SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi / 2026 / Sayı: 73

Moral disengagement and bullying behavior: Psychometric evaluation of a new scale in a Turkish sample

Ahlaki uzaklaşma ve zorbalık davranışı: Türkiye örnekleminde yeni bir ölçeğin psikometrik incelenmesi

İsmail Kuşci(Bursa Uludağ Üniversitesi)0000-0002-2178-8429
Vedat Bakır(KÜTAHYA DUMLUPINAR ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0001-5458-5110
Pages
635–659
Publication Date
2025-01-31
🏛️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)

These findings indicate that the Turkish version of the MDBBS is a valid and reliable measurement tool.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study aimed to adapt the Moral Disengagement in Bullying Behavior Scale (MDBBS) developed by Jeong et al. (2024) into Turkish and examine its psychometric properties.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The research was conducted with a total of 509 university students across two different samples.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:These findings indicate that the Turkish version of the MDBBS is a valid and reliable measurement tool.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:2024 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Ahlaki uzaklaşma · zorbalık davranışı · ölçek uyarlama

Abstract

This study aimed to adapt the Moral Disengagement in Bullying Behavior Scale (MDBBS) developed by Jeong et al. (2024) into Turkish and examine its psychometric properties. The research was conducted with a total of 509 university students across two different samples. The construct validity of the scale was examined through Exploratory (EFA) and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA). As a result of the EFA, a single-factor structure consistent with the original scale was obtained, and a 13-item form was finalized after the removal of item 5. The CFA results confirmed the single-factor structure (χ²/df = 2.292, CFI = 0.959, RMSEA = 0.065). The scale demonstrated a Cronbach's alpha coefficient of .901 and a McDonald's omega coefficient of .899. For criterion validity, the MDBBS showed significant positive correlations with the Moral Disengagement Scale (r = 0.521), Cyberbullying (r = 0.323), Cyber Victimization (r = 0.297), and Depression (r = 0.192), and a significant negative correlation with Psychological Well-being (r = -0.294). These findings indicate that the Turkish version of the MDBBS is a valid and reliable measurement tool. The adaptation of the MDBBS into Turkish will contribute to advancing research in the areas of bullying and moral disengagement and provide a valuable instrument for the development of bullying prevention and intervention programs.

Özet

Bu çalışmada, Jeong ve arkadaşları (2024) tarafından geliştirilen Ahlaki Uzaklaşma Zorbalık Davranışı Ölçeği'nin (AUZDÖ) Türkçeye uyarlanması ve psikometrik özelliklerinin incelenmesi amaçlanmıştır. Araştırma, iki farklı örneklemdeki toplam 510 üniversite öğrencisi üzerinde yürütülmüştür. Ölçeğin yapı geçerliği Açımlayıcı Faktör Analizi (AFA) ve Doğrulayıcı Faktör Analizi (DFA) ile incelenmiştir. AFA sonucunda, orijinal ölçekle tutarlı olarak tek faktörlü bir yapı elde edilmiş, 5. maddenin çıkarılmasıyla 13 maddelik bir form oluşturulmuştur. DFA sonuçları, tek faktörlü yapıyı doğrulamıştır (χ²/sd = 2.292, CFI = 0.959, RMSEA = 0.065). Ölçeğin Cronbach alfa katsayısı .901, McDonald omega katsayısı .899 olarak bulunmuştur. Ölçüt geçerliği kapsamında, AUZDÖ'nün Ahlaki Uzaklaşma Ölçeği (r = 0.521), Siber Zorbalık (r = 0.323), Siber Mağduriyet (r = 0.297) ve Depresyon (r = 0.192) ile pozitif; Psikolojik İyi Oluş (r = -0.294) ile negatif yönde anlamlı ilişkiler gösterdiği bulunmuştur. Bu bulgular, AUZDÖ'nün Türkçe formunun geçerli ve güvenilir bir ölçme aracı olduğunu göstermektedir. AUZDÖ'nün Türkçe uyarlaması, zorbalık ve ahlaki uzaklaşma alanındaki araştırmaların gelişimine katkı sağlayacak, ayrıca zorbalığı önleme ve müdahale programlarının geliştirilmesinde kullanılabilecek değerli bir araç sunmaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

