Cansu TOSUN, Fatma ALTUN, Hikmet YAZICI, Mustafa ŞAHİN, Ümit PEKDEMİR, Eda YAZICI BULUT

Kolektivist başa çıkma stilleri envanterinin Türk kültürüne uyarlanması

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı Kolektivist Başa Çıkma Stilleri Envanterinin (KBÇSE) Türk kültürüne uyarlanması ile ilgili geçerlik ve güvenirlik işlemlerini yapmaktır.Yöntem: Araştırma grubu beş farklı üniversitede öğrenim gören 691 (Kadın= 523, Erkek= 168) öğrenciden oluşmaktadır. KBÇSE'nin geçerlik işlemlerinde, ölçüt bağıntılı geçerlik, açımlayıcı ve doğrulayıcı faktör analizi, güvenirlik işlemlerinde ise iç tutarlılık, testi yarıya bölme ve testin tekrarı tekniklerinden yararlanılmıştır. Bulgular: Ölçeğin yapı geçerliği orijinal formundaki beş faktörlü yapıyı koruduğu yalnız bazı maddelerin (m5, m11, m14, m20, m22, m25 ve m27) uygun faktör yüklerine sahip olmadığı için modelden çıkarılması gerektiği tespit edilmiştir. Toplam varyansın %63.08'ini açıklayan, ve 23 maddeden oluşan beş faktörlü yapının doğrulayıcı faktör analizi sonuçları ise, modelin veri ile uyumlu olduğunu göstermektedir (?2sd= 2.08, GFI= 0.90, AGFI= 0.87, CFI= 0.95, RMSEA= 0.06 ve SRMR= 0.07). Açımlayıcı ve doğrulayıcı faktör analizleri için belirlenen iki farklı örneklemle yapılan güvenirlik analizlerinde, Cronbach alfa iç tutarlılık kat sayıları sırasıyla 0.81 ve 0.84 olarak bulunurken, alt ölçekler için bu değerlerin 0.72 ile 0.92 arasında değiştiği saptanmıştır. Test tekrar test güvenirliği r= 0.82 olan ölçeğin alt faktörleri için elde edilen değerlerin ise r= 0.72 ile r= 0.84 arasında değiştiği tespit edilmiştir. Sonuç: Özgün formu ile benzer şekilde beş faktörlü bir yapıya sahip olan KBÇSE'nin Türk kültüründe geçerli ve güvenilir bir ölçme aracı olduğu sonucuna ulaşılmıştır.

Turkish adaptation of collectivist coping styles inventory

Objective: The aim of this study is to assess the validityand reliability of Collectivist Coping Styles Inventory (CCSI)for Turkish culture.Method: The research group is consists of 691 students(Female= 523, Male= 168) studying at five differentuniversities. Criterion-related validity, exploratory, andconfirmatory factor analysis were used for the validity ofCCSI while internal consistency, split half and test-retesttechniques were used in the reliability of CCSI.Results: It has been determined that the factor structureof the scale had five factors as in the original form.However, some of the items (Item5, Item11, Item14,Item20, Item22, Item25, and Item27) have been removedfrom model because they did not have satisfactory factorloadings. The confirmatory factor analysis results of thefive-factor structure, consisting of 23 items and explaining63.08% of the total variance, indicated that the modelwas compatible with the data (?2sd=2.08, GFI=0.90,AGFI=0.87, CFI=0.95, RMSEA=0.06, and SRMR=0.07). Inthe reliability analyses using the EFA and CFA samples;Cronbach's alpha coefficients were 0.81 and 0.84,respectively, and these values were found to varybetween 0.72 and 0.92 for the subscales. The test-retestreliability coeffcient's were r=0.82 for the whole scale andvaried between r=0.72 and r=0.84 for the subscales.Conclusion: It has been concluded that CCSI, with a similarfive-factor structure as the original form, is a valid andreliable instrument in Turkish culture.

