Psychometric Properties of the Turkish Version of the Green Space Use Satisfaction Scale

Buket Aydemir; Güney Çetinkaya

doi:10.54141/psbd.1744497

Psychometric Properties of the Turkish Version of the Green Space Use Satisfaction Scale

Abstract

The benefits of green spaces for individuals’ psychological, physical, and social well-being underscore the need to measure satisfaction with green spaces. However, the lack of measurement tools in Turkish culture limits research on satisfaction with green space use. Therefore, this study aims to adapt the Green Space Use Satisfaction Scale (GUSS) to Turkish culture and to conduct validity and reliability analyses. The Turkish form of the scale was subjected to linguistic adaptation by the back translation method and shaped by expert opinions. Confirmatory factor analysis and measurement invariance across gender groups were used to assess construct validity. Reliability analyses were conducted using Cronbach’s alpha, CR, and the split-half method. The study sample comprised 357 students recruited from three public universities in the Mediterranean region of Türkiye via convenience sampling. The findings revealed that the Turkish version of the scale aligns with the original scale structure, demonstrates measurement equivalence across gender groups, and exhibits high internal consistency. Additionally, the concurrent validity test demonstrated a significant and positive relationship between the GUSS and the Satisfaction with Life Scale. This study offers a significant cultural perspective to the literature by adapting the GUSS to Turkish culture, thereby facilitating cross-cultural comparisons in the broader literature

Keywords

Ethical Statement

The study approved by the Ethics Committee of Istanbul Yeni Yuzyil University (2025/03-1492).

References

Adinolfi, C., Suárez-Cáceres, G. P., & Carinanos, P. (2014). Relation between visitors’ behaviour and characteristics of green spaces in the city of Granada, south-eastern Spain. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 13(3), 534-542. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2014.03.007
Agyemang, C., Van Hooijdonk, C., Wendel-Vos, W., Lindeman, E., Stronks, K., & Droomers, M. (2007). The association of neighbourhood psychosocial stressors and self-rated health in Amsterdam, the Netherlands. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 61(12), 1042–1049. https://doi.org/10.1136/jech.2006.052548
Ambrey, C. L. (2016). Urban greenspace, physical activity and wellbeing: The moderating role of perceptions of neighbourhood affability and incivility. Land Use Policy, 57, 638–644. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2016.06.034
Aspinall, P. A., Thompson, C. W., Alves, S., Sugiyama, T., Brice, R., & Vickers, A. (2010). Preference and relative importance for environmental attributes of neighbourhood open space in older people. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 37(6), 1022-1039. https://doi.org/10.1068/b36024
Atmış, E., Günşen, H.B., (2016). Effect of urbanization on transformation of forestry in Turkey (Period of 1990-2010) Journal of the Faculty of Forestry Istanbul University 66(1): 16-29. https://doi.org/10.17099/jffiu.6363
Bai, H., Wilhelm Stanis, S. A., Kaczynski, A. T., & Besenyi, G. M. (2013). Perceptions of neighborhood park quality: Associations with physical activity and body mass index. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 45(1), S39–48. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12160-012-9448-4
Barakat, C., & Yousufzai, S. (2020). Green space and mental health for vulnerable populations: A conceptual review of the evidence. Journal of Military Veteran and Family Health, 6(S3), 51–57. https://doi.org/10.3138/jmvfh-2019-0040
Bedimo-Rung, A. L., Mowen, A. J., & Cohen, D. A. (2005). The significance of parks to physical activity and public health: a conceptual model. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 28(2), 159-168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2004.10.024

