Yıl: 2021 Cilt: 9 Sayı: 2 Sayfa Aralığı: 152 - 165 Metin Dili: İngilizce DOI: 10.4274/nkmj.galenos.2021.91885 İndeks Tarihi: 12-10-2021

Cognitive, Affective and Behavioral Investigation of Turkish People’s Attitudes Towards the COVID-19 Pandemic Quarantine Process

Öz:
Aim: The aim of study is to determine the attitude of the Turkish people (in cognitive, affective and behavioral dimensions) and the factors affectingthis attitude during the coronavirus epidemic that has affected the whole world since December 2019.Materials and Methods: The data collected by a scale were modeled with explanatory factor analysis (EFA), confirmatory factor analysis (CFA)and structural equation modeling (SEM), and the effects of the dimensions and the importance of the effective items in each dimension weredetermined.Results: 61.4% of the participants were male and 65.4% were under the age of 40 years. Individuals’ “questioning their purpose of coming to lifeagain” and “desire of being more sensitive to the events around them than in the past” were found to be significant, respectively. Other resultsobtained from the study are given in the relevant tables and figures.Conclusion: It was determined that the affective dimension had the highest effect on the results of EFA, CFA and SEM analyses, which wereeffective in examining the attitudes of individuals towards an event with these sub-dimensions.
Anahtar Kelime:

Türk Halkının COVID-19 Pandemisi Karantina Sürecine Yönelik Tutumlarının Bilişsel, Duyuşsal ve Davranışsal Boyutta İncelenmesi

Öz:
Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı, Aralık 2019’dan beri tüm dünyayı etkisi altına alan koronavirüs salgını süresince Türk halkının sergilediği tutumu (bilişsel, duyuşsal ve davranışsal boyutlarda) ve bu tutum üzerinde etkili olan etmenleri belirlemektir. Gereç ve Yöntem: Bir ölçek aracılığı ile derlenen veriler açıklayıcı faktör analizi (AFA), doğrulayıcı faktör analizi (DFA), yapısal eşitlik modellemesi (YEM) ile modellenerek, boyutlar arası ilişkiler ile her bir boyutta etkili olan maddelerin önemleri belirlenmiştir. Bulgular: Katılımcıların %61,4’ü erkek ve %65,4’ü 40 yaş altıdır. Bireylerin tutumlarını açıklayan alt boyutlardan davranışsal boyut üzerinde bireylerin ekonomik tedbirlere vereceği önemin en etkili değişken olduğu, bilişsel ve duyuşsal boyutlarda ise sırası ile bireylerin hayata geliş amaçlarını tekrar sorgulamaları ve çevrelerindeki olaylara karşı geçmiştekinden daha duyarlı olacaklarının önemi anlamlı bulunmuştur. Çalışmadan elde edilen diğer sonuçlar ilgili tablo ve şekillerde verilmiştir. Sonuç: Bireylerin bir olaya karşı olan tutumlarının bu alt boyutlar ile incelenmesi noktasında etkili olan istatistiksel yöntemlerden AFA, DFA ve YEM analizi sonuçlarında duyuşsal boyutun etkisinin en yüksek olduğu belirlenmiştir.
Anahtar Kelime:

Belge Türü: Makale Makale Türü: Araştırma Makalesi Erişim Türü: Erişime Açık
  • 1. Honigsbaum M. Pandemic. Lancet. 2009;373:1939.
  • 2. Morens DM, Folkers GK, Fauci AS. What is a pandemic? J Infect Dis. 2009;200:1018-21.
  • 3. Last JM. Dictionary of Epidemiology. Fourth Edition. John M. Last, Robert A. Spasoff, and Susan S. Harris (edited). 2000.
  • 4. Qiu W, Rutherford S, Mao A, Chu C. The Pandemic and its Impacts. Health, Culture and Society, Dec. 2017:1-11.
