SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Coğrafya Dergisi / 2026 / Sayı: 50

Adaptation of the Climate Change Curiosity Scale into Turkish

Melehat Gezer(DICLE UNIVERSITY, ZİYA GÖKALP FACULTY OF EDUCATION, DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SCIENCES AND TURKISH LANGUAGE TEACHING, DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL STUDIES EDUCATION)0000-0001-7701-3203
Mustafa İlhan(Dicle University, Ziya Gökalp Faculty of Education, Measurement and Evaluation)0000-0003-1804-002X
Pages
79–91
Publication Date
2025-07-24
🏛️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)

These results indicated that the Turkish version of the CCCS is a valid and reliable instrument.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:In this study, the Climate Change Curiosity Scale (CCCS) developed by Próchniak and Ossowski (2023) was adapted into Turkish.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The research was conducted on three separate study groups consisting of 527 prospective teachers.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:These results indicated that the Turkish version of the CCCS is a valid and reliable instrument.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:2023 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Climate change · curiosity · scale adaptation

Abstract

In this study, the Climate Change Curiosity Scale (CCCS) developed by Próchniak and Ossowski (2023) was adapted into Turkish. The research was conducted on three separate study groups consisting of 527 prospective teachers. Of the 349 participants in the first study group, 10 were excluded from the dataset as they were outliers. The confirmatory factor analysis was conducted on the remaining 339 participants and it was detected that the unidimensional structure in the original version of the scale was verified and the factor loadings of the items ranged between .33 and .67. Within the scope of concurrent validity, the hypothesis that there was a positive significant relationship between the CCCS scores and the scores obtained from the Climate Change Worry Scale was tested, and the correlation analysis results performed with the data collected from 99 prospective teachers confirmed this hypothesis. The data from the first study group were used for internal consistency reliability estimates and item analysis, and the McDonald’s omega and Cronbach’s alpha coefficients were found to be .863 and .859, respectively, while the item correlations varied between .33 and .62. Test-retest reliability was examined on the data of 79 prospective teachers, and the intraclass correlation coefficient calculated for this purpose was obtained as .899. These results indicated that the Turkish version of the CCCS is a valid and reliable instrument.

🔖

Cite This Article

Gezer, M., İlhan, M. (2025). Adaptation of the Climate Change Curiosity Scale into Turkish. Coğrafya Dergisi, Sayı: 50, 79–91. https://doi.org/10.26650/JGEOG2025-1649069

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (83)