Bell, S. L., Phoenix, C., Lovell, R., &Wheeler, B. W. (2014). Greenspace, health and wellbeing: Making space for individual agency. Health & Place, 30, 287-292. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthplace.2014.10.005
Bratman, G. N., Olvera‐Alvarez, H. A., and Gross, J. J. (2021). The affective benefits of nature exposure. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 15(8), e12630. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12630
Brislin, R. W. (1970). Back-translation for cross-cultural research. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 1(3), 185-216. https://doi.org/10.1177/135910457000100301
Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1992). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. Sociological Methods & Research, 21(2), 230-258. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124192021002005
Browning, M. H., Rigolon, A., & McAnirlin, O. (2022). Where greenspace matters most: A systematic review of urbanicity, greenspace, and physical health. Landscape and Urban Planning, 217, 104233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2021.104233
Callaghan, A., McCombe, G., Harrold, A., McMeel, C., Mills, G., Moore-Cherry, N., & Cullen, W. (2021). The impact of green spaces on mental health in urban settings: a scoping review. Journal of Mental Health, 30(2), 179-193. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638237.2020.1755027
Chen, F. F. (2007). Sensitivity of goodness of fit indexes to lack of measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 14(3), 464-504. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705510701301834
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Coles, R. W., & Bussey, S. C. (2000). Urban forest landscapes in the UK—progressing the social agenda. Landscape and Urban Planning, 52, 181-188. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-2046(00)00132-8
Conedera, M., Del Biaggio, A., Seeland, K., Moretti, M., & Home, R. (2015). Residents’ preferences and use of urban and peri-urban green spaces in a Swiss mountainous region of the Southern Alps. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 14(1), 139–147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2015.01.003
Comrey, A. L., & Lee, H. B. (1992). A first course in factor analysis (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (4th ed.). Pearson.
DeVellis, R. F. (2017). Scale development: theory and applications (4th ed.). Sage.
Diener, E. D., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49(1), 71-75. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa4901_13
Dunton, G. F., Almanza, E., Jerrett, M., Wolch, J., & Pentz, M. A. (2014). Neighborhood park use by children: use of accelerometry and global positioning systems. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 46(2), 136-142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2013.10.009
Durak, M., Senol-Durak, E., & Gencoz, T. (2010). Psychometric properties of the satisfaction with life scale among Turkish university students, correctional officers, and elderly adults. Social Indicators Research, 99, 413-429. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-010-9589-4
Engledow, J. L. (1977). Was consumer satisfaction a pig in a poke? Business Horizons, 20(2), 87-94.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39-50. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378101800104
Gavrilidis, A. A., Zakerhaghighi, K., Popa, A. M., Akbarian, S. Z., Onose, D. A., Grădinaru, S. R., & Slave, R. A. (2024). Perceptions of cultural ecosystem services provision by small public urban green spaces: Perspectives from different cultural backgrounds. Urban Ecosystems, 27(3), 699-716. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-023-01480-3
George, D., & Mallery, P. (2019). IBM SPSS statistics 26 step by step: A simple guide and reference (16th ed.). Routledge.
Gianfredi, V., Buffoli, M., Rebecchi, A., Croci, R., Oradini-Alacreu, A., Stirparo, G., ... & Signorelli, C. (2021). Urban Green Spaces and Public Health Outcomes: a systematic review of literature. European Journal of Public Health, 31, 164-638. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/ckab164.638
Gobster, P.H., & Westphal, L.M. (2004). The human dimensions of urban greenways: planning for recreation and related experiences. Landscape and Urban Planning 68(2-3), 147-165. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-2046(03)00162-2
Gozalo, G. R., Morillas, J. M. B., González, D. M., & Moraga, P. A. (2018). Relationships among satisfaction, noise perception, and use of urban green spaces. Science of the Total Environment, 624, 438-450. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.12.148
Guite, H. F., Clark, C., & Ackrill, G. (2006). The impact of the physical and urban environment on mental well-being. Public Health, 120(12), 1117–1126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.puhe.2006.10.005
Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2019). Multivariate data analysis (8th ed.). Cengage.
Halkos, G., Leonti, A., & Sardianou, E. (2021). Activities, motivations and satisfaction of urban parks visitors: A structural equation modeling analysis. Economic Analysis and Policy, 70, 502-513. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eap.2021.04.005
Hartig, T., Mitchell, R., De Vries, S., & Frumkin, H. (2014). Nature and health. Annual Review of Public Health, 35(1), 207-228. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-publhealth-032013-182443
Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(1), 115-135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8