  • 5. Morens DM, Taubenberger JK, Folkers GK, Fauci AS. Pandemic influenza’s 500th anniversary. Clin Infect Dis. 2010;51:1442-4.
  • 6. Madhav N, Oppenheim B, Gallivan M, Mulembakani P, Rubin E, Nathan Wolfe N, Pandemics: Risks, Impacts, and Mitigation” (Chapter 17 in Disease Control Priorities. Editors: Jamison D.T, Gelband H, Horton S, Jha, P, Laxminarayan R, Mock C.N and Nugent R, Third Edition, The World Bank Group, Washington: DC. 2018.
  • 7. Çakır Z, Savaş H.B. A mathematical modelling for the COVID-19 pandemic in Iran. Ortadogu Tıp Dergisi. 2020;12:206-10.
  • 8. Çobanoğlu N. Bireysel, Profesyonel, Toplumsal, Bilimsel ve Siyasal Etiği Yeniden Sorgulatan COVID-19 Pandemisi. Anatolian Clinic the Journal of Medical Sciences. 2020;25:36-42.
  • 9. Sadique MZ, Edmunds WJ, Smith RD, Meerding WJ, de Zwart O, Brug J, et al. Precautionary behavior in response to perceived threat of pandemic influenza. Emerg Infect Dis. 2007;13:1307-13.
  • 10. Brewer NT, Chapman GB, Gibbons FX, Gerrard M, McCaul KD, Weinstein ND. Meta-analysis of the relationship between risk perception and health behavior: the example of vaccination. Health Psychol. 2007;26:136-45.
  • 11. de Zwart O, Veldhuijzen IK, Elam G, Aro AR, Abraham T, Bishop GD, et al. Perceived threat, risk perception, and efficacy beliefs related to SARS and other (emerging) infectious diseases: results of an international survey. Int J Behav Med. 2009;16:30-40.
  • 12. Siu W. Extended parallel process model and H5N1 influenza virus. Psychol Rep. 2008;102:539-50.
  • 13. Norman P, Boer H, Seydel ER. Protection Motivation Theory. In Predicting health behaviour Edited by: Conner M, Norman P. Berkshire, UK: Open University Press, 2005;81-126.
  • 14. Champion VL, Skinner CS. The Health Belief Model. In Health behaviour and health education; theory, research, and practice Edited by: Glanz K, Rimer BK, Viswanath K. San Francisco: CA: Jossey Bass, 2008;45-65.
  • 15. Witte K. Fear as motivator, fear as inhibitor: Using the EPPM to explain fear appeal successes and failures. In The handbook of communication and emotion. Edited by: Andersen PA, Guerrero LK. New York: Academic Press. 1998;423-50.
  • 16. Weinstein ND, Sandman PM, Blalock SJ. The Precaution Adoption Process Model. In Health behaviour and health education; theory, research, and practice Edited by: Glanz K, Rimer BK, Viswanath K. San Francisco: CA: Jossey Bass. 2008;123-47.
  • 17. Kok G, Jonkers R, Gelissen R, Meertens R, Schaalma H, de Zwart O. Behavioural intentions in response to an influenza pandemic. BMC Public Health. 2010;10:174.
  • 18. Poletti P. Human behaviour in epidemic modelling. PhD thesis. Dissertation, University of Trento. 2010.
  • 19. Fenichel EP, Castillo-Chavez C, Ceddia MG, Chowell G, Parra PA, Hickling GJ, et al. Adaptive human behavior in epidemiological models. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2011;108:6306-11.
  • 20. Enemark C. Pandemic pending. Australian Journal of International Affairs. 2006;60:43-9.
  • 21. Donner WR, Rodriguez H, Diaz W. Public Warning Response Following Tornadoes in New Orleans, LA, and Springfield, MO: A Socialogical Anaysis. Second Symposium on Policy and Socio-economic Research. San Antonio, Texas: 2007.
