KaydedilenlerDerginizi ekleyin

Dergiler / Adıyaman Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi / 2026 / Sayı: AİLE YILI ÖZEL SAYISI Özel Sayı

SOSYAL MEDYADA PAYLAŞAN EBEVEYNLİK: ERGENLERİN ARABULUCULUK STRATEJİLERİNİN AİLE İÇİ İLİŞKİLERE ETKİSİ

SOCIAL ON SOCIAL MEDIA: THE IMPACT OF ADOLESCENTS’ MEDIATION STRATEGIES ON FAMILY RELATIONSHIP

Yeliz Kındap Tepe(ONDOKUZ MAYIS ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0003-0963-810X
Güleycan Akgöz(KARADENİZ TEKNİK ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0002-5681-7496
Zeliha Demiroğlu0009-0009-5172-1493
Sayfa
788–821
Yayın Tarihi
2025-10-30
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

Bulgular, ergenlerin ebeveynlerine sınırlar koyarak dijital mahremiyetlerini korumaya çalıştıklarını ve bu süreçte aile içi ilişkileri etkileyebilecek çatışmalar yaşandığını göstermektedir.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:Bu çalışma, ergenlerin paylaşan ebeveynlerine yönelik arabuluculuk stratejilerinin, sosyal medya paylaşımlarından kaynaklanan aile içi çatışmalar üzerindeki aracılık etkisini incelemektedir.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:Araştırma kapsamında, Ergen Arabuluculuk Stratejileri Ölçeği Türkçeye uyarlanarak psikometrik özellikleri değerlendirilmiş; ergenlerin arabuluculuk stratejileri cinsiyet ve sınıf düzeyine göre analiz edilmiştir.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:Bulgular, ergenlerin ebeveynlerine sınırlar koyarak dijital mahremiyetlerini korumaya çalıştıklarını ve bu süreçte aile içi ilişkileri etkileyebilecek çatışmalar yaşandığını göstermektedir.
🔬Tür:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:Ergen arabuluculuğu stratejileri · paylaşan ebeveynlik · dijital ebeveynlik

Özet

Bu çalışma, ergenlerin paylaşan ebeveynlerine yönelik arabuluculuk stratejilerinin, sosyal medya paylaşımlarından kaynaklanan aile içi çatışmalar üzerindeki aracılık etkisini incelemektedir. Araştırma kapsamında, Ergen Arabuluculuk Stratejileri Ölçeği Türkçeye uyarlanarak psikometrik özellikleri değerlendirilmiş; ergenlerin arabuluculuk stratejileri cinsiyet ve sınıf düzeyine göre analiz edilmiştir. Toplamda 432 lise öğrencisiyle yürütülen çalışmada, kız ergenlerin erkeklere kıyasla daha fazla arabuluculuk stratejisi kullandığı, ayrıca üst sınıf düzeyindeki ergenlerin bu stratejileri daha sık benimsediği bulunmuştur. Bulgular, ergenlerin ebeveynlerine sınırlar koyarak dijital mahremiyetlerini korumaya çalıştıklarını ve bu süreçte aile içi ilişkileri etkileyebilecek çatışmalar yaşandığını göstermektedir. Çalışma, dijital çağda çocuk ve ebeveyn rollerindeki değişimi anlamaya katkı sunarken, dijital mahremiyet, kuşaklar arası iletişim ve aile içi dengeyi sağlama açısından eğitim ve farkındalık çalışmalarına ihtiyaç olduğunu vurgulamaktadır.

