Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

Akılcı ve Sezgisel Karar Verme Stilleri Ölçeğinin Türkçeye Uyarlanması

Year 2020, Volume: 16 Issue: Eğitim ve Toplum Özel sayısı, 5995 - 6013, 31.12.2020
https://doi.org/10.26466/opus.720827

Abstract

Bu araştırmada rasyonel ve sezgisel karar verme biçimleri ölçeğini Türkçe'ye uyarlayıp, güvenilirliğini ve geçerliliğini incelemek amaçlanmıştır. Veriler, 357 kadın ve 383 erkek olmak üzere toplam 740 üniversite öğrencisi grubundan toplanmıştır. Doğrulayıcı faktör analizi ile ölçeğin psikometrik özellikleri Mplus Programında incelenmiştir. Akılcı ve sezgisel karar verme ölçeği ile karar verme stilleri ölçeği arasındaki ilişki ölçüt geçerliliği kapsamında incelenmiştir. Ölçeğin ölçüt ile ilgili geçerliliği, iç tutarlılığı ve test-tekrar test güvenirliği SPSS programında hesaplanmıştır. Doğrulayıcı faktör analizi sonuçları, akılcı ve sezgisel karar stilleri ölçeğinin iki faktörlü yapısının doğrulandığını göstermiştir. Ölçüt geçerlik kapsamında rasyonel ve sezgisel karar biçimleri ölçeği ile karar verme biçimleri alt ölçekleri arasında pozitif korelasyonlar bulunmuştur. Toplam ölçek için Cronbach’ın alfa değeri .80'dir. Alt ölçek boyutları için, akılcı karar verme için 0,90 ve sezgisel karar verme için 0,85 olduğu görülmüştür.Ölçeğin bütünü için test-tekrar test korelasyon değeri .86 şeklinde bulunmuştur. Araştırma bulguları, akılcı ve sezgisel karar verme ölçeğinin Türkiye'deki üniversite öğrencileri ile psikometrik uyumluluğa sahip olduğunu ve yapılacak bilimsel çalışmalarda kullanılabileceğini göstermiştir.

References

  • Baiocco, R., Laghi,F. ve D’Alessio,M. (2009). Decision-making style among adolescents: Relationship with sensation seeking and locus of control. Journal of Adolescence, 32,963-976
  • Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2018). Handbook of data analysis for the Social Sciences. Statistical research pattern SPSS applications and interpretation (24th Edition). Ankara: Pegem Academy
  • Çolakkadıoğlu, O.(2012). The reliability and validity study of adolescent decision-making questionnaire for the high school students. Journal of The Institute Of Social Sciences Of Mustafa Kemal University, 9(19), 387- 403.
  • Driver, M. J., Brousseau, K. E. ve Hunsaker, P. L. (1990). The dynamic decision maker. New York, NY: Harper & Row
  • Driver, M. J., Svensson, K., Amato, R. P. ve Pate, L. E. (1996). A human information-processing approach to strategic change: Altering managerial decision styles. International Studies of Management and Organization, 26, 41–58.
  • Hamilton,K Shih,S.I. ve Mohammed,S. (2016). The development and validation of the rational and intuitive decision styles scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 98(5), 523-535.
  • Hunt, R. G., Krzystofiak, F. J., Meindl, J. R. ve Yousry, A. M. (1989). Cognitive style and decision making. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 44, 436–453.
  • Kinicki, A. ve Williams, B. (2013). Management: A practical introduction (6th edition). New York: McGraw-Hill.
  • Kline, R.B. (2005).Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (Second Edition). NY: Guilford Publications.
