ABSTRACT
Conclusion:
Based on the findings of the research, it has been revealed that the Turkish version of the Adolescent Distress Eustress Scale is a valid and reliable measurement tool.
Results:
The construct validity of the scale was examined by confirmatory factor analysis and the dual structure, which constituted the subdimensions of the Adolescent Boredom Estress scale (ADES), was confirmed. As a result of the criterion compliance validity study, negative correlations were found between the ADES-Distress sub-dimension and the General Self-Efficacy scale and positively significant correlations were found with the Perceived Stress Scale. Positive significant relationships were detected between ADES-Eustress sub-dimension and General Self-Efficacy scale, and negative significant relationships were found with the Perceived Stress Scale. As a result of the internal consistency analysis, the reliability Cronbach alpha coefficient was calculated as .81 for the ADES-Distress sub-dimension and .84 for the ADES-Eustress sub-dimension.
Materials and Methods:
In the 2019-2020 academic year, a total of 366 high school students, 261 female and 105 male, studying at different official secondary schools in Tuzla, Istanbul, participated in the study. In order to examine the psychometric properties of the Turkish version of the scale, linguistic equivalence, criterion concordance validity, calculation of internal consistency coefficient and confirmatory factor analysis were performed.
Objectives:
The aim of this study is to analyze the psychometric properties of Adolescent Distress Eustress Scale developed by Branson, Dry, Palmer and Turnbull, such as validity and reliability, and to carry out adaptation studies to Turkish.
References
1
Cicchetti D, Rogosch FA. A developmental psychopathology perspective on adolescence. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2002;70:6-20.
2
Lazarus RS, Folkman S. Stress, appraisal, and coping. New York: Springer publishing; 1984.
3
Yılmaz N. Ergenlerde problemli internet kullanımının yordayıcıları olarak stresle başa çıkma ve kişilik özellikleri [Yayınlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi]. Ankara: Ankara Üniversitesi; 2016.
4
Cüceloğlu D. İnsan ve davranışı. 2. Baskı. İstanbul: Remzi Kitabevi; 1991.
5
Baltaş Z, Baltaş A. Stres ve başaçıkma yolları. 19.baskı. İstanbul: Remzi Kitabevi; 2016.
6
Selye H. Stresswithoutdistress. G. Serban (Ed.) Psychopathology of humanadaptation. Boston: Springer Science; 1976.
7
Nelson DL, Simmons BL. Eustress: an elusive construct, an engaging pursuit. Res Occup Stress Wel. 2003;3:265-322.
8
Salgırlı Demirbaş Y. Stresin köpeklerde davranış üzerine etkileri. Mehmet Akif Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Enstitüsü Dergisi. 2015;3:34-42.
9
ALPERT R, HABER RN. Anxiety in academic achievement situations. J Abnorm Soc Psychol. 1960;61:207-15.
10
Lazarus RS. Psychological stress and coping in adaptation and illness. Int J Psychiatry Med. 1974;5:321-33.
11
Selye H. Stress and distress. Compr Ther. 1975;1:9-13.
12
Le Fevre M, Matheny J, Kolt GS. Eustress, distress, and interpretation in occupational stress. J Manage Psychol. 2003;18:726-44.
13
Hargrove MB, Becker, WS, Hargrove DF. The HRD Eustress Model: Generating Positive Stress With Challenging Work. Hum Resour Dev Rev. 2015;14:279-98.
14
Lazarus RS. From psychological stress to the emotions: a history of changing outlooks. Annu Rev Psychol. 1993;44:1-21.
15
Venkatesh B, Ram N. Eustress: A unique dimension to stress management. Voıce Res. 2015;4:26-9.
16
Seeger F. Development and validation of the eustress questionnaire [MasterThesis]. Enschede: University of Twente; 2019.
17
Yerkes RM, Dodson JD. The relation of strength of stimulus to rapidity of habit-formation. J Comp Neurol Psycho. 1908;18:459-82.
18
Folkman S, Lazarus RS, Gruen RJ, DeLongis A. Appraisal, coping, health status, and psychological symptoms. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1986;50:571-9.