Abstract

The study focuses on the mediating role of adolescents’ mediation strategies toward sharenting and family conflicts. In the conrext of the study, the Adolescent Mediation Strategies Scale was adapted into Turkish, and its psychometric properties were evaluated. In addition, adolescents’ mediation strategies were analyzed based on gender and grade level. Conducted with a total of 432 high school students, the study revealed that female adolescents employed mediation strategies more frequently than their male peers, and those in higher grade levels adopted these strategies more often. The findings indicate that adolescents attempt to protect their digital privacy by setting boundaries for their parents, which can lead to conflicts affecting intra-family relationships. This study contributes to understanding the changing roles of adolescents and parents in the digital age and highlights the need for educational and awareness programs that promote digital privacy, intergenerational communication, and the maintenance of family balance.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

Tepe, Y. K., Akgöz, G., Demiroğlu, Z. (2025). SOSYAL MEDYADA PAYLAŞAN EBEVEYNLİK: ERGENLERİN ARABULUCULUK STRATEJİLERİNİN AİLE İÇİ İLİŞKİLERE ETKİSİ. Adıyaman Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, Sayı: AİLE YILI ÖZEL SAYISI Özel Sayı, 788–821. https://doi.org/10.14520/adyusbd.1734487

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (52)

  1. Aktaş, G. (2023). Çocuğun mizacı ve sosyal uyumu arasındaki ilişkide evlilik içi iletişim ve ebeveyn katılımının boylamsal düzenleyicili aracılık rolü [Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi]. Mersin Üniversitesi.
  2. Amon, M. J., Kartvelishvilli, N., Bertenthal, B., Hugenberg, K. U. R. T., & Kapadia, A. (2022). Sharenting and children’s privacy: Parenting style, practices, and perspectives on sharing young children’s photos on social media. Computer supported cooperative work. https://doi.org/10.1145/3512963
  3. Baldry, A. C., Sorrentino, A., & Farrington, D. P. (2019). Cyberbullying and cybervictimization versus parental supervision, monitoring and control of adolescents' online activities. Children and Youth Services Review, 96, 302-307. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2018.11.018
  4. Beyens, I., & Valkenburg, P. M. (2019). Parental media mediation in adolescence: A comparative study of parent and adolescent reports. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 63(4), 716-736. https://doi.org/10.1080/08838151.2019.1665390
  5. Blum-Ross, A., & Livingstone, S. (2017). “Sharenting,” parent blogging, and the boundaries of the digital self. Popular Communication, 15(2), 110-125. https://doi.org/10.1080/15405702.2017.1304596
  6. Brinthaupt, T. M., & Lipka, R. P. (2002). Understanding early adolescent self and identity: An introduction. In T. M. Brinthaupt & R. P. Lipka (Eds.), Understanding early adolescent self and identity: Applications and interventions (pp. 1-21).
  7. Brosch, A. (2016). When the child is born into the internet: Sharenting as a growing trend among parents on Facebook. The New Educational Review, 43(1), 225-235. https://doi.org/10.15804/tner.2016.43.1.16
  8. Brosch, A. (2018). Sharenting: Why do parents violate their children’s privacy? The New Educational Review, 54(4), 75-85. https://doi.org/10.15804/tner.2018.54.4.06
  9. Boyd, D. (2008). Why youth (heart) social network sites: The role of networked publics in teenage social life. In D. Buckingham (Ed.), Youth, identity and digital media (pp. 119-142). The MIT Press.
  10. Chen, V. H. H., & Chng, G. S. (2016). Active and restrictive parental mediation over time: Effects on youths’ self-regulatory competencies and impulsivity. Computers & Education, 98, 206-212. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.03.003
  11. Chen, L., & Shi, J. (2019). Reducing harm from media: A meta-analysis of parental mediation. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 96(1), 173-193. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699018792908
  12. Clark, L. S. (2011). Parental mediation theory for the digital age. Communication Theory, 21(4), 323-343. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468- 2885.2011.01395.x
  13. Correa, T. (2012). Bottom-up technology transmission within families: How children influence their parents in the adoption and use of digital media. Journal of Family Communication, 12(4), 322-339. https://doi.org/10.1080/15267431.2012.730468
