Psychometric Properties of Adaptation of the Social Efficacy and Outcome Expectations Scale to Turkish

Fuad Bakioglu, Ayse Sibel Turkum


APA 6th edition
Bakioglu, F., & Turkum, A.S. (2017). Psychometric Properties of Adaptation of the Social Efficacy and Outcome Expectations Scale to Turkish. European Journal of Educational Research, 6(2), 213-223. doi:10.12973/eu-jer.6.2.213

Harvard
Bakioglu F., and Turkum A.S. 2017 'Psychometric Properties of Adaptation of the Social Efficacy and Outcome Expectations Scale to Turkish', European Journal of Educational Research , vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 213-223. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.6.2.213

Chicago 16th edition
Bakioglu, Fuad and Turkum, Ayse Sibel . "Psychometric Properties of Adaptation of the Social Efficacy and Outcome Expectations Scale to Turkish". (2017)European Journal of Educational Research 6, no. 2(2017): 213-223. doi:10.12973/eu-jer.6.2.213

Abstract

The aim of this study was to examine the psychometric properties of the Social Efficacy and Outcome Expectations Scale (SEOES) on Turkish. The sample group included two groups of university students (ns= 440, 359). The validity of the scale was assessed using exploratory factor analysis, confirmatory factor analysis and concurrent validity, and the reliability was assessed using Cronbach Alpha’s internal consistency coefficient, test-retest method and item discrimination. The findings obtained from the exploratory factor analysis showed that 51.2 percent of total variance of the scale was explained and the scale consisted of two sub-dimensions like the original one. Confirmatory factor analysis indicated an acceptable fit to the data. The concurrent validity of the SEOES was respectively studied using (.65) Scale of Perceived Social Self-Efficacy; (.29) Satisfaction With Life Scale; and (-.36) UCLA Loneliness Scale. As for the scale’s reliability, the internal consistency was determined to be .91; .92 for Social Efficacy Scale; and .81 for Outcome Expectations Scale. The results of test-retest result (.90) and the findings of item analysis showed that the items in Turkish version of the scales were compatible with the original one. The present results provide evidence supporting the validity and reliability Turkish version of the SEOES.

Keywords: Social Efficacy and Outcome Expectations Scale, validity, reliability; Turkish university students.


References

Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84 (2), 191–215.

Bandura, A. (1994). Self-efficacy. In V. S. Ramachaudran (Ed.), Encyclopedia of human behavior (Vol. 4, pp. 71-81). New York: Academic Press. (Reprinted in H. Friedman.[Ed.], Encyclopedia of mental health. San Diego: Academic Press, 1998).

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W. H. Freemen Company.

Bandura, A. (2001). Social Cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annual review of psychology52 (1), 1-26.

Bandura, A. (2006). Guide for constructing self-efficacy scales. In F. Pajares & T. Urdan (Eds.), Self-efficacy beliefs of adolescents, (Vol. 5., pp. 307-337). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.

Brown, T. A. (2006). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research: (First Edition). NY: Guilford Publications, Inc.

Buyukozturk, S., Akgun, O. E., Ozkahveci, O., & Demirel, F. (2004). The Validity and Reliability Study of the Turkish Version of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 4 (2), 231-239.

Connolly, J. (1989). Social self-efficacy in adolescence: Relations with self-concept, social adjustment, and mental health. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 21 (3), 258-269. Doi: 10.1037/h0079809

Cokluk, O., Sekercioglu, G., & Buyukozturk, S. (2010). Sosyal Bilimler Icin Cok Degiskenli Istatistik SPSS ve LISREL Uygulamalari [Multivariate Statistics SPSS and LISREL Applications for Social Sciences]. Ankara: PegemA Yayincilik.

Di Giunta, L., Eisenberg, N., Kupfer, A., Steca, P., Tramontano, C., & Caprara, G. V. (2010).Assessing perceived empathic and social self-efficacy across countries. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 26 (2), 77-86. Doi: 10.1027/1015-5759/a000012

DeWitz, S. J., & Walsh, W. B. (2002). Self-efficacy and college student satisfaction. Journal of Career Assessment, 10, 315–326.

Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Laresen, R. J. & Griffin, S. (1985).The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49, 71-75.

Dogan, T. Cotok, A. N. & Tekin, G. E. (2011).Reliability and validity of the Turkish Version of the UCLA Loneliness Scale (ULS-8) among university students. Procedia Social and Behavioral Science. 15, 2058-2062. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.04.053.

Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tahtam, R. L., & Black, W. C. (1998).Multivariate data analysis (5th Edt.). New Jersey, NJ: PrinticeHall.

Hays, R. D., & Di Matteo, M. R. (1987).A short-form measure of loneliness. Journal of Personality Assessment, 51, 69–81.

Hermann, K. S., & Betz, N. E. (2006). Path models of the relationships of instrumentality and expressiveness, social self-efficacy, and self-esteem to depressive symptoms in college students. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 25, 1086–1106. Doi: 10.1521/jscp.2006.25.10.1086

Hooper, D. Coughlan, J. & Mullen, M. R. (2008).Structural equation modeling. Guidelines for determining model fit. The Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 6 (1), 53-60.

Korkmaz, I. (2005). Sosyal Ogrenme Kurami [Social Learning Theory]. Binnur Yesilyaprak (Ed.), Gelisim ve Ogrenme Psikolojisi icinde (pp. 199-222). Ankara: PegemYayinlari.

Lent, R. W., Brown, S. D., & Hackett, G. (1994).Toward a unifying social cognitive theory of career and academic interest, choice and performance. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 45, 79-122.

Miller, P. (2008). Gelisim Psikolojisi Kuramlari [Developmental Psychology Theories]. (cev. Zeynep Gultekin). Ankara: Imge Yayinevi.

Morsunbul, U. (2014). The association of internet addiction with attachment styles, personality traits, loneliness and life satisfaction. Journal International Human Science, 11 (1), 357-372. Doi:10.14687/ijhs.v11i1.2727

Ozdamar, K. (1997). Paket Programlar ile Istatistiksel Veri Analizi 1 [Statistical Data Analysis with Packet Programs 1]. Eskisehir: Kaan Kitabevi.

Palanci, M. (2004). A reality therapy oriented helping model for explaining and reducing collage students’ social anxiety. Unpublished Doctoral Thesis, Karadeniz Technical University, Trabzon. Turkey.

Smith, H. M., & Betz, N. E. (2000). Development and validation of a scale of perceived social self-efficacy.Journal of Career Assessment, 8(3), 283–301. Doi: 10.1177/106907270000800306

Sumer, N. (2000). Yapisal Esitlik Modelleri [Structural Equality Models]. Turk Psikoloji Yazilari, 3 (6), 49-74.

Sencan, H. (2005). Sosyal ve davranissal olcumlerde guvenilirlik ve gecerlilik [Reliability and validity in social and behavioral], Ankara: Seckin Yayinevi.

Wright, S. L., & Perrone, K. M. (2010). An examination of the role of attachment and efficacy in life satisfaction. Counseling Psychologist, 38, 796−823. Doi:10.1177/0011000009359204

Wright, S. L., Wright D. A., & Jenkins-Guarnieri (2013). Development of the Social Efficacy and Social Outcome Expectations Scale. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development.46 (3), 218-231. Doi:10.1177/0748175613484042

Yetim, U. (1993). Life satisfaction: A study based on the organization of personal projects. Social Indicators Research, 29 (3), 277-289.