Journals / Türk Psikoloji Yazıları / 2018 / Cilt: 21 - Sayı: 0

Who Is the Separatist: Untangling The Dynamics Of Multiple Social Identities In The Intractable Turkish-Kurdish Conflict In Turkey

Kimmiş O Ayrılıkçı: Türkiye’de Uzun Süredi̇r Devam Eden Türk-Kürt Çatışmasının Çoklu Sosyal Kimlik Dinamiklerini Çözümlemek

Pages
38–61
DOI
—
🏛️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)

Results showed that Kurdish citizens had lower score on nationalist meaning in national attachment such as patriotism than Turkish citizens, however no significant differences was observed between these groups in terms of civic responsibility, civic solidarity, and cultural identification which have been formed a societal attachment with the nation state.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Present study aims to investigate how citizen groups that differentiated themselves ethnically as Kurdish and Turkish organise their multiple identities in Turkey.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Results showed that Kurdish citizens had lower score on nationalist meaning in national attachment such as patriotism than Turkish citizens, however no significant differences was observed between these groups in terms of civic responsibility, civic solidarity, and cultural identification which have been formed a societal attachment with the nation state.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:An extended English summary is provided at the end of this article.
🔬Design:Survey & Empirical Study
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Present study aims to investigate how citizen groups that differentiated themselves ethnically as Kurdish and Turkish organise their multiple identities in Turkey. The study also tries to understand how members define their self as ‘us’ as well as the way which how attached the society that they live in the light of political psychology theories. Self-categorised ninety-nine Kurdish and a hundred-three Turkish complete the study survey. A series of ANOVA and Path analyses was conducted on data. Results showed that Kurdish citizens had lower score on nationalist meaning in national attachment such as patriotism than Turkish citizens, however no significant differences was observed between these groups in terms of civic responsibility, civic solidarity, and cultural identification which have been formed a societal attachment with the nation state. These results will be evaluated in the light of Social Identity Content Theory as well as other identity theories in literature. The importance of this study is to disentangle complicated definitions and underlying psychological mechanism in identity dynamics in the context of interactable Kurdish-Turkish conflict. This study hopes to provide empirical evidences for further investigations as well as to induce effective conflict resolutions policies, and to contribute starting and maintenance of reconciliation initiatives between these ethnic citizen groups in Turkey. An extended English summary is provided at the end of this article.

Özet

Bu araştırmanın amacı Türkiye bağlamında Türk ve Kürt gibi etnik kimlikleri üzerinden farklılaşan vatandaş gruplarının çoklu sosyal kimliklerini nasıl organize ettiğini, bu grup üyelerinin kendilerini nasıl biz olarak tanımladığını ve içinde yaşadığı topluma hangi biçimlerde bağlandığını politik psikoloji kuramları ışığında ortaya koymaktır. Bu amaç doğrultusunda 99’u Kürt ve 103’ü Türk olmak üzere 202 kişiyle anket çalışması gerçekleştirilmiştir. Analizlerden elde edilen sonuçlara göre Türklerle karşılaştırıldığında Kürtlerin toplumsal bağlanımın milliyetçi boyutu olan vatanseverlikte anlamlı olarak daha düşük bir bağlanım gerçekleştirdiği, ancak sivil sorumluluk, sivil dayanışma, kültürel özdeşleşme gibi diğer toplumsal bağlanım boyutlarında anlamlı bir farklılığın ortaya çıkmadığı gözlemlenmiştir. Elde edilen bu sonuçlar başta Kimlik İçeriği Kuramı olmak üzere, çeşitli kimlik teorileri ekseninde değerlendirilmiştir. Bu çalışma, Türk-Kürt çatışmasındaki karmaşık tanımlamaların ve kimlik süreçlerinin arkasındaki psikolojik mekanizmaların ortaya konması bakımından önemlidir. Çalışma sonuçlarının hem bu alanda gerçekleştirilecek bilimsel veriye dayalı çalışmalara katkı sunması hem de bu uzun süreli problemin çözümü ve vatandaş grupları arasındaki normalleşme süreçlerinin başlaması ve sürdürülmesine yönelik politikalara katkıda bulunması umulmaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

ÇOYMAK, A. (2018). Who Is the Separatist: Untangling The Dynamics Of Multiple Social Identities In The Intractable Turkish-Kurdish Conflict In Turkey. Türk Psikoloji Yazıları, Cilt: 21 - Sayı: 0, 38–61. https://ajindex.com/articles/128813

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (11)

  1. Alwin, D. F. ve Hauser, R. M. (1975). The decomposition of effects in path analysis. American Sociological Review, 40(1), 37-47.
  2. Arbuckle, J. L. (1989). AMOS: Analysis of Moment Structures. The American Statistician, 33 (1), 66. Arslan, S. (2006). Farklı soyutlama düzeylerinde benlik temsillerii-: Bireysel benlik ve kolektif benlik ya da ‘ben’lik ve ‘biz’lik. Türk Psikoloji Yazıları, 9(18), 81-99.
  3. Barrett, P. (2007). Structural equation modelling: Adjudging model fit. Personality and Individual Differences, 42(5), 815-824.
  4. Baysu, G. (2007). The Effects of Intergroup Perceptions and Ingroup Identifications on the Political Participation of the Second-Generation Turkish Migrants in the Netherlands. Middle East Technical University, Ankara: Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. Baysu, G., Coşkan, C., & Duman, Y. (Basımda). Can identification as Muslim increase support for reconciliation? The case of the Turkish-Kurdish armed conflict. Yayınlanmamış makale taslağı. Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological bulletin, 107(2), 238. Bentler, P. M. ve Bonnet, G. D. (1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88, 588-606.
  5. Bourdieu, P. (2011).
  6. The forms of capital (1986). Cultural theory: An anthology, 81-93.
  7. Brewer, M. B. (2001). The many faces of social identity: Implications for political psychology. Political Psychology, 22, 115-125.
  8. Brewer, M. B. ve Pierce, K. P. (2005). Social identity complexity and outgroup tolerance. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31(3), 428-437.
  9. Carmines, E. ve McIver, J. (1981). Analyzing Models with Unobserved Variables: Analysis of Covariance Structures. İçinde G. Bohrnstedt, ve E. Borgatta (Ed), Social Measurement: Current Issues (ss. 61–73).
  10. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology,94, 95-120.
  11. Çoymak, A. (2009). Associations of religious identification, secular identification, perceived discrimination, and political trust with ethnic and societal (national) identification (Yayımlanmamış yükseklisans tezi, Orta Doğu Teknik Üniversites) Çoymak, A. (2015). The dynamics of citizenship, multiple identities and intergroup trust amongst young people in Northern Ireland (Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi, Queen’s University Belfast). Çoymak, A. ve Doğruyol, B. (2007). Social representations of “laicism” and “Muslim” as concepts of multiple identiti