SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Marmara Üniversitesi Atatürk Eğitim Fakültesi Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 53 Sayı: 53

Turkish Adaptation and Psychometric Analysis of The Short Boredom Proneness Scale

Kısa Can Sıkıntısı Eğilimi Ölçeğinin Türkçe’ye Uyarlanması ve Psikometrik Yönden İncelenmesi

Halim Güner(MUŞ ALPARSLAN ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0003-1537-7655
Nesrullah Okan(FIRAT ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0002-9496-6417
Selami Kardaş(MUŞ ALPARSLAN ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0003-2773-3936
Pages
326–341
Publication Date
2021-01-24
🏛️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)

As a result, good levels of analysis results were obtained in the adaptation process and the Short Boredom Proneness Scale was introduced to the literature.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Boredom is one of the basic emotions experienced by many people of all age groups.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In this study, due to this critical importance, the short version of the seven-item Boredom Tendency scale developed by Struk, Carriere, Cheyne and Danckert (2015) was adapted to Turkish.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:As a result, good levels of analysis results were obtained in the adaptation process and the Short Boredom Proneness Scale was introduced to the literature.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:2015 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Can Sıkıntısı Eğilimi · Uyarlama · Geçerlik

Abstract

Boredom is one of the basic emotions experienced by many people of all age groups. The long and frequent experience of this emotion creates negative emotions such as stress, depression, substance abuse, and anxiety. For this reason, measurement tools that measure boredom are critical. In this study, due to this critical importance, the short version of the seven-item Boredom Tendency scale developed by Struk, Carriere, Cheyne and Danckert (2015) was adapted to Turkish. In adaptation, first of all, language equivalence was achieved by following the steps in the literature. For construct validity, exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was performed with the data collected from 496 university students, and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was performed with the data collected from 251 students. Significant and good levels results were obtained in both analyzes. The stress sub-factor of the DASS-21 was used for criterion validity. The relationship between the short boredom scale and stress was examined with the data collected from 90 students and the correlation value was r = .57. For the reliability of the adapted scale, the Cronbach's alpha (α) value and the discrimination of 27% lower and upper groups were examined. As a result of the analysis, α =, 91 and a significant t-test value (t = 42.328; p <, 001) was obtained. As a result, good levels of analysis results were obtained in the adaptation process and the Short Boredom Proneness Scale was introduced to the literature.

Özet

Can sıkıntısı duygusu bütün yaş gruplarında birçok kişinin yaşadığı temel duygulardandır. Bu duygunun uzun süreli ve sık bir şekilde yaşanması kişilerde stres, depresyon, madde bağımlılığı, endişe gibi olumsuz duyguları beraberinde getirmektedir. Bu nedenle can sıkıntısını değerlendiren ölçme araçları kritik önemdedir. Bu çalışmada da bu kritik önemden dolayı Struk, Carriere, Cheyne ve Danckert (2015) tarafından geliştirilen yedi maddelik Can Sıkıntısı Eğilimi ölçeğinin kısa versiyonunun Tükçe’ye uyarlanması yapılmıştır. Uyarlamada öncelikle dil eşdeğerliliği literatürdeki basamaklar takip edilerek sağlanmıştır. Yapı geçerliliği için 495 üniversite öğrencisinden toplanan veriler ile açımlayıcı faktör analizi (AFA) ve 251 öğrenciden toplanan veri ile de doğrulayıcı faktör analizi (DFA) yapılmıştır. Her iki analizde de anlamlı ve yeterli düzeyde sonuçlar elde edilmiştir. Ölçüt geçerliliği için de DASS-21 ölçeğinin stres alt boyutu kullanılmıştır. Doksan öğrenciden toplanan veriler ile kısa can sıkıntısı ölçeği ile stres arasındaki ilişkiye bakılmış ve korelasyon değeri r=,57 çıkmıştır. Uyarlama yapılan ölçeğin güvenirliği için Cronbach alfa değerine ve %27’lik alt ve üst dilimlerin ayırıcılık özelliğine bakılmıştır. Analiz sonucunda α=,91 ve anlamlı bir t-testi değeri elde edilmiştir. Sonuç olarak uyarlama aşamalarında uygun analiz sonuçları elde edilmiş ve Kısa Can Sıkıntısı Eğilimi Ölçeği literatüre kazandırılmıştır.

