Journals / Anadolu Psikiyatri Dergisi / 2009 / Cilt: 10 - Sayı: 4

Problem solving style,hopelessness,helplesness and haplessness and haplessness as the predictors of psychopathology assessed by MMPI-2

Belirsizliğe Tahammülsüzlük Ölçeği, Endişe ile İlgili Olumlu İnançlar Ölçeği ve Endişenin Sonuçları Ölçeği'nin Türkçeye uyarlanması, geçerliliği ve güvenilirliği

Pages
261–270
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)

Results: Findings revealed that internal consistencies of IUS, WW-II, COWS and their subscales were satisfactory.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: The aim of the study was to adapt three different scales to Turkish population which were measuring intolerance to uncertainty, assessing positive beliefs about worry and positive and negative appraisals about worry.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Methods: The sample consisted of 441 students from various departments of the Hacettepe University.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Results: Findings revealed that internal consistencies of IUS, WW-II, COWS and their subscales were satisfactory.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Objective: The aim of the study was to adapt three different scales to Turkish population which were measuring intolerance to uncertainty, assessing positive beliefs about worry and positive and negative appraisals about worry. Methods: The sample consisted of 441 students from various departments of the Hacettepe University. Intolerance of Uncertainty Scale (IUS), Why Worry-II Scale (WW-II), Consequences of Worrying Scale (COWS), State-Trait Anxiety Inventory-Trait Anxiety Form (TAI) was used to collect data. Results: Findings revealed that internal consistencies of IUS, WW-II, COWS and their subscales were satisfactory. The factor analysis of IUS revealed a four factor solution: ‘uncertainty is stressful and upsetting’, ‘negative self-assessment about uncertainty’, ‘disturbing thoughts about the uncertainty of future’, ‘uncertainty keeps someone from acting’. The factor analysis of WW-II revealed a three factor solution: ‘worrying helps problem solving and is a source of motivation’, ‘worrying prevents dangerous and negative consequences’, ‘worrying protects against negative emotions’. The factor analysis of COWS revealed a two factor solution: ‘negative appraisal about worry’ and ‘positive appraisal about worry’. Conclusion: It is concluded that Turkish versions of the IUS, WW-II, and COWS were reliable and valid instruments that can be used in normal Turkish samples; however the results should be supported in further studies that include clinical samples.

Özet

Amaç: Bu çalışmada bireylerin belirsizliğe tahammülsüzlüklerini, endişe ile ilgili olumlu inançlarını, endişe ile olumlu ve olumsuz değerlendirmelerini ölçen üç farklı ölçeğin Türkçeye uyarlanması ve normallerden oluşan bir örneklemde psikometrik özelliklerinin araştırılması amaçlanmıştır. Yöntem: Araştırmanın örneklemi Hacettepe Üniversitesi’nin çeşitli bölümlerinde öğrenim gören 441 öğrenciden oluşmuştur. Veri toplamak amacıyla Belirsizliğe Tahammülsüzlük Ölçeği (BTÖ), Endişe ile İlgili Olumlu İnançlar Ölçeği (EOİÖ), Endişenin Sonuçları Ölçeği (ESÖ) ve Sürekli Kaygı Envanteri (SKE) kullanılmıştır. Bulgular: Analiz sonuçlarında BTÖ, EOİÖ ve ESÖ’nin tüm ve alt ölçek olarak iç tutarlıklarının tatmin edici düzeyde olduğu görülmüştür. BTÖ’ne uygulanan faktör analizinde dört faktör elde edilmiştir: ‘belirsizlik stres verici ve üzücüdür’, ‘belirsizlik ile ilgili olumsuz benlik değerlendirmeleri’, ‘geleceği bilmemek rahatsız edicidir’ ve ‘belirsizlik eyleme geçmeyi engeller’. EOİÖ’ne uygulanan faktör analizinde ‘endişelenmek problem çözmeye yardımcı olur ve motivasyon kaynağıdır’, ‘endişelenmek tehlikeli ve olumsuz sonuçları engeller’, ‘endişelenmek olumsuz duygulara karşı korur’ şeklinde adlandırılan üç faktöre ulaşılmıştır. ESÖ’nin ‘endişe ile ilgili olumsuz değerlendirmeler’ ve ‘endişe ile ilgili olumlu değerlendirmeler’ şeklinde iki faktörünün olduğu görülmüştür. Sonuç: BTÖ, EOİÖ ve ESÖ’nin Türk kültüründe normallerden oluşan örneklemlerde kullanılabilecek geçerli ve güvenilir ölçekler olduğu, ancak elde edilen bulguların klinik örneklemleri de kapsayan yeni çalışmalarla desteklenmesi gerektiği düşünülmektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

