Araştırma Makalesi
BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster

Kendini Sansürleme ve Sosyal Destek: Benlik Kurgusunun Aracı Rolü

Yıl 2025, Cilt: 17 Sayı: Supplement 1, 303 - 313
https://doi.org/10.18863/pgy.1728420

Öz

Amaç: Bu çalışma, algılanan sosyal destek ile kendini sansürleme arasındaki ilişkiyi, özellikle benlik kurgusunun aracılık rolüne odaklanarak incelemiştir. Kendini sansürleme—kişinin sosyal onay ya da olumsuz değerlendirilme kaygısıyla kişisel görüş, inanç veya duygularını dile getirmekten kaçınma eğilimi—bireysel iyi oluşu ve kişilerarası iletişimi etkileyen kritik bir faktör olarak tanımlanmaktadır. Öte yandan, sosyal destek bireylerin başa çıkma kapasitesini artıran ve psikolojik uyumu teşvik eden koruyucu bir kaynak olarak yaygın şekilde kabul edilmektedir. Benlik kurgusunun kültürel önemi göz önünde bulundurularak, bu çalışmada farklı benlik kurgusu yönelimlerinin sosyal destek ile kendini sansürleme arasındaki ilişkiye aracılık edip etmediği araştırılmıştır.
Yöntem: Çalışma korelasyonel bir desenle yürütülmüştür. Örneklem, 16 ile 56 yaşları arasında 400 katılımcıdan (293 kadın, %74,3; 107 erkek, %25,8) oluşmaktadır. Veriler, İlişkisel–Bireysel–Toplulukçu Benlik Yönleri Ölçeği, Çok Boyutlu Algılanan Sosyal Destek Ölçeği ve Kendini Sansürleme İsteği Ölçeği kullanılarak toplanmıştır. Hipotez edilen modelin test edilmesi için hiyerarşik regresyon analizleri ve 10.000 tekrar ile bootstrap aracılık testleri uygulanmıştır.
Bulgular: Sonuçlar, daha yüksek düzeyde algılanan sosyal desteğe sahip bireylerin kendini sansürleme eğilimlerinin daha düşük olduğunu göstermiştir (β = -0,13, p < ,05). Ayrıca, bireysel benlik kurgusunun sosyal destek ile kendini sansürleme arasındaki ilişkide anlamlı bir aracılık rolü üstlendiği bulunmuştur (β = -0,18, %95 GA [-0,09, -0,01]). Buna karşın, ilişkisel veya toplulukçu benlik kurguları için anlamlı bir aracılık etkisi gözlenmemiştir.
Sonuç: Bu bulgular, algılanan sosyal desteğin özellikle bireyselci benlik kurgusuna sahip bireylerde kendini sansürleme eğilimlerini azaltmada koruyucu bir işlev gördüğünü ortaya koymaktadır. Çalışma, sosyal destek ile kendini sansürleme arasındaki ilişkiye aracılık eden mekanizmaların incelenmesinde kültürel benlik yapılarının dikkate alınmasının önemini vurgulamakta ve hem kuramsal hem de uygulamalı açıdan katkılar sunmaktadır.

