Turkish Adaptation of State Mindfulness Scale: Confirmatory Factor Analysis and Reliability Study

Veli DUYAN, (Ankara Üniversitesi, Ankara, Türkiye)
Murat , (Akdeniz Üniversitesi, Antalya, Türkiye)
Elif GÖKÇEARSLAN ÇİFCİ, (Akdeniz Üniversitesi, Antalya, Türkiye)
Selen YAĞCI (CİSED, Ankara, Türkiye)
Psikiyatride Güncel Yaklaşımlar
5 0
Yıl: 2022 Cilt: 14 Sayı: Ek 1 Sayfa Aralığı: 1 - 10 Metin Dili: İngilizce DOI: 10.18863/pgy.1008106 İndeks Tarihi: 19-02-2023

Turkish Adaptation of State Mindfulness Scale: Confirmatory Factor Analysis and Reliability Study

Öz:
Mindfulness-based approaches, which have been used in many fields in recent years, have been widely accepted especially in practices in psychology and psychiatry, and have been integrated into traditional treatment methods. In parallel with the positive effects of the concept of mindfulness on mental, spiritual and physical well-being, researches have also steadily increased and various scales have been developed to measure mindfulness which can be summarized as the mindful awareness of the moment by accepting one’s experience without judgment.Some of these scales were adapted to Turkish in the last decade. Considering the extensive usage of the concept of mindfulness in health-related fields, this study aimed to introduce the State Mindfulness Scale into Turkish, as one of the important scales to be evaluated on a more solid theoretical and methodological basis. Accordingly, the source scale was translated into Turkish through the steps suggested by WHO. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was performed for the validity of the scale. Cronbach alpha reliability coefficient, Item Total Score Analysis, Guttman reliability coefficients, Spearman-Brown confidence coefficients were evaluated and the findings regarding the internal consistency of the scale were used in terms of the reliability analysis of the scale. For CFA and other analyses, 345 students at Akdeniz University were included in the study. As a result of CFA, it was found that the 21 item 2-factor structure in the source scale was compatible with the target culture (X2/Sd: 3,41; RMSEA: 0,088: CFI: 0,95). The correlation reliability coefficients of the scale ranged from 0.484 to 0.743. The Cronbach alpha value of the first factor of the scale was 0.899, the Cronbach alpha value of the second factor was 0.728, and the Cronbach alpha value for the total score was 0.921. The findings show that the validity and reliability of the State Mindfulness Scale has been ensured and the scale has been successfully adapted to Turkish.
Anahtar Kelime: Mindfulness state mindfulness mindfulness scale mindful awareness

Durumluk Bilinçli Farkındalık (Mindfulness) Ölçeği’nin Türkçeye Uyarlanması: Doğrulayıcı Faktör Analizi ve Güvenirlik Çalışması