Kuşci, İ., Bakır, V. (2025). Moral disengagement and bullying behavior: Psychometric evaluation of a new scale in a Turkish sample. Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, Sayı: 73, 635–659. https://doi.org/10.21764/maeuefd.1547674

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (43)

  1. Arslan, N. (2017). Peer Bullying among high school students: Turkish version of Bullying Scale. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 5, 853-857.
  2. Bandura, A. (1989). Human agency in social cognitive theory. American Psychologist, 44(9), 1175. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.44.9.1175
  3. Bandura, A. (1999). Moral disengagement in the perpetration of inhumanities. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 3(3), 193 209. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327957pspr0303_3
  4. Bandura, A. (2002). Selective moral disengagement in the exercise of moral agency. Journal of Moral Education, 31(2), 101-119.
  5. Bandura, A., Barbaranelli, C., Caprara, G. V., & Pastorelli, C. (1996). Mechanisms of moral disengagement in the exercise of moral agency. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71(2), 364–374. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.71.2.364
  6. Brislin, R. W., Lonner, W. J., & Thorndike, R. M. (1973). Cross-cultural research methods. John Wiley & Sons.
  7. Bussey, K., Fitzpatrick, S., & Raman, A. (2015). The role of moral disengagement and selfefficacy in cyberbullying. Journal of School Violence, 14(1), 30-46. https://doi.org/10.1080/15388220.2014.954045
  8. Caprara, G. V., Fida, R., Vecchione, M., Tramontano, C., & Barbaranelli, C. (2009). Assessing civic moral disengagement: Dimensionality and construct validity. Personality and Individual Differences, 47(5), 504–509. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2009.04.027
  9. Concha-Salgado, A., Ramírez, A., Pérez, B., Pérez-Luco, R., & García-Cueto, E. (2022). Moral disengagement as a self-regulatory cognitive process of transgressions: Psychometric evidence of the Bandura scale in Chilean adolescents. International journal of environmental research and public health, 19(19), 12249.
  10. Crick, N. R., & Grotpeter, J. K. (1995). Relational aggression, gender, and social-psychological adjustment. Child Development, 66(3), 710-722.
  11. Detert, J. R., Treviño, L. K., & Sweitzer, V. L. (2008). Moral disengagement in ethical decision making: A study of antecedents and outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(2), 374-391.
  12. DeVellis, R. F. (2017). Scale development: Theory and applications (4th ed.). Sage Publications.
  13. Diener, E., Wirtz, D., Tov, W., Kim-Prieto, C., Choi, D.-w., Oishi, S., & Biswas-Diener, R. (2010). New well-being measures: Short scales to assess flourishing and positive and negative feelings. Social Indicators Research, 97(2), 143-156. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-009-9493-y
  14. Efilti, E., & Özdemir, Ş. A. (2021). Swearer Zorbalık Ölçeğinin Türk kültürüne uyarlanması ve geçerlilik, güvenilirlik analizi. OPUS Uluslararası Toplum Araştırmaları Dergisi, 17(34), 125-146. http://dx.doi.org/110.26466/opus.738264
  15. Ekmekçioğlu, E., & Aydoğan, E. (2019). Ahlaki uzaklaşma ölçeğinin geçerlilik ve güvenilirlik çalışması. Üçüncü Sektör Sosyal Ekonomi Dergisi, 54(2), 701-712.
  16. Fang, J., Wang, X., Yuan, K.-H., & Wen, Z. (2020). Childhood psychological maltreatment and moral disengagement: A moderated mediation model of callous-unemotional traits and empathy. Personality and Individual Differences, 157, Article 109814. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2020.109814
  17. Field, A. (2013). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics (4th ed.). Sage Publications. George, D., & Mallery, M. (2010). SPSS for Windows step by step: A simple guide and reference, 17.0 update (10th ed.). Pearson.
  18. Gezici Yalçın, M., Şenyurt, A. Y., Gültepe, B., & Coşkun, H. (2016). Ahlâkî Uzaklaşma Ölçeğinin Türkçeye uyarlanması. Kalem Eğitim ve İnsan Bilimleri Dergisi, 6(1), 309-332.
  19. Gini, G., Pozzoli, T., & Hymel, S. (2014). Moral disengagement among children and youth: A meta‐analytic review of links to aggressive behavior. Aggressive Behavior, 40(1), 56–68. https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.21502
  20. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). Pearson.