Kaynakça

  • Arazzini-Stewart M, De George-Walker L (2014) Self-handicapping, perfectionism, locus of control and self-efficacy: a path model. Pers Individ Dif, 66:160-164.
  • Banaji MR, Prentice DA (1994) The self in social contexts. Annu Rev Psychol, 45:297-332.
  • Bandura A (1986) Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ, Prentice-Hall.
  • Baron RM, Kenny DA (1986) The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. J Pers Soc Psychol, 51:1173-1182.
  • Bar-Tal D (2017) Self-censorship as a socio-political-psychological phenomenon: conception and research. Polit Psychol, 38:37-65.
  • Büyüköztürk Ş, Kılıç Çakmak E, Akgün ÖE, Karadeniz Ş, Demirel F (2020) Bilimsel Araştırma Yöntemleri. 27. baskı. Ankara, Pegem Akademi.
  • Boz HA (1999) Kitle iletişim araçları ve suskunluk sarmalı. Ankara Üniversitesi Egitim Bilimleri Fakültesi Dergisi, 32:42-48.
  • Cassel J (1974) Psychosocial processes and stress: theoretical formulation. Int J Health Serv, 4:471-482.
  • Clark CJ, Fjeldmark M, Lu L, Baumeister RF, Ceci SI, Frey K et al. (2024) Taboos and self-censorship among U.S. psychology professors. Perspect Psychol Sci, 20:941-957.
  • Cohen S, Wills TA (1985) Stress, social support, and the buffering hypothesis. Psychol Bull, 98:310-357.
  • Coşkun H, Durak M, Elgin VM (2012) Kendini Sansürleme İsteği Ölçeği: geçerlilik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Yeni Sempozyum, 50:83-89.
  • Ciarrochi J, Heaven PCL, Davies F (2007) The impact of hope, self-esteem, and attributional style on adolescents’ school grades and emotional well-being: a longitudinal study. J Res Pers, 41:1161-1178.
  • Cohen, J, Cohen, P, West, SG, Aiken, LS (2003). Applied Multiple Regression/Correlation Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ, Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.
  • Cross SE, Hardin EE, Gercek-Swing B (2011) The what, how, why, and where of self-construal. Pers Soc Psychol Rev, 15:142-179.
  • Çam Z, Öğülmüş S (2021) Testing of a model on the school burnout among high school students and exploring the model's prediction level of grade retention. International Journal of Curriculum and Instruction 13:950-985.
  • Das S, Kramer A (2013) Self-censorship on Facebook. Proc Int AAAI Conf Weblogs Soc Media, 7:120-127.
  • Demaray MK, Malecki CK (2002) Critical levels of perceived social support associated with student adjustment. Sch Psychol Q, 17:213-241.
  • Downey G, Feldman SI (1996) Implications of rejection sensitivity for intimate relationships. J Pers Soc Psychol, 70:1327-1343.
  • Dülger Ö (2009) Ergenlerde algılanan sosyal destek ile karar verme davranışları arasındaki ilişkinin incelenmesi (Yüksek lisans tezi). İstanbul, Marmara Üniversitesi.
  • Ercan H (2011) İlişkisel-bireyci-toplulukçu benlik ölçeğinin psikometrik özellikleri ve uyarlama çalışması. Karamanoğlu Mehmetbey Üniversitesi Sosyal ve Ekonomik Araştırmalar Dergisi, 13:37-45.
  • Eker D, Arkar H, Yaldız H (2001) Çok boyutlu algılanan sosyal destek ölçeğinin gözden geçirilmiş formunun faktör yapısı, geçerlik ve güvenirliği. Turk Psikiyatri Derg, 12:17-25.
  • Feick DL, Rhodewalt F (1997) The double-edged sword of self-handicapping: discounting, augmentation, and the protection and enhancement of self-esteem. Motiv Emot, 21:147-163.
  • Frost RO, Marten P, Lahart C, Rosenblate R (1990) The dimensions of perfectionism. Cognit Ther Res, 14:449-468.
  • Hayes AF, Glynn CJ, Shanahan J (2005a) Willingness to self-censor: a construct and measurement tool for public opinion research. Int J Public Opin Res, 17:298-323.
  • Hayes AF, Glynn CJ, Shanahan J (2005b) Validating the Willingness to Self-Censor scale: individual differences in the effect of the climate of opinion on opinion expression. Int J Public Opin Res, 17:443-455.
  • Hayes AF, Uldall BR, Glynn CJ (2010) Validating the Willingness to Self-Censor Scale II: inhibition of opinion expression in a conversational setting. Commun Methods Meas, 4:256-272.
  • Heine SJ, Lehman DR, Markus HR, Kitayama S (1999) Is there a universal need for positive self-regard? Psychol Rev, 106:766-794.
