Araştırma Makalesi
BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster

Turkish Adaptation of the Motivation for Solitude Scale

Yıl 2022, Cilt: 24 Sayı: 4, 1500 - 1511, 29.12.2022

Hikmet Yazıcı Fatma Altun Kobul Öykü Özyazıcı Kuzur

https://doi.org/10.32709/akusosbil.1020782

Öz

The aim of this study is to examine the validity and reliability of the Motivation for Solitude Scale-Short Form (TBOM-KF) in Turkish culture. 717 (Female= 466, 65%, Male= 251, 35%) adults comprised the sample of the study. In study, Personal Information Form, Motivation for Solitude Scale-Short Form, Multi-Measure Agentic Personality Scale (MAPS) and UCLA Loneliness Scale-Short Form were used. As a result of exploratory factor analysis (EFA), a two-factor (self-determined and not self-determined solitude) structure was obtained, which explained the model at a rate of 48.07%. In confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), it was found that the model had a good fit with the data (x2/Sd= 1.82, CFI= .95, GFI= .95, AGFI= .93, RMSEA= .05, SRMR= .05). Self-determined solitude factor was positively correlated with the life purpose and self-efficacy factors of the MAPS; not self-determined solitude factor showed negative correlations with the four factors of the MAPS and positive correlation with the UCLA Loneliness Scale. The Cronbach's alpha internal consistency coefficient was .81 and .78 for the EFA and CFA samples and the split-test reliability was .83 and .80 for the EFA and CFA samples. The test-retest reliability of the scale was .80. The results show that the scale is a valid and reliable measurement tool in Turkish culture.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Motivation for solitude solitude scale adaptation Turkish culture