  14. Correa, T., Straubhaar, J. D., Chen, W., & Spence, J. (2015). Brokering new technologies: The role of children in their parents’ usage of the internet. New Media & Society, 17(4), 483-500. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444813504266
  15. Demiroğlu, Z., Taplı, M., Durak, C. ve Kındap-Tepe, Y. (2024). Ergenlerin Paylaşan Ebeveynliğe Yönelik Tutumlarının ve Öncüllerinin İncelenmesi. Yazıcı, E.Y. (Ed). Eğitim Alanında Güncel Bilimsel Araştırmalar (s. 34-63). Ankara: İKSAD yayınları.
  16. Duggan, M., Lenhart, A., Lampe, C., & Ellison, N. B. (2015). Parents and social media. Pew Research Center. Retrieved from https://www.pewinternet.org/2015/01/30/parents-and-social-media/
  17. Duerager, A., & Livingstone, S. (2012). How can parents support children’s internet safety? London: EU Kids Online.
  18. Eagly, A. H., & Wood, W. (2012). Social role theory. In P. A. M. Van Lange, A. W. Kruglanski, & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of theories of social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 458–476). Sage.
  19. Eisenberg, A. R. (1992). Conflicts between mothers and their young children. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly (1982-), 38(1), 21-43.
  20. Hiniker, A., Schoenebeck, S. Y., & Kientz, J. A. (2016). Not at the dinner table: Parents' and children's perspectives on family technology rules. In Proceedings of the 19th ACM Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing (pp. 1376-1389). https://doi.org/10.1145/2818048.2819951
  21. Ho, S. S., Lwin, M. O., Yee, A. Z., Sng, J. R., & Chen, L. (2019). Parents' responses to cyberbullying effects: How third-person perception influences support for legislation and parental mediation strategies. Computers in Human Behavior, 92, 373-380. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.11.033
  22. Kietzmann, J. H., Hermkens, K., McCarthy, I. P., & Silvestre, B. S. (2011). Social media? Get serious! Understanding the functional building blocks of social media. Business Horizons, 54(3), 241–251. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2011.01.005
  23. Kumar, P., & Schoenebeck, S. (2015). The modern day baby book: Enacting good mothering and stewarding privacy on Facebook. In Proceedings of the 18th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing (pp. 1302-1312). https://doi.org/10.1145/2675133.2675190
  24. Lee, D. G. (2018). Parental verbal mediation for children's internet use. Journal of Communication Research, 5(2), 117-132.
  25. Levy, E. (2017). Parenting in the digital age: How are we doing? Pew Research Center. Retrieved from https://www.pewresearch.org/
  26. Lipu, M., & Siibak, A. (2019). ‘Take it down!’: Estonian parents’ and pre-teens’ opinions and experiences with sharenting. Media International Australia, 170(1), 57–67. https://doi.org/10.1177/1329878X19828366
  27. Livingstone, S., & Bober, M. (2005). UK children go online. London: Ofcom.
  28. Livingstone, S., & Helsper, E. J. (2008). Parental mediation of children's internet use. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 52(4), 581-599. https://doi.org/10.1080/08838150802437396
  29. Livingstone, S., Ólafsson, K., Helsper, E. J., Lupiáñez-Villanueva, F., Veltri, G. A., & Folkvord, F. (2017). Maximizing opportunities and minimizing risks for children online: The role of digital skills in emerging strategies of parental mediation. Journal of Communication, 67(1), 82-105. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12269
  30. Marasli, M., Suhendan, E., Yilmazturk, N. H., & Figen, C. (2016). Parents’ shares on social networking sites about their children: Sharenting. Anthropologist, 24(2), 399–406. https://doi.org/10.1080/09720073.2016.11891874
  31. Mesch, G. S. (2006). Family characteristics and intergenerational conflicts over the Internet. Information, Communication & Society, 9(4), 473-495. https://doi.org/10.1080/13691180600885962
  32. Mestre, M. V., Samper, P., Frías, M. D., & Tur, A. M. (2009). Are women more empathetic than men? A longitudinal study in adolescence. The Spanish journal of psychology, 12(1), 76-83.
  33. Nelissen, S., & Van den Bulck, J. (2018). Expanding the unidirectional view on parental television mediation: Children’s guidance of their parent’s television use. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 62(2), 232- 250. https://doi.org/10.1080/08838151.2018.1460845