  • Hirt ER, McCrea SM, Boris HI (2003) I know you self-handicapped last exam: gender differences in reactions to self-handicapping. J Pers Soc Psychol, 84:177-193.
  • Hofstede G (2001) Culture’s Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviors, Institutions and Organizations Across Nations. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage.
  • Kağıtçıbaşı Ç, Cemalcılar Z (2015) Dünden Bugüne İnsan ve İnsanlar. 17. baskı. İstanbul, Evrim Yayınları.
  • Kağıtçıbaşı Ç (2007) Benlik ve Kimlik: Kültürel Psikolojiye Giriş. İstanbul, Koç Üniversitesi Yayınları.
  • Karasar N (2012) Bilimsel Araştırma Yöntemi. 23. baskı. Ankara, Nobel Yayıncılık.
  • Kashima ES, Hardie EA (2000) The development and validation of the relational, individual, and collective self-aspects (RIC) scale. Asian J Soc Psychol, 3:19-48.
  • Kearns H, Forbes A, Gardiner M, Marshall K (2008) When a high distinction isn’t good enough: a review of perfectionism and self-handicapping. Aust Educ Res, 35:21-36.
  • Kim HS, Sherman DK, Taylor SE (2008) Culture and social support. Am Psychol, 63:518-526.
  • Leary MR (1983) A brief version of the Fear of Negative Evaluation Scale. Pers Soc Psychol Bull, 9:371-375.
  • Lee RM, Ahn S (2011) Discrimination against Latina/os: a meta-analysis of individual-level resources and outcomes. Couns Psychol, 39:463-489.
  • Markus HR, Kitayama S (1991) Culture and the self: implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychol Rev, 98:224-253.
  • Markus HR, Kitayama S (2003) Culture, self, and the reality of the social. Psychol Inq, 14:277-283.
  • McCrea SM, Hirt ER (2001) The role of ability judgments in self-handicapping. Pers Soc Psychol Bull, 27:1378-1389.
  • Mihailidis P, Viotty S (2017) Spreadable spectacle in digital culture: civic expression, fake news, and the role of media literacies in postfact society. Am Behav Sci, 61:441-454.
  • Noelle-Neumann E (1974) The spiral of silence: a theory of public opinion. J Commun, 24:43-51.
  • Okazaki S (1997) Sources of ethnic differences between Asian American and White American college students on measures of depression and social anxiety. J Abnorm Psychol, 106:52-60.
  • Preacher KJ, Hayes AF (2004) SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models. Behav Res Methods Instrum Comput, 36:717-731.
  • Preacher KJ, Hayes AF (2008) Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behav Res Methods, 40:879-891.
  • Singelis TM (1994) The measurement of independent and interdependent self-construals. Pers Soc Psychol Bull, 20:580-591.
  • Strube MJ (1986) An analysis of the Self-Handicapping Scale. Basic Appl Soc Psychol, 7:211-224.
  • Topbay Y (2016) Ortaokul öğrencilerinin psikolojik sağlamlık düzeylerinin algılanan sosyal destek ve aile işlevleri açısından incelenmesi (Yüksek lisans tezi). İstanbul, Beykent Üniversitesi.
  • Triandis HC (1995) Individualism and Collectivism. Boulder, CO, Westview Press.
  • Van Dyne L, Ang S, Botero IC (2003) Conceptualizing employee silence and employee voice as multidimensional constructs. J Manage Stud, 40:1359-1392.
  • Vignoles VL, Owe E, Becker M, Smith PB, Easterbrook MJ, Brown R, et al. (2016) Beyond the East-West dichotomy: global variation in cultural models of selfhood. J Exp Psychol Gen, 145:966-1000.
  • Yang J, Jiang H, Dai M, Guo W (2025) Resilience under the chilling effect: how social support and digital media reshape online political participation among Chinese youth. Front Psychol, 16:1634604.
  • Yıldırım İ (1998) Akademik başarı düzeyleri farklı olan lise öğrencilerinin bazı değişkenlere göre sosyal destek düzeyleri. Türk Psikolojik Danışma ve Rehberlik Dergisi, 2:33-45.
  • Yuen S, Lee FLF (2025) Echoes of silence: how social influence fosters self-censorship under democratic backsliding. Democratization, 32:1213-1238.
  • Zhao D, Yang D, Bernstein MS (2025) Mapping the spiral of silence: surveying unspoken opinions in online communities. arXiv:2502.00952.
  • Zimet GD, Dahlem NW, Zimet SG, Farley GK (1990) The multidimensional scale of perceived social support. J Pers Assess, 55:610-617.
  • Zuckerman M, Tsai FF (2005) Costs of self-handicapping. J Pers, 73:411-442.

