SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Hacettepe Üniversitesi Hemşirelik Fakültesi Dergisi / 2026 / Volume: 9 Issue: 2

Validity and Reliability Study of the Turkish Version of the Social-Functional Autonomy Measurement System

Sosyal-Fonksiyonel Otonomi Değerlendirme Ölçeğinin Türkçe Versiyonun Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Çalışması

Ayten Küçük(Afyonkarahisar Health Sciences University, Atatürk Vocational School Of Health Services, Elder Care Program)0000-0001-9781-0971
Oya Nuran Emiroğlu(Hacettepe University, Faculty of Nursing, Public Health Nursing Department)0000-0002-5722-5660
Pages
200–206
Publication Date
2022-08-31
🏛️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)

It was found that the scale was collected under one dimension (factor), and its eigenvalue was 3.768.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Aim: Social functions are required to be at an optimum level to maintain and develop an individual’s health at all ages.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The research was conducted with 92 nursing home residents living in three nursing homes in Afyonkarahisar.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:It was found that the scale was collected under one dimension (factor), and its eigenvalue was 3.768.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Özerklik · sağlıklı yaşlanma · sosyal fonksiyonlar

Abstract

Aim: Social functions are required to be at an optimum level to maintain and develop an individual’s health at all ages. This study aimed to evaluate the validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the Social-Functional Autonomy Measurement System (Social-SMAF Scale) on elders. Material and Methods: This methodological study was conducted to evaluate the validity and reliability of the Social-SMAF scale. The research was conducted with 92 nursing home residents living in three nursing homes in Afyonkarahisar. Results: It was observed that the scale consisting of 6 items explained 70.186% of the total variance. It was found that the scale was collected under one dimension (factor), and its eigenvalue was 3.768. Sampling adequacy was checked for factor analysis to be applicable (Bartlett's Test=211.779; p<0.001 and KMO=0.770). The Cronbach Alpha coefficient for the internal consistency of the social autonomy scale was calculated as 0.80. In the confirmatory factor analysis of the scale, it was determined that it formed a suitable model that could be grouped under a single factor. Conclusion: The “Social-SMAF” scale was valid and reliable in evaluating the social independence of elderly individuals living in Turkish society.

Özet

Amaç: Her yaşta bireyin sağlığının korunması ve geliştirilmesi için sosyal işlevlerin optimum düzeyde olması gerekmektedir. Bu çalışmanın amacı, Sosyal-İşlevsel Özerklik Ölçme Sistemi'nin(Sosyal-SMAF ölçeği) Türkçe formunun yaşlılar üzerinde geçerlik ve güvenirliğini değerlendirmektir. Gereç ve Yöntem: Bu metodolojik çalışma, Sosyal-SMAF ölçeğinin geçerlik ve güvenirliğini değerlendirmek amacıyla yapılmıştır. Araştırma Afyonkarahisar'da üç huzurevinde kalan 92 huzurevi sakini ile gerçekleştirilmiştir. Bulgular: 6 maddeden oluşan ölçeğin toplam varyansın %70.186'sını açıkladığı görülmüştür. Ölçeğin tek boyut(faktör) altında toplandığı ve özdeğerinin 3.768 olduğu bulunmuştur. Faktör analizinin uygulanabilir olması için örnekleme yeterliliğine bakılmıştır (Bartlett's Test=211.779;p<0,001 ve KMO=0,770). Sosyal özerklik ölçeğinin iç tutarlılığı için Cronbach Alfa katsayısı 0.80 olarak bulunmuştur. Ölçeğin yapılan doğrulayıcı faktör analizinde, tek faktör altında toplanabilen uygun bir model oluşturduğu tespit edilmiştir. Sonuç: “Sosyal-SMAF” ölçeğinin, Türk toplumunda yaşayan yaşlı bireylerin sosyal bağımsızlığını değerlendirmede geçerli ve güvenilir olduğu görülmüştür.