  • Lavrakas, P.J. (2008). Introduction. P.J. Lavrakas (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Survey Research Methods içinde (s.35-41). California: Sage.
  • Leykin,Y. ve DeRubeis, R. J.(2010). Decision-making styles and depressive symptomatology: Development of the Decision Styles Questionnaire. Judgment and Decision Making, 5(7), 506–515.
  • Maruyama, G.M. (1998). Basics of structural equation modeling (First Edition).CA: Sage Publications.
  • Miller, D. C. ve Byrnes, J. P. (2001). Adolescents’ decision making in social situations. A self-regulation perspective. Applied Developmental Psychology, 22,237-256.
  • Nutt, P. C. (1990). Strategic decisions made by top executives and middle managers with data and process dominant style. Journal of Management Studies, 27, 173-194
  • Özgüven, İ. E. (1994). Psychological tests. Ankara: Yeni Dogus Printing House.
  • Phillips, W. J., Fletcher, J. M., Marks, A. D. G. ve Hine, D. W. (2016). Thinking styles and decision making: A meta- analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 142(3), 260–290
  • Rowe, A. J. ve Mason, R. O. (1987). Managing with style: A guide to understanding, assessing, and improving decision making. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass
  • Rowe, A. J. ve Boulgarides, J. D. (1992). The decision maker. A. J. Rowe ve J. D. Boulgarides (Ed.), Managerial decision making: A guide to successful business decisions (s. 21–43). New York:Macmillan.
  • Rowe, A. J. ve Davis, S. A. (1996). Intelligent information systems: Meeting the challenge of the knowledge era. Westport: Quorum Books.
  • Scott,S.G. ve Bruce, R. A. (1995). Decision-making style: The development and assessment of a new measure. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 55, 818–831.
  • Sireci,S.G., Patsula,L. ve Hambleton,R.K.(2005). Statistical methods for identifying flaws in the test adaptation process. R.K. Hambleton, P. F. Merenda ve C. D. Spielberger (Eds.)Adapting educational and psychological tests for cross-cultural assessment içinde (s.93-116). London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  • Spicer, D. P. ve Sadler-Smith, E. (2005). An examination of the general decision-making style questionnaire in two UK samples. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 20, 137–149.
  • Şeker,H. ve Gençdoğan, B.(2014).Psikolojide ve eğitimde ölçme aracı geliştirme (2. Basım). Ankara: Nobel Yayınları.
  • Tabachnick B.G. ve Fidel, L.S. (2001).Using multivariate statistics (4th Edition).MA: Allyn and Bacon.
  • Taşdelen,A.(2001). Teacher candidates' decision-making styles based on some psychosocial variables. Pamukkale University Faculty of Education,10(10),40-52.
  • Ümmet,D.,İme,Y.,Çağlar,A. ve Akyıl, Y.(2020).Lise öğrencilerinde karar verme: olumsuz değerlendirilme korkusu ve başarı yönelimlerine gore bir değerlendirme.Humanistic Perspective,2(2),68-80.
  • Wood, N. L. ve Highhouse, S. (2014). Do self-reported decision styles relate with others’ impressions of decision quality? Personality and Individual Differences, 70, 224–228.