Howell, A. J., Dopko, R. L., Passmore, H.-A., & Buro, K. (2011). Nature connectedness: Associations with well-being and mindfulness. Personality and Individual Differences, 51, 166-171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2011.03.037
Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1-55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
Jabbar, M., Yusoff, M. M., & Shafie, A. (2022). Assessing the role of urban green spaces for human well-being: A systematic review. GeoJournal, 87, 4405-4423. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10708-021-10474-7
Jay, M., & Schraml, U. (2009). Understanding the role of urban forests for migrants–Uses, perception and integrative potential. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 8(4), 283–294. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2009.07.003
Jennings, V., & Bamkole, O. (2019). The relationship between social cohesion and urban green space: An avenue for health promotion. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16(3), 452. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16030452
Jim, C. Y., & Chen, W. Y. (2006). Perception and attitude of residents toward urban green spaces in Guangzhou (China). Environmental Management, 38, 338-349. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-005-0166-6
Kaczynski, A. T., & Henderson, K. A. (2007). Environmental correlates of physical activity: a review of evidence about parks and recreation. Leisure Sciencess, 29(4), 315-354. https://doi.org/10.1080/01490400701394865
Kline, R. B. (2016). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (4th ed.). Guilford Press.
Ko, M. C., & Lee, J. H. (2025). Measuring the psychological benefits of green space usage: development and validation of the Green Space Use Satisfaction Scale. Social Indicators Research, 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-025-03536-7
Kondo, M. C., Fluehr, J. M., McKeon, T., & Branas, C. C. (2018). Urban green space and its impact on human health. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 15(3), 445. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15030445
Kong, F., & Nakagoshi, N. (2005). Changes of urban green spaces and their driving forces: a case study of Jinan City, China. Journal of International Development and Cooperation, 11(2), 97-109.
Lee, J., & Kim, D. H. (2022). Urban forest visit motivation scale: Development and validation. Sustainability, 15(1), 408. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15010408
Lee, Y. C., & Kim, K. H. (2015). Attitudes of citizens towards urban parks and green spaces for urban sustainability: The case of Gyeongsan City, Republic of Korea. Sustainability, 7(7), 8240-8254. https://doi.org/10.3390/su7078240
Liu, S., Su, C., Zhang, J., Takeda, S., Liu, J., & Yang, R. (2023). Cross-cultural comparison of urban green space through crowdsourced big data: A natural language processing and image recognition approach. Land, 12(4), 767. https://doi.org/10.3390/land12040767
Maas, J., Van Dillen, S. M., Verheij, R. A., & Groenewegen, P. P. (2009). Social contacts as a possible mechanism behind the relation between green space and health. Health & Place, 15(2), 586-595. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthplace.2008.09.006
Maas, J., Verheij, R. A., de Vries, S., Spreeuwenberg, P., Schellevis, F. G., & Groenewegen, P. P. (2009). Morbidity is related to a green living environment. Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health, 63(12), 967-973. https://doi.org/10.1136/jech.2008.079038
MacCallum, R. C., Browne, M. W., & Sugawara, H. M. (1996). Power analysis and determination of sample size for covariance structure modeling. Psychological Methods, 1(2), 130–149. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.1.2.130
Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). McGraw-Hill.
Osborne, J. W., & Overbay, A. (2004). The power of outliers (and why researchers should always check for them). Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 9(6), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.7275/qf69-7k43
Ostoić, S. K., van den Bosch, C. C. K., Vuletić, D., Stevanov, M., Živojinović, I., Mutabdžija-Bećirović, S., ... & Malovrh, Š. P. (2017). Citizens’ perception of and satisfaction with urban forests and green space: Results from selected Southeast European cities. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 23, 93-103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2017.02.005
Özgüner, H. (2011). Cultural differences in attitudes towards urban parks and green spaces. Landscape Research, 36(5), 599-620. https://doi.org/10.1080/01426397.2011.560474
Pala, Ö. N., & Acar, S. (2024). Assessing a greening tool through the lens of green gentrification: Socio-spatial change around the Nation's Gardens of Istanbul. Cities, 150, 105023. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2024.105023
Palliwoda, J., Kowarik, I., & von der Lippe, M. (2017). Human-biodiversity interactions in urban parks: the species level matters. Landscape and Urban Planning 157, 394-406. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2016.09.003
Pazhouhanfar, M. (2018). Role of space qualities of urban parks on mood change. Psychological Studies, 63, 25–31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12646-017-0434-6
Pensini, P., Horn, E., & Caltabiano, N. (2016). An exploration of the relationships between adults’ childhood and current nature exposure and their mental well-being. Children, Youth and Environments, 26, 125-147. https://doi.org/10.7721/chilyoutenvi.26.1.0125