Öz:
Son yıllarda birçok alanda kullanılmaya başlanan bilinçli farkındalık (mindfulness) temelli yaklaşımlar özellikle, psikoloji ve psikiyatri alnındaki uygulamalarda geniş kabul görmüş ve geleneksel tedavi yöntemlerine entegre edilmiştir. Kişinin yaşadığı deneyime ilişkin yargılamadan ve kabullenerek anın farkındalığı olarak özetlenebilecek bilinçli farkındalık kavramının zihinsel, ruhsal ve fiziksel iyilik hali üzerindeki olumlu etkilerine paralel olarak araştırmalar da istikrarlı bir şekilde artmıştır ve bilinçli farkındalığın ölçümlenmesi için çeşitli ölçekler geliştirilmiştir. Bu ölçeklerin bir kısmı da son on yıl içerisinde Türkçeye uyarlanmıştır. Bu çalışmada, bilinçli farkındalık kavramının sağlıkla ilgili alanlarda yaygın bir şekilde uygulanması göz önüne alındığında, değerlendirilmesi daha sağlam bir teorik ve metodolojik temele oturtulması açısından önem taşıyan ölçeklerden biri olan Durumluk Bilinçli Farkındalık (Mindfulness) Ölçeğinin (State Mindfulness Scale-SMS) Türkçeye kazandırılması amaçlanmıştır. Bu doğrultuda kaynak ölçek WHO’nun önerdiği adımlarla Türkçeye çevrilmiştir. Ölçeğin geçerliliği için doğrulayıcı faktör analizi (DFA) yapılmıştır. Ölçeğin güvenirlik analizi için Cronbach alfa güvenirlik katsayısı, madde toplam puan analizi, Guttman güvenirlik katsayıları, Spearman–Brown güvenirlik katsayıları değerlendirilerek ölçeğin iç tutarlığına ilişkin bulgulardan faydalanılmıştır. DFA ve diğer analizler için Akdeniz Üniversitesinde öğrenci olan 345 kişi araştırmaya dahil edilmiştir. DFA neticesinde kaynak ölçekte yer alan 21 madde 2 faktörlü yapının hedef kültür ile uyumlu olduğu bulgusuna ulaşılmıştır (X2/Sd: 3,41; RMSEA: 0,088: CFI: 0,95). Ölçeğin korelasyon güvenirlik katsayılarının 0,484 ile 0,743 arasında değiştiği, ölçeğe ait birinci faktörün Cronbach alfa değerinin 0,899, ikinci faktörün Cronbach alfa değeri’nin 0,728, toplam puana ilişkin Cronbach alfa değerinin ise 0,921 olduğu sonucuna ulaşılmıştır. Bulgular, Durumluk Bilinçli Farkındalık ölçeğinin geçerlik ve güvenilirliğinin sağlandığını ve ölçeğin Türkçe’ye başarıyla uyarlandığını göstermektedir.
Anahtar Kelime: Bilinçli farkındalık durumluk bilinçli farkındalık bilinçli farkındalık ölçeği bilinçli farkındalık