  1. Albrecht, G. (2011). Chronic environmental change: Emerging “psychoterratic” sYndromes. In I. Weissbecker (Ed.), Climate change and human well-being: Global chAllenges And opportunities pp. 43-56. Springer Science + Business Media. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-9742-5 3 google scholar
  2. Altizer S., Ostfeld, R.S., Johnson P.T., Kutz, S., & Harvell, C. D. (2013). Climate change and infectious diseases: From evidence to a predictive framework. Science, 341(6145), 514-519. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1239401 google scholar
  3. Ang, S. H. (2021). ReseArch projects for business & mAnAgement students (2nd ed.). Sage. google scholar
  4. Atçı, İ., & İlhan, M. (2024). The effect of presenting geometry items with and without shapes on the psYchometric properties of the test and students’ test scores. JournAl of Measurement And EvAluAtion in EducAtion And Psychology, 15(3), 193208. https://doi.org/10.21031/epod.1483567 google scholar
  5. Berlyne, D. E. (1954). A theory of human curiosity. British JournAl of Psychology, 45(3), 180-191. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8295.1954.tb01243.x google scholar
  6. Berlyne, D. E. (1957). Conflict and information-theory variables as determinants of human perceptual curiosity. JournAl of ExperimentAl Psychology, 53(6), 399-404. https://psYcnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/h0049194 google scholar
  7. Bethlehem, J. (2010). Selection bias in web surveys. International StAtistical Review, 78(2), 161-188. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-5823.2010.00112.x google scholar
  8. Bourque, F., & Cunsolo Willox, A. (2014). Climate change: The next challenge for public mental Health? International Review of PsychİAtry, 26(4), 415-422. https://doi.org/ 10.3109/09540261.2014.925851 google scholar
  9. Boztunç Öztürk, N., Eroğlu, M. G. ve Kelecioğlu, H. (2015). A review of articles concerning scale adaptation in the field of education. EducAtion And Science, 40(178), 123-137. http://dx.doi.org/10.15390/EB.2015.4091 google scholar
  10. Buchanan, T. (2002). Online assessment: Desirable or dangerous? ProfessionAl Psychology: ReseArch And PrActice, 33(2), 148-154. https://doi.org/10.1037/0735-7028.33.2.148 google scholar
  11. Burke, S. E. L., Sanson, A. V. & Van Hoorn, J. (2018). The psYchological effects of climate change on children. Current PsychİAtry Reports, 20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11920-018-0896-9 google scholar
  12. Cianconi, P., Betrö, S., & Janiri, L. (2020) The impact of climate change on mental health: A sYstematic descriptive review. Frontiers in PsychİAtry, 11. https://doi.org/ 10.3389/fpsYt.2020.00074 google scholar
  13. Cebeci, F., Karaman, M., Öztürk, A. F., Uzun, K., Altın, M. O., Arıcı, A. ve Artan, T. (2022). İklim değişikliği anksiYetesi ölçeğinin Türkçe uYarlaması: Geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Ufkun Ötesi Bilim Dergisi, 22(1), 20-42. https://doi.org/10.54961/uobild. 1129602 google scholar
  14. Christensen, R., & Knezek, G. (2015). The climate change attitude survey: Measuring middle school student beliefs and intentions to enact positive environmental change. InternAtionAl JournAl of EnvironmentAl & Science EducAtion, 10(5), 773788. https://doi.org/10.12973/ijese.2015.276a google scholar
  15. Clayton, S. (2020). Climate anxiety: Psychological responses to climate change. journAl of Anxiety Disorders, 74, 1-7. https://doi.Org/10.1016/j.janxdis.2020.102263 google scholar
  16. Clayton, C., & Karazsia, B. T. (2020). Development and validation of a measure of climate change anxiety. Journal of EnvironmentAl Psychology, 69, 101434. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2020.101434 google scholar
  17. Collins, R. P., Litman, J. A., & Spielberger, C. D. (2004). The measurement of perceptual curiosity. Personality And IndividuAl Differences, 36(5), 1127-1141. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/S0191-8869(03)00205-8 google scholar
  18. Crocker, L., & Algina, J. (1986). Introduction to clAssicAl And modern test theory. Holt, Rinehart and Winston. google scholar
  19. Dal, B., Alper, U., Özdem Yılmaz, Y. ve Sönmez, D. (2015). A model for pre-service teachers’ climate change awareness and willingness to act for pro-climate change friendly behavior: Adaptation of awareness to climate change questionnaire. InternAtionAl ReseArch in GeogrAphicAl And Environmental EducAtion, 24(3), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1080/10382046.2015.1034456 google scholar