SARI, S., DAĞ, İ. (2009). Problem solving style,hopelessness,helplesness and haplessness and haplessness as the predictors of psychopathology assessed by MMPI-2. Anadolu Psikiyatri Dergisi, Cilt: 10 - Sayı: 4, 261–270. https://ajindex.com/articles/356364

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (16)

  1. American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. Fourth edition (DSM-IV). Washington, D.C., American Psychiatric Association, 1994
  2. Dugas MJ, Gagnon F, Ladouceur R, Freeston MH. Generalized anxiety disorder: a preliminary test of a conceptual model. Behav Res Ther 1998; 36:215-226
  3. Buhr K, Dugas MJ. The intolerance of uncertainty scale: Psychometric properties of the english version. Behav Res Ther 2002; 40:931-945
  4. Holaway RM, Heimberg RG, Coles ME. A comparison of intolerance of uncertainty in analogue obsessive-compulsive disorder and generalized anxiety disorder. Anxiety Disord 2006; 20:158-174
  5. Dugas MJ, Marchand A, Ladouceur R. Further validation of a cognitive behavioral model of generalized anxiety disorder: Diagnostic and symptom specificity. Anxiety Disord 2005; 19:329-343
  6. Dugas MJ, Koerner N. Cognitive-behavioral treatment for generalized anxiety disorder: current status and future directions. J Cogn Psychother 2005; 19:61-81
  7. Wells A. Meta-cognition and worry: A cognitive model of generalised anxiety Disorder. Behav Cogn Psychother 1995; 23:301-320
  8. Wells A, Carter K. Preliminary tests of a cognitive model of generalized anxiety disorder. Behav Res Ther 1999; 37:585-594
  9. Koerner N, Dugas MJ. An investigation of appraisals in individuals vulnerable to excessive worry: The role of intolerance of uncertainty. Cogn Ther Res 2008; 32:619-638
  10. Dugas MJ, Freeston MH, Ladouceur R. Intolerance of uncertainty and problem orientation in worry. Cogn Ther Res 1997; 21:593-606
  11. Dugas MJ, Schwartz A, Francis K. Intolerance of uncertainty, worry and Depression. Cogn Ther Res 2004; 28:835-842
  12. Laugesen N, Dugas MJ, Bukowski WM. Under- standing adolescent worry: The application of a cognitive model. J Abnorm Clin Psychol 2003; 31:55-64
  13. Ladouceur R, Gosselin P, Dugas MJ. Experimental manipulation of intolerance of uncertainty: a study of a theoretical model of worry. Behav Res Ther 2000; 38:933-941
  14. Sica C, Coradeschi D, Sanavio E, Dorz S, Manchisi D, Novara C. A study of the psychometric properties of the obsessive beliefs inventory and interpretations of intrusions inventory on clinical Italian individuals. J Anxiety Disord 2004; 18:291-307
  15. Steketee G, Frost RO, Cohen I. Beliefs in obsessive- compulsive disorder. J Anxiety Disord 1998; 12:525-532
  16. Tolin DF, Abramowitz JS, Brigidi BD, Foa EB. Intolerance of uncertainty in obsessive-compulsive disorder. Anxiety Disor