Self-Censorship and Social Support: Mediating Role of Self-Construal

Yıl 2025, Cilt: 17 Sayı: Supplement 1, 303 - 313
https://doi.org/10.18863/pgy.1728420

Öz

Objective: This study examined the relationship between perceived social support and self-censorship, with a particular focus on the mediating role of self-construal. Self-censorship—defined as the tendency to withhold personal opinions, beliefs, or emotions due to concerns about social approval or negative evaluation—represents a critical factor influencing both individual well-being and interpersonal communication. Conversely, social support is widely recognized as a protective resource that enhances individuals’ coping capacity and promotes psychological adjustment. Given the cultural significance of self-construal, this study aimed to determine whether different self-construal orientations mediate the relationship between social support and self-censorship.
Method: The study employed a correlational design. The sample comprised 400 participants (293 women, 74.3%; 107 men, 25.8%) aged 16 to 56 years. Data were collected using the Relational–Individual–Collective Self-Aspects Scale, the Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support, and the Willingness to Self-Censor Scale. Hierarchical regression analyses and mediation tests were conducted via the bootstrapping method with 10,000 resamples to examine the hypothesized model.
Results: Findings indicated that individuals with higher levels of perceived social support exhibited lower tendencies toward self-censorship (β = -0.13, p < .05). Moreover, individual self-construal significantly mediated the relationship between social support and self-censorship (β = -0.18, 95% CI [-0.09, -0.01]). By contrast, no significant mediating effects were observed for relational or collective self-construals.
Conclusion: These results suggest that perceived social support serves a protective function in reducing self-censorship tendencies, particularly among individuals with an individualistic self-construal. The study highlights the importance of considering cultural self-structures when examining the mechanisms underlying the relationship between social support and self-censorship, providing both theoretical and practical implications.

