MADDE CEVAP KURAMI İLE İKİ BOYUTLU SOSYO-DEMOGRAFİK DURUM ÖLÇEĞİ GELİŞTİRME ÇALIŞMASI-I: MADDE SEÇİMİ VE FAKTÖR YAPISININ OLUŞTURULMASI
Author :
Abstract
Sosyo-ekonomik ve sosyo-kültürel durum değişkenleri davranış bilimlerinde en çok kullanılan değişkenlerdir. Ancak bu değişkenler, sınıflayıcı değişkenler olarak çalışmalarda analizlere dahil edilmektedirler. Bu çalışmada, bu değişkenlerin aralıklı ölçek düzeyinde değerlendirmesine olanak verecek şekilde bir ölçeğin geliştirilmesi düşünülmüştür. Çalışmaya 1982 ile 2013 yılları arasında basılmış ve elektronik ortamda kopyasına ulaşılabilen 266 makalenin sosyo-demografik değişkenleri incelenerek başlanmıştır. Bu doğrultuda ön çalışmaya 28 madde yazılarak başlanmıştır. Bu çalışma 50 kadın, 58 erkek toplam 108 kişiyle yürütülmüştür. Ön çalışma sonunda 4 madde atılmış, bir madde yeniden düzenlenmiş ve bir madde de eklenmiştir. İkinci çalışmaya 17-69 yaşları arasında 695 kadın, 409 erkek (2 kişi cinsiyet belirtmemiştir) toplam 1106 kişi katılmıştır. Bu çalışmada sosyo-ekonomik alt boyutundan bir madde atılmış ve 16 madde ile içtutarlık katsayısı 0,76 olarak belirlenmiştir. 8 Maddeli sosyo-kültürel alt boyutu iç tutarlık katsayısı ise 0,66 olarak hesaplanmıştır. Geliştirilen ölçeğin, iki boyutlu yapısıyla ve genel toplam puanıyla değerlendirilebilecek bir ölçek olduğu görülmüştür.
Keywords
Abstract
Socio-economic and socio-cultural status variables are the most commonly used variables in behavioral sciences. However, these variables are included in the analysis of the studies as nominal scales. This study aims to develop a scale that allows evaluating these variables in an interval scale. The study began by examining the socio-demographic variables of 266 articles that were printed between the years 1982 and 2013 and the electronic copies were accessible. In this direction, preliminary study was started by preparing 28 items. The participants of the study were 50 women and 58 men, a total of 108 people. As a result of preliminary study 4 items removed, one item revised and one item added. In the second study, a total of 1106 people, between the ages of 17 and 69 years, 695 women and 409 men (2 people did not mention gender) participated. In this study one item of the socio-economic sub-dimension was removed, and internal consistency coefficient of the 16 items were determined as 0.76. Internal consistency coefficient of socio-cultural sub-dimension with 8 items was calculated as 0.66. The developed scale is two sub-dimensional and gives a total score.
Keywords
- Adler, N. E., Boyce, T., Chesney, M. A., Cohen, S., Folkman, S., Kahn, R. L., & Syme, S. L. (1994). Socioeconomic status and health: the challenge of the gradient. American Psychologist, 49(1), 15-24.
- Aggarwal, O. P., Bhasin, S. K., Sharma, A. K., Chhabra, P., Aggarwal, K., & Rajoura, O. P. (2005). A New Instrument (Scale) for measuring the socioeconomic status of a family: preliminary study. Indian Journal of Community Medicine, 30(4), 10-12.
- Allen, L., Williams, J., Townsend, N., Mikkelsen, B., Roberts, N., Foster, C., & Wickramasing- he, K. (2017). Socioeconomic status and non-communicable disease behavioural risk factors in low-income and lower-middle-income countries: a systematic review. The Lancet Global Health, 5(3), e277-e289.