  • 22. Mileti D, Sorensen J. Communication of Emergency Public Warnings: A Social Science Perspective and State-of-the-Art Assessment. Washington DC: Federal Emergency Management Agency, 1990.
  • 23. Hagan P, Maguire B, Bopping D. Public behaviour during a pandemic. The Australian Journal of Emergency Management. 2008;23:35-40.
  • 24. Kağıtçıbaşı Ç. Yeni insan ve insanlar. 10. Baskı. İstanbul: Evrim Yayın Evi ve Bilgisayar San. Tic. Ltd. Şti. 2006.
  • 25. Turgut MF, Baykul Y. Eğitimde Ölçme ve Değerlendirme. Ankara: Saydam Matbaacılık. 1992.
  • 26. Aslan S, Yalçın M. Öğretmenliğe İlişkin Tutumun Beş Faktör Kişilik Tipleriyle Yordanması. Milli Eğitim Dergisi. 2013;197:169-79.
  • 27. Fishbein M, Ajzen I. Beliefs attitude intention and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Massachusetts, MA: Addison-Wesley. 1975.
  • 28. Yaşar M. Eğitimde Ölçme ve Değerlendirme Dersine Yönelik Tutum Ölçeğinin Geliştirilmesi. Eğitim Bilimleri Araştırmaları Dergisi. 2014;4:259-79.
  • 29. Smith MB. Attitude Change International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences. Crowell and Mac Millan, 1968.
  • 30. Turgut MF. Tutumların Ölçülmesi (DersNotu), No: 7, Ankara: Hacettepe Üniversitesi, 1977. 31. Petty RE, Cacioppo JT. The Elaboration Likelihood Model of Persuasion. Advences in Experimental Social Psychology. 1986;19:123-205.
  • 32. Kaplan A, İpek AS. Matematik Öğretmenliği Adaylarının Öğretmenlik Mesleğine Yönelik Tutumlarının incelenmesi. Eğitim ve Bilim, 2002;27:69- 73.
  • 33. Thurstone LL. Attitudes Can Be Measured Readings In Attitude Theory And Measurement. Ed: Martin Fishbein. New York: John Wiley&Sons, Inc. 1967;77-89.
  • 34. Tepe D, Öğrencilerin Fen Derslerine Karşı Tutumları ile Başarıları Arasındaki İlişki. Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi. Ankara: Hacettepe Üniversitesi, 1999.
  • 35. Tay B, Tay BA. Sosyal Bilgiler Dersine Yönelik Tutumun Başarıya Etkisi. Türk Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi. 2006;4:73-84.
  • 36. Koç E. Tüketici Davranışı ve Pazarlama Stratejileri: Global ve Yerel Yaklaşım. Seçkin Yayıncılık, Ankara: 2007.
  • 37. Özgüven N. Tüketicilerin Online Alışverişe Karşı Tutumları ile Demografik Özellikleri Arasındaki İlişkinin Analizi. Karamanoğlu Mehmetbey Üniversitesi Sosyal ve Ekonomik Araştırmalar Dergisi. 2011;2011:47-54.
  • 38. Bloom BS. İnsan Nitelikleri ve Okulda Öğrenme. (Çev. D. Ali Özçelik), İstanbul: Milli Eğitim Basımevi. 1995.
  • 39. Odabaşı Y, Gülfidan B. Tüketici Davranışı. Medicat Akademi. İstanbul, 2002.
  • 40. Stapleton CD. Basic Concepts And Procedures Of Confirmatory Factor Analysis. Paper Presented At The Annual Meeting Of The Southwest Educational Research Association, January 23-25 1997.
  • 41. Rennie KM. Exploratory And Confirmatory Rotation Strategies in Exploratory Factor Analysis. Paper Presented At The Annual Meeting Of The Southwest Educational Research Association, 1997.
  • 42. Büyüköztürk Ş. Faktör analizi: Temel kavramlar ve ölçek geliştirmede kullanımı. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi Dergisi. 2002;32:470-83.