Peters, K., Elands, B., & Buijs, A. (2010). Social interactions in urban parks: Stimulating social cohesion? Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 9(2), 93-100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2009.11.003
Pizam, A., Neumann, Y., & Reichel, A. (1978). Dimentions of tourist satisfaction with a destination area. Annals of Tourism Research, 5(3), 314-322. https://doi.org/10.1016/0160-7383(78)90115-9
Pritchard, A., Richardson, M., Sheffield, D., & McEwan, K. (2020). The relationship between nature connectedness and eudaimonic well-being: A meta-analysis. Journal of Happiness Studies, 21, 1145-1167. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-019-00118-6
Rigolon, A., Browning, M. H., Lee, K., & Shin, S. (2018). Access to urban green space in cities of the Global South: A systematic literature review. Urban Science, 2(3), 67. https://doi.org/10.3390/urbansci2030067
Shanahan, D. F., Bush, R., Gaston, K. J., Lin, B. B., Dean, J., Barber, E., & Fuller, R. A. (2016). Health benefits from nature experiences depend on dose. Scientific Reports, 6(1), 28551. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep28551
Son, J., & Kim, B. (2023). Translation performance from the user’s perspective of large language models and neural machine translation systems. Information, 14(10), 574. https://doi.org/10.3390/info14100574
Son, J., Lee, Y., Kramer, C., & Saha, S. (2025). Residents’ perceptions of cultural ecosystem services from urban green spaces: A comparative study of Korea and Germany. Basic and Applied Ecology, 88, 32–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.baae.2025.08.002
Stoltz, J., & Schaffer, C. (2018). Salutogenic affordances and sustainability: Multiple benefits with edible forest gardens in urban green spaces. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 343957. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02344
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2019). Using multivariate statistics (7th ed.). Pearson.
Tamosiunas, A., Grazuleviciene, R., Luksiene, D., Dedele, A., Reklaitiene, R., Baceviciene, M., ... &Nieuwenhuijsen, M. J. (2014). Accessibility and use of urban green spaces, and cardiovascular health: findings from a Kaunas cohort study. Environmental Health, 13, 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1186/1476-069X-13-20
Terefe, A. E., & Hou, Y. (2024). Determinants influencing the accessibility and use of urban green spaces: A review of empirical evidence. City and Environment Interactions, 24, 100159. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cacint.2024.100159
Tian, Y., Jim, C. Y., Tao, Y., & Shi, T. (2011). Landscape ecological assessment of green space fragmentation in Hong Kong. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 10(2), 79-86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2010.11.002
Voorhees, C. M., Brady, M. K., Calantone, R., & Ramirez, E. (2016). Discriminant validity testing in marketing: An analysis, causes for concern, and proposed remedies. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 44(1), 119–134. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-015-0455-4
White, M. P., Alcock, I., Grellier, J., Wheeler, B. W., Hartig, T., Warber, S. L., ... & Fleming, L. E. (2019). Spending at least 120 minutes a week in nature is associated with good health and wellbeing. Scientific Reports, 9(1), 7730. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-44097-3
World Bank (2020). World Social Report 2020 Inequality in a Rapidly Changing World. Retrieved from: https://www.un.org/development/desa/dspd/wp-content/uploads/sites/22/2020/02/World-Social-Report2020-FullReport.pdf
World Bank (2024). Urban Population Indicator. Retrieved from: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.URB.TOTL.IN.ZS?end=2023&start=1960&view=chart
World Health Organization. (2017). Urban green space interventions and health: A review of impacts and effectiveness. WHO Regional Office for Europe, Copenhagen. Retrieved from: http://www.euro.who.int/__data/assets/pdf_file/0010/337690/FULL-REPORT-for-LLP.pdf?ua=1
Worthington, R. L., & Whittaker, T. A. (2006). Scale development research: A content analysis and recommendations for best practices. The Counseling Psychologist, 34(6), 806–838. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000006288127
Yıldızbaş, N. T., Gençay, G., Birben, Ü., Oskay, F., Perkumienė, D., Škėma, M., & Aleinikovas, M. (2025). Benefits Beyond the Physical: How Urban Green Areas Shape Public Health and Environmental Awareness in Istanbul. Forests, 16(5), 786. https://doi.org/10.3390/f16050786
Zhang, F., & Qian, H. (2024). A comprehensive review of the environmental benefits of urban green spaces. Environmental Research, 118837. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2024.118837
Zhang, H., Chen, B., Sun, Z., & Bao, Z. (2013). Landscape perception and recreation needs in urban green space in Fuyang, Hangzhou, China. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 12(1), 44–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2012.11.001
Zhang, J. W., Howell, R. T., & Iyer, R. (2014). Engagement with natural beauty moderates the positive relation between connectedness with nature and psychological well-being. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 38, 55-63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2013.12.013
Zhang, Y., Van den Berg, A. E., Van Dijk, T., & Weitkamp, G. (2017). Quality over quantity: Contribution of urban green space to neighborhood satisfaction. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 14(5), 535. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph14050535