Kaynakça

  • Arazzini-Stewart M, De George-Walker L (2014) Self-handicapping, perfectionism, locus of control and self-efficacy: a path model. Pers Individ Dif, 66:160-164.
  • Banaji MR, Prentice DA (1994) The self in social contexts. Annu Rev Psychol, 45:297-332.
  • Bandura A (1986) Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ, Prentice-Hall.
  • Baron RM, Kenny DA (1986) The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. J Pers Soc Psychol, 51:1173-1182.
  • Bar-Tal D (2017) Self-censorship as a socio-political-psychological phenomenon: conception and research. Polit Psychol, 38:37-65.
  • Büyüköztürk Ş, Kılıç Çakmak E, Akgün ÖE, Karadeniz Ş, Demirel F (2020) Bilimsel Araştırma Yöntemleri. 27. baskı. Ankara, Pegem Akademi.
  • Boz HA (1999) Kitle iletişim araçları ve suskunluk sarmalı. Ankara Üniversitesi Egitim Bilimleri Fakültesi Dergisi, 32:42-48.
  • Cassel J (1974) Psychosocial processes and stress: theoretical formulation. Int J Health Serv, 4:471-482.
  • Clark CJ, Fjeldmark M, Lu L, Baumeister RF, Ceci SI, Frey K et al. (2024) Taboos and self-censorship among U.S. psychology professors. Perspect Psychol Sci, 20:941-957.
  • Cohen S, Wills TA (1985) Stress, social support, and the buffering hypothesis. Psychol Bull, 98:310-357.
  • Coşkun H, Durak M, Elgin VM (2012) Kendini Sansürleme İsteği Ölçeği: geçerlilik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Yeni Sempozyum, 50:83-89.
  • Ciarrochi J, Heaven PCL, Davies F (2007) The impact of hope, self-esteem, and attributional style on adolescents’ school grades and emotional well-being: a longitudinal study. J Res Pers, 41:1161-1178.
  • Cohen, J, Cohen, P, West, SG, Aiken, LS (2003). Applied Multiple Regression/Correlation Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ, Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.
  • Cross SE, Hardin EE, Gercek-Swing B (2011) The what, how, why, and where of self-construal. Pers Soc Psychol Rev, 15:142-179.
  • Çam Z, Öğülmüş S (2021) Testing of a model on the school burnout among high school students and exploring the model's prediction level of grade retention. International Journal of Curriculum and Instruction 13:950-985.
  • Das S, Kramer A (2013) Self-censorship on Facebook. Proc Int AAAI Conf Weblogs Soc Media, 7:120-127.
  • Demaray MK, Malecki CK (2002) Critical levels of perceived social support associated with student adjustment. Sch Psychol Q, 17:213-241.
  • Downey G, Feldman SI (1996) Implications of rejection sensitivity for intimate relationships. J Pers Soc Psychol, 70:1327-1343.
  • Dülger Ö (2009) Ergenlerde algılanan sosyal destek ile karar verme davranışları arasındaki ilişkinin incelenmesi (Yüksek lisans tezi). İstanbul, Marmara Üniversitesi.
  • Ercan H (2011) İlişkisel-bireyci-toplulukçu benlik ölçeğinin psikometrik özellikleri ve uyarlama çalışması. Karamanoğlu Mehmetbey Üniversitesi Sosyal ve Ekonomik Araştırmalar Dergisi, 13:37-45.
  • Eker D, Arkar H, Yaldız H (2001) Çok boyutlu algılanan sosyal destek ölçeğinin gözden geçirilmiş formunun faktör yapısı, geçerlik ve güvenirliği. Turk Psikiyatri Derg, 12:17-25.
  • Feick DL, Rhodewalt F (1997) The double-edged sword of self-handicapping: discounting, augmentation, and the protection and enhancement of self-esteem. Motiv Emot, 21:147-163.
  • Frost RO, Marten P, Lahart C, Rosenblate R (1990) The dimensions of perfectionism. Cognit Ther Res, 14:449-468.
  • Hayes AF, Glynn CJ, Shanahan J (2005a) Willingness to self-censor: a construct and measurement tool for public opinion research. Int J Public Opin Res, 17:298-323.
  • Hayes AF, Glynn CJ, Shanahan J (2005b) Validating the Willingness to Self-Censor scale: individual differences in the effect of the climate of opinion on opinion expression. Int J Public Opin Res, 17:443-455.
  • Hayes AF, Uldall BR, Glynn CJ (2010) Validating the Willingness to Self-Censor Scale II: inhibition of opinion expression in a conversational setting. Commun Methods Meas, 4:256-272.
  • Heine SJ, Lehman DR, Markus HR, Kitayama S (1999) Is there a universal need for positive self-regard? Psychol Rev, 106:766-794.
  • Hirt ER, McCrea SM, Boris HI (2003) I know you self-handicapped last exam: gender differences in reactions to self-handicapping. J Pers Soc Psychol, 84:177-193.
  • Hofstede G (2001) Culture’s Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviors, Institutions and Organizations Across Nations. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage.
  • Kağıtçıbaşı Ç, Cemalcılar Z (2015) Dünden Bugüne İnsan ve İnsanlar. 17. baskı. İstanbul, Evrim Yayınları.
