SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Klinik Psikoloji Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 9 Sayı: 2

The Turkish adaptation, validity, and reliability of the Fragmented Self Inventory

Parçalanmış Kendilik Envanteri’nin Türkçeye uyarlanması, geçerliği ve güvenirliği

Zeynep Gül Akın(ATILIM ÜNİVERSİTESİ, SOSYAL BİLİMLER ENSTİTÜSÜ)0009-0008-6706-6692
Kutlu Kağan Türkarslan(ANKARA MEDİPOL ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0002-2440-3977
Pages
174–191
Publication Date
2025-08-25
🏛️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)

In the path analysis in which fragmented grandiosity and fragmented idealization predicted depression, anxiety and stress, it was found that fragmented grandiosity significantly predicted anxiety and stress, and fragmented idealization significantly predicted depression, anxiety and stress.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The Fragmented Self Inventory (FSI) is a self-report measurement tool developed to examine the experiences of fragmented self as defined by Heinz Kohut.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Data were collected from 495 participants (female = 67.88%, Mage = 33.86, SD = 12.87).
💡
Conclusion & Impact:In the path analysis in which fragmented grandiosity and fragmented idealization predicted depression, anxiety and stress, it was found that fragmented grandiosity significantly predicted anxiety and stress, and fragmented idealization significantly predicted depression, anxiety and stress.
🔬Design:Klinik Araştırma
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:aynalama · idealleştirme · parçalanmış büyüklenmecilik

Abstract

The Fragmented Self Inventory (FSI) is a self-report measurement tool developed to examine the experiences of fragmented self as defined by Heinz Kohut. The scale focuses on the experiences in two axes of the self in the context of psychoanalytic self-psychology, namely fragmented grandiosity (FSI-FG) and fragmented idealization (FSI-FI). This study aimed to adapt the FSI into Turkish and to evaluate its psychometric properties in a Turkish-speaking sample. Data were collected from 495 participants (female = 67.88%, Mage = 33.86, SD = 12.87). Confirmatory factor analysis was conducted to test the two-factor structure of the FSI. The convergent validity of the scale was evaluated by examining the relationships of the FSI-FG and FSI-FI scores with self-esteem, pathological narcissism, self-control, discipline, emotion dysregulation, meaning in life and purpose, depression, anxiety, and stress variables. The reliability of the scale was examined by internal consistency coefficients and test-retest intraclass correlations. The results of confirmatory factor analysis supported the two-factor structure of the Turkish FSI. Higher scores on the axis of fragmented grandiosity were associated with lower self-esteem and higher symptoms of pathological narcissism, whereas higher scores on fragmented idealization were associated with poorer self-control, lower discipline, higher difficulties in emotion regulation, and higher difficulty in finding meaning and purpose in life, supporting the convergent validity of the FSI. The FSI-FG and FSI-FI subscales showed satisfactory internal consistency (McDonald’s ω = .77 and .86) and four-week test-retest reliability (ICC = .78 and .81). In the path analysis in which fragmented grandiosity and fragmented idealization predicted depression, anxiety and stress, it was found that fragmented grandiosity significantly predicted anxiety and stress, and fragmented idealization significantly predicted depression, anxiety and stress. The findings of this study indicate that the Turkish form of the FSI can be used to measure experiences of fragmented grandiosity and fragmented idealization.