🔖

Cite This Article

Güner, H., Okan, N., Kardaş, S. (2021). Turkish Adaptation and Psychometric Analysis of The Short Boredom Proneness Scale. Marmara Üniversitesi Atatürk Eğitim Fakültesi Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, Cilt: 53 Sayı: 53, 326–341. https://doi.org/10.15285/maruaebd.797235

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (43)

  1. Aljawarneh, A. Y. (2019). Boredom proneness and private self-consciousness among a sample of university students. Indian Journal of Positive Psychology, 10(3), 135-139.
  2. Brislin, R.,W., Lonner, W.,J., ve R.M. Thorndike, R., M. (1973). Cross Cultural Research Methods. New York: John Willey & Sons Pub.
  3. Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2010). Sosyal Bilimler için Veri Analizi El Kitabı. Pegem Akademi Yayıncılık, Ankara.
  4. Büyüköztürk, Ş., Kılıç Çakmak, E., Akgün, Ö.E., Karadeniz, Ş. ve Demirel, F. (2019). Bilimsel Araştırma Yöntemleri (27. Baskı). Ankara: Pegem Yayınları
  5. Cha, E. S., Kim, K. H., & Erlen, J. A. (2007). Translation of scales in cross-cultural research: Issues and techniques. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 58(4), 386–395.
  6. Conroy, R. M., Golden, J., Jeffares, I., O'Neill, D. & McGee, H. (2010). Boredom-proneness, loneliness, social engagement and depression and their association with cognitive function in older people: A population study.Psychology, Health & Medicine, 15:4, 463-473. Doi: 10.1080/13548506.2010.487103
  7. Çokluk, Ö., Şekercioğlu, G. ve Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2012). Sosyal Bilimler İçin Çok Değişkenli İstatistik: SPSS ve Lisrel Uygulamaları. Pegem Akademi Yayıncılık, Ankara.
  8. Daschmann, E. C., Goetz, T., & Stupnisky, R. H. (2011). Testing the predictors of boredom at school: Development and validation of the precursors to boredom scales.British Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 421–440. Doi: 10.1348/000709910x526038
  9. Dursun, P. ve Tezer, E. (2013). Turkish adaptation of the boredom proneness scale short-form. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences 84, 1550–1554. Doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.06.786
  10. Eastwood, J. D., Frischen, A., Fenske, M. J., & Smilek, D. (2012). The unengaged mind: Defining boredom in terms of attention. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7(5), 482–495. Doi 10.1177/1745691612456044
  11. Elhai, J. D., Rozgonjuk, D. Alghraibeh, A. M. & Yang, H. (2019). Disrupted daily activities from ınterruptive smartphone notifications: relations with depression and anxiety severity and the mediating role of boredom proneness. Social Science Computer Review, 1-18. Doi: 10.1177/0894439319858008
  12. Elpidorou, A. (2014). The bright side of boredom. Opinion Article, Doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01245
  13. Elpidorou, A. (2018) The good of boredom. Philosophical Psychology,31:3, 323-351. Doi: 10.1080/09515089.2017.1346240
  14. Fahlman, S. A., Mercer-Lynn, K. B., Flora, D. B., & Eastwood, J. D. (2013). Development and validation of the multidimensional state boredom scale. Assessment, 20(1), 68–85. Doi: 10.1177/1073191111421303
  15. Farmer, R., & Sundberg, N. D. (1986). Boredom proneness: The development and correlates of a new scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 50, 4–17. Doi 10.1207/s15327752jpa5001_2
  16. Gana, K., Deletang, B. & Metais, L. (2000). Is boredom proneness associated with introspectiveness? Social Behavıor and Personalıty, 28(5), 499-504. Doi: 10.2444/Sbp.2000.28.5.499
  17. Hamilton, J. A., Haier, R. J., & Buchsbaum, M. S. (1984). Intrinsic enjoyment and boredom coping scales: Validation with personality, evoked potential, and attention measures. Personality and Individual Differences, 5, 183–193. Doi: 10.1016/0191-8869(84)90050-3
  18. Harasymchuk, C., & Fehr, B. (2012). Development of a prototype-based measure of relational boredom. Personal Relationships, 19, 162–181. Doi: 10.1111/j.1475-6811.2011.01346.x
  19. Henry, J. D., & Crawford, J. R. (2005). The short‐form version of the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales (DASS‐21): Construct validity and normative data in a large non‐clinical sample. British Journal of Clinical Psychology,44(2), 227-239. Doi: 10.1348/014466505X29657
  20. Hill, A. B., & Perkins, R. E. (1985). Towards a model of boredom. British Journal of Psychology, 76, 235–240. Doi: 10.1111/j.2044-8295.1985.tb01947.x
  21. Hunter, J. A., Abraham, E. H., Hunter, A. G., Goldberg, L. C. & Eastwood, J. D. (2016). Personality and boredom proneness in the prediction of creativity and curiosity.Thinking Skills and Creativity, 22, 48-57. Doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2016.08.002