  • Kağıtçıbaşı Ç (2007) Benlik ve Kimlik: Kültürel Psikolojiye Giriş. İstanbul, Koç Üniversitesi Yayınları.
  • Karasar N (2012) Bilimsel Araştırma Yöntemi. 23. baskı. Ankara, Nobel Yayıncılık.
  • Kashima ES, Hardie EA (2000) The development and validation of the relational, individual, and collective self-aspects (RIC) scale. Asian J Soc Psychol, 3:19-48.
  • Kearns H, Forbes A, Gardiner M, Marshall K (2008) When a high distinction isn’t good enough: a review of perfectionism and self-handicapping. Aust Educ Res, 35:21-36.
  • Kim HS, Sherman DK, Taylor SE (2008) Culture and social support. Am Psychol, 63:518-526.
  • Leary MR (1983) A brief version of the Fear of Negative Evaluation Scale. Pers Soc Psychol Bull, 9:371-375.
  • Lee RM, Ahn S (2011) Discrimination against Latina/os: a meta-analysis of individual-level resources and outcomes. Couns Psychol, 39:463-489.
  • Markus HR, Kitayama S (1991) Culture and the self: implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychol Rev, 98:224-253.
  • Markus HR, Kitayama S (2003) Culture, self, and the reality of the social. Psychol Inq, 14:277-283.
  • McCrea SM, Hirt ER (2001) The role of ability judgments in self-handicapping. Pers Soc Psychol Bull, 27:1378-1389.
  • Mihailidis P, Viotty S (2017) Spreadable spectacle in digital culture: civic expression, fake news, and the role of media literacies in postfact society. Am Behav Sci, 61:441-454.
  • Noelle-Neumann E (1974) The spiral of silence: a theory of public opinion. J Commun, 24:43-51.
  • Okazaki S (1997) Sources of ethnic differences between Asian American and White American college students on measures of depression and social anxiety. J Abnorm Psychol, 106:52-60.
  • Preacher KJ, Hayes AF (2004) SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models. Behav Res Methods Instrum Comput, 36:717-731.
  • Preacher KJ, Hayes AF (2008) Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behav Res Methods, 40:879-891.
  • Singelis TM (1994) The measurement of independent and interdependent self-construals. Pers Soc Psychol Bull, 20:580-591.
  • Strube MJ (1986) An analysis of the Self-Handicapping Scale. Basic Appl Soc Psychol, 7:211-224.
  • Topbay Y (2016) Ortaokul öğrencilerinin psikolojik sağlamlık düzeylerinin algılanan sosyal destek ve aile işlevleri açısından incelenmesi (Yüksek lisans tezi). İstanbul, Beykent Üniversitesi.
  • Triandis HC (1995) Individualism and Collectivism. Boulder, CO, Westview Press.
  • Van Dyne L, Ang S, Botero IC (2003) Conceptualizing employee silence and employee voice as multidimensional constructs. J Manage Stud, 40:1359-1392.
  • Vignoles VL, Owe E, Becker M, Smith PB, Easterbrook MJ, Brown R, et al. (2016) Beyond the East-West dichotomy: global variation in cultural models of selfhood. J Exp Psychol Gen, 145:966-1000.
  • Yang J, Jiang H, Dai M, Guo W (2025) Resilience under the chilling effect: how social support and digital media reshape online political participation among Chinese youth. Front Psychol, 16:1634604.
  • Yıldırım İ (1998) Akademik başarı düzeyleri farklı olan lise öğrencilerinin bazı değişkenlere göre sosyal destek düzeyleri. Türk Psikolojik Danışma ve Rehberlik Dergisi, 2:33-45.
  • Yuen S, Lee FLF (2025) Echoes of silence: how social influence fosters self-censorship under democratic backsliding. Democratization, 32:1213-1238.
  • Zhao D, Yang D, Bernstein MS (2025) Mapping the spiral of silence: surveying unspoken opinions in online communities. arXiv:2502.00952.
  • Zimet GD, Dahlem NW, Zimet SG, Farley GK (1990) The multidimensional scale of perceived social support. J Pers Assess, 55:610-617.
  • Zuckerman M, Tsai FF (2005) Costs of self-handicapping. J Pers, 73:411-442.
Toplam 57 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil İngilizce
Konular Kişilik ve Bireysel Farklılıklar, Sosyal Psikoloji
Bölüm Araştırma
Yazarlar

Gülşah Koç 0000-0003-2894-9640

Tuğba Seda Çolak Turan 0000-0002-7219-1999

Erken Görünüm Tarihi 4 Ekim 2025
Yayımlanma Tarihi 7 Ekim 2025
Gönderilme Tarihi 30 Haziran 2025
Kabul Tarihi 3 Ekim 2025
Yayımlandığı Sayı Yıl 2025 Cilt: 17 Sayı: Supplement 1

Kaynak Göster

AMA Koç G, Çolak Turan TS. Self-Censorship and Social Support: Mediating Role of Self-Construal. Psikiyatride Güncel Yaklaşımlar. Ekim 2025;17(Supplement 1):303-313. doi:10.18863/pgy.1728420

Creative Commons Lisansı
Psikiyatride Güncel Yaklaşımlar Creative Commons Atıf-Gayriticari-Türetilemez 4.0 Uluslararası Lisansı ile lisanslanmıştır.