- Bairwa, M., Rajput, M., & Sachdeva, S. (2013). Modified Kuppuswamy’s socioeconomic scale: social researcher should include updated income criteria, 2012. Indian Journal of Community Medicine: Official Publication of Indian Association of Preventive and Social Medicine, 38(3), 185-186.
- Bollen, K. A., Glanville, J. L., & Stecklov, G. (2001). Socioeconomic status and class in studies of fertility and health in developing countries. Annual Review of Sociology, 27(1), 153185.
- Boyd, M. (2008). A socioeconomic scale for Canada: Measuring occupational status from the census. Canadian Review of Sociology, 45(1), 51-91.
- Callahan, C. L., & Eyberg, S. M. (2010). Relations between parenting behavior and SES in a clinical sample: Validity of SES measures. Child and Family Behavior Therapy, 32(2), 125-138.
- Chan, T. W. (2010). Social Status and Cultural Consumption, Cambridge: Cambridge Univer- sity Press.
- Coleman, J. S. (1986). Social theory, social research, and a theory of action. American Journal of Sociology, 91(6), 1309-1335.
- Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of So- ciology, 94(S), S95-S120.
- Coleman, J. S. (1990). Foundations of social theory. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
- Diemer, M. A., Mistry, R. S., Wadsworth, M. E., López, I., & Reimers, F. (2013). Best practices in conceptualizing and measuring social class in psychological research. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 13(1), 77-113.
- Dudala, S. R., Reddy, K. A. K., & Prabhu, G. R. (2014). Prasad's socio-economic status classifi- cation-an update for 2014. International Journal of Research in Health Sciences, 2(3),
- Ekehammar, B., Sidanius, J., & Nilsson, I. (1987). Social status: construct and external validity. The Journal of Social Psychology, 127(5), 473-481.
- El-Gilany, A., El-Wehady, A., & El-Wasify, M. (2012). Updating and validation of the socioe- conomic status scale for health research in Egypt. Eastern Mediterranean Health Journal, 18(9), 962-968.
- Featherman, D. L., & Hauser, R. M. (1976). Prestige or socioeconomic scales in the study of occupational achievement?. Sociological Methods and Research, 4(4), 403-422.
- Fujishiro, K., Xu, J., & Gong, F. (2010). What does “occupation” represent as an indicator of socioeconomic status?: Exploring occupational prestige and health. Social Science and Medicine, 71(12), 2100-2107.
- Goldschmidt, W. (1950). Social class in America-a critical review. American Anthropologist, 52(4), 483-498.
- Hauser, R. M. (1994). Measuring socioeconomic status in studies of child development. Child Development, 65(6), 1541-1545.
- Hauser, R. M. (2010). Intergenerational economic mobility in the United States - Measures, differentials, and trends. EurAmerica, 40(3), 635-681.
- Heimer, K. (1997). Socioeconomic status, subcultural definitions, and violent delinquency. So- cial Forces, 75(3), 799-833.
- Hollingshead, A. B. (1975). Four factor index of social status. Unpublished Working Paper, Department of Sociology, Yale University.
- Hollingshead, A. B. (2011). Four Factor Index of Social Status. Yale Journal of Sociology, 8:
- Hollingshead, A. B., & Redlich, F. C. (1958). Social Class and Mental Illness. New York: John Wiley.
- Krieger, N., Williams, D. R., & Moss, N. E. (1997). Measuring social class in US public health research: concepts, methodologies, and guidelines. Annual Review of Public Health, 18(1), 341-378.
- Kumar, N., Gupta, N., & Kishore, J. (2012). Kuppuswamy’s Socioeconomic Scale: updating income ranges for the year 2012. Indian Jornal of Public Health, 56(1), 103-104.
- Liu, W. M., Ali, S. R., Soleck, G., Hopps, J., dunston, K., & Pickett, T., Jr. (2004). Using Social Class in Counseling Psychology Research. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 51(1), 318.