Kaynakça

  • Atak, H., Kapçı, E. G. ve Çok, F. (2013). Evaluation of the Turkish version of the multi-measure agentic personality scale. Düşünen Adam The Journal of Psychiatry and Neurological Sciences, 26(1), 36-45.
  • Avan, O. ve Çakmak, S. (2020). Üniversite öğrencilerinde yalnızlık, tek başınalık ve benlik saygısı ilişkisi. Anadolu Türk Eğitim Dergisi, 2(1), 19-35.
  • Browne, M. W. ve Cudeck, R. (1992). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. Sociological Methods & Research, 21(2), 230-258.
  • Buchholz, E. S. (1997). The call of solitude: Alonetime in a world of attachment. New York: Simon and Schuster.
  • Burger, J. M. (1995). Individual differences in preference for solitude. Journal of Research in Personality, 29, 85- 108.
  • Chua, S. N. ve Koestner, R. (2008). A self-determination theory perspective on the role of autonomy in solitary behavior. Journal of Social Psychology, 148(5), 645-647.
  • Corsano, P., Majorano, M., Michelini, G. ve Musetti, A. (2011). Solitudine e autodeterminazione in adolescenza [Loneliness and self-determination during adolescence]. Ricerche di Psicologia, 4, 473- 498.
  • Côté, J. E. (1997). An empirical test of the identity capital model. Journal of Adolescence, 20(5), 577-597.
  • Dankaert, E. S., Guse, T. ve van Zyl, C. J. (2019). Psychometric properties of the Motivation for Solitude Scale–Short Form in a sample of South African adolescents. South African Journal of Psychology, 49(1), 14-26.
  • Davis, L. L. (1992). Instrument review: Getting the most from a panel of experts. Applied Nursing Research, 5(4), 194-197.
  • Deci, E. L. ve Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self determination in human behavior. New York: Plenum Press.
  • Doğan, T., Akıncı Çötok, N. ve Göçet Tekin, E. (2011). Reliability and validity of the Turkish version of the UCLA Loneliness Scale (ULS-8) among university students. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 15, 2058-2062.
  • Erpay, T. (2017). Tek başına olma ve tek başına olmayı tercih etmenin yalnızlık, yaşamda anlam ve utangaçlıkla ilişkisinin incelenmesi (Yayımlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi). Ankara Üniversitesi, Ankara.
  • Field, A. (2013). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics (4th ed.). London, England: Sage.
  • Galanaki, E. P. (2013). Solitude in children and adolescents: A review of the research literature. Psychology and Education–An Interdisciplinary Journal, 50(3-4), 79-88.
  • Hays, R.D. ve DiMatteo, M.R. (1987). A short-form measure of loneliness. Journal of Personality Assessment, 51(1), 69-81.
  • Hu, L. T. ve Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1-55.
  • Inguglia, C., Ingoglia, S., Liga, F., Lo Coco, A. ve Lo Cricchio, M. (2015). Autonomy and relatedness in adolescence and emerging adulthood: Relationships with parental support and psychological distress. Journal of Adult Development, 22(1), 1-13.
  • Keisari, S., Palgi, Y., Ring, L., Folkman, A. ve Ben-David, B. M. (2022). “Post-lockdown Depression”: Adaptation difficulties, depressive symptoms, and the role of positive solitude when returning to routine after the lifting of Nation-Wide COVID-19 social restrictions. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 13. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2022.838903
  • Knafo, D. (2012). Solitude and relatedness: A wily and complex twinship: Reply to commentaries. Psychoanalytic Dialogues, 22(1), 83-92.
  • Larson, R. ve Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1978). Experiential correlates of time alone in adolescence. Journal of Personality, 46(4), 677-693.
  • Larson, R. ve Lee, M. (1996). The capacity to be alone as a stress buffer. The Journal of Social Psychology, 136(1), 5-16.
  • Long, C. R. (2000). A comparison of positive and negative episodes of solitude (Unpublished master’s thesis). Massachusetts Amherst University, USA.
  • Long, C. R. ve Averill, J. R. (2003). Solitude: An exploration of benefits of being alone. Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior, 33(1), 21-44.
  • Marcoen, A. ve Goossens, L. (1993). Loneliness, attitude towards loneliness and solitude: Age differences and developmental significance during adolescence. In S. Jackson & H. Rondriguez-Tome´ (Eds.), Adolescence and its social worlds. 197–227, Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
  • Nguyen, T. T., Weinstein, N. ve Ryan, R. (2018). Unpacking the “Why” of Time Spent Alone: Who Prefers and Who Chooses it Autonomously? https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/sjcwg
  • Nguyen, T. V. T., Ryan, R. M. ve Deci, E. L. (2018). Solitude as an approach to affective self-regulation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 44(1), 92-106.
  • Nguyen, T. V., Werner, K. M. ve Soenens, B. (2019). Embracing me-time: Motivation for solitude during transition to college. Motivation and Emotion, 43, 571–591.
  • Nicol, C. C. (2005). Self-determined motivation for solitude and relationship: Scale development and validation (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Southern Illinois University at Carbondale, Carbondale.
  • Ost Mor, S., Palgi, Y. ve Segel-Karpas, D. (2021). The definition and categories of positive solitude: Older and younger adults’ perspectives on spending time by themselves. The International Journal of Aging and Human Development, 93(4), 943-962.
  • Özyazıcı, Ö. (2019). Üniversite öğrencilerinde tek başınalık, psikolojik ihtiyaç doyumu ve benlik kurgusu (Yayımlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi). Trabzon Üniversitesi, Trabzon.
  • Pallant. J. (2016). SPSS kullanma kılavuzu: SPSS ile adım adım veri analizi (S. Balcı & B. Ahi. Çev.). Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık.
  • Perlman, D. ve Peplau, L. A. (1981). Toward a social psychology of loneliness. Personal Relationships, 3, 31-56.
  • Schumacker, R. E. ve Lomax, R. G. (2010). A beginner’s guide to structural Equation Modeling (3rd ed.). New Jersey: Lawrance Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
  • Storr, A. (1988). Solitude: A return to the self. New York: Ballantine Books.
  • Tabachnick, B. G. ve Fidell, L.S. (2015). Çok değişkenli istatistiklerin kullanımı (M. Baloğlu, Çev. Ed. ). Ankara: Nobel Yayın Dağıtım.
  • Thomas, V. ve Azmitia, M. (2019). Motivation matters: Development and validation of the motivation for solitude scale–short form (MSS-SF). Journal of Adolescence, 70, 33-42.
  • Wang, Y. (2006). Culture and solitude: Meaning and significance of being alone (Unpublished master’s thesis). Massachusetts Amherst University, USA.
  • Winnicot, D. W. (1958). The capacity to be alone. The International Journal of Psycho-Analysis, 39, 416-420.