  22. Iannaccone, B. (2019). Boredom proneness and character strengths related to academic achievement in adolescence. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertations. Carter and Moyers School of Education, Lincoln. https://digitalcommons.lmunet.edu/edddissertations/13
  23. Iso-Ahola, S. E., & Weissinger, E. (1987). Leisure and Boredom. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 5(3), 356–364.
  24. Iso-Ahola, S. E., & Weissinger, E. (1990). Perceptions of boredom in leisure: Conceptualization reliability, and validity of the Leisure Boredom Scale. Journal of Leisure Research, 22, 1–17.
  25. Lee, F. K. S. & Zelman, D. C. (2019). Boredom proneness as a predictor of depression, anxiety and stress: The moderating effects of dispositional mindfulness. Personality and Individual Differences, 146 (2019) 68–75. Doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2019.04.001
  26. Mahmoud, J. S. R., Staten, R. T., Hall, L. A., & Lennie, T. A. (2012). The relationship among young adult college students’ depression, anxiety, stress, demographics, life satisfaction, and coping styles. Issues in Mental Health Nursing, 33(3), 149-156. Doi: 10.3109/01612840.2011.632708
  27. Nabilla, S. P., Christiab, M. & Dannisworoc, C. A. (2019). The Relationship between Boredom Proneness and Sensation Seeking among Adolescent and Adult Former Drug Users. Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, 229, 420-443. Doi: 10.2991/iciap-18.2019.35
  28. Nett, U. E., Goetz, T., & Daniels, L. M. (2010). What to do when feeling bored: Student strategies for coping with boredom. Learning and Individual Differences, 20, 626–638. Doi: 10.1016/j.lindif.2010.09.004
  29. Nocera, T. (2019). Assessing the Effects of Psychopathy, Sadism, Aggression, and Boredom Proneness on Cyber Aggression Perpetration in Emerging Adults: Is Moral Disengagement to Blame? Unpublished Doctoral Dissertations. College of Education and Human Sciences and the School of Psychology, Mississippi. https://aquila.usm.edu/dissertations/1712
  30. Peng, J., Guo, W., Zhao, L., Han, X., & Wu, S. (2020). Short Boredom Proneness Scale: Adaptation and validation of a Chinese version with college students. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 48(2). Doi: 10.2224/sbp.8968
  31. Ragheb, M. G., & Merydith, S. P. (2001). Development and validation of a unidimensional scale measuring free time boredom. Leisure Studies, 20, 41–59. Doi: 10.1080/02614360122569
  32. Schermelleh-Engel, K., Moosbrugger, H., & Müller, H. (2003). Evaluating the fit of structural equation models: Test of significance and descriptive goodness-of-fit measures. Methods of Psychological Research-Online, 8 (2), 23–74.
  33. Stephen J. Vodanovich, S. J., Wallace, J. C. & Kass, S. J. (2005). A confirmatory approach to the factor structure of the boredom proneness scale: evidence for a two-factor short form. Journal of Personality Assessment, 85:3, 295-303. Doi: 10.1207/s15327752jpa8503_05
  34. Struk, A. A., Carriere, J. S. A., Cheyne, J. A., & Danckert, J. (2015). A Short Boredom Proneness Scale: Development and Psychometric Properties. Assessment, 24(3), 346–359. Doi: 10.1177/1073191115609996
  35. Tavşancıl, Ezel. (2010). Tutumların Ölçülmesi Ve Spss İle Veri Analizi. Ankara: Nobel Yayınları.
  36. Vodanovich, S. J. & Watt, J. D. (2015): Self-Report Measures of Boredom: An Updated Review of the Literature. The Journal of Psychology. Doi: 10.1080/00223980.2015.1074531
  37. Watt, J. D. (1991). Effect of boredom proneness on time perception. Psychological Reports, 69, 323-327. Doi: 10.2466/pro.69.5.323-327
  38. Watt, J. D., & Ewing, J. E. (1996). Toward the development and validation of a measure of sexual boredom. Journal of Sex Research, 33, 57–66. Doi: 10.1080/00224499609551815
  39. Watt, J. D., & Hargis, M. B. (2010). Boredom Proneness: Its relationship with subjective underemployment, perceived organizational support, and job performance. Journal of Business and Psychology, 25, 163–174. Doi: 10.1007/s10869-009- 9138-9
  40. Wolff, W., Martarelli, C., Schüler, J. & Bieleke, M. (2020). High boredom proneness and low trait self-control impair adherence to social distancing guidelines during the COVID-19 pandemic. PsyArXiv, 17 Apr. 2020. Doi: 10.31234/osf.io/jcf95
  41. Wolniewicz, C. A., Rozgonjuk, D. & Elhai, J. D. (2020). Boredom proneness and fear of missing out mediate relations between depression and anxiety with problematic smartphone use. Hum Behav & Emerg Tech. 2020;2:61–70. Doi: 10.1002/hbe2.159
  42. Yılmaz, Ö., Boz, H. ve Arslan, A. (2017). Depresyon Anksiyete Stres Ölçeğinin (Dass 21) Türkçe Kısa Formunun Geçerlilik-Güvenilirlik Çalışması. Finans Ekonomi ve Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 2(2).
  43. Zuckerman, M. (1979). Sensation seeking: Beyond the optimal level of arousal. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.