coroiu A, Moran C, Campbell T, Geller AC (2020) Barriers and facilitators of adherence to social distancing recommendations during COVID-19 among a large international sample of adults. PLoS One, 15:e0239795.
• Durand H, Bacon SL, Byrne M, Kenny E, Lavoie KL, McGuire BE et al.(2020) Identifying and addressing psychosocial determinants of adherence to physical distancing guidance during the COVID-19 pandemic–project protocol. HRB Open Res, 3:58.
• Fan X, Sivo SA (2007) Sensitivity of fit indices to model misspecification and model types. Multivariate Behav Res, 42:509-529.
• Farrell K, Durand H, McSharry J, Meade O, Kenny E, Noone C et al. (2021) Exploring barriers and facilitators of physical distancing in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic: A qualitative interview study. HRB Open Res, 4:50.
• Feehan J, Apostolopoulos V (2021) Is COVID-19 the worst pandemic?. Maturitas, 149:56–58.
• Fishbein M, Yzer MC (2003) Using theory to design effective health behavior interventions. Commun Theory, 13:164-183.
• Fischer R, Karl JA (2022) Predicting behavioral intentions to prevent or mitigate COVID-19: A cross-cultural meta-analysis of attitudes, norms, and perceived behavioral control effects. Soc Psychol Personal Sci, 13:264-276.
• Francis J, Eccles MP, Johnston M, Walker A, Grimshaw JM, Foy R et al.(2004) Constructing questionnaires based on the theory of planned behaviour: A manual for health services researchers. UK, Centre for Health Services Research, University of Newcastle.
• Galea S, Merchant RM, Lurie N (2020) The mental health consequences of COVID-19 and physical distancing: The need for prevention and early intervention. JAMA Intern Med, 180:817–818.
• George D, Mallery M (2010) SPSS for Windows Step By Step: A Simple Guide and Reference, 17.0 update, 10th ed. Boston, Pearson.
• Gibson LP, Magnan RE, Kramer EB, Bryan AD (2021) Theory of planned behavior analysis of social distancing during the COVID-19 pandemic: Focusing on the intention–behavior gap. Ann Behav Med, 55:805-812.
• Glanz K, Rimer BK, Viswanath K (2008) Health Behavior and Health Education: Theory, Research and Practice. 4th ed.. New York, Wiley.
• Gutema H, Debela Y, Walle B, Reba K, Wondiye H (2018) Testicular self examination among Bahir Dar University students: Application of integrated behavioral model. BMC Cancer, 18:21.
• Gollwitzer A, Martel C, Brady WJ, Pärnamets P, Freedman IG, Knowles ED et al.(2020) Van Bavel, J. J. Partisan differences in physical distancing are linked to health outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic. Nat Hum Behav, 4:1186-1197.
• Harrington, D. (2009) Confirmatory factor analysis. New York, Oxford University Press.
• Hita MLR, Grégoire Y, Lussier B, Boissonneault S, Vandenberghe C, Sénécal S (2023) An extended health belief model for COVID-19: understanding the media-based processes leading to social distancing and panic buying. J Acad Mark Sci, 51:132-152.
• Ho MH, Chang HC, Lin YK, Traynor V, Tsai HH, Buckwalter K et al. (2019) Application of the Integrated Behavioral Model et al.to oral self‐care behavior of community‐dwelling middle‐aged and older people in Taiwan. Public Health Nutr, 36:726-734.
• Hu LT, Bentler PM (1999) Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct Equ Modeling, 6:1-55.
• Imamoğlu EO, Karakitapoğlu-Aygün Z (2004) Self-construals and values in different cultural and socioeconomic contexts. Genet Soc Gen Psychol Monogr, 130:277–306.
• Kagee A, Van der Merwe M (2006) Predicting treatment adherence among patients attending primary health care clinics: The utility of the theory of planned behaviour. S Afr J Psychol, 36:699-714.
• Koo JR, Cook AR, Park M, Sun Y, Sun H, Lim JT et al.(2020) Interventions to mitigate early spread of SARS-CoV-2 in Singapore: A modelling study. Lancet Infect Dis, 20:678-688.
• Kuper-Smith BJ, DoppelhoferLM, Oganian Y, Rosenblau G, Korn CW (2021) Risk perception and optimism during the early stagesof the COVID-19 pandemic. R Soc Open Sci, 8:210904.
• Michie S, Carey RN, Johnston M, Rothman AJ, De Bruin M, Kelly MP et al. (2018) From theory-inspired to theory-based interventions: A protocol for developing and testing a methodology for linking behaviour change techniques to theoretical mechanisms of action. Ann Behav Med, 52:501-512.
• Ministry of Interior (2020) https://www.icisleri.gov.tr/65-yas-ve-uzeri20-yas-altikronik-rahatsizligi-bulunan-kisilerin-sokaga-cikma-kisitlamasi-istisnasi-genelgesi (Accessed 05.2020).