Belge Türü: Makale Makale Türü: Araştırma Makalesi Erişim Türü: Erişime Açık
  • Baer RA (2003) Mindfulness training as a clinical intervention:A conceptual and empirical review. Clin Psychol (New York), 10:125-143.
  • Bentler PM, Chou CP (1987) Practical issues in structural modeling. Sociol Methods Res, 16:78-117.
  • Bentler PM (1990) Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychol Bull, 2:238-246.
  • Bishop SR, Lau M, Shapiro S, Carlson L, Anderson ND, Carmody J et al. (2004) Mindfulness: A proposed operational definition. Clin Psychol, 11:230-241.
  • Bland JM, Altman DG (1997) Statistics notes: Cronbachs alpha. BMJ, 314:572.
  • Bollen KA (1989) A new incremental fit index for general structural equation models. Sociol Methods Res, 17:303-316.
  • Brown KW, Ryan RM (2003) The benefits of being present:Mindfulness and its role in psychological well-being. J Pers Soc Psychol, 84:822-848.
  • Brown KW, Ryan RM, Creswell JD (2007) Mindfulness: Theoretical foundations and evidence for salutary effects. Psychol Inq, 18:211–237.
  • Browne MW, Cudeck R (1992) Alternative ways of assessing model fit. Sociol Methods Res, 21:230–258.
  • Cerny BA, Kaiser HF (1977) A study of a measure of sampling adequacy for factor-analytic correlation matrices. Multivariate Behav Res, 12:43–47.
  • Cheung GW, Rensvold RB (2002) Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Struct Equ Modeling, 9:233–255.
  • Chiesa A, Serretti A (2010) A systematic review of neurobiological and clinical features of mindfulness meditations. Psychol Med, 40:1239−1252.
  • Cronbach LJ (1951) Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16:297–334.
  • De Vet HCW, Mokkink LB, Mosmuller DG, Terwee CB (2017) Spearman–Brown prophecy formula and Cronbach’s alpha: different faces of reliability and opportunities for new applications. J Clin Epidemiol, 85:45–49.
  • Derin G, Aydin E, Kirkiç KA (2017) A scale on the attitudes towards STEM education. El-Cezeri Journal of Science and Engineering, 4:547–559.
  • Dorman JP, Fisher DL, Waldrip BG (2006) Classroom environment, students’perceptions of assessment, academic efficacy and attitude to science: a Lisrel analysis. In Contemporary Approaches to Research on Learning Environments (Eds DL Fisher, MS Khine):1–28. London,UK; World Scientific.
  • Duyan V, Gülden Ç, Gelbal S (2012) Öz-denetim Ölçeği - ÖDÖ: güvenirlik ve geçerlik çalışması. Toplum ve Sosyal Hizmet, 23:19-30.
  • Eisinga R, Te Grotenhuis M, Pelzer B (2013) The reliability of a two-item scale: Pearson, Cronbach, or Spearman-Brown? Int J Public Health, 58:637–642.
  • Enebrink P, Björnsdotter A, Ghaderi A (2013) The emotion regulation questionnaire: psychometric properties and norms for Swedish parents of children aged 10-13 years. Eur J Psychol, 9:289–303.
  • Ermis E, Bayraktar S (2021) Çok boyutlu varoluşsal pişmanlık envanterinin türkçeye uyarlanması: güvenirlik ve geçerlilik analizi. Psikiyatride Güncel Yaklaşımlar, 13 (Suppl 1):421–440.
  • Germer C (2005) Mindfulness: What is it? what does it matter? In Mindfulness and Psychotherapy (Eds. CK Germer, RD Siegel, PR Fulton):3-27. New York, Guilford Press.
  • Gliem JA, Gliem RR (2003) Calculating, interpreting, and reporting Cronbach’s alpha reliability coefficient for Likert-type scales. 2003 Midwest Research to Practice Conference in Adult, Continuing, and Community Education, Columbus, 82-88..
  • Glomb TM, Duffy MK, Bono JE, Yang T (2011) Mindfulness at work. In Research in Personnel And Human Resources Management Vol 30 (Eds A Joshi, H Liao, JJ Martocchio):115-157. Bibgley, Emerald Group Publishing.
  • Groeneveld RA, Meeden G (1984) Measuring skewness and kurtosis. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series D (The Statistician), 33:391-399.
  • Grossman P, Niemann L, Schmidt S, Walach H (2004) Mindfulness-based stress reduction and health benefits: A meta-analysis. J Psychosom Res, 57:35–43.
  • Harrington A, Dunne JD (2015) When mindfulness is therapy: Ethical qualms, historical perspectives. Am Psychol, 70:621–31.
  • Hayes SC, Wilson KG (2003). Mindfulness: Method and process. Clin Psychol (New York), 10:161-165.