PDF

___

1. Lazarus RS, Folkman S. Stress, Appraisal and Coping. New York: Springer, 1984; 14-143.
2. Carver CS, Scheier MF, Weintraub JK. Assessing coping strategies: a theoretically based approach. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1989;56(2):267- 83. [CrossRef]
3. Folkman S, Moskowitz JT. Coping: pitfalls and promise. Annu Rev Psychol. 2004;55:745-74. [CrossRef]
4. Oláh A. Coping strategies among adolescents: a cross-cultural study. Journal of Adolescence. 1995;18(4):491-512. [CrossRef]
5. Campbell-Sills L, Cohan SL, Stein MB. Relationship of resilience to personality, coping, and psychiatric symptoms in young adults. Behav Res Ther. 2006;44(4):585-99. [CrossRef]
6. Hepp U, Moergeli H, Büchi S, Wittmann L, Schnyder U. Coping with serious accidental injury: a one-year follow-up study. Psychother Psychosom. 2005;74(6):379-86. [CrossRef]
7. Kesimci A, Göral FS, Gençöz T. Determinants of stress-related growth: Gender, stressfulness of the event, and coping strategies. Current Psychology. 2005;24(1):68-75. [CrossRef]
8. Marmar CR, Weiss DS, Metzler TJ, Delucchi K. Characteristics of emergency services personel related to peritraumatic dissociation during critical incident exposure. Am J Psychiatry. 1996;153(Suppl 7):94-102. [CrossRef]
9. Bjorck JP, Cuthbertson W, Thurman JW, Lee YS. Ethnicity, coping, and distress among Korean Americans, Filipino Americans, and Caucasian Americans. J Soc Psychol. 2001;141(4):421-42. [CrossRef]
10. Dunahoo CL, Hobfoll SE, Monnier J, Hulsizer MR, Johnson R. There's more than rugged individualism in coping. Part 1: Even the lone ranger had tonto. Anxiety, Stress and Coping. 1998;11(2):137- 65. [CrossRef]
11. Kuo BC. Collectivism and coping: Current theories, evidence, and measurements of collective coping. Int J Psychol. 2013;48(3):374- 88. [CrossRef]
12. Lazarus RS. Toward better research on stress and coping. Am Psychol. 2000;55(6):665-73. [CrossRef]
13. Dabul AJ, Bernal ME, Knight GP. Allocentric and idiocentric selfdescription and academic achievement among Mexican American and Anglo American adolescents. Journal of Social Psychology. 1995;135(5):621-30. [CrossRef]
14. Rhee E, Uleman JS, Lee HK, Roman RJ. Spontaneous selfdescriptions and ethnic identities in individualistic and collectivistic cultures. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1995;69(1):142-52. [CrossRef]
15. Kağıtçıbaşı Ç. Kültürel Psikoloji: Kültür Bağlamında İnsan ve Aile. 3. Baskı, İstanbul: Evrim Yayınları, 2007;93-106.
16. Aaker JL, Lee AY. "I" seek pleasures and "we" avoid pains: The role of self-regulatory goals in information processing and persuasion. Journal of Consumer Research. 2001;28(1):33-49. [CrossRef]
17. Hamid PN. Self-monitoring, locus of control, and social encounters of Chinese and New Zealand students. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology. 1994; 25(3):353-68. [CrossRef]
18. Morris MW, Peng K. Culture and cause: American and Chinese attributions for social and physical events. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology. 1994;67(6):949-71. [CrossRef]
19. Endler NS, Parker JD. Multidimensional assessmen of coping: a critical evaluation. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1990;58(5):844-54. [CrossRef]
20. Folkman S, Lazarus RS. An analysis of coping in a middle-aged community sample. J Health Soc Behav. 1980;21(3):219-39. [CrossRef]
21. Markus HR, Kitayama S. Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review. 1991;98(2):224-53. [CrossRef]
22. Lam AG, Zane NWS. Ethnic differences in coping with interpersonal stressors: a test of self-construals as cultural mediators. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology. 2004;35(4):446-59. [CrossRef]
23. Morling B, Fiske ST. Defining and measuring harmony control. Journal of Research in Personality. 1999;33(4):379-414. [CrossRef]
24. Cross SE. Self-construals, coping, and stress in cross-cultural adaptation. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology. 1995;26(6):673- 97. [CrossRef]