Tek Başına Olma Motivasyonu Ölçeğinin Türk Kültürüne Uyarlanması

Yıl 2022, Cilt: 24 Sayı: 4, 1500 - 1511, 29.12.2022

Hikmet Yazıcı Fatma Altun Kobul Öykü Özyazıcı Kuzur

https://doi.org/10.32709/akusosbil.1020782

Öz

Araştırmanın amacı, Tek Başına Olma Motivasyonu Ölçeği-Kısa Formunun (TBOM- KF) Türk kültüründeki geçerlik ve güvenirliğinin incelenmesidir. Araştırma grubu 717 (Kadın= 466, %65, Erkek= 251, %35) kişiden oluşmaktadır. Araştırmanın verileri, Bilgi Toplama Formu, Tek Başına Olma Motivasyonu Ölçeği-Kısa Formu, Çok-Yönlü Eylemli Kişilik Ölçeği (ÇEKÖ) ve UCLA Yalnızlık Ölçeği-Kısa Formu ile toplanmıştır. Ölçeğin geçerlik işlemleri kapsamında açımlayıcı ve doğrulayıcı faktör analizlerinin yanı sıra ölçüt bağıntılı geçerlikten yararlanılmıştır. Açımlayıcı faktör analizi (AFA) sonucunda modeli %48,07 oranında açıklayan iki faktörlü (tercih edilen ve tercih edilmeyen tek başına olma) bir yapı elde edilmiştir. Doğrulayıcı faktör analizi (DFA) sonucunda ise modelin veri ile uyumunun iyi düzeyde olduğu bulunmuştur (X2/sd= 1,82, CFI= 0,95, GFI= 0,95, AGFI= 0,93, RMSEA= 0,05, SRMR= 0,05). Ölçüt bağıntılı geçerlik işlemlerinde tercih edilen tek başına olma faktörü ÇEKÖ’nün yaşam amacı ve öz yeterlilik faktörleri ile pozitif yönde; tercih edilmeyen tek başına olma faktörü ÇEKÖ’nün dört alt faktörü ile negatif, UCLA Yalnızlık Ölçeği ile pozitif yönde anlamlı ilişkiler göstermiştir. Ölçeğin Cronbach alfa iç tutarlık katsayıları AFA ve DFA örneklemleri için sırasıyla .81 ve .78, testi yarıya bölme güvenirliği AFA ve DFA örneklemleri için sırasıyla .83 ve .80 bulunmuştur. Tüm ölçeğin test-tekrar test güvenirliği 0.80’dir. Sonuçlar ölçeğin Türk kültüründe geçerli ve güvenilir bir ölçme aracı olduğunu göstermektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Tek başına olma motivasyonu tek başınalık ölçek uyarlama Türk kültürü

