Journals / Nöropsikiyatri Arşivi / 2016 / Cilt: 53 - Sayı: 4

Validity and Reliability of the Turkish Adaptation of the Dream Reflective Awareness Questionnaire (DRAQ)

Rüya Reflektif Farkındalık Ölçeği Türkçe Uyarlama, Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Çalışması

Pages
296–302
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)

Conclusion: Based on the results obtained, we can conclude that the scale is a valid and reliable tool with sufficient psychometric properties.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Introduction: The aim of this research was to adapt the Dream Reflective Awareness Questionnaire (DRAQ) to Turkish and to examine its psychometric properties.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Methods: In total, 378 college students participated in the study.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Conclusion: Based on the results obtained, we can conclude that the scale is a valid and reliable tool with sufficient psychometric properties.
🔬Design:Survey & Empirical Study
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Introduction: The aim of this research was to adapt the Dream Reflective Awareness Questionnaire (DRAQ) to Turkish and to examine its psychometric properties. Methods: In total, 378 college students participated in the study. The average age of the participants was 20.4 years; 56% of participants were women and 44% were men. After the scale linguistic equivalence was completed, the validity and reliability analyses were checked. Exploratory factor analysis and confirmatory factor analysis were utilized for the construct validity, and Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was used for internal consistency reliability. Results: In the exploratory factor analysis of the scale, unlike the original form, a 5-factor structure for 15 items was obtained, explaining the 71% of the total variance. The factor loads were between 0.61 and 0.88. Confirmatory factor analysis results confirmed the structure that was obtained from the exploratory factor analysis. The Cronbach’s alpha internal consistency coefficient, which was derived from the reliability analysis of the scale, ranged between 0.74 and 0.78. Conclusion: Based on the results obtained, we can conclude that the scale is a valid and reliable tool with sufficient psychometric properties.

Özet

Amaç: Bu araştırmanın amacı Rüya Reflektif Farkındalık Ölçeği'nin (RRFÖ) Türkçe'ye uyarlanması ve psikometrik özelliklerinin incelenmesidir

🔖

Cite This Article

GENÇ, A., BARUT, Y., AYDIN, C., BAŞOL, G. (2016). Validity and Reliability of the Turkish Adaptation of the Dream Reflective Awareness Questionnaire (DRAQ). Nöropsikiyatri Arşivi, Cilt: 53 - Sayı: 4, 296–302. https://ajindex.com/articles/292436

References (14)

  1. Foulkes D. Dreaming: A Cognitive-Psychological Analysis. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 1985
  2. Domhoff GW. The content of dream: Methodologic and theoretical implications. Kryger MH, Roth T, Dement WC, editörler. Principles and Practies of Sleep Medicine içinde. 4. baskı. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders; 2005; s. 522-534
  3. Kahan TL, LaBarge S, Levitan L, Zimbardo P. Similarities and differences between dreaming and waking cognition: an exploratory study. Conscious Cogn 1997; 6:132-147. [CrossRef] 4. Kozmova M, Wolman RN. Self-awareness in dreaming. Dreaming 2006; 16:196-214. [CrossRef] 5. Kondrat ME. Who is the self in self-aware: Professional self-awareness from a critical theory perspective. The University of Ohaio. Social Service Review USA December 1999; s. 451-477
  4. Lee MN. Reflective awareness in dreams following loss and trauma. Yayınlanmamış doktora tezi 2010. Edmonton, Alberta
  5. Rossi, EL. Dreams and the Growth of Personality: Expanding Awareness in Psychotherapy. 2nd Edition. New York: Brunner-Mazel; 1985
  6. Schredl M, Erlacher D. Lucid dreaming frequency and personality. Personality and Individual Differences 2004; 37:1463-1473. [CrossRef] 9. Gackenbach J. Frameworks for understanding lucid dreaming: A review. Dreaming 1991; 1:109-128. [CrossRef] 10. Green C, McCreery C. Lucid Dreaming: The Paradox of Consciousness During Sleep. New York: Routledge; 1994
  7. Windt JM, Noreika W. How to integrate dreaming into a general theory of consciousness – a critical review of existing positions and suggestions for future research. Conscious Cogn 2011; 20:1091-1107. [CrossRef] 12. Lee MN, Kuiken D, Czupryn J. Reflective awareness in impactful dreams and dream induced changes. IASD Konferansı 2007. Sonoma, CA
  8. Lee MN. Reflective Awareness in Dreams Following Loss and Trauma. Yayınlanmamış doktora tezi, Edmonton, Alberta, 2010
  9. Şencan H. So syal ve Davranışsal Ölçümlerde Güvenilirlik ve Geçerlik. Ankara: Seçkin; 2005
  10. Büyüköztürk, Ş. Veri Analizi El Kitabı. Ankara: Pegem A Yayıncılık; 2004
  11. Pallant J. SPSS Survival Manual. Buckingham: Open University Press; 2003
  12. Büyüköztürk Ş. Faktör Analizi: Temel Kavramlar ve Ölçek Geliştirmede Kullanımı. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi 2002; 32:470-483
  13. Tabachnick BG, Fidell, LS. Using Multivariate Statistics. Boston: Allyn & Bacon; 2001
  14. Tavşancıl E. Tutumların Ölçülmesi ve SPSS ile Veri Analizi. Ankara: Nobel; 2002.