Ergen ve Ailelerin Psikolojik Sağlamlığının Değerlendirilmesinde Kullanılan Araçların Güvenirlik Genellemesinin Meta Analiz Yöntemiyle İncelenmesi
View/ Open
Date
2024Author
Demir, Emin
xmlui.dri2xhtml.METS-1.0.item-emb
6 ayxmlui.mirage2.itemSummaryView.MetaData
Show full item recordAbstract
Psychological resilience is defined as the capacity to adapt successfully to problems despite the factors that threaten the organism and its development. The number of instruments for the assessment of psychological resilience in children, adolescents and families is gradually increasing, but generalisation studies on the reliability values of the measurements obtained are limited. As a result of the literature review, the frequently used "Psychological Resilience Scale for Adolescents (Hjemdal et al. 2006)" and "Family Psychological Resilience Assessment Scale (Sixbey, 2005)" were examined and it was determined that there was no reliability generalisation. The records obtained from Web of Science, Scopus, Pubmed, Proquest, YÖK National Thesis Centre, TR Index and DergiPark databases were examined according to the inclusion criteria. The data included in the study were analysed in open source R software with Bonett transformation using random effects model. The transformed cronbach alpha coefficients were calculated as 0.920 for the total Psychological Resilience Scale for Adolescents (READ), 0.788 for the Personal Competence subscale, 0.780 for the Social Competence subscale, 0.654 for the Structured Style subscale, 0.863 for the Family Cohesion subscale and 0.819 for the Social Resources subscale. Family Resilience Assessment Scale (FRAS) was 0.951 for the total, 0.949 for Family Communication and Problem Solving subscale, 0.792 for Utilizing Social and Economic Resources subscale, 0.861 for Maintaining a Positive Outlook subscale, 0.635 for Family Connectedness subscale, 0.873 for Family Spirituality subscale, and 0.702 for Ability to Make Meaning of Adversity subscale. The transformed cronbach's alpha coefficients obtained were evaluated for the use of the scales in basic research and clinical trials by considering the reference values presented in the literature.