- Mackenbach, J. P., Bopp, M., Deboosere, P., Kovacs, K., Leinsalu, M., Martikainen, P., Menvi- elle, G., Regidor, E., & de Gelder, R. (2017). Determinants of the magnitude of socioeconomic inequalities in mortality: a study of 17 European countries. Health and Place, 47, 44-53.
- Miech, R. A., & Hauser, R. M. (2001). Socioeconomic status and health at midlife: a compari- son of educational attainment with occupation-based indicators. Annals of Epidemiology, 11(2), 75-84.
- Mishra, D., & Singh, H. P. (2003). Kuppuswamy’s socioeconomic status scale-a revision. In- dian journal of pediatrics, 70(3), 273-274.
- Mueller, C. W., & Parcel, T. L. (1981). Measures of socioeconomic status: Alternatives and recommendations. Child Development, 13-30.
- Nakao, K., & Treas, J. (1992). The 1989 socioeconomic index of occupations: Construction from the 1989 occupational prestige scores. Chicago, IL: National Opinion Research Center.
- Nakao, K., & Treas, J. (1994). Updating occupational prestige and socioeconomic scores: How the new measures measure up. Sociological Methodology, 1-72.
- Nam, C. B., & Boyd, M. (2004). Occupational status in 2000; over a century of census-based measurement. Population Research and Policy Review, 23(4), 327-358.
- Oakes, J. M., & Rossi, P. H. (2003). The measurement of SES in health research: current practi- ce and steps towards a new approach. Social Science and Medicine, 56, 769-784.
- Patro, B. K., Jeyashree, K., & Gupta, P. K. (2012). Kuppuswamy’s socioeconomic status scale 2010-the need for periodic revision. Indian journal of pediatrics, 79(3), 395-396.
- Perry, L. B., & McConney, A. (2010). Does the SES of the school matter? An examination of socioeconomic status and student achievement using PISA 2003. Teachers College Record, 112(4), 1137-1162.
- Phelan, J. C., Link, B. G., & Tehranifar, P. (2010). Social conditions as fundamental causes of health inequalities: theory, evidence, and policy implications. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 51(S), S28-S40.
- Schöllgen, I., Huxhold, O., & Tesch-Römer, C. (2010). Socioeconomic status and health in the second half of life: findings from the German Ageing Survey. European Journal of Ageing, 7(1), 17-28.
- Shaikh, Z., & Pathak, R. (2017). Revised Kuppuswamy and BG Prasad Socio-Economic Scales for 2016. International Journal of Community Medicine And Public Health, 4(4), 997
- Shavers, V. L. (2007). Measurement of socioeconomic status in health disparities research. Jo- urnal of the National Medical Association, 99(9), 1013-1023.
- Singh, T., Sharma, S., & Nagesh, S. (2017). Socio-economic status scales updated for 2017. International Journal of Research in Medical Sciences ;5(7),3264-3267.
- Sirin, S. R. (2005). Socioeconomic status and academic achievement: a meta-analytic review of research. Review of Educational Research, 75(3), 417-453.
- Stevens, G., & Hoisington, E. (1987). Occupational prestige and the 1980 US labor force. Social Science Research, 16(1), 74-105.
- Stringhini, S., Carmeli, C., Jokela, M., Avendaño, M., Muennig, P., Guida, F., ... & Chadeau- Hyam, M. (2017). Socioeconomic status and the 25× 25 risk factors as determinants of premature mortality: a multicohort study and meta-analysis of 1.7 million men and women. The Lancet, 389(10075), 1229-1237.
- Surekha, T., Himabindu, Y., & Sriharibabu, M. (2013). Impact of socio-economic status on ovarian reserve markers. Journal of Human Reproductive Sciences, 6(3), 201-204.
- Tobias, M. (2017). Social rank: a risk factor whose time has come?. The Lancet, 389(10075),
- Vasudevan, J., Mishra, A. K., & Singh, Z. (2016). An update on BG Prasad’s socioeconomic scale: May 2016. International Journal of Research in Medical Sciences, 4(9), 4183