  • 43. Bollen KA, Long JS. Testing structural equation models. Sage, Newbury Park, CA:1993.
  • 44. Maruyama GM. Basics of Structural Equation Modeling. SAGE Publications. Inc;1998.
  • 45. Yılmaz V, Çelik HE, Bankacılık Sektöründe Müşteri Memnuniyeti ve Bankaya Bağlılık Arasındaki İlişkinin Yapısal Eşitlik Modelleriyle Araştırılması. VII. Ulusal Ekonometri ve İstatistik Sempozyumu. İstanbul: 2005.
  • 46. Pang NSK. School values and teachers feelings: a LISREL model. Journal of Educational Administration. 1996;34:64-83.
  • 47. Yılmaz V. Consumer behavior of shopping center choice. Social Behavior and Personality. 2004;32:783-90.
  • 48. Rigdon EE. Structural equation modeling In GA Marcoulides (Ed.), Modern methods for business research, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1998;251- 94.
  • 49. Çınar İ, Saraçlı S. Öğretmenlerin Örgütsel Bağlılık ve Motivasyonları Arasındaki İlişkinin İncelenmesi: Çay ilçesi örneği”. International Online Journal of Education Sciences. 2015;7:266-81.
  • 50. DeWitte SN. Mortality risk and survival in the aftermath of the medieval Black Death. PLoS One. 2014;9:e96513.
  • 51. Platt C. King Death: The Black Death and Its Aftermath in Late-Medieval England. Oxon, U.K.: Routledge;2014.
  • 52. Jones DS. The persistence of American Indian health disparities. Am J Public Health. 2006;96:2122-34.
  • 53. Diamond J. Guns Germs and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies. New York: Norton. 2009.
  • 54. Chisholm H. Cholera. Encyclopedia Britannica. 1911;11:265-6.
  • 55. Frieden NM. The Russian cholera epidemic, 1892-93, and medical professionalization. J Soc Hist. 1977;10:538-59.
  • 56. Johnson NP, Mueller J. Updating the accounts: global mortality of the 1918-1920 “Spanish” influenza pandemic. Bull Hist Med. 2002;76:105-15.
  • 57. McKibbin WJ, Sidorenko AA. Global Macroeconomic Consequences of Pandemic Influenza.Analysis, Lowy Institute for International Policy. Sydney: Australia. 2006.
  • 58. Viboud C, Simonsen L, Fuentes R, Flores J, Miller MA, Chowell G. Global Mortality Impact of the 1957-1959 Influenza Pandemic. J Infect Dis. 2016;213:738-45.
  • 59. Mathews JD, Chesson JM, McCaw JM, McVernon J. Understanding influenza transmission, immunity and pandemic threats. Influenza Other Respir Viruses. 2009;3:143-9.
  • 60. Kavet J. A perspective on the significance of pandemic influenza. Am J Public Health. 1977;67:1063-70.
  • 61. WHO (World Health Organization), Situation Report: Zika Virus, Microcephaly, Guillain-Barre Syndrome. Weekly data report. February 2 1977.
  • 62. Dixon S, McDonald S, Roberts J. AIDS and Economic Growth in Africa: A Panel Data Analysis. Journal of International Development. 2001;13:411-26.
  • 63. Wang MD, Jolly AM. Changing virulence of the SARS virus: the epidemiological evidence. Bull World Health Organ. 2004;82:547-8.
  • 64. Keogh-Brown MR, Smith RD. The economic impact of SARS: how does the reality match the predictions? Health Policy. 2008;88:110-20.
  • 65. Dawood FS, Iuliano AD, Reed C, Meltzer MI, Shay DK, Cheng PY, et al. Estimated global mortality associated with the first 12 months of 2009 pandemic influenza A H1N1 virus circulation: a modelling study. Lancet Infect Dis. 2012;12:687-95.
  • 66. Kim YW, Yoon SJ, Oh IH. The economic burden of the 2009 pandemic H1N1 influenza in Korea. Scand J Infect Dis. 2013;45:390-6.