  20. Deniz, M., İnel, Y. ve Sezer, A. (2021). Awareness scale of university students about global climate change. InternAtionAl JournAl of GeogrAphy And GeogrAphy EducAtion (IGGE), 43, 252-264. google scholar
  21. DeVellis, R. (2017). ScAle development: Theory And ApplicAtions (4th ed.). Sage. google scholar
  22. Dijkstra, E. M., & Goedhart, M. J. (2012) Development and validation of the ACSI: Measuring students’ science attitudes, pro-environmental behaviour, climate change attitudes and knowledge. EnvironmentAl EducAtion ReseArch, 18(6), 733749. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2012.662213 google scholar
  23. Dyche L., & Epstein R. M. (2011). Curiosity and medical education. MedicAl Education, 45(7), 653-757. https://doi.Org/10.1111/i.1365-2923.2011.03944.x google scholar
  24. Ebel, R. L., & Frisbie, D. A. (1991). EssentiAls of educAtionAl meAsurement (5th ed.). Prentice-Hall. google scholar
  25. Erkuş, A. (2012). MeAsurement And scAle development in psychology [Psikolojide ölçme ve ölçek geliştirme]. Pegem Akademi. google scholar
  26. EEA (2019). Air quality in Europe The number of deaths in the EU AttributAble to fine particulAte matter fell by 45% between 2005 And 2022. The European Environment Agency. https://www.eea.europa.eu google scholar
  27. Field, A. (2018). Discovering stAtistics using IBM SPSS stAtistics (5th ed.). Sage. google scholar
  28. Fikri, E. (2023). Development and validation of the curiosity of climate changes scale [Letter]. Psychology ReseArch And BehAvior MANAgement, 4971-4972. https://doi. org/10.2147/PRBM.S452356 google scholar
  29. Gezer, M. ve İlhan, M. (2019). Adaptation of climate change knowledge test into Turkish: Validity and reliability study. 27th InternAtionAl Congress of EducAtionAl Sciences Full Text Book, 505-514, Atatürk University, Antalya, Türkiye. google scholar
  30. Gezer, M. ve İlhan, M. (2020). Climate change hope scale: A study of adaptation to Turkish. Mediterranean JournAl of EducAtionAl ReseArch, 14(34), 337-356. https:// doi.org/10.29329/mier.2020.32216 google scholar
  31. Gezer, M. ve İlhan, M. (2021). Climate change worry scale: Turkish adaptation study. AegeAn GeogrAphiCAl JournAl, 30(1), 195-204. https://doi.org/10.51800/ecd.932817 google scholar
  32. Goodwin, P., Haigh, I. D., Rohling, E. J., & Slangen, A. (2017). A new approach to proiecting 21st century sea-level changes and extremes. EArth's Future, 5, 240-253. https://doi.Org/101002/2016EF000508 google scholar
  33. Hambleton, R.K. & Bollwark, J. (1991) Adapting tests for use in different cultures: Technical ıssues and methods. Bulletin of the InternAtionAl Test Commission, 18, 3-32. google scholar
  34. Hayes, A. F., & Coutts, J. J. (2020). Use omega rather than Cronbach’s alpha for estimating reliability. but. CommuniCAtion Methods And MeAsures, 14(1), 1-24. https://doi.org/10.1080/19312458.2020.1718629 google scholar
  35. Hulley, S. B., Newman, T. B., & Cummings, S. R. (2013). Choosing the study subiects: specification, sampling, and recruitment. In S. B. Hulley, S. R. Cummings, W. S. Browner, D. G. Grady & T. B. Newman (Eds), Designing clinicAl reseArch (4th ed., pp. 23-31). Wolters Kluwer. google scholar
  36. IPCC (2021). Climate change 2021: The physical science basis. Contribution of working group I to the sixth assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Masson-Delmotte, V., et al. (eds.)]. IPCC. https://doi.org/101017/ 9781009157896 google scholar
  37. IPCC (2023). Sections. In: ClimAte chAnge 2023: Synthesis report. Contribution of working groups I, II And III to the sixth Assessment report of the IntergovernmentAl Panel on ClimAte ChAnge [Core Writing Team, H. Lee and J. Romero (eds.)]. IPCC, pp. 35-115. https://doi.org/10.59327/IPCC/AR6-9789291691647 google scholar
  38. İlhan, M., Gezer, M. ve Şahin, M. G. (2024). Adaptation of the environmental worry index into Turkish: A validity and reliability study on teacher candidates. KAstAmonu EducAtion JournAl, 32(2), 295-305. https://doi.org/10.24106/kefdergi.1473617 google scholar
  39. İlhan, M., Güler, N. ve Taşdelen Teker, G. (2024). Validity And reliability in measurements based on rater judgments [Puanlayıcı yargılarına dayalı ölçmelerde geçerlik ve güvenirlik]. Pegem Akademi. google scholar
  40. Kakaei S., Zakerimoghadam, M., Rahmanian, M., & Abbasi Dolatabadi, Z. (2021). The impact of climate change on heart failure: A narrative review study. ShirAz E-MediCAl JournAl, 22(9). https://doi.org/10.5812/semi.107895 google scholar
  41. Koçak, D., Gülleroğlu, H. D. ve Çokluk Bökeoğlu, Ö. (2022). HAndbook of AdAptAtion of meAsurement tool [Ölçme ArAcı uyArlAmA el kitAbı]. Pegem Akademi. google scholar