Details

Primary Language

English

Subjects

Sports and Recreation

Journal Section

Research Article

Authors

Buket Aydemir
0000-0001-9567-5382
Türkiye

Güney Çetinkaya ^*
0000-0002-1757-5105
Türkiye

Early Pub Date

March 7, 2026

Publication Date

March 7, 2026

Submission Date

July 17, 2025

Acceptance Date

November 21, 2025

Published in Issue

Year 2026 Volume: 17 Number: 1

DOI

https://doi.org/10.54141/psbd.1744497

IZ

https://izlik.org/JA33AW85GA

Cite

RIS / Bibtex

APA

Aydemir, B., & Çetinkaya, G. (2026). Psychometric Properties of the Turkish Version of the Green Space Use Satisfaction Scale. Pamukkale Journal of Sport Sciences, 17(1), 44-69. https://doi.org/10.54141/psbd.1744497

AMA

1.Aydemir B, Çetinkaya G. Psychometric Properties of the Turkish Version of the Green Space Use Satisfaction Scale. Pamukkale J Sport Sci. 2026;17(1):44-69. doi:10.54141/psbd.1744497

Chicago

Aydemir, Buket, and Güney Çetinkaya. 2026. “Psychometric Properties of the Turkish Version of the Green Space Use Satisfaction Scale”. Pamukkale Journal of Sport Sciences 17 (1): 44-69. https://doi.org/10.54141/psbd.1744497.

EndNote

Aydemir B, Çetinkaya G (April 1, 2026) Psychometric Properties of the Turkish Version of the Green Space Use Satisfaction Scale. Pamukkale Journal of Sport Sciences 17 1 44–69.

IEEE

[1]B. Aydemir and G. Çetinkaya, “Psychometric Properties of the Turkish Version of the Green Space Use Satisfaction Scale”, Pamukkale J Sport Sci, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 44–69, Apr. 2026, doi: 10.54141/psbd.1744497.

ISNAD

Aydemir, Buket - Çetinkaya, Güney. “Psychometric Properties of the Turkish Version of the Green Space Use Satisfaction Scale”. Pamukkale Journal of Sport Sciences 17/1 (April 1, 2026): 44-69. https://doi.org/10.54141/psbd.1744497.

JAMA

1.Aydemir B, Çetinkaya G. Psychometric Properties of the Turkish Version of the Green Space Use Satisfaction Scale. Pamukkale J Sport Sci. 2026;17:44–69.

MLA

Aydemir, Buket, and Güney Çetinkaya. “Psychometric Properties of the Turkish Version of the Green Space Use Satisfaction Scale”. Pamukkale Journal of Sport Sciences, vol. 17, no. 1, Apr. 2026, pp. 44-69, doi:10.54141/psbd.1744497.

Vancouver

1.Buket Aydemir, Güney Çetinkaya. Psychometric Properties of the Turkish Version of the Green Space Use Satisfaction Scale. Pamukkale J Sport Sci. 2026 Apr. 1;17(1):44-69. doi:10.54141/psbd.1744497