• Montaño DE, Kasprzyk D, Taplin SH (2008) Health behavior and health education: Theory, research and practice, 4th ed. (Eds K Glanz, BK Rimer, KV Viswanath):68-96. San Francisco, Jossey-Bass.
• Montaño DE, Kasprzyk D (2015) Theory of reasoned action, theory of planned behavior, and the integrated behavioral model. In Health Behavior: Theory, Research, and Practice. (Eds K Glanz, BK Rimer, KV Viswanath):95–124. San Fransisco, Jossey-Bass.
• Oosterhoff, B, Palmer CA, Wilson J, Shook N (2020) Adolescents' motivations to engage in social distancing during the COVID-19 pandemic: Associations with mental and social health. J Adolesc Health, 67:179-185.
• Park J, Tolea M, Besser L, Galvin J (2020) Intention to be screened for Alzheimer’s disease in nondemented older adults: Integrated behavioral model and self-efficacy as mediation effect. J Hum Behav Soc Environ, 30: 778–796.
• Pedersen MJ, Favero N (2020) Social distancing during the COVID19 pandemic: Who are the present and future noncompliers?. Public Adm Rev, 80:805-814.
• Peterson RA (2000) A meta-analysis of variance accounted for and factor loadings in exploratory factor analysis. Mark Lett, 11:261-275.
• Ponterotto JG, Ruckdeschel DE (2007) An overview of coefficient alpha and a reliability matrix for estimating adequacy of internal consistency coefficients with psychological research measures. Percept Mot Skills, 105:997-1014.
• Prachthauser M, Cassisi JE, Le TA, Nicasio AV (2020) The social distance scale (v1): A screening instrument to assess patient adherence to prevention strategies during pandemics. Int J Environ Res Public Health, 17:8158.
• Sass DA (2010) Factor loading estimation error and stability using exploratory factor analysis. Educ Psychol Meas, 70:557-577.
• Shahzad F, Du J, Khan I, Ahmad Z, Shahbaz M (2021) Untying the precise impact of COVID-19 policy on social distancing behavior. Int J Environ Res Public Health, 18:896.
• Skegg D, Gluckman P, Boulton G, Hackmann H, Karim SSA Piot P et al.(2021) Future scenarios for the COVID-19 pandemic. Lancet, 397:777-778.
• Soucy JPR, Sturrock SL, Berry I, Daneman N, MacFadden DR, Brown KA (2020) Estimating the effect of physical distancing on the COVID-19 pandemic using an urban mobility index. medRXiv; doi: 10.1101/2020.04.05.20054288.
• Şimşek ÖF (2017) Yapısal Eşitlik Modellemesine Giriş: Temel İlkeler ve LISREL Uygulamaları. Ankara, Ekinoks.
• Tabernero C, Castillo-Mayén R, Luque B, Cuadrado E (2020) Social values, self-and collective efficacy explaining behaviours in coping with Covid-19: Self-interested consumption and physical distancing in the first 10 days of confinement in Spain. PLoS One, 15:e0238682.
• The Khoa D, Wang CY, Guchait P (2021) Using regulatory focus to encourage physical distancing in services: When fear helps to deal with Mr. Deadly COVID-19. The Service Industries Journal, 41:32-57.
• Van de Schoot R, Lugtig P, Hox J (2012) A checklist for testing measurement invariance. Eur J Dev Psychol, 9:486-492.
• WHO (2021) Advice for the public: Coronavirus disease (COVID-19). https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/advice-for-public (Accessed 07.06.2021).
• WHO (2021) World Health Statistics 2021: A visual summary. https://www.who.int/data/stories/world-health-statistics-2021-a-visual-summary (Accessed 29.06.2021).
• AHO (2023) Statement on the fifteenth meeting of the IHR (2005) Emergency Committee on the COVID-19 pandemic. https://www.who.int/news/item/05-05-2023-statement-on-the-fifteenth-meeting-of-the-international-health-regulations-(2005)-emergency-committee-regarding-the-coronavirus-disease-(covid-19)-pandemic (Accessed 05.05.2023).
• Xie K, Liang B, Dulebenets MA, Mei Y (2020) The impact of risk perception on social distancing during the COVID-19 pandemic in China. Int J Environ Res Public Health, 17:6256.
• Yu Y, Lau JTF, Lau MMC (2021) Levels and factors of social and physical distancing based on the Theory of Planned Behavior during the COVID-19 pandemic among Chinese adults. Transl Behav Med, 11:1179–1186.
• Zirenko M, Kornilova T, Qiuqi Z, Izmailova A (2021) Personality regulation of decisions on physical distancing: Cross-cultural comparison (Russia, Azerbaijan, China). Pers Individ Dif, 170:110418.