SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Yükseköğretim Dergisi / 2024 / Cilt: 14 Sayı: 3

Adapting The Motivation Scale for PhD Studies to Turkish

Doktora Çalışmalarına Yönelik Motivasyon Ölçeği’nin Türkçeye Uyarlanması

Büşra Görkaş Kayabaşı(GAZİ ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0001-6650-5982
Semih Kaynak(AMASYA ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0001-9829-9634
Emrah Kayabaşı(Bursa Uludağ Üniversitesi)0000-0002-3732-9315
Gürcü Erdamar(GAZİ ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0001-6753-0151
Pages
107–120
Publication Date
2024-12-31
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Confirmatory factor analysis and explanatory structural equation modeling were used to analyze the results, and it was found that the scale had satisfactory psychometric evidence.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The main objective of this study is to adapt the MPhD scale (scale of motivation for PhD studies) developed by Litalien et al. (2015) to measure the levels of motivation of doctoral students in the culture of Canada to Turkish.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Additionally, using the “Life Satisfaction Scale” developed by Diener et al. (1985) and adapted to Turkish by Dağlı and Baysal (2016), the relationship between scores obtained from the motivation scale for PhD studies and life satisfaction is investigated within the context of criterion-based validity.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Confirmatory factor analysis and explanatory structural equation modeling were used to analyze the results, and it was found that the scale had satisfactory psychometric evidence.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:2015 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Doktora · Motivasyon · Ölçek

Abstract

The main objective of this study is to adapt the MPhD scale (scale of motivation for PhD studies) developed by Litalien et al. (2015) to measure the levels of motivation of doctoral students in the culture of Canada to Turkish. Additionally, using the “Life Satisfaction Scale” developed by Diener et al. (1985) and adapted to Turkish by Dağlı and Baysal (2016), the relationship between scores obtained from the motivation scale for PhD studies and life satisfaction is investigated within the context of criterion-based validity. To achieve this goal, first, the items of the MPhD scale were adapted to Turkish using expert opinions and language validity was tested with 30 doctoral students studying in universities in Turkey. After the formation of the final Turkish form of the scale, a total of 335 doctoral students were administered the scale and psychometric evidence for its validity and reliability was determined. Confirmatory factor analysis and explanatory structural equation modeling were used to analyze the results, and it was found that the scale had satisfactory psychometric evidence. The Life Satisfaction Scale produced valid and reliable information on the study group included in the research. The scores obtained from the adapted scale were compared with the scores of the Life Satisfaction Scale and the relationship between the participants’ motivation for doctoral studies and life satisfaction was determined.

Özet

Bu çalışmanın temel amacı Litalien ve diğerleri (2015) tarafından Kanada kültüründe doktora öğrencilerinin doktora çalışmalarına yönelik motivasyon düzeylerini belirlemek üzere geliştirilen MPhD ölçeği’ni (scale of motivation for PhD studies) Türkçe’ye uyarlamaktır. Ayrıca, Diener ve diğerleri (1985) tarafından geliştirilen, Dağlı ve Baysal (2016) tarafından Türkçe’ye uyarlaması yapılan “Yaşam Doyumu Ölçeği” kullanılarak ölçüte dayalı geçerlik kapsamında katılımcıların doktora çalışmalarına yönelik motivasyon ölçeğinden elde ettikleri puanlar ile yaşam doyumu arasındaki ilişki araştırılmıştır. Bu amaç kapsamında ilk olarak MPhD ölçeğinin maddeleri uzman görüşleri alınarak Türkçe’ye uyarlanmış ve Türkiye’deki üniversitelerde okuyan 30 doktora öğrencisi ile dil geçerliği yapılmıştır. Ölçeğin Türkçe nihai formunun oluşturulmasının ardından ölçek toplam 335 doktora öğrencisine uygulanarak ölçeğin geçerliği ve güvenirliğine ilişkin psikometrik kanıtlar tespit edilmiştir. Doğrulayıcı faktör analizi ve açımlayıcı yapısal eşitlik modellemesi kullanarak yapılan analizler sonucunda ölçeğin tatmin edici psikometrik kanıtlara sahip olduğu görülmüştür. Yaşam Doyumu ölçeğinin araştırmada yer alan çalışma grubu üzerinde geçerli ve güvenilir bilgiler ürettiği saptanmıştır. Katılımcıların uyarlaması yapılan ölçekten elde ettikleri puanlarla, Yaşam Doyumu Ölçeği puanları karşılaştırılmış ve doktora çalışmalarına yönelik motivasyonlarıyla yaşam doyumları arasındaki ilişkiler belirlenmiştir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Kayabaşı, B. G., Kaynak, S., Kayabaşı, E., Erdamar, G. (2024). Adapting The Motivation Scale for PhD Studies to Turkish. Yükseköğretim Dergisi, Cilt: 14 Sayı: 3, 107–120. https://doi.org/10.53478/yuksekogretim.1261381

