Journals / CBÜ Beden Eğitimi ve Spor Bilimleri Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 21 Sayı: 2

Social Security Awareness Scale in Sport (SSAS): Validity and Reliability Study

Sporda Sosyal Güvenlik Farkındalığı Ölçeği (SSGFÖ): Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Çalışması

Mehmet Kartal(ADIYAMAN ÜNİVERSİTESİ, BEDEN EĞİTİMİ VE SPOR YÜKSEKOKULU, ANTRENÖRLÜK EĞİTİMİ BÖLÜMÜ)0000-0003-3153-0496
Cenk Temel(AKDENİZ ÜNİVERSİTESİ, SPOR BİLİMLERİ FAKÜLTESİ, SPOR YÖNETİCİLİĞİ BÖLÜMÜ)0000-0001-6777-085X
Sinan Uğraş(ÇANAKKALE ONSEKİZ MART ÜNİVERSİTESİ, SPOR BİLİMLERİ FAKÜLTESİ, BEDEN EĞİTİMİ VE SPOR EĞİTİMİ BÖLÜMÜ)0000-0003-0792-1497
Pages
447–462
Publication Date
2026-07-31
🏛️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)

In conclusion, the scale is considered a valid, reliable, and functional measurement tool for determining athletes’ levels of social security awareness and identifying deficiencies in this area.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study was designed to develop the Social Security Awareness in Sports Scale (SSASS) in order to determine athletes' levels of awareness regarding social security rights in sports and to examine the scale's validity and reliability.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The study group consisted of 341 athletes aged 18 and over who participated in national/international competitions in individual and team sports (AFA=170, DFA=171).
💡
Conclusion & Impact:In conclusion, the scale is considered a valid, reliable, and functional measurement tool for determining athletes’ levels of social security awareness and identifying deficiencies in this area.
🔬Design:Lab & Field Experiment
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Spor · Sosyal güvenlik · Farkındalık

Abstract

This study was designed to develop the Social Security Awareness in Sports Scale (SSASS) in order to determine athletes' levels of awareness regarding social security rights in sports and to examine the scale's validity and reliability. The study group consisted of 341 athletes aged 18 and over who participated in national/international competitions in individual and team sports (AFA=170, DFA=171). Of the participants, 26.7% were female (n=91) and 73.3% were male (n=250). The 40-item pool created in line with the literature and expert opinions within the scope of the research was reduced to 34 items after pre-application and expert evaluations. As a result of AFA, items with factor loadings below 0.50 and those that were redundant were removed, reducing the scale to 18 items. The scale was grouped into three dimensions: ‘Assurance,’ ‘Access,’ and ‘Follow-up.’ The total variance explained by the scale was 72.313%, with the Assurance dimension explaining 35.249% of the variance, the Access dimension explaining 23.423%, and the Monitoring dimension explaining 13.642%. The fit indices of the three-dimensional model were found to be within an acceptable range (χ²/df=2.209, GFI=0.852, NFI=0.905, TLI=0.935, IFI=0.946, CFI=0.945, RMSEA=0.084, SRMR=0.039). The Cronbach's alpha coefficient of the scale was calculated as 0.95; Assurance dimension = 0.95, Access dimension = 0.91, Tracking dimension = 0.77. In conclusion, the scale is considered a valid, reliable, and functional measurement tool for determining athletes’ levels of social security awareness and identifying deficiencies in this area.

Özet

Bu araştırma, sporcuların sosyal güvenlik haklarına ilişkin farkındalık düzeylerini belirlemek amacıyla “Sporda Sosyal Güvenlik Farkındalığı Ölçeğini (SSGFÖ)” geliştirmek ve ölçeğin geçerlik-güvenirlik analizlerini yapmak üzere tasarlanmıştır. Araştırmanın çalışma grubunu bireysel ve takım sporlarında ulusal/uluslararası düzeyde yarışmalara katılan 18 yaş ve üzeri 341 sporcu oluşturmaktadır (AFA=170, DFA=171). Katılımcıların %26,7’si kadın (n=91), %73,3’ü erkek (n=250) sporcudur. Araştırma kapsamında literatür ve uzman görüşleri doğrultusunda oluşturulan 40 maddelik soru havuzu, ön uygulama ve uzman değerlendirmeleri sonrasında 34 maddeye indirilmiştir. AFA sonucunda faktör yükü 0,50’nin altında kalan ve aynı zamanda binişik olan maddeler çıkarılarak 18 maddeye indirgenmiş ve “Güvence”, “Erişim” ve “Takip” olmak üzere ölçek üç boyutta toplanmıştır. Ölçeğin meydana getirdiği toplam varyans %72,313 olup, Güvence boyutu %35,249, Erişim boyutu %23,423, Takip boyutu %13,642 varyansı açıklamaktadır. DFA sonucunda ise üç boyutlu modelin uyum indeksleri kabul edilebilir aralıkta bulunmuştur (χ²/df=2,209, GFI=0,852, NFI=0,905, TLI=0,935, IFI=0,946, CFI=0,945, RMSEA=0,084, SRMR=0,039). Ölçeğin Cronbach’s alfa katsayısı 0,95; Güvence boyutu = 0,95, Erişim boyutu = 0,91, Takip boyutu = 0,77 olarak hesaplanmıştır. Sonuç olarak ölçeğin, sporcuların sosyal güvenlik farkındalık düzeylerini belirlemede ve bu alandaki eksiklikleri ortaya koymada kullanılabilecek geçerli, güvenilir ve işlevsel bir ölçme aracı olduğu değerlendirilmektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Gökduman, Ç., Kartal, M., Temel, C., Uğraş, S. (2026). Social Security Awareness Scale in Sport (SSAS): Validity and Reliability Study. CBÜ Beden Eğitimi ve Spor Bilimleri Dergisi, Cilt: 21 Sayı: 2, 447–462. https://doi.org/10.33459/cbubesbd.1795280