Özet

Parçalanmış Kendilik Envanteri (PKE), Heinz Kohut'un tanımladığı parçalanmış kendilik deneyimlerini incelemek için geliştirilmiş bir öz-bildirim ölçüm aracıdır. Ölçek, psikanalitik kendilik psikolojisi bağlamında parçalanmış büyüklenmecilik (PKE-PB) ve parçalanmış idealleştirme (PKE-Pİ) olmak üzere iki kendilik eksenindeki deneyimlere odaklanmaktadır. Bu çalışmanın amacı PKE’yi Türkçeye uyarlamak ve psikometrik özelliklerini Türkçe konuşan bir örneklemde değerlendirmektir. Çalışmanın verileri 495 katılımcıdan toplanmıştır (kadın = %67.88, Ort.yaş = 33.86, SS = 12.87). PKE'nin iki faktörlü yapısını doğrulamak için doğrulayıcı faktör analizi gerçekleştirilmiştir. Ölçeğin yakınsak geçerliği, PKE-PB ve PKE-Pİ’nin; özsaygı, patolojik narsisizm, öz-denetim, disiplin, duygu düzenleme güçlüğü, hayat anlam ve amacı, depresyon, anksiyete ve stres değişkenleri ile ilişkisine bakılarak değerlendirilmiştir. Ölçeğin güvenirliği ise iç tutarlılık katsayıları ve test-tekrar test sınıf içi korelasyonları ile incelenmiştir. Doğrulayıcı faktör analizinin sonuçları PKE'nin Türkçe formunun iki faktörlü yapısını desteklemektedir. Parçalanmış büyüklenmecilik ekseninde daha yüksek puanların, düşük benlik saygısı ve yüksek patolojik narsisizm belirtileri ile; parçalanmış idealleştirmede daha yüksek puanların ise düşük öz-denetim, düşük disiplin, yüksek duygu düzenleme zorlukları ve hayatta anlam ve amaç bulmada daha fazla güçlük çekme ile ilişkili olması, PKE’nin yakınsak geçerliğini desteklemektedir. PKE-PB ve PKE-Pİ alt ölçeklerinin, tatmin edici iç tutarlılık gösterdiği (McDonald'ın ω = .77 ve .86) ve dört haftalık test-tekrar test güvenirliğine (SKK = .78 ve .81) sahip olduğu görülmüştür. Parçalanmış büyüklenmecilik ve parçalanmış idealleştirmenin depresyon, anksiyete ve stresi yordadığı yol analizinde, parçalanmış büyüklenmeciliğin anksiyete ve stresi, parçalanmış idealleştirmenin ise depresyon, anksiyete ve stresi anlamlı şekilde yordadığı bulunmuştur. Bu çalışmanın bulguları, PKE'nin Türkçe formunun parçalanmış büyüklenmecilik ve parçalanmış idealleştirme deneyimlerini ölçmekte kullanılabileceğine işaret etmektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Akın, Z. G., Türkarslan, K. K. (2025). The Turkish adaptation, validity, and reliability of the Fragmented Self Inventory. Klinik Psikoloji Dergisi, Cilt: 9 Sayı: 2, 174–191. https://doi.org/10.57127/kpd.26024438.1503950

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (44)

