Content uploaded by Nuri Türk
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Nuri Türk on Jan 01, 2025
Content may be subject to copyright.
Tarih Okulu Dergisi (TOD)
Journal of History School (JOHS)
(2024), 17(73), 3121-3141
Authenticity process
http://dx.doi.org/10.29228/joh.78675
Makale türü:
Article type: Research article
Kabul tarihi
04.10.2024
10.12.2024
31.12.2024
Submitted date
Accepted date
Online publishing date
Atıf Bilgisi / Reference Information
&
. Journal of History School, 73, 3121-3141
[3121]
BAĞLANMA STİLLERİ ÖLÇEĞİ KISA FORMU’NUN PSİKOMETRİK
ÖZELLİKLERİNİN İNCELENMESİ1
Metin ÇELİK2 & Nuri TÜRK3
Öz
a
el
-
b
1 50, 2. yazar: % 50. Siirt
, 25.09.2024 tarih, 7609
2Dr. ., Siirt Fen Edebiyat Psikoloji Sosyal Psikoloji
metincelik@siirt.edu.tr, Orcid: 0000-0001-5739-1522
3. ., Siirt
Rehberlik nuri.turk@siirt.edu.tr, Orcid: 0000-0002-7059-9528
[3122]
Anahtar Kelimeler: .
Investigation of Psychometric Properties of Attachment Styles Scale Short
Form
Abstract
This study aimed to adapt the Attachment Styles Scale Short Form to Turkish culture. In
order to perform the validity and reliability analyses of the scale, 374 university students
were reached by convenience sampling method. Attachment Styles Scale Short Form,
Life Satisfaction Scale and Fear of Happiness Scale were used as data collection tools.
According to the results of the reliability analyses of the Attachment Styles Scale Short
Form, Cronbach's alpha values were .76 for secure attachment, .76 for anxious attachment
and .83 for avoidant attachment. Furthermore, the good level of item discrimination index
values ensured that the internal validity of the scale was strong. According to the results
of CFA conducted to ensure the construct validity of the scale, the model fit values were
at an acceptable level. Item factor loadings were found to be between .45 and .83 for
secure attachment, .47 and .75 for anxious attachment and .67 and .79 for avoidant
attachment. Besides, the results of convergent-divergent validity and measurement
invariance analyses diversified and expanded the method of the study. According to the
results of criterion validity, secure attachment has negative significant relationships with
fear of happiness and positive significant relationships with life satisfaction. Anxious and
avoidant attachment had negative significant relationships with life satisfaction and
positive significant relationships with fear of happiness. Consequently, Attachment Styles
Scale Short Form, which was adapted, can be said to be a valid and reliable measurement
tool in the Turkish sample.
Keywords: Attachment Styles, Secure Attachment, Validity, Reliability.
GİRİŞ
-
[3123]
2023).
ampirik bulgularla desteklenmesi, birey
-
kendilerini rahat hissetmektedirler (Ainsworth et al., 1978). Bu bireyler olumlu
-
bak
-
yorumlanmak
[3124]
-
Bu
YÖNTEM
-
[3125]
Katılımcılar
-
Tablo 1.
Kategoriler
n
%
Cinsiyet
Erkek
107
267
28.6
71.4
Orta
69
290
15
18.4
77.5
4.0
206
81
31
56
55.1
21.7
8.3
15.0
Anne-Baba
Tutumu
Koruyucu
Demokrat
Otoriter
109
101
69
95
29.1
27.0
18.4
25.4
Toplam
374
100
Veri Toplama Araçları
[3126]
likert tipidir. Test-
-
tekrar-
Dil Kapsam Geçerliği
(25.09.2024-
herhangi
[3127]
Veri Analizi
pua
-
- de
-
BULGULAR
[3128]
Tablo 2.
Maddeler
Ortalama
Standart
Sapma
Madde Toplam
Ortak
Madde 1
3.6
1.4
-.29
-.60
.41
.40
Madde 2
3.7
1.4
-.26
-.53
.64
.68
Madde 3
4.4
1.3
-.68
-.16
.66
.72
Madde 4
4.4
1.2
-.72
.12
.53
.59
Madde 5
2.6
1.3
.53
-.40
.43
.50
Madde 6
3.2
1.6
.14
-1.0
.62
.64
Madde 7
2.9
1.5
.33
-.82
.58
.58
Madde 8
2.5
1.5
.71
-.61
.59
.64
Madde 9
3.4
1.6
.00
-1.0
.60
.59
Madde10
4.3
1.5
-.50
-.73
.64
.68
Madde11
3.7
1.5
-.23
-.90
.69
.70
Madde12
3.4
1.6
.00
-1.0
.67
.65
-
Geçerlilik Analizi ile İlgili Bulgular
el uyumu (X2 uyum testi, X2 /sd),
Fid
[3129]
Tablo 3.