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (40)

  1. Alpar R. (2012). Uygulamalı istatistik ve geçerlik-güvenirlik. (2. Baskı). Detay.
  2. Alper, Y. (2022). Sosyal sigortalar hukuku. (12. Baskı). Dora.
  3. Arıkan, Y., ve Mil, İ. (2013). Amatör sporcuların sosyal güvenliği. Akademik Araştırmalar Dergisi, 58, 221–238.
  4. Baillie, P. H. F. (1993). Understanding retirement from sports. The Counseling Psychologist, 21(3), 399–410. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000093213004
  5. Brown, T. A. (2015). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research (2nd ed.). Guilford Press.
  6. Büyüköztürk, Ş., Kılıç Çakmak, E., Akgün, Ö. E., Karadeniz, Ş., ve Demirel, F. (2012). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri. Pegem Akademi.
  7. Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2017). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage Publications.
  8. Çankaya, C., ve Dalbudak, I. (2025). Awareness of professional amputee footballers with physical disabilities about social security and the necessary training in this regard. Cadernos De Educação Tecnologia E Sociedade, 18(se3), 217–226. https://doi.org/10.14571/brajets.v18.nse3.217-226
  9. Çokluk, Ö., Şekercioğlu, G., ve Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2016). Sosyal bilimler için çok değişkenli istatistik SPSS ve Lisrel uygulamaları. Pegem Akademi.
  10. European Olympic Academies. (2023, February 15). Insufficient coverage for athletes in Olympic sports - Focus on social protection. https://www.eoaolympic.org/insufficient-coverage-for-athletes-in-olympic-sports-focus-on-social-protection/ Erişim tarihi: 15.06.2025.
  11. Fiege, L. (2025). The social protection of olympic elite athletes in Europe: A human right trapped between international commitment and domestic institutionalisation?. The International Sports Law Journal, 25, 234-256. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40318-025-00323-x
  12. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378101800104
  13. Gökduman, Ç. (2023). Fiili profesyonel sporcuların sosyal güvenlik hakları üzerine bir araştırma. Doktora tezi, Akdeniz Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Antalya.
  14. Gökduman, Ç., ve Çankaya, C. (2019). Amatör dövüş sporcularının sosyal güvenlik (sağlık) konusundaki farkındalık düzeyinin araştırılması. Spor Eğitim Dergisi, 3(2), 11-19. https://izlik.org/JA76SC74FZ
  15. Gurgis, J. J., Kerr, G., & Darnell, S. (2022). ‘Safe sport is not for everyone’: Equity-deserving athletes’ perspectives of, experiences and recommendations for safe sport. Frontiers İn Psychology, 13, Article 832560. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.832560
  16. Hair, J.F.Jr, Black, W.C., Babin, B.J., Anderson, R.E., & Tatham, R.L. (2005). Multivariate Data Analysis (6th Edition). Pearson, Prentice Hall.
  17. Heerdt, D., & Rook, W. (2022). Remedy and redress for sport-related human rights abuses. The International Sports Law Journal, 22(1), 85–92. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40318-022-00227-0
  18. Hong, H. J., & Fraser, I. (2023). High-performance athletes’ transition out of sport: Developing corporate social responsibility, International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics, 15(4), 725–741. https://doi.org/10.1080/19406940.2023.2242877
  19. Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (2009). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
  20. International Labour Organization. (2021). World social protection report 2020–22: Social protection at the crossroads - In pursuit of a better future. International Labour Office. https://www.ilo.org/sites/default/files/wcmsp5/groups/public/%40ed_protect/%40soc_sec/documents/publication/wcms_817572.pdf adresinden erişildi. Erişim tarihi: 24.06.2025
  21. International Labour Organization. (2024). World social protection report 2024–26: Social protection at the crossroads – in pursuit of a better future. International Labour Office. https://www.ilo.org/sites/default/files/2024-09/WSPR_2024_EN_WEB_1.pdf adresinden erişildi. Erişim tarihi: 11.07.2025