  1. Aydın, C., Kaya, M. ve Peker, H. (2015). Hayatın Anlam ve Amacı Ölçeği: Geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Ondokuz Mayıs Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi, 38, 39-55.
  2. Banai, E., Mikulincer, M. ve Shaver, P. R. (2005). “Selfobject” needs in Kohut’s self psychology: Links with attachment, self-cohesion, affect regulation, and adjustment. Psychoanalytic Psychology, 22(2), 224-260.
  3. Bjureberg, J., Ljótsson, B., Tull, M. T., Hedman, E., Sahlin, H., Lundh, L.-G., Bjärehed, J., DiLillo, D., Messman-Moore, T., Gumpert, C. H. ve Gratz, K. L. (2016). Development and validation of a brief version of the Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale: The DERS-16. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 38(2), 284-296.
  4. Bollen, K. ve Lennox, R. (1991). Conventional wisdom on measurement: A structural equation perspective. Psychological Bulletin, 110(2), 305-314.
  5. Brown, T. A. (2015). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research (2. baskı). Guilford Publications. Bujang, M. A. ve Baharum, N. (2017). A simplified guide to determination of sample size requirements for estimating the value of intraclass correlation coefficient: A review. Archives of Orofacial Sciences, 12(1), 1-11.
  6. Burkitt, I. (1994). The shifting concept of the self. History of the Human Sciences, 7(2), 7-28.
  7. Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112(1), 155-159.
  8. Çuhadaroğlu, F. (1986). Adolesenlarda benlik saygısı (Yayınlanmamış uzmanlık tezi). Hacettepe Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Psikiyatri Anabilim Dalı, Ankara.
  9. Dunn, T. J., Baguley, T. ve Brunsden, V. (2014). From alpha to omega: A practical solution to the pervasive problem of internal consistency estimation. British Journal of Psychology, 105(3), 399-412.
  10. Freud, S. (1955). Beyond the pleasure principle. J. Strachey (Ed. & Çev.), The standard edition of the complete psychological works of Sigmund Freud içinde (Cilt 18, ss. 1-64). The Hogarth Press. (Orijinal eserin yayın tarihi 1920)
  11. Freud, S. (1953). The ego and the id. J. Strachey (Ed. & Çev.), The standard edition of the complete psychological works of Sigmund Freud içinde (Cilt 19, ss. 1-66). The Hogarth Press. (Orijinal eserin yayın tarihi 1923)
  12. Granello, D. H. ve Wheaton, J. E. (2004). Online data collection: Strategies for research. Journal of Counseling & Development, 82(4), 387-393.
  13. Gratz, K. L. ve Roemer, L. (2004). Multidimensional assessment of emotion regulation and dysregulation: Development, factor structure, and initial validation of the Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 26(1), 41-54.
  14. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J. ve Anderson, R. E. (2019). Multivariate data analysis. Cengage Learning. Hermida, R. (2015). The problem of allowing correlated errors in structural equation modeling: Concerns and considerations. Computational Methods in Social Sciences, 3(1), 5-17.
  15. Hoekstra, R., Vugteveen, J., Warrens, M. J. ve Kruyen, P. M. (2019). An empirical analysis of alleged misunderstandings of coefficient alpha. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 22(4), 351-364.
  16. Hofmann, W., Gawronski, B., Gschwendner, T., Le, H. ve Schmitt, M. (2005). A meta-analysis on the correlation between the implicit association test and explicit self-report measures. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31(10), 1369-1385.
  17. Hughes, D. J. (2018). Psychometric validity. The Wiley handbook of psychometric testing içinde (s. 751-779). John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
  18. Kline, R. B. (2015). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (4. baskı). Guilford Publications.
  19. Kohut, H. (1971). The analysis of the self: A systematic approach to the psychoanalytic treatment of narcissistic personality disorders. International Universities Press.
  20. Kohut, H. (1978). The restoration of the self. University of Chicago Press.
  21. Kohut, H. (1979). Four basic concepts in self-psychology. P. H. Ornstein (Ed.), The search for the self içinde (C. 4, s. 447-470). Karnac Books.
  22. Kohut, H. (1984). How does analysis cure? University of Chicago Press.
  23. Kohut, H. ve Wolf, E. S. (1978). The disorders of the self and their treatment: An outline. The International Jour- nal of Psychoanalysis, 59(4), 413-425.
  24. Kyriazos, T. A. (2018). Applied psychometrics: Sample size and sample power considerations in factor analysis (efa, cfa) and sem in general. Psychology, 09(08), 2207-2230.
  25. Lai, K. ve Green, S. B. (2016). The problem with having two watches: Assessment of fit when RMSEA and CFI disagree. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 51(2-3), 220-239.
  26. Lee, R. R. ve Martin, J. C. (1991). Psychotherapy after Kohut: A textbook of self psychology. Analytic Press.
  27. Lovibond, P. F. ve Lovibond, S. H. (1995). The structure of negative emotional states: Comparison of the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales (DASS) with the Beck Depression and Anxiety Inventories. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 33(3), 335-343.
  28. Mansfield, N. (2000). Subjectivity: Theories of the self from Freud to Haraway. NYU Press.
  29. Matheson, G. J. (2019). We need to talk about reliability: Making better use of test-retest studies for study design and interpretation. PeerJ, 7, e6918.
  30. Mindrila, D. (2010). Maximum likelihood (ML) and diagonally weighted least squares (DWLS) estimation procedures: A comparison of estimation bias with ordinal and multivariate non-normal data. International Journal of Digital Society, 1(1), 60-66.
  31. Nebioglu, M., Konuk, N., Akbaba, S. ve Eroglu, Y. (2012). The investigation of validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the Brief Self-Control Scale. Klinik Psikofarmakoloji Bülteni, 22(4), 340-351.
  32. Pincus, A. L., Ansell, E. B., Pimentel, C. A., Cain, N. M., Wright, A. G. C. ve Levy, K. N. (2009). Initial construction and validation of the Pathological Narcissism Inventory. Psychological Assessment, 21(3), 365-379.
  33. Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and the adolescent self-image. University Press.
  34. Rosenberg, M. (1989). Self-concept research: A historical overview. Social Forces, 68(1), 34-44.
  35. Rowe, C. E. ve MacIsaac, D. S. (1989). Empathic Attunement: The “technique” of psychoanalytic self psychology. Jason Aronson.
  36. Siegel, A. M. (1996). Heinz Kohut and the psychology of the Self (Makers of modern psychotherapy). Routledge.
  37. Silverstein, M. L. (2007). Disorders of the self: A personality-guided approach. American Psychological Association.
  38. Stav, O. S., Mikulincer, M. ve Sharabany, R. (2021). Studying self-fragmentation from Kohut’s self psychology perspective: Development and validation of the Fragmented Self Inventory. Psychoanalytic Psychology, 38(1), 39-48.
  39. Şen, G. ve Barışkın, E. (2019). Patolojik Narsisizm Envanterinin Türkçe standardizasyonu, geçerlik ve güvenirliğinin sınanması. Türk Psikiyatri Dergisi, 30(2), 118-129.
  40. Tangney, J. P., Baumeister, R. F. ve Boone, A. L. (2004). High self-control predicts good adjustment, less pathology, better grades, and interpersonal success. Journal of Personality, 72(2), 271-322.
  41. Yaşlıoğlu, M. ve Yaşlıoğlu, D. T. (2020). How and when to use which fit indices? A practical and critical review of the methodology. Istanbul Management Journal, 88, Article 88.
  42. Yıldırım, A., Boysan, M. ve Kefeli, M. C. (2018). Psychometric properties of the Turkish version of the Depres- sion Anxiety Stress Scale-21 (DASS-21). British Journal of Guidance & Counselling, 46(5), 582-595.
  43. Yiğit, İ. ve Guzey Yiğit, M. (2019). Psychometric properties of Turkish version of Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale-Brief Form (DERS-16). Current Psychology, 38(6), 1503-1511.
  44. Zhu, Y. ve Han, S. (2008). Cultural differences in the self: From philosophy to psychology and neuroscience. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 2(5), 1799-1811.