  42. Koo, T. K., & Li, M. Y. (2016). A guideline of selecting and reporting ıntraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research. JournAl of ChiroprActic Medicine, 15(2), 155-163. https://doi.org/10.1016/ijcm.2016.02.012 google scholar
  43. Kumar, J. P. (2021). Climate change and cities: challenges ahead. Frontiers in SustAİnAble Cities, 3. https://doi.org/10.3389/Frsc.2021.645613 google scholar
  44. Lafferty, K. D. (2009). The ecology of climate change and infectious diseases. Ecology, 90(4), 888-900. https://doi.org/101890/08-00791 google scholar
  45. Libarkin, J. C., & Gold, A. U., & Harris, S. E., & McNeal, K. S., & Bowles, R. P. (2018). A new, valid measure oF climate change understanding: Associations with risk perception. ClimAtic ChAnge, 150, 403-416. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-018-2279-y google scholar
  46. Ligneul, R., Mermillod, M., & Morisseau, T. (2018). From relieF to surprise: Dual control oF epistemic curiosity in the human brain. NeuroImAge, 181, 490-500. https://doi. org/10.1016/i.neuroimage.2018.07.038 google scholar
  47. Litman, J. A. (2000). Construct And predictive vAlidity of meAsures of epistemic And perceptual curiosity. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University oF South Florida. Available From ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (304640836). google scholar
  48. Litman, J. A. (2007). Curiosity as a Feeling oF interest and Feeling oF deprivation: The I/D model oF curiosity. In P. R. Zelick (Ed.), Issues in the psychology of motivAtion (pp. 149-156). Nova Science. google scholar
  49. Litman, J. A. (2008). Interest and deprivation Factors oF epistemic curiosity. PersonAlity And IndividuAl Differences, 44(7), 1585-1595. https://doi.org/10.1016/i.paid.2008.01. 014 google scholar
  50. Litman, J. A. (2012). Epistemic curiosity. In Seel, N. M. (Eds), Encyclopedia of the sciences of leArning. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-1428-6_1645 google scholar
  51. Litman, J. A., Collins, R. P., & Spielberger, C. D. (2005). The nature and measurement oF sensory curiosity. PersonAlity And IndividuAl Differences, 39(6), 1123-1133. https:// doi.org/10.1016/i.paid.2005.05.001 google scholar
  52. Litman, J. A., & Spielberger, C. D. (2003). Measuring epistemic curiosity and its diversive and specific components. JournAl of PersonAlity Assessment, 80(1), 7586. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327752JPA8001_16 google scholar
  53. Loewenstein, G. (1994). The psychology oF curiosity: A review and reinterpretation. PsychologicAl Bulletin, 116(1), 75-98. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0033-2909.116.1.75 google scholar
  54. Manning, C., & Clayton, S. (2018). Threats to mental health and wellbeing associated with climate change. In S. Clayton & C. Manning (Eds.), Psychology And climAte chAnge: HumAn perceptions, impActs, And responses (pp. 217-244). Elsevier Academic. https://doi.org/101016/B978-0-12-813130-5.00009-6 google scholar
  55. McGuire, C., & Rowland, T. (1966). Curiosity in the educational encounter: A representation oF Daniel E. Berlyne. Retrieved From https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED 013987 google scholar
  56. McNary, L. (2024). Curiosity: A conceptual re-analysis For improved measurement. Current Psychology, 43, 575-586. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-022-04170-z google scholar
  57. Meade, A. W., & Craig, S. B. (2012). IdentiFying careless responses in survey data. PsychologicAl Methods, 17(3), 437-455. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028085 google scholar
  58. MetcalFe, J., Schwartz, B. L., & Eich, T. S. (2020). Epistemic curiosity and the region oF proximal learning. Current Opinion in BehAviorAl Sciences, 35, 40-47. https://doi. org/10.1016/i.cobeha.2020.06.007 google scholar
  59. Mitchell, J. E., Crosby, R. D., Wonderlich, S., &Adson, D. E. (2000). Elements of clinicAl reseArch in psychiAtry. American Psychiatric. google scholar
  60. Mora, C., McKenzie, T., Gaw, I. M., Dean, J. M., von Hammerstein, H., Knudson, T. A., Setter, S. O., Smith, C. Z., Webster, K. M., Patz, J. A., & Franklin, E. C. (2022). Over halF oF known human pathogenic diseases can be aggravated by climate change. NAture ClimAte ChAnge, 12, 869-875. https://doi.org/101038/s41558-022-01426-1 google scholar
  61. Ockey, G. J., & Choi, I. (2015). Structural equation modeling reporting practices for language assessment. Language Assessment Ouarterly, 12(3), 305-319. https://doi. org/10.1080/15434303.2015.1050101 google scholar