  • Hoyle RH (2000) Confirmatory factor analysis. In Handbook of Applied Multivariate Statistics and Mathematical Modeling (Eds. HEA Tinsley, MM Brown): 465–497. Cambridge, MA, Academic Press.
  • Jackson DL, Voth J, Frey MP (2013) A note on sample size and solution propriety for confirmatory factor analytic models. Struct Equ Modeling, 20:86–97.
  • Joanes DN, Gill CA(1998) Comparing measures of sample skewness and kurtosis. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series D (The Statistician), 47:183-189.
  • Kabat-Zinn J (1994) Wherever You Go, There You Are: Mindfulness Meditation in Everyday Life. New York, NY, Hyperion.
  • Kabat-Zinn J (2003) Mindfulness-based interventions in context: Past, present, and future. Clin Psychol (New York), 10:144–156.
  • Kabat-Zinn J (2005) Coming to Our Senses. London, Piatkus Books.
  • Kaiser HF (1974) An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika, 39:31–36.
  • Kırlıoğlu, HİK, Daşbaş S, Karakuş Ö (2020) Sosyal hizmet uygulamasında Mesleki Uygunluk Ölçeği: Feçerlilik ve güvenirlik. Journal of Society and Social Work, 31:793–822.
  • Kim TH, White H (2004) On more robust estimation of skewness and kurtosis. Financ Res Lett, 1:56-73.
  • Lance CE, Vandenberg RJ (2002) Confirmatory factor analysis. In Measuring and Analyzing Behavior In Organizations: Advances in Measurement and Data Analysis (Eds F Drasgow, N Schmitt):221–254, San Fransisco, CA, Jossey-Bass.
  • Langer EJ (1989) Mindfulness. Cambridge, MA, Da Capo Press.
  • Langer EJ (2005) Well-being: Mindfulness versus positive evaluation. In Handbook of Positive Psychology (Eds CR Snyder, SJ Lopez ):214–230. New York: Oxford University Press.
  • LoBiondo-Wood G, Haber J (2017) Reliability and validity. In Nursing Research-E-Book: Methods and Critical Appraisal for Evidence-Based Practice (Eds. G LoBiondo-Wood, J Haber):289-294. New York, Elsevier Health.
  • Mardia K V (1970) Measures of multivariate skewness and kurtosis with applications. Biometrika, 57:519-530.
  • Marsh HW, Balla JR, McDonald RP (1988) Goodness-of-fit indexes in confirmatory factor analysis: The effect of sample size. Psychol Bull, 103:391.
  • Moran PAP (1948) Rank Correlation and Product-Moment Correlation. Biometrika, 35:203–206.
  • Muthén LK, Muthén BO (2002) How to use a Monte Carlo study to decide on sample size and determine power. Struct Equ Modeling, 9:599–620.
  • Osburn HG (2000) Coefficient alpha and related internal consistency reliability coefficients. Psychol Methods, 5:343-55.
  • Pearson ES (1931) The test of significance for the correlation coefficient. J Am Stat Assoc, 26:128–134.
  • Puth MT, Neuhäuser M, Ruxton GD (2014) Effective use of Pearson’s product–moment correlation coefficient. Anim Behav, 93:183–189.
  • Raykov T (2007) Reliability if deleted, not ‘alpha if deleted’: Evaluation of scale reliability following component deletion. Br J Math Stat Psychol, 60:201–216.
  • Raykov T (2008) Alpha if item deleted: A note on loss of criterion validity in scale development if maximizing coefficient alpha. Br J Math Stat Psychol, 61:275–285.
  • Ross LE, Sellers E M, Gilbert Evans SE, Romach M K (2004). Mood changes during pregnancy and the postpartum period: development of a biopsychosocial model. Acta Psychiatr Scand, 109:457–466.
  • Ruimi L, Hadash Y, Tanay G, Bernstein A. (2019). State Mindfulness Scale (SMS). In Handbook of Assessment in Mindfulness Research (Eds. ON Medvedev, CU Krägeloh, RJ Siegert, NN Singh):1-25. New York, Springer Science.
  • Sauer S, Walach H, Schmidt S, Hinterberger T, Lynch S, Büssing A, Kohls N (2013) Assessment of mindfulness: Review on state of the art. Mindfulness, 4:3-17.
  • Shapiro SL, Carlson LE, Astin JA, Freedman B (2006) Mechanisms of mindfulness. J Clin Psychol, 62:373–386.
  • Shapiro SL, Oman D, Thoresen CE, Plante TG, Flinders T (2008) Cultivating mindfulness: Effects on well-being. J Clin Psychol, 64:840–862.
  • Stahl B, Goldstein E (2019) A Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction Workbook. Oakland, CA, New Harbinger Publications.
  • Sullivan GM (2011) A primer on the validity of assessment instruments. J Grad Med Educ, 3:119–120.