X2/df
CFI
IFI
AGFI
GFI
RMSEA
SRMR
Kabul Edilebilir
Uyum
3<-<5
Modelin Uyum
2.9
.94
.94
.90
.93
.07
.05
.90
.92
2
AGFI=..90, GFI=93, RMSEA=.07, SRMR=.05 NFI=.90 VE TLI=.92
2
mektedir.
Şekil 1
[3130]
Tablo 4.
CR
AVE
MSV
ASV
.77
.47
.07
.07
.68
.75
.45
.38
.22
-.27
.66
.82
.55
.38
.22
-.27
.62
.74
Ölçme Değişmezliğine İlişkin Bulgular
[3131]
Tablo 5.
Modeller
X2
(df)
X2/df
CFI
RMSEA
p
Karar
Anne Baba Tutumu
355.2
(204)
1.7
.904
.045
/
/
/
/
/
Metrik
385.1
(231)
1.6
.902
.042
29.9
(27)
.318
.002
.003
Skalar
423.8
(267)
1.5
.900
.040
38.73
(36)
.348
.002
.002
471.34
(303)
1.5
.893
.039
47.51
(36)
.095
.007
.001
Cinsiyet
227.41
(102)
2.230
.900
.062
/
/
/
/
/
Metrik
232.74
(111)
2.097
.902
.059
5.33
(9)
.805
-.002
.003
Skalar
253.04
(123)
2.057
.896
.058
20.29
(12)
.062
.006
.001
226.72
(135)
1.976
.894
.056
13.68
(12)
.320
.002
.002
-.002 ile- .007
-
-
k modelden skalar
Madde Ayırt Ediciliği
[3132]
Tablo 6.
t
p
Madde 1
15.0
00
Madde 2
21.4
00
Madde 3
20.8
00
Madde 4
14.8
00
Madde 5
13.6
00
Madde 6
24.6
00
Madde 7
20.4
00
Madde 8
24.6
00
Madde 9
19.8
00
Madde 10
21.6
00
Madde 11
24.9
00
Madde 12
25.4
00
gruplar
t
Ölçüt Geçerliliği
Tablo 7.
istatistikler ve korelasyon verileri
n
Ortalama
SD
1
2
3
4
5
166
4.0
1.0
-
166
2.7
1.0
-
166
3.5
1.3
-
166
3.7
1.4
.24**
-30**
-.41**
-
5.Mutluluk Korkusu
166
3.2
1.5
-.20**
.45**
.47**
-
r
pozitif ve mutluluk korkusu (r=-.
(r=-.
mutluluk korkusu (r=.45)
[3133]
(r=-.
(r=.47)
Güvenirlik Analizleri ile İlgili Bulgular
Tablo 8.
Alt Boyutlar
Cronbach Alfa (a)
(CR)
.75
.77
.75
.75
.82
.82
TARTIŞMA, SONUÇ VE ÖNERİLER
Cronbach Alfa de-
[3134]
- .69) ve ortak varyans
-
- .55),
-
r (r=-.
(r=-.