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (68)

  1. Ahmed, W., & Bruinsma, M. (2006). A structural model of self-concept, autonomous motivation and academic performance in cross-cultural perspective. Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 4(3), 551–576.
  2. Bair, C. R., & Haworth, J. G. (2004). Doctoral student attrition and persistence: A meta-synthesis of research. In J. C. Smart (Ed.), Higher education: Handbook of theory and research (Vol. 19, pp. 481–534). Kluwer Academic. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-40202456-8_11
  3. Beaton, D. E., Bombardier, C., Guillemin, F., & Ferraz, M. B. (2000). Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine, 25(24), 3186–3191. https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-200012150-00014
  4. Bozanoğlu, İ. (2004). Akademik güdülenme ölçeği: Geliştirmesi, geçerliği, güvenirliği. Ankara University Journal of Faculty of Educational Sciences (JFES), 37(2), 83–98. https://doi.org/10.1501/Egifak_0000000094
  5. Brown, T. A. (2006). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research (1st ed.). Guilford.
  6. Castelló, M., Pardo, M., Sala-Bubaré, A., & Suñé-Soler, N. (2017). Why do students consider dropping out of doctoral degrees? Institutional and personal factors. Higher Education, 74, 1053–1068. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-016-0106-9
  7. Dağlı, A., & Baysal, N. (2016). Yaşam doyumu ölçeğinin Türkçe’ye uyarlanması: Geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Elektronik Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 15(59), 1250–1262. https://doi.org/10.17755/esosder.263229
  8. De Clercq, M., Frenay, M., Azzi, A., Klein, O., & Galand, B. (2021). All you need is self-determination: Investigation of PhD students’ motivation profiles and their impact on the doctoral completion process. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 16, 189–209. https://doi.org/10.28945/4702
  9. Diener, E. D., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49(1), 71–75. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa4901_13
  10. Dünya Bankası. (2022). Educational attainment, doctoral or equivalent, population 25+. World Bank Data. (Erişim Tarihi: 12 Aralık 2022).
  11. Eğmir, E., Ödemiş, İ. S., Bayar, V., Bayar, A., & Kayır, G. (2013). Lisansüstü eğitim gören öğrencilerin akademik güdülenme düzeyleri. Sakarya Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü. VI. Ulusal Lisansüstü Eğitim Sempozyumu Bildiri Kitabı, 95(6), 97–103.
  12. Erdem, A. R. (2013). Bilgi toplumunda üniversitenin değişen rolleri ve görevleri. Yükseköğretim Dergisi, 3(2), 109–120.
  13. Eurostat. (2022). Pupils and students enrolled by education level, sex and age. Eurostat Data Browser. (Erişim Tarihi: 12 Aralık 2022).
  14. Field, A. (2013). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics. Sage.
  15. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50. https://doi.org/10.2307/3151312
  16. Franke, G., & Sarstedt, M. (2019). Heuristics versus statistics in discriminant validity testing: A comparison of four procedures. Internet Research, 29(3), 430–447. https://doi.org/10.1108/IntR-12-2017-0515
  17. Gardner, S. K. (2009). Student and faculty attributions of attrition in high and low-completing doctoral programs in the United States. Higher Education, 58(1), 97–112. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-008-9184-7
  18. Gjersing, L., Caplehorn, J. R., & Clausen, T. (2010). Cross-cultural adaptation of research instruments: Language, setting, time and statistical considerations. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 10(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-10-13
  19. Gomes, C. M. A., Almeida, L. S., & Núñez, J. C. (2017). Rationale and applicability of exploratory structural equation modeling (ESEM) in psychoeducational contexts. Psicothema, 29(3), 396–401. https://doi.org/10.7334/psicothema2016.369
  20. Griffin, G. (2023). Doing a Ph.D. in a low-income country: Motivations and prospects. Higher Education Studies, 13(4), 136–148. https://doi.org/10.5539/hes.v13n4p136
  21. Grover, V. (2007). Successfully navigating the stages of doctoral study. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 2, 9–20. https://doi.org/10.28945/54
  22. Haybron, D. M. (2004). Happiness and the importance of life satisfaction. University of Arizona.
  23. Hegarty, N. (2010). Application of the academic motivation scale to graduate school students. The Journal of Human Resource and Adult Learning, 6(2), 48–55.
  24. Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43, 115–135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8