  62. Ojala, M., Cunsolo, A., Ogunbode, C.A., & Middleton, J. (2021). Anxiety, worry, and grief in a time of environmental and climate crisis: A narrative review. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 46, 35-58. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-environ-012220-022716 google scholar
  63. O’Leary, Z., & Tennet, E. (2025). The essential guide to doing your research project (5th ed.). Sage. google scholar
  64. Özbay, S. ve Alcı, B. (2021). Climate change worry scale: Adaptation to Turkish, validity and reliability study. R&S-Research Studies Anatolia Journal, 4(3), 183-193. https:// doi.org/10.33723/rs.958016 google scholar
  65. Özdamar, K. (2011). Statistical data analysis with package programs-I (8th ed.) [Paket programlar ile istatistiksel veri analizi-I (8. baskı)]. Kaan. google scholar
  66. Padhy, S. K., Sarkar, S., Panigrahi, M., & Paul, S. (2015). Mental health effects of climate change. Indian Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 19(1), 3-7, https://doi.org/10.4103/0019-5278.156997 google scholar
  67. Pihkala, P. (2020). Eco-anxiety and environmental education. Sustainability, 12(23), 10149. https://doi.org/10.3390/su122310149 google scholar
  68. Pituch, K. A., & Stevens, J. P. (2016). Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences (6th ed.). Routledge. google scholar
  69. Preston, K. (2022). Robust maximum likelihood. In the Sage encyclopedia of research design (2th ed., Vol. 4, pp. 1440-1440). Sage. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781071812082 google scholar
  70. Pröchniak P., & Ossowski A. (2023). Development and validation of the curiosity of climate changes scale. Psychology Research and Behavior Management, 16, 48294838. https://doi.org/10.2147/PRBM.S425867 google scholar
  71. Sakaki, M., Ten, A., Stone, H., & Murayama, K. (2024). Role of metacognitive confidence judgments in curiosity: Different effects of confidence on curiosity across epistemic and perceptual domains. Cognitive Science, 48(6), e13474. https://doi. org/10.1111/cogs.13474 google scholar
  72. Salkind, N. J. (2017). Statistics for people who (think they) hate statistics (6th ed.). Sage. google scholar
  73. Salomon, E., Preston, J. L., & Tannenbaum, M. B. (2017). Climate change helplessness and the (de)moralization of individual energy behavior. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 23(1), 15-28. https://doi.org/10.1037/xap0000105 google scholar
  74. Schermelleh-Engel, K., Moosbrugger, H., & Müller, H. (2003). Evaluating the fit of structural equation models: Tests of significance and descriptive goodness-of-fit measures. Methods of Psychological Research Online, 8(2), 23-74. google scholar
  75. Searle, K., & Gow, K. (2010). Do concerns about climate change lead to distress? International Journal of Climate Change Strategies and Management, 2(4), 362379. https://doi.org/10.1108/17568691011089891 google scholar
  76. Subaşı, A. (2019). A dynamic systems theory of epistemic curiosity. New Ideas in Psychology, 54, 8-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.newideapsych.2018.12.003 google scholar
  77. Stewart, A. E. (2021). Psychometric properties of the climate change worry scale. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(2). https:// doi.org/10.3390/iierph18020494 google scholar
  78. Şahin, M. G. ve Boztunç Öztürk, N. (2018). Scale development process in educational field: A content analysis research. Kastamonu Education Journal, 26(1), 191-199. https://doi.org/10.24106/kefdergi.375863 google scholar
  79. Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2019). Using multivariate statistics (7th ed.). Pearson. google scholar
  80. Türkeş, M. (2008). What is climate change? Basic definition, causes, observed and predicted results of climate change. Climate Change and Environment, 1(1), 26-37. google scholar
  81. van Valkengoed, A. M., Steg, L. & Perlaviciute, G. (2021). Development and validation of a climate change perceptions scale. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 76, 101652. https://doi.org/10.1016/i.ienvp.2021.101652 google scholar
  82. Yurdugül, H. (2006). The comparison of reliability coefficients in parallel, tau-equivalent, and congeneric measurements. Ankara University Journal of Faculty of Educational Sciences, 39(1), 15-37. https://doi.org/10.1501/Egifak_0000000127 google scholar
  83. Hayes, A. F., & Coutts, J. J. (2020). Use omega rather than Cronbach’s alpha for estimating reliability. but. CommuniCAtion Methods And MeAsures, 14(1), 1-24. https://doi.org/10.1080/19312458.2020.1718629 google scholar