25. Yeh CJ, Arora AK, Wu KA. A New Theoretical Model of Collectivistic Coping: In Wong PTP, Wong LJC. (editors) In Handbook of Multicultural Perspectives on Stress and Coping. New York: Springer, 2006, 55-72. [CrossRef]
26. Heppner PP, Heppner MJ, Lee DG, Wang YW, Park HJ, Wang LF. Development and validation of a collectivist coping styles inventory. Journal of Counseling Psychology. 2006;53(1):107-25. [CrossRef]
27. Moore JL, Constantine MG. Development and initial validation of the Collectivistic Coping Styles Measure with African, Asian, and Latin American international students. Journal of Mental Health Counseling. 2005;27(4):329-47. [CrossRef]
28. Kuo BCH, Roysircar G, Newby-Clark IR. Development of the CrossCultural Coping Scale: Collective, avoidance, and engagement strategies. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development. 2006;39:161-81.
29. Zhang D, Long BC. A Multicultural Perspective on Work-Related Stress: Development of a Collective Coping Scale. In Wong PTP, Wong LJC. (editors) In Handbook of Multicultural Perspectives on Stress and Coping. New York: Springer, 2006, 555-576. [CrossRef]
30. Göregenli M. Kültürümüz açısından bireycilik-toplulukçuluk eğilimleri: Bir başlangıç çalışması. Türk Psikoloji Dergisi. 1995;10(35):1-14.
31. Gençöz F, Gençöz T, Bozo Ö. Hierarchical dimensions of coping styles: a study conducted with Turkish university students. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal. 200r6;34(5):525- 34. [CrossRef]
32. Şahin NH, Durak A. Stresle başa çıkma tarzları ölçeği: Üniversite öğrencileri için uyarlanması. Türk Psikoloji Dergisi. 1995;10(34):56- 73.
33. Ağargün MY, Beşiroğlu L, Kıran ÜK, Özer ÖA, Kara H. COPE (Başa çıkma tutumlarını değerlendirme ölçeği): Psikometrik özelliklere ilişkin bir ön çalışma. Anadolu Psikiyatri Dergisi. 2005;6(4):221-6.
34. Boysan M. Validity of the coping inventory for stressful situationsshort form (CISS-21) in a non-clinical Turkish sample. Dusunen Adam: The Journal of Psychiatry and Neurological Sciences. 2012;25(2):101-07. [CrossRef]
35. Gershuny BS. Structural Mmodels of Psychological Trauma, Dissociative Phenomena, and Distress in a Mixed-Trauma Sample of Females: Relationships to Fear About Death and Control. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, University of Missouri, Columbia, 1999.
36. Şahin N, Şahin NH, Heppner PP. Psychometric properties o f the problem solving inventory in a group of Turkish university students. Cognitive Therapy and Research. 1993;17(4):379-96. [CrossRef]
37. Byrne BM. Structural Equation Modeling with AMOS: Basic Concepts, Applications, and Programming. 2nd Edition, New York: Routledge, 2010.
38. Hu LT, Bentler PM. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal. 1999;6(1):1-55. [CrossRef]
39. Bayram N. Yapısal Eşitlik Modellemesine Giriş: AMOS Uygulamaları. 2. Baskı, İstanbul: Ezgi Kitabevi, 2013.
40. Doll WJ, Xia W, Torkzadeh G. A confirmatory factor analysis of the end-user computing satisfaction instrument. Mis Quarterly. 1994;18(4):453-61. [CrossRef]
41. Hambleton RK. Guidelines for Adapting Educational and Psychological Tests. Annual Meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education. New York: US Educational Resources Information Center, 1996.
42. Tabachnick BG, Fidell LS. Using Multivariate Statistics. 5th Edition. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Allyn & Bacon, 2007.
43. Costello AB, Osborne JW. Best Practices in Exploratory Factor Analysis: Four Recommendations for Getting the Most From Your Analysis. Practical Assessment, Research and Evolotiorn. 2005; 10:1-9.
44. DeVellis RF. Ölçek Geliştirme Kuram ve Uygulamalar. T. Totan (Çev. ed. 3. basımdan çeviri). Ankara: Nobel, 2014.
45. Brace N, Kemp R, Snelgar R. SPSS for Psychologists: A Guide to Data Analysis Using SPSS for Windows. 2nd Edition, New York: Palgrav, 2003.
46. Siu AFY, Chang, JF. Coping styles and psychological distress among Hong Kong university students: validation of the collectivist coping style inventory. International Journal for the Advancement of Counselling 2011;33(2):88-100. [CrossRef]