  25. Hina Batool, S., Ali, A. F., & Safdar, M. (2022). What Pakistani doctoral students want? A qualitative exploration of their research experiences. Global Knowledge, Memory and Communication, 71(4/5), 355–369. https://doi.org/10.1108/GKMC-04-2021-0074
  26. Hoskins, C. M., & Goldberg, A. D. (2005). Doctoral student persistence in counselor education programs: Student–program match. Counselor Education and Supervision, 44(3), 175–188.
  27. Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55.
  28. Ivankova, N. V., & Stick, S. L. (2007). Students’ persistence in a distributed doctoral program in educational leadership in higher education: A mixed methods study. Research in Higher Education, 48(1), 93–135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-006-9025-4
  29. Jablonski, A. M. (2001). Doctoral studies as professional development of educators in the United States. European Journal of Teacher Education, 24(2), 215–221. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619760120095606
  30. Jöreskog, K. G. (1969). A general approach to confirmatory maximum likelihood factor analysis. Psychometrika, 34(2), 183–202. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02289343
  31. Kalaycı, N., & İlhan, E. (2017). Yükseköğretimde çekirdek program. Yükseköğretim ve Bilim Dergisi, 1, 118-131. https://doi.org/10.5961/jhes.2017.190
  32. Karataş, H., & Erden, M. (2012). Akademik motivasyon ölçeğinin dilsel eşdeğerlik, geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Education Sciences, 7(4), 983-1003. https://doi.org/10.12739/10.12739
  33. Kärner, A., Kukemelk, H., & Herdlein, R. J. (2005). Motivation for obtaining the doctor of philosophy degree in the post-soviet era: The case of Estonia. International Education, 35, 24–34.
  34. Kline, R. B. (2008). Convergence of structural equation modeling and multilevel modeling. In M. Williams & W. P. Vogt (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of innovation in social research methods (pp. 562–589). Sage.
  35. Lei, M., & Lomax, R. G. (2005). The effect of varying degrees of nonnormality in structural equation modeling. Structural Equation Modeling, 12(1), 1-27. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15328007sem1201_1
  36. Linnenbrink, E. A., & Pintrich, P. R. (2002). Motivation as an enabler for academic success. School Psychology Review, 31(3), 313-327. https://doi.org/10.1080/02796015.2002.12086158
  37. Litalien, D., Guay, F., & Morin, A. J. (2015). Motivation for PhD studies: Scale development and validation. Learning and Individual Differences, 41, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2015.05.006
  38. Litalien, D., & Guay, F. (2015). Dropout intentions in PhD studies: A comprehensive model based on interpersonal relationships and motivational resources. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 41, 218-231. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2015.03.004
  39. Lynch, M. F., Salikhova, N. R., & Salikhova, A. (2018). Internal motivation among doctoral students: Contributions from the student and from the student’s environment. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 13, 255-272.
  40. Marcoulides, G. A., & Schumacker, R. E. (Eds.). (2001). New developments and techniques in structural equation modeling. Psychology Press.
  41. Mason, M. M. (2012). Motivation, satisfaction, and innate psychological needs. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 7, 259-277. https://doi.org/10.28945/1596
  42. McGee, E. O., White, D. T., Jenkins, A. T., Houston, S., Bentley, L. C., Smith, W. J., & Robinson, W. H. (2016). Black engineering students’ motivation for PhD attainment: Passion plus purpose. Journal for Multicultural Education, 10(2), 167-193. https://doi.org/10.1108/JME-01-2016-0007
  43. Munyengebe, S., Haiyan, H., Yiyi, Z., & Jeifei, S. (2017). Factors and levels associated with lecturers’ motivation and job satisfaction in a Chinese university. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics Science and Technology Education, 13(10), 6416-6428. https://doi.org/10.12973/ejmste/77946
  44. Muszynski, S. Y. (1988). The relationship between demographic/situational factors, cognitive/affective variables, and needs and time to completion of the doctoral program in psychology. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Kent State University, OH, USA.
  45. Naylor, R., Chakravarti, S., & Baik, C. (2016). Differing motivations and requirements in PhD student cohorts: A case study. Issues in Educational Research, 26(2), 351-367.