Adaptation of Rational and Intuitive Decision Making Styles Scale to Turkish

Year 2020, Volume: 16 Issue: Eğitim ve Toplum Özel sayısı, 5995 - 6013, 31.12.2020
https://doi.org/10.26466/opus.720827

Abstract

This research was designed to adapt the rational and intuitive decision styles scale into Turkish and to evaluate its reliability and validity. Research sample of the research consisting of 740 university students. Participants are 357 women and 383 men. CFA was used to test the psychometric properties of the scale in the Mplus Program. The relationship between rational and intuitive decision-making scale and decision-making styles scale was examined within the context of criterion validity. The criterion validity, internal coherency and test-retest reliability was calculated in the SPSS program. According to results, structure of the the rational and intuitive decision styles has been validated. For the criterion validity, positive correlations were found between the rational and intuitive decision styles scale and decision-making styles subscales. Cronbach’s alpha was .80 for the total scale. For subscales dimensions, it was found to be .90 for rational decision making and .85 for intuitive decision making. The test-retest correlation coefficient was .86.This research showed that rational and intuitive decision-making scale has great psychometric compatibility with university students in Turkey, and it could be used in studies with university students.

References

  • Baiocco, R., Laghi,F. ve D’Alessio,M. (2009). Decision-making style among adolescents: Relationship with sensation seeking and locus of control. Journal of Adolescence, 32,963-976
  • Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2018). Handbook of data analysis for the Social Sciences. Statistical research pattern SPSS applications and interpretation (24th Edition). Ankara: Pegem Academy
  • Çolakkadıoğlu, O.(2012). The reliability and validity study of adolescent decision-making questionnaire for the high school students. Journal of The Institute Of Social Sciences Of Mustafa Kemal University, 9(19), 387- 403.
  • Driver, M. J., Brousseau, K. E. ve Hunsaker, P. L. (1990). The dynamic decision maker. New York, NY: Harper & Row
  • Driver, M. J., Svensson, K., Amato, R. P. ve Pate, L. E. (1996). A human information-processing approach to strategic change: Altering managerial decision styles. International Studies of Management and Organization, 26, 41–58.
  • Hamilton,K Shih,S.I. ve Mohammed,S. (2016). The development and validation of the rational and intuitive decision styles scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 98(5), 523-535.
  • Hunt, R. G., Krzystofiak, F. J., Meindl, J. R. ve Yousry, A. M. (1989). Cognitive style and decision making. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 44, 436–453.
  • Kinicki, A. ve Williams, B. (2013). Management: A practical introduction (6th edition). New York: McGraw-Hill.
  • Kline, R.B. (2005).Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (Second Edition). NY: Guilford Publications.
  • Lavrakas, P.J. (2008). Introduction. P.J. Lavrakas (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Survey Research Methods içinde (s.35-41). California: Sage.
  • Leykin,Y. ve DeRubeis, R. J.(2010). Decision-making styles and depressive symptomatology: Development of the Decision Styles Questionnaire. Judgment and Decision Making, 5(7), 506–515.
  • Maruyama, G.M. (1998). Basics of structural equation modeling (First Edition).CA: Sage Publications.
  • Miller, D. C. ve Byrnes, J. P. (2001). Adolescents’ decision making in social situations. A self-regulation perspective. Applied Developmental Psychology, 22,237-256.
  • Nutt, P. C. (1990). Strategic decisions made by top executives and middle managers with data and process dominant style. Journal of Management Studies, 27, 173-194
  • Özgüven, İ. E. (1994). Psychological tests. Ankara: Yeni Dogus Printing House.
  • Phillips, W. J., Fletcher, J. M., Marks, A. D. G. ve Hine, D. W. (2016). Thinking styles and decision making: A meta- analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 142(3), 260–290
  • Rowe, A. J. ve Mason, R. O. (1987). Managing with style: A guide to understanding, assessing, and improving decision making. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass
  • Rowe, A. J. ve Boulgarides, J. D. (1992). The decision maker. A. J. Rowe ve J. D. Boulgarides (Ed.), Managerial decision making: A guide to successful business decisions (s. 21–43). New York:Macmillan.
  • Rowe, A. J. ve Davis, S. A. (1996). Intelligent information systems: Meeting the challenge of the knowledge era. Westport: Quorum Books.
  • Scott,S.G. ve Bruce, R. A. (1995). Decision-making style: The development and assessment of a new measure. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 55, 818–831.
  • Sireci,S.G., Patsula,L. ve Hambleton,R.K.(2005). Statistical methods for identifying flaws in the test adaptation process. R.K. Hambleton, P. F. Merenda ve C. D. Spielberger (Eds.)Adapting educational and psychological tests for cross-cultural assessment içinde (s.93-116). London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  • Spicer, D. P. ve Sadler-Smith, E. (2005). An examination of the general decision-making style questionnaire in two UK samples. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 20, 137–149.
  • Şeker,H. ve Gençdoğan, B.(2014).Psikolojide ve eğitimde ölçme aracı geliştirme (2. Basım). Ankara: Nobel Yayınları.
  • Tabachnick B.G. ve Fidel, L.S. (2001).Using multivariate statistics (4th Edition).MA: Allyn and Bacon.
  • Taşdelen,A.(2001). Teacher candidates' decision-making styles based on some psychosocial variables. Pamukkale University Faculty of Education,10(10),40-52.
  • Ümmet,D.,İme,Y.,Çağlar,A. ve Akyıl, Y.(2020).Lise öğrencilerinde karar verme: olumsuz değerlendirilme korkusu ve başarı yönelimlerine gore bir değerlendirme.Humanistic Perspective,2(2),68-80.
  • Wood, N. L. ve Highhouse, S. (2014). Do self-reported decision styles relate with others’ impressions of decision quality? Personality and Individual Differences, 70, 224–228.
There are 27 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Subjects Other Fields of Education
Journal Section Articles
Authors

Yakup İme 0000-0001-6818-8044

Makbule Kalı Soyer 0000-0002-9031-5721

Muhammet Şerif Keskinoğlu This is me 0000-0003-1840-2406

Publication Date December 31, 2020
Acceptance Date June 19, 2020
Published in Issue Year 2020 Volume: 16 Issue: Eğitim ve Toplum Özel sayısı

Cite

APA İme, Y., Kalı Soyer, M., & Keskinoğlu, M. Ş. (2020). Akılcı ve Sezgisel Karar Verme Stilleri Ölçeğinin Türkçeye Uyarlanması. OPUS International Journal of Society Researches, 16(Eğitim ve Toplum Özel sayısı), 5995-6013. https://doi.org/10.26466/opus.720827