  34. Nikken, P., & Jansz, J. (2006). Parental mediation of children’s videogame playing: A comparison of the reports by parents and children. Learning, Media and Technology, 31(2), 181-202. https://doi.org/10.1080/1743988060070525
  35. Ouvrein, G., & Verswijvel, K. (2019). Sharenting: Parental adoration or public humiliation? A focus group study on adolescents' experiences with sharenting against the background of their own impression management. Children and Youth Services Review, 99, 319–327. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2019.02.019
  36. Ouvrein, G., & Verswijvel, K. (2021). Child mediation: Effective education or conflict stimulation? Adolescents’ child mediation strategies in the context of sharenting and family conflict. Journal of E-Learning and Knowledge Society, 17(3), 70-79. https://doi.org/10.20368/1971- 8829/1115164
  37. Perry, M. S., & Werner‐Wilson, R. J. (2011). Couples and computer‐mediated communication: A closer look at the affordances and use of the channel. Family and Consumer Sciences Research Journal, 40(2), 120- 134. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1552-3934.2011.02043.x
  38. Pinquart, M., & Silbereisen, R. K. (2002). Changes in adolescents' and mothers' autonomy and connectedness in conflict discussions: An observation study. Journal of Adolescence, 25(5), 509-522. https://doi.org/10.1006/jado.2002.0370
  39. Sasson, H., & Mesch, G. (2014). Parental mediation, peer norms and risky online behavior among adolescents. Computers in Human Behavior, 33, 32-38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.12.010
  40. Schreurs, L., & Vandenbosch, L. (2021). Introducing the Social Media Literacy (SMILE) model with the case of the positivity bias on social media. Journal of Children and Media, 15(3), 320-337. https://doi.org/10.1080/17482798.2021.1876798
  41. Smith, S. (2013). Are you guilty of oversharenting? Retrieved from https://www.parenting.com/
  42. Steinberg, L. (2001). We know some things: Parent–adolescent relationships in retrospect and prospect. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 11(1), 1- 19. https://doi.org/10.1111/1532-7795.00001
  43. Steinberg, L., & Morris, A. S. (2001). Adolescent development. Annual Review of Psychology, 52(1), 83–110. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.52.110101.090640
  44. Turgut, Y. E., & Aslan, A. (2016). Çocukların karşılaştıkları internet riskleri ve ebeveyn arabuluculuğu. In 4th International Instructional Technologies Teacher Education Symposium (pp. 337-344).
  45. Valkenburg, P. M., Krcmar, M., Peeters, A. L., & Marseille, N. M. (1999). Developing a scale to assess three styles of television mediation: "Instructive mediation," "restrictive mediation," and "social coviewing." Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 43(1), 52-66. https://doi.org/10.1080/08838199909364550
  46. Van Den Bulck, J., & Van Den Bergh, B. (2001). Parental guidance of children's media use and conflict in the family. KUL. Departement Communicatiewetenschap. Intern rapport, 2001.
  47. Van Den Bulck, J., & Van Den Bergh, B. (2005). The child effect in media and communication research: A call to arms and an agenda for research. Annals of the International Communication Association, 29(1), 35-48. https://doi.org/10.1080/23808985.2005.11679165
  48. Van den Bulck, J., Custers, K., & Nelissen, S. (2016). The child-effect in the new media environment: Challenges and opportunities for communication research. Journal of Children and Media, 10(1), 30–38. https://doi.org/10.1080/17482798.2015.1121897
  49. Verswijvel, K., Walrave, M., Hardies, K., & Heirman, W. (2019). Sharenting, is it a good or a bad thing? Understanding how adolescents think and feel about sharenting on social network sites. Children and Youth Services Review, 104, 104401. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2019.104401
  50. Walrave, M. (2023). The translucent family: Sharenting and privacy negotiations between children and parents. In The Routledge handbook of privacy and social media (pp. 165-174). Routledge.
  51. Wagner, A., & Gasche, L. A. (2018). Sharenting: Making decisions about others' privacy on social networking sites. Darmstadt Technical University, Department of Business Administration, Economics and Law, Institute for Business Studies (BWL).
  52. Wentzel, K. R. (1993). Social competence at school: Relation between social responsibility and academic achievement. Review of Educational Research, 63(1), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543063001001