  21. Hu, L.-t., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
  22. Hymel, S., & Perren, S. (2015). Introduction to the special issue: Moral disengagement and aggression in children and youth. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 61(1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.13110/merrpalmquar1982.61.1.0001
  23. Hymel, S., Rocke-Henderson, N., & Bonanno, R. A. (2005). Moral disengagement: A framework for understanding bullying among adolescents. Journal of Social Sciences, 8(1), 1-11.
  24. Jeong, R., Demaray, M. K., & Styck, K. M. (2024). Development of the Moral Disengagement Bullying Behavior Scale. International Journal of Bullying Prevention. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42380-023-00206-5
  25. Kline, R. B. (2015). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (4th ed.). Guilford Press.
  26. Kowalski, R. M., Giumetti, G. W., Schroeder, A. N., & Lattanner, M. R. (2014). Bullying in the digital age: A critical review and meta-analysis of cyberbullying research among youth. Psychological Bulletin, 140(4), 1073-1137.
  27. Kutlu, F., & Aydın, G. (2010). Akran zorbalığı ölçek geliştirme ön çalışması: Kendini bildirim formu. Türk Psikoloji Yazıları, 13(25), 1-12.
  28. Kyriacou, C., & Zuin, A. (2016). Cyberbullying and moral disengagement: an analysis based on a social pedagogy of pastoral care in schools. Pastoral Care in Education, 34(1), 34-42. https://doi.org/10.1080/02643944.2015.1134631
  29. Lovibond, P. F., & 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. https://doi.org/10.1016/0005-7967(94)00075-U
  30. Moore, C. (2008). Moral disengagement in processes of organizational corruption. Journal of Business Ethics, 80(1), 129-139.
  31. Olweus, D. (1993). Bullying at school: What we know and what we can do. Blackwell Publishing.
  32. Pornari, C. D., & Wood, J. (2010). Peer and cyber aggression in secondary school students: The role of moral disengagement, hostile attribution bias, and outcome expectancies. Aggressive Behavior, 36(2), 81–94. https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.20336
  33. Steiger, J. H. (2007). Understanding the limitations of global fit assessment in structural equation modeling. Personality and Individual Differences, 42(5), 893–898. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2006.09.017
  34. Streiner, D. L. (2003). Starting at the beginning: An introduction to coefficient alpha and internal consistency. Journal of Personality Assessment, 80(1), 99–103. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327752JPA8001_18
  35. Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2013). Using multivariate statistics (6th ed.). Pearson.
  36. Taber, K. S. (2018). The use of Cronbach’s alpha when developing and reporting research instruments in science education. Research in science education, 48, 1273-1296. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-016-9602-2
  37. Tanrikulu, I., & Erdur-Baker, Ö. (2021). Psychometric properties of a Cyberbullying Inventory for university students. British Journal of Guidance & Counselling, 49(3), 494-507. https://doi.org/10.1080/03069885.2020.1775174
  38. Tavşancıl, E. (2002). Tutumların ölçülmesi ve SPSS ile veri analizi. Nobel Yayıncılık.
  39. Telef, B. B. (2013). Psikolojik iyi oluş ölçeği: Türkçeye uyarlama, geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 28(28-3), 374-384.
  40. Thornberg, R., & Jungert, T. (2014). School bullying and the mechanisms of moral disengagement. Aggressive Behavior, 40(2), 99–108. https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.21509
  41. Visconti, K. J., Ladd, G. W., & Kochenderfer-Ladd, B. (2015). The role of moral disengagement in the associations between children’s social goals and aggression. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 61(1), 101–123. https://doi.org/10.13110/merrpalmquar1982.61.1.0101
  42. Worthington, R. L., & Whittaker, T. A. (2006). Scale development research: A content analysis and recommendations for best practices. The Counseling Psychologist, 34(6), 806–838. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000006288127
  43. Yılmaz, Ö., Boz, H., & Arslan, A. (2017). Depresyon Anksiyete Stres Ölçeğinin (DASS 21) Türkçe kısa formunun geçerlilik-güvenilirlik çalışması. Finans Ekonomi ve Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 2(2), 78-91.