  • 67. Arabi YM, Balkhy HH, Hayden FG, Bouchama A, Luke T, Baillie JK, et al. Middle East Respiratory Syndrome. N Engl J Med. 2017;376:584-94.
  • 68. Jun K. MERS Outbreak Prompts South Korean Stimulus Package. Wall Street Journal. 2015;25.
  • 69. Park JM, Kim J. Hong Kong Sets ‘Serious’ Response to South Korea’s MERS Outbreak, Reuters. June 8 2015.
  • 70. WHO. Ebola Situation Report, Weekly data report. April 15 2016.
  • 71. World Bank, The Economic Impact of the 2014 Ebola Epidemic: Short and Medium Term Estimates for Guinea, Liberia, and Sierra Leone Working, 2014;90748, World Bank, Washington, DC.
  • 72. UNDP (United Nations Development Programme), A Socio-Economic Impact Assessment of the Zika Virus in Latin America and the Caribbean: With a Focus on Brazil, Colombia, and Suriname. Synthesis report, UNDP, New York. 2017.
  • 73. Schermelleh-Engel K, Moosbrugger H, Müller H. Evaluating the fit of structural equation models: Tests of significance and descriptive goodnessof- fit measures. Methods of Psychological Research. 2003:8;23-74.
APA Tunca B, Özgören E, Berk İ, Ipek Berk B, DEMİR M, Fermancı N, Babacan Ş, Akşit M, DURMAZ Y, GAZELOĞLU C, Saracli S (2021). Cognitive, Affective and Behavioral Investigation of Turkish People’s Attitudes Towards the COVID-19 Pandemic Quarantine Process. , 152 - 165. 10.4274/nkmj.galenos.2021.91885
Chicago Tunca Berkalp,Özgören Ece,Berk İhsan,Ipek Berk Buket,DEMİR MUSTAFA,Fermancı Nefise,Babacan Şevkiye,Akşit Murat,DURMAZ YEMLİHA,GAZELOĞLU CENGİZ,Saracli Sinan Cognitive, Affective and Behavioral Investigation of Turkish People’s Attitudes Towards the COVID-19 Pandemic Quarantine Process. (2021): 152 - 165. 10.4274/nkmj.galenos.2021.91885
MLA Tunca Berkalp,Özgören Ece,Berk İhsan,Ipek Berk Buket,DEMİR MUSTAFA,Fermancı Nefise,Babacan Şevkiye,Akşit Murat,DURMAZ YEMLİHA,GAZELOĞLU CENGİZ,Saracli Sinan Cognitive, Affective and Behavioral Investigation of Turkish People’s Attitudes Towards the COVID-19 Pandemic Quarantine Process. , 2021, ss.152 - 165. 10.4274/nkmj.galenos.2021.91885
AMA Tunca B,Özgören E,Berk İ,Ipek Berk B,DEMİR M,Fermancı N,Babacan Ş,Akşit M,DURMAZ Y,GAZELOĞLU C,Saracli S Cognitive, Affective and Behavioral Investigation of Turkish People’s Attitudes Towards the COVID-19 Pandemic Quarantine Process. . 2021; 152 - 165. 10.4274/nkmj.galenos.2021.91885
Vancouver Tunca B,Özgören E,Berk İ,Ipek Berk B,DEMİR M,Fermancı N,Babacan Ş,Akşit M,DURMAZ Y,GAZELOĞLU C,Saracli S Cognitive, Affective and Behavioral Investigation of Turkish People’s Attitudes Towards the COVID-19 Pandemic Quarantine Process. . 2021; 152 - 165. 10.4274/nkmj.galenos.2021.91885