🔖

Cite This Article

Küçük, A., Emiroğlu, O. N. (2022). Validity and Reliability Study of the Turkish Version of the Social-Functional Autonomy Measurement System. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Hemşirelik Fakültesi Dergisi, Volume: 9 Issue: 2, 200–206. https://doi.org/10.31125/hunhemsire.1167323

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (25)

  1. Er D. Aged psychosocial perspective. Fırat Sağlık Hizmetleri Dergisi. 2009;4(11):131-44.
  2. Dimitrova B. Carr AJ, Higginson IJ, Robinson PG, (editors). Quality of life. London: BMJ Books, 2003;p.133. Eur J Public Health. 2005;15(6):668.
  3. Boylu AA, Günay G. The effect of the perceived social support on the elderly life satisfaction. Journal of the Human and Social Sciences Researches. 2018;7(2):1351-63.
  4. Bakar N, Hacıhasanoğlu Aşılar R. Factors affecting depression and quality of life in the elderly. J Gerontol Geriatr Res. 2015;4(5):49.
  5. Matsui M, Capezuti E. Perceived autonomy and self-care resources among senior center users. Geriatr Nurs. 2008;29(2):141-7.
  6. Edwards C, Staniszewska S. Investigation of the ways in which patients' reports of their satisfaction with health care are constructed. Sociol Health Illn. 2004;26(2):159-83.
  7. Andresen M, Puggaard L. Autonomy among physically frail older people in nursing home settings: A study protocol for an intervention study. BMC Geriatr. 2008;8(32).
  8. Karadakovan A. Geriatric nursing. In: Mas MR, Işık AT, Karan MA, Beğer T, Akman Ş, Ünal T. (Editors). Geriatrics. First edition. Ankara; Turkey: Forse Printing Office; 2008; p.1423-48.
  9. Aslan D, Ertem M. Elderly health: Problems and solutions. Inside: Tezcan S, P. distinguished demographic change in Turkey; Old age perspective. Turkey: The Association of Public Health Specialist Publications; 2012; p.1-8.
  10. Kathleen JF. Health assessment in gerontological nursing. Ebersole P, Hess P, Touhy TA, Jett KF & Luggen AS. (Eds.). Toward Healthy Aging Human Needs and Nursing Response.7th ed. Canada: Mosby Elsevier; 2008; p.104-19.
  11. Hebert R. Functional decline in old age. Can Med Assoc J.1997;157(8):1037-45.
  12. Sherbourne CD, Meredith LS, Rogers W, Ware JE. Social support and stressful life events: age differences in their effects on health-related quality of life among the chronically ill. Qual.Life Res. 1992;1:235-346.
  13. Aytaç Ö, Kurtdaş MÇ. Social origins of illness-health and health sociology. Fırat University Journal of Social Science.2015;25(1):231-50.
  14. Desrosiers J, Hebert R, Payette H, Roy PM, Tousignant M, Côté S, et al. A geriatric day hospital: Who improves the most?. Can J Aging. 2004;23(3):217-28.
  15. Henkel LA, Kris A, Birney S, Krauss K. The functions and value of reminiscence for older adults in long-term residential care facilities. Memory. 2017; 25(3):425-435.
  16. Pinsonnault E, Dubuc N, Desrosiers J, Delli-Colli N, Hébert R. Validation study of a social functioning scale: Thesocial-SMAF (Social-Functional Autonomy Measurement System). Arch Gerontol Geriatr. 2009;48:40-4.
  17. Pinsonnault E, Desrosiers J, Dubuc N, Kalfat H, Colvez A, Delli-Colli N. Functional autonomy measurement system: development of a social subscale. Arch Gerontol Geriatr. 2003;37:223-33.
  18. Pockett R. Interprofessional education for practice: Some implications for Australian social work. Australian Social Work. 2011;63(2):207-22.
  19. Tavşancıl E. Measurement of attitudes and data analysis with SPSS. Ankara, Turkey: Nobel Publication Distribution; 2010.
  20. Gözüm S, Aksayan S. Guidelines for cross-cultural scale adaptation II: Psychometric properties and cross-cultural comparison. Turkish Journal of Research & Development in Nursing. 2003;5(1):3-14.
  21. Jones PS, Lee JW, Phillips LR, Zhang XE, Jaceldo KB. An adaptation of Brislin's translation model for cross-cultural research. Nurs Res. 2001;50(5):300-04.
  22. Büyüköztürk Ş. Data Analysis Handbook. 5th Edition. Ankara, Turkey: Pegem Publications; 2005.
  23. Quinn G, Keough M. Experimental design and data analysis for biologist. Cambridge University Press. United Kingdom: 2002. Ch. 9. Multifactor analysis of variance.
  24. Şencan H. Validity and Reliability in Social and Behavioral Measurements. I(p.50-420). Level 1. Ankara, Turkey: Seçkin Publishing; 2005.
  25. Alpar R. Validity and reliability. In: Applied statistics and validity-reliability with examples of sports, health and education sciences (p.313-395). 2nd edition. Ankara, Turkey: Detay Publishing; 2010.