Kaynakça

  • Atak, H., Kapçı, E. G. ve Çok, F. (2013). Evaluation of the Turkish version of the multi-measure agentic personality scale. Düşünen Adam The Journal of Psychiatry and Neurological Sciences, 26(1), 36-45.
  • Avan, O. ve Çakmak, S. (2020). Üniversite öğrencilerinde yalnızlık, tek başınalık ve benlik saygısı ilişkisi. Anadolu Türk Eğitim Dergisi, 2(1), 19-35.
  • Browne, M. W. ve Cudeck, R. (1992). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. Sociological Methods & Research, 21(2), 230-258.
  • Buchholz, E. S. (1997). The call of solitude: Alonetime in a world of attachment. New York: Simon and Schuster.
  • Burger, J. M. (1995). Individual differences in preference for solitude. Journal of Research in Personality, 29, 85- 108.
  • Chua, S. N. ve Koestner, R. (2008). A self-determination theory perspective on the role of autonomy in solitary behavior. Journal of Social Psychology, 148(5), 645-647.
  • Corsano, P., Majorano, M., Michelini, G. ve Musetti, A. (2011). Solitudine e autodeterminazione in adolescenza [Loneliness and self-determination during adolescence]. Ricerche di Psicologia, 4, 473- 498.
  • Côté, J. E. (1997). An empirical test of the identity capital model. Journal of Adolescence, 20(5), 577-597.
  • Dankaert, E. S., Guse, T. ve van Zyl, C. J. (2019). Psychometric properties of the Motivation for Solitude Scale–Short Form in a sample of South African adolescents. South African Journal of Psychology, 49(1), 14-26.
  • Davis, L. L. (1992). Instrument review: Getting the most from a panel of experts. Applied Nursing Research, 5(4), 194-197.
  • Deci, E. L. ve Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self determination in human behavior. New York: Plenum Press.
  • Doğan, T., Akıncı Çötok, N. ve Göçet Tekin, E. (2011). Reliability and validity of the Turkish version of the UCLA Loneliness Scale (ULS-8) among university students. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 15, 2058-2062.
  • Erpay, T. (2017). Tek başına olma ve tek başına olmayı tercih etmenin yalnızlık, yaşamda anlam ve utangaçlıkla ilişkisinin incelenmesi (Yayımlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi). Ankara Üniversitesi, Ankara.
  • Field, A. (2013). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics (4th ed.). London, England: Sage.
  • Galanaki, E. P. (2013). Solitude in children and adolescents: A review of the research literature. Psychology and Education–An Interdisciplinary Journal, 50(3-4), 79-88.
  • Hays, R.D. ve DiMatteo, M.R. (1987). A short-form measure of loneliness. Journal of Personality Assessment, 51(1), 69-81.
  • Hu, L. T. ve Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1-55.
  • Inguglia, C., Ingoglia, S., Liga, F., Lo Coco, A. ve Lo Cricchio, M. (2015). Autonomy and relatedness in adolescence and emerging adulthood: Relationships with parental support and psychological distress. Journal of Adult Development, 22(1), 1-13.
  • Keisari, S., Palgi, Y., Ring, L., Folkman, A. ve Ben-David, B. M. (2022). “Post-lockdown Depression”: Adaptation difficulties, depressive symptoms, and the role of positive solitude when returning to routine after the lifting of Nation-Wide COVID-19 social restrictions. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 13. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2022.838903
  • Knafo, D. (2012). Solitude and relatedness: A wily and complex twinship: Reply to commentaries. Psychoanalytic Dialogues, 22(1), 83-92.
  • Larson, R. ve Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1978). Experiential correlates of time alone in adolescence. Journal of Personality, 46(4), 677-693.
  • Larson, R. ve Lee, M. (1996). The capacity to be alone as a stress buffer. The Journal of Social Psychology, 136(1), 5-16.
  • Long, C. R. (2000). A comparison of positive and negative episodes of solitude (Unpublished master’s thesis). Massachusetts Amherst University, USA.
  • Long, C. R. ve Averill, J. R. (2003). Solitude: An exploration of benefits of being alone. Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior, 33(1), 21-44.
  • Marcoen, A. ve Goossens, L. (1993). Loneliness, attitude towards loneliness and solitude: Age differences and developmental significance during adolescence. In S. Jackson & H. Rondriguez-Tome´ (Eds.), Adolescence and its social worlds. 197–227, Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
  • Nguyen, T. T., Weinstein, N. ve Ryan, R. (2018). Unpacking the “Why” of Time Spent Alone: Who Prefers and Who Chooses it Autonomously? https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/sjcwg
  • Nguyen, T. V. T., Ryan, R. M. ve Deci, E. L. (2018). Solitude as an approach to affective self-regulation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 44(1), 92-106.
  • Nguyen, T. V., Werner, K. M. ve Soenens, B. (2019). Embracing me-time: Motivation for solitude during transition to college. Motivation and Emotion, 43, 571–591.
  • Nicol, C. C. (2005). Self-determined motivation for solitude and relationship: Scale development and validation (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Southern Illinois University at Carbondale, Carbondale.
  • Ost Mor, S., Palgi, Y. ve Segel-Karpas, D. (2021). The definition and categories of positive solitude: Older and younger adults’ perspectives on spending time by themselves. The International Journal of Aging and Human Development, 93(4), 943-962.
  • Özyazıcı, Ö. (2019). Üniversite öğrencilerinde tek başınalık, psikolojik ihtiyaç doyumu ve benlik kurgusu (Yayımlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi). Trabzon Üniversitesi, Trabzon.
  • Pallant. J. (2016). SPSS kullanma kılavuzu: SPSS ile adım adım veri analizi (S. Balcı & B. Ahi. Çev.). Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık.
  • Perlman, D. ve Peplau, L. A. (1981). Toward a social psychology of loneliness. Personal Relationships, 3, 31-56.
  • Schumacker, R. E. ve Lomax, R. G. (2010). A beginner’s guide to structural Equation Modeling (3rd ed.). New Jersey: Lawrance Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
  • Storr, A. (1988). Solitude: A return to the self. New York: Ballantine Books.
  • Tabachnick, B. G. ve Fidell, L.S. (2015). Çok değişkenli istatistiklerin kullanımı (M. Baloğlu, Çev. Ed. ). Ankara: Nobel Yayın Dağıtım.
  • Thomas, V. ve Azmitia, M. (2019). Motivation matters: Development and validation of the motivation for solitude scale–short form (MSS-SF). Journal of Adolescence, 70, 33-42.
  • Wang, Y. (2006). Culture and solitude: Meaning and significance of being alone (Unpublished master’s thesis). Massachusetts Amherst University, USA.
  • Winnicot, D. W. (1958). The capacity to be alone. The International Journal of Psycho-Analysis, 39, 416-420.
Toplam 39 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil Türkçe
Bölüm Psikoloji
Yazarlar

Hikmet Yazıcı 0000-0002-0250-1453

Fatma Altun Kobul 0000-0001-8523-7768

Öykü Özyazıcı Kuzur 0000-0002-0194-9352

Yayımlanma Tarihi 29 Aralık 2022
Gönderilme Tarihi 8 Kasım 2021
Yayımlandığı Sayı Yıl 2022 Cilt: 24 Sayı: 4

Kaynak Göster

APA Yazıcı, H., Altun Kobul, F., & Özyazıcı Kuzur, Ö. (2022). Tek Başına Olma Motivasyonu Ölçeğinin Türk Kültürüne Uyarlanması. Afyon Kocatepe Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 24(4), 1500-1511. https://doi.org/10.32709/akusosbil.1020782
 Kapak Resmi İndir

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Derginin Tüm Sayıları için Tıklayınız.