IEEE Tunca B,Özgören E,Berk İ,Ipek Berk B,DEMİR M,Fermancı N,Babacan Ş,Akşit M,DURMAZ Y,GAZELOĞLU C,Saracli S "Cognitive, Affective and Behavioral Investigation of Turkish People’s Attitudes Towards the COVID-19 Pandemic Quarantine Process." , ss.152 - 165, 2021. 10.4274/nkmj.galenos.2021.91885
ISNAD Tunca, Berkalp vd. "Cognitive, Affective and Behavioral Investigation of Turkish People’s Attitudes Towards the COVID-19 Pandemic Quarantine Process". (2021), 152-165. https://doi.org/10.4274/nkmj.galenos.2021.91885
APA Tunca B, Özgören E, Berk İ, Ipek Berk B, DEMİR M, Fermancı N, Babacan Ş, Akşit M, DURMAZ Y, GAZELOĞLU C, Saracli S (2021). Cognitive, Affective and Behavioral Investigation of Turkish People’s Attitudes Towards the COVID-19 Pandemic Quarantine Process. Namık Kemal Tıp Dergisi, 9(2), 152 - 165. 10.4274/nkmj.galenos.2021.91885
Chicago Tunca Berkalp,Özgören Ece,Berk İhsan,Ipek Berk Buket,DEMİR MUSTAFA,Fermancı Nefise,Babacan Şevkiye,Akşit Murat,DURMAZ YEMLİHA,GAZELOĞLU CENGİZ,Saracli Sinan Cognitive, Affective and Behavioral Investigation of Turkish People’s Attitudes Towards the COVID-19 Pandemic Quarantine Process. Namık Kemal Tıp Dergisi 9, no.2 (2021): 152 - 165. 10.4274/nkmj.galenos.2021.91885
MLA Tunca Berkalp,Özgören Ece,Berk İhsan,Ipek Berk Buket,DEMİR MUSTAFA,Fermancı Nefise,Babacan Şevkiye,Akşit Murat,DURMAZ YEMLİHA,GAZELOĞLU CENGİZ,Saracli Sinan Cognitive, Affective and Behavioral Investigation of Turkish People’s Attitudes Towards the COVID-19 Pandemic Quarantine Process. Namık Kemal Tıp Dergisi, vol.9, no.2, 2021, ss.152 - 165. 10.4274/nkmj.galenos.2021.91885
AMA Tunca B,Özgören E,Berk İ,Ipek Berk B,DEMİR M,Fermancı N,Babacan Ş,Akşit M,DURMAZ Y,GAZELOĞLU C,Saracli S Cognitive, Affective and Behavioral Investigation of Turkish People’s Attitudes Towards the COVID-19 Pandemic Quarantine Process. Namık Kemal Tıp Dergisi. 2021; 9(2): 152 - 165. 10.4274/nkmj.galenos.2021.91885
Vancouver Tunca B,Özgören E,Berk İ,Ipek Berk B,DEMİR M,Fermancı N,Babacan Ş,Akşit M,DURMAZ Y,GAZELOĞLU C,Saracli S Cognitive, Affective and Behavioral Investigation of Turkish People’s Attitudes Towards the COVID-19 Pandemic Quarantine Process. Namık Kemal Tıp Dergisi. 2021; 9(2): 152 - 165. 10.4274/nkmj.galenos.2021.91885
IEEE Tunca B,Özgören E,Berk İ,Ipek Berk B,DEMİR M,Fermancı N,Babacan Ş,Akşit M,DURMAZ Y,GAZELOĞLU C,Saracli S "Cognitive, Affective and Behavioral Investigation of Turkish People’s Attitudes Towards the COVID-19 Pandemic Quarantine Process." Namık Kemal Tıp Dergisi, 9, ss.152 - 165, 2021. 10.4274/nkmj.galenos.2021.91885
ISNAD Tunca, Berkalp vd. "Cognitive, Affective and Behavioral Investigation of Turkish People’s Attitudes Towards the COVID-19 Pandemic Quarantine Process". Namık Kemal Tıp Dergisi 9/2 (2021), 152-165. https://doi.org/10.4274/nkmj.galenos.2021.91885