  22. Kline, R. B. (2016). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (4th ed.). Guilford Press.
  23. Liu, H. (2024). Unveiling the economic potential of sports industry in China: A data driven analysis, PLoS ONE, 19(9), Article e0310131. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0310131
  24. McNamee, M., Harvey, H., van Bottenburg, M., Geeraert, A., Semenova, A., Sampedro, A. C., Mittag, J., Fiege, L., Seltmann, M., Andersen, S. J., & Le Coq, C. (Eds.). (2023). Strengthening athlete power in sport: Final report, play the Game. https://www.playthegame.org/media/zd3hly0p/sapis-final-report.pdf Erişim tarihi: 11.07.2025
  25. Meydan, C. H., ve Şeşen, H. (2011). Yapısal eşitlik modellemesi AMOS uygulamaları. Detay.
  26. Mittag, J., Seltmann, M., Fiege, J., Hofmann, L., Smokvina, V., Zembura, P., Haas, L., & Cattaneo, A. (2025). Elite athletes’ social protection in olympic sports in europe: An evaluation of the status quo: Evaluation report sopros-project. https://doi.org/10.25847/sopros.01.2025 Erişim tarihi: 11.07.2025
  27. Nesterovych, O. (2025). Legal status of a professional athlete: normative definition and problems of regulation. Visegrad Journal on Human Rights, (2), 94-99. https://doi.org/10.61345/1339-7915.2025.2.14
  28. Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd Ed.). McGrawHill.
  29. Patel, S. (2021). Gaps in the protection of athletes gender rights in sport-a regulatory riddle. International Sports Law Journal, 21, 257–275. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40318-021-00182-2
  30. Pepe, O., ve Arısoy, A. (2023). Futbolcuların sosyal güvenlikleri ile ilgili farkındalıklarının bazı değişkenler açısından incelenmesi. Yalvaç Akademi Dergisi, 8(1), 117-124. https://doi.org/10.57120/yalvac.1260748
  31. Sukmana, O., Tongat, T., Heriyanti, L., Purwani, E. S., Nurwahyuni, E., Sunaryo, S., & Lubis, M. D. A. (2025). Athletes' right to social security: A comparative analysis of legal guarantees and implementation in ASEAN member states. Retos, 69, 1162-1179.
  32. Şencan H. (2005). Sosyal ve davranışsal ölçümlerde güvenilirlik ve geçerlilik. 1.Baskı. Seçkin.
  33. Tabachnick B. G., & Fidel, L. S. (2001). Using multivariate statistics (Fourth Edition). MA. Allyn & Bacon, Inc.
  34. Tabachnick, B.G., & Fidell, L.S. (2013). Multivariate statistics. Pearson Education.
  35. Torvaldsson, K., Lindblom, H., Sonesson, S., Senorski, E. H., Stigson, H., Tamm, L., Sandberg, J., & Hägglund, M. (2023). Swedish olympic athletes report one injury insurance claim every second year: A 22-year insurance registry-based cohort study. Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy: Official Journal of The ESSKA, 31(10), 4607–4617. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-023-07511-y
  36. Tuakli-Wosornu, Y. A., Goutos, D., Ramia, I., Galea, N. M., Mountjoy, M., Grimm, K., & Bekker, S. (2021). Development and validation of the athletes' rights survey. BMJ Open Sport & Exercise Medicine, 7(4), Article e001186. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjsem-2021-001186
  37. Tuakli-Wosornu, Y. A., Goutos, D., Ramia, I., Galea, N. R., Mountjoy, M. L., Grimm, K., Wu, Y., & Bekker, S. (2022). ‘Knowing we have these rights does not always mean we feel free to use them’: Athletes’ perceptions of their human rights in sport. BMJ Open Sport & Exercise Medicine, 8(3), Article e001406. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjsem-2022-001406
  38. Wangsa-Chandra, C.P., & Djulaeka, D. (2024). Legal protection of social security and forms of providing accountability, coaching, and welfare for ındonesian national athletes. Enrichment: Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Development, 2(7), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.55324/enrichment.v2i7.164
  39. Windholz, E. (2025). Professional athletes and injury insurance: A better way forward. Alternative Law Journal, 50(2), 96-100. https://doi.org/10.1177/1037969X251337131
  40. Yaroshenko, O., Kaganovska, T., Sheverdina, V., Sliusar, A., & Rozhnov, O. (2024). Protection of athletes’ rights in international sports organizations. Statute Law Review, 45(2), hmae041. https://doi.org/10.1093/slr/hmae041