  • Stevens J (2002) Applied Multivariate Statistics For The Social Sciences. Mahwah, NJ,Lawrence Erlbaurn Associates.
  • Tabachnick BG, Fidell LS, Ullman JB (2013) Using Multivariate Statistics. Boston, MA, Pearson.
  • Tanay G, Bernstein, A (2013) State Mindfulness Scale (SMS): development and initial validation. Psychol Assess, 25:1286-1299.
  • Ulutaş DA, Kırlıoğlu M (2021) Adaptation of spiritual competency scale (SCS–R–II) to Turkish: Validity and reliability study. Society and Social Work, 32:1371–1387.
  • WHO (2021) Process of Translation and Adaptation of Instruments. Geneva, WHO.
  • Vreeswijk M, Broersen J, Schurink G (2019) Mindfulness ve Şema Terapi. (Çev. Ed. B Alımcı, S Çamkıran, B Demir, S Göral Alkan). İstanbul, Psikonet.
  • Yang Y, Green SB (2011) Coefficient alpha: a reliability coefficient for the 21st century? J Psychoeduc Assess, 29:377–392.
APA DUYAN V, ÇAY M, Gökçearslan Çifci E, Yağcı S (2022). Turkish Adaptation of State Mindfulness Scale: Confirmatory Factor Analysis and Reliability Study. , 1 - 10. 10.18863/pgy.1008106
Chicago DUYAN VELI,ÇAY Murat,Gökçearslan Çifci Elif,Yağcı Selen Turkish Adaptation of State Mindfulness Scale: Confirmatory Factor Analysis and Reliability Study. (2022): 1 - 10. 10.18863/pgy.1008106
MLA DUYAN VELI,ÇAY Murat,Gökçearslan Çifci Elif,Yağcı Selen Turkish Adaptation of State Mindfulness Scale: Confirmatory Factor Analysis and Reliability Study. , 2022, ss.1 - 10. 10.18863/pgy.1008106
AMA DUYAN V,ÇAY M,Gökçearslan Çifci E,Yağcı S Turkish Adaptation of State Mindfulness Scale: Confirmatory Factor Analysis and Reliability Study. . 2022; 1 - 10. 10.18863/pgy.1008106
Vancouver DUYAN V,ÇAY M,Gökçearslan Çifci E,Yağcı S Turkish Adaptation of State Mindfulness Scale: Confirmatory Factor Analysis and Reliability Study. . 2022; 1 - 10. 10.18863/pgy.1008106
IEEE DUYAN V,ÇAY M,Gökçearslan Çifci E,Yağcı S "Turkish Adaptation of State Mindfulness Scale: Confirmatory Factor Analysis and Reliability Study." , ss.1 - 10, 2022. 10.18863/pgy.1008106
ISNAD DUYAN, VELI vd. "Turkish Adaptation of State Mindfulness Scale: Confirmatory Factor Analysis and Reliability Study". (2022), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.18863/pgy.1008106
APA DUYAN V, ÇAY M, Gökçearslan Çifci E, Yağcı S (2022). Turkish Adaptation of State Mindfulness Scale: Confirmatory Factor Analysis and Reliability Study. Psikiyatride Güncel Yaklaşımlar, 14(Ek 1), 1 - 10. 10.18863/pgy.1008106
Chicago DUYAN VELI,ÇAY Murat,Gökçearslan Çifci Elif,Yağcı Selen Turkish Adaptation of State Mindfulness Scale: Confirmatory Factor Analysis and Reliability Study. Psikiyatride Güncel Yaklaşımlar 14, no.Ek 1 (2022): 1 - 10. 10.18863/pgy.1008106
MLA DUYAN VELI,ÇAY Murat,Gökçearslan Çifci Elif,Yağcı Selen Turkish Adaptation of State Mindfulness Scale: Confirmatory Factor Analysis and Reliability Study. Psikiyatride Güncel Yaklaşımlar, vol.14, no.Ek 1, 2022, ss.1 - 10. 10.18863/pgy.1008106
AMA DUYAN V,ÇAY M,Gökçearslan Çifci E,Yağcı S Turkish Adaptation of State Mindfulness Scale: Confirmatory Factor Analysis and Reliability Study. Psikiyatride Güncel Yaklaşımlar. 2022; 14(Ek 1): 1 - 10. 10.18863/pgy.1008106
Vancouver DUYAN V,ÇAY M,Gökçearslan Çifci E,Yağcı S Turkish Adaptation of State Mindfulness Scale: Confirmatory Factor Analysis and Reliability Study. Psikiyatride Güncel Yaklaşımlar. 2022; 14(Ek 1): 1 - 10. 10.18863/pgy.1008106
IEEE DUYAN V,ÇAY M,Gökçearslan Çifci E,Yağcı S "Turkish Adaptation of State Mindfulness Scale: Confirmatory Factor Analysis and Reliability Study." Psikiyatride Güncel Yaklaşımlar, 14, ss.1 - 10, 2022. 10.18863/pgy.1008106
ISNAD DUYAN, VELI vd. "Turkish Adaptation of State Mindfulness Scale: Confirmatory Factor Analysis and Reliability Study". Psikiyatride Güncel Yaklaşımlar 14/Ek 1 (2022), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.18863/pgy.1008106
Sayfa Oluşturulma Tarihi
13-05-2024 13:38

İLETİŞİM

TÜBİTAK ULAKBİM TR Dizin

Yüzüncüyıl, İşçi Blokları Mahallesi

Muhsin Yazıcıoğlu Caddesi No:51/C

06530 Çankaya / ANKARA +90 (312) 298 92 00

trdizin@tubitak.gov.tr

TÜBİTAK ULAKBİM Ulusal Akademik Ağ ve Bilgi Merkezi Cahit Arf Bilgi Merkezi © Tüm Hakları Saklıdır. Gizlilik Politikası Kullanım Şartları