r=-. (r=.45) ve
(r=.47)
Temi
mutluluk korkusunu azaltmada
[3135]
KAYNAKÇA / REFERENCES
[3136]
[3137]
[3138]
[3139]
EXTENDED ABSTRACT
Purpose: Different models have been proposed in studies related to attachment
theory. One of these models is the three-dimensional attachment theory
developed by Ainsworth et al. (1978). This model, which consists of secure,
anxious-ambivalent and avoidant attachment styles, is among the most accepted
attachment approaches today. Securely attached individuals feel comfortable in
close relationships (Ainsworth et al., 1978). These individuals have positive self-
perception and self- a, 2009). Secure attachment
makes it easier to empathise with others and to establish sincere relationships
(Mallon, 2008). Securely attached parent-caregivers are needed for the formation
of secure attachment, which is seen as a prerequisite for healthy and qualified
relationships. Individuals with anxious-ambivalent attachment style are known to
dislike physical closeness (Bell & Ainsworth, 1972). One of the reasons for this
situation is the inconsistent behaviour of the caregiver towards the needs of the
child (Aronson et al., 2012). Individuals who are exposed to this inconsistency
experience fear of rejection and desire for closeness in a sense of intense
uncertainty (Mikulincer et al., 2013). Furthermore, insensitive and indifferent
behaviour of parents or caregivers towards their children leads to fear of closeness
individuals protest against separation. This protest is interpreted as an effort to
reduce anger by moving away from the person to whom the individual is attached
(Ainsworth, 1979). For this reason, individuals with avoidant attachment
maintain distance in their relationships and hide their feelings. Attachment Styles
[3140]
Scale (Feeney et al., 1994) and Three Dimensional Attachment Styles Scale
(Erzen, 2016) were developed based on the three-dimensional structure of
attachment styles. The multi-item nature of both the 4-dimensional and 3-
dimensional attachment styles scales may decrease the data quality because it
may increase the fatigue and inattention of individuals. Besides, the development
of short forms of the scales is seen as one of the ways to overcome resource and
time limitations. Within this context, 40-item Attachment Styles Scale (Feeney et
al., 1994) was shortened to 12 items by Iwanaga et al. (2018). This study aims to
examine the validity and reliability of this scale consisting of three sub-
dimensions and 12 items in Turkish culture.
Method: The data of the study were analysed using SSPS 27 and AMOS 24
programs. Statistical significance value was determined as p<.05. For validity
analyses, first level multifactor confirmatory factor analysis, convergent and
discriminant validity, criterion validity, item discrimination, and language and
content validity were examined. Cronbach's Alpha reliability coefficient and
combined reliability value method were used to determine the reliability of the
scale. For CFA, model fit criteria, comparative fit indices, absolute fit values and
residual fit values were taken as criteria. Within the scope of the internal validity
of the scale, the item mean scores between the lower 27% and upper 27% groups
were tested using t test. Since the scale does not give a total score, each subscale
was evaluated within itself. Fear of Happiness and Life Satisfaction Scale were
used for criterion validity. There are different opinions in the literature about
which fit indices should be evaluated at the reporting stage in measurement
invariance studies. This study analysed the observed change in chi-square, CFI
and RMSEA values for measurement invariance. For measurement invariance,
the observed change in chi-
researchers
most appropriate fit index to explain the relationship between latent and observed
CFI at the scalar invariance stage (Chen, 2007;
Cheung & Rensvold, 2002). Measurement invariance in this study observed
change in chi-square, CFI and RMSEA values were analysed.
Results: According to the reliability analysis findings, the internal consistency
coefficients of the scale were found to be .76 for secure attachment, .76 for
anxious attachment and .83 for avoidant attachment. Similarly, in the original
scale, Cronbach's alpha values ranged between .83-.85. Therefore, each sub-
scale's reliability coefficient can be said to be at an acceptable level. As a result
of the analysis conducted within the scope of the internal validity of the
Attachment Styles Scale Short Form, it was seen that the 27% difference between
[3141]
the lower and upper groups was statistically significant. In other words, the item
discrimination level of the scale can be said to be good. CFA results applied on
the scale showed that the model fit values were in the adequate range. Moreover,
the item factor loadings of the scale were between .45 and .83 for secure
attachment, .47 and .75 for anxious attachment and .67 and .79 for avoidant
attachment. The convergent and divergent validity results of the Attachment
Styles Scale Short Form (CR>.60, AVE=.45- .55) revealed that it provided
convergent and divergent validity. Chi-square analysis on measurement
invariance showed that the results were not significant.
Discussion and Conclusion: All analyses of the Attachment Styles Scale Short
Form show that it is a valid and reliable measurement tool. However, the study
has some limitations. The first limitation of the study is that the sample group
consists only of university students. In order to ensure that the scale is
generalisable, future studies can be conducted on both older adults and secondary
and high school students. This study conducted many analyses, including
measurement invariance, to test the reliability and validity of the scale. Besides,
different statistical methods such as Rash model can be used in future studies.
Moreover, collecting data through self-report in this study may cause built-in
method bias. Therefore, this bias can be prevented by using techniques such as
interviews and observations in future studies. Despite all these limitations, having
a short measurement tool that can measure the attachment styles of individuals in
T is important in terms of expanding the attachment styles literature. Future
studies using this scale may provide an opportunity for academicians and mental
health professionals to examine the causes and consequences of attachment styles
in more depth.
Çıkar Çatışması Bildirimi
Yazarlar
Destek/Finansman Bilgileri
Yazarlar
Yapay Zekâ Kullanımı Bildirimi
Yazarlar