  46. Neumann, R., & Tan, K. K. (2011). From PhD to initial employment: The doctorate in a knowledge economy. Studies in Higher Education, 36(5), 601-614. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2011.594596
  47. Netemeyer, R. G., Bearden, W. O., & Sharma, S. (2003). Scaling procedures: Issues and applications. Sage.
  48. Papalia, D. E., Olds, S. W., & Feldman, R. D. (2007). Human development. McGraw-Hill.
  49. Perry, J. L., Nicholls, A. R., Clough, P. J., & Crust, L. (2015). Assessing model fit: Caveats and recommendations for confirmatory factor analysis and exploratory structural equation modeling. Measurement in Physical Education and Exercise Science, 19(1), 12-21. https://doi.org/10.1080/1091367X.2014.952370
  50. Pintrich, P. R. (2003). Motivation and classroom learning. In W. M. Reynolds & G. E. Miller (Eds.), Handbook of psychology: Educational psychology (pp. 103–122). John Wiley & Sons.
  51. Powers, C. L. (2008). Academic achievement and social involvement as predictors of life satisfaction among college students. Psi Chi Journal of Undergraduate Research, 13(3), 128-135.
  52. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000a). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 54-67. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1999.1020
  53. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000b). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68-78. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68
  54. Saracaloğlu, A. S. (2008). Lisansüstü öğrencilerin akademik güdülenme düzeyleri, araştırma kaygıları ve tutumları ile araştırma yeterlikleri arasındaki ilişki. Van Yüzüncü Yıl Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 5(2), 179-208.
  55. Seçer, B. (2021). Akademisyen olmayanlar açısından doktora eğitimi. İzmir İktisat Dergisi, 36(2), 295-313.
  56. Scott, D., Brown, A., Lunt, I., & Thorne, L. (2004). Professional doctorates: Integrating academic and professional knowledge. McGraw-Hill Education.
  57. Sheldon, K. M., Ryan, R. M., Deci, E. L., & Kasser, T. (2004). The independent effects of goal contents and motives on well-being: It’s both what you pursue and why you pursue it. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30(4), 475-486. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167203261883
  58. Soliemanifar, O., Shaabani, F., & Morovati, Z. (2013). The relationship between academic achievement motivation and academic burnout in postgraduate students of Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz. Journal of Life Science and Biomedicine, 3(3), 233-236.
  59. Sternberg, R. J., & Williams, W. M. (2009). Educational psychology (2nd ed.). Pearson.
  60. Tarvid, A. (2014). Motivation to study for a PhD degree: Case of Latvia. Procedia Economics and Finance, 14, 585-594. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(14)00747-3
  61. Vallerand, R. J., & Thill, E. E. (1993). Introduction à la psychologie de la motivation. Montréal: Éditions Études Vivantes.
  62. Vallerand, R. J., Pelletier, L. G., Blais, M. R., Brière, N. M., Senécal, C., & Vallières, E. F. (1992). The academic motivation scale: A measure of intrinsic, extrinsic, and amotivation in education. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 52(4), 1003-1017. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164492052004025
  63. Varış, F. (1972). Türkiye'de lisansüstü eğitim: Pozitif bilimlerin temel ve uygulamalı alanlarında. Ankara University Journal of Faculty of Educational Sciences (JFES), 5(1), 51-74. https://doi.org/10.1501/Egifak_0000000336
  64. Veenhoven, R. (1996). The study of life satisfaction. In W. E. Saris, R. Veenhoven, A. C. Scherpenzeel, & B. Bunting (Eds.), A comparative study of satisfaction with life in Europe (pp. 11-48). Eötvös University Press.
  65. Wellington, J., & Sikes, P. (2006). ‘A doctorate in a tight compartment’: Why do students choose a professional doctorate and what impact does it have on their personal and professional lives? Studies in Higher Education, 31(6), 723-734. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070601004358
  66. Turan, Y. (2023). Amerika Birleşik Devletleri ve Türkiye'deki doktora öğrencilerinin çalışma süreçlerine etki eden faktörlerin bireyci ve toplumcu özellikler açısından incelenmesi (Bir karşıt kültür çalışması). [Doktora Tezi, İnönü Üniversitesi].
  67. Yurt, E., & Bozer, E. N. (2015). Akademik motivasyon ölçeğinin Türkçeye uyarlanması. Gaziantep University Journal of Social Sciences, 14(3), 669-685. https://doi.org/10.21547/jss.256759
  68. Yüksek Öğretim Kurulu (2016). Lisansüstü eğitim ve öğretim yönetmeliği.