19
Crum AJ, Salovey P, Achor S. Rethinking stress: the role of mindsets in determining the stress response. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2013;104:716-33.
20
Crum AJ, Lyddy C. De-stressing stress: The power of mindsets and the art of stressing mindfully. C. Ngnoumen, A. Ie, E. ve E. Langer (Ed.) TheHandbook of Minfulness. Hoboken, New Jersey: Wiley-Blackwell; 2014: 948-63.
21
Tugade MM, Fredrickson BL, Barrett LF. Psychological resilience and positive emotional granularity: examining the benefits of positive emotions on coping and health. J Pers. 2004;72:1161-90.
22
Marten F. The Mediating effect of eustress and distress on the relation between the mindset towards stres and health. Mediating Effect of Eustress and Distress. 2013:1-22.
23
O’Sullivan, G. The relationship between hope, eustress, self-efficacy, and life satisfaction among undergraduates. Soc Indic Res. 2011;101:155-72.
24
Gross S, Semmer NK, Meier LL, Kälin W, Jacobshagen N, Tschan F. The effect of positive events at work on after-work fatigue: they matter most in face of adversity. J Appl Psychol. 2011;96:654-64.
25
Li CT, Cao J, Li TMH. Eustress or distress: an empirical study of perceived stress in everyday college life. Ubi Comp 2016 Adjunct - Proceedings of the 2016 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing. 2016: 1209-17.
26
Branson V, Dry MJ, Palmer E, Turnbull D. The adolescent distress-eustress scale: development and validation. SAGE Open. 2019;9:1-14.
27
Tedeschi RG, Calhoun LG. The Posttraumatic Growth Inventory: measuring the positive legacy of trauma. J Trauma Stress. 1996;9:455-71.
28
İnci F, Boztepe H. Travma sonrası büyüme: öldürmeyen acı güçlendirir mi? Psikiyatri Hemşireliği Dergisi. 2013;4:80-4.
29
Blasche G, Zilic J, Frischenschlager O. Task-related increases in fatigue predict recovery time after academic stress. J Occup Health. 2016;58:89-95.
30
Silva E, Aguiar J, Reis LP, Sá JOE, Gonçalves J, Carvalho V. Stress among Portuguese Medical Students: the EuStress Solution. J Med Syst. 2020;44:45.
31
Cohen S, Kamarck T, Mermelstein R. A global measure of perceived stress. J Health Soc Behav. 1983;24:385-96.
32
Erci B. Reliability and validity of the Turkish version of perceived stress scale. Atatürk Üniversitesi Hemşirelik Yüksekokulu Dergisi. 2006;9:58-63.
33
Çelik Örücü M, Demir A. Psychometric evaluation of perceived stres scale for Turkish university students. Stress Health. 2009;25:103-9.
34
Eskin M, Harlak H, Demirkıran F, Dereboy Ç. Algılanan stres ölçeğinin Türkçeye uyarlanması: güvenirlik ve geçerlik analizi. New/Yeni Symposium Journal. 2013;51:132-40.
35
Kaya C, Tansey TN, Melekoğlu, M, Çakıroğlu O, Cahn F. Psychometric evaluation of Turkish version of the Perceived Stress Scale with Turkish college students. J Ment Health. 2019;28:161-7.
36
Lovibond SH, Lovibond, PF. Manual forthedepressionanxietystressscales (2nd ed.). Sydney: Psychology Foundation; 1995.
37
Akın A, Çetin B. Depresyon anksiyete stres ölçeği (DASÖ): geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Bilimleri. 2007;7:241-68.
38
Akkuş Çutuk Z, Kaya M. Depresyon, anksiyete ve stres ölçeği (DASS-42) lise formu: Türkçe geçerlik ve güvenirliği. Elektronik Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi. 2018;17:1327-36.
39
Sarıçam H. The psychometric properties of Turkish version of depression anxiety stress scale-21 (DASS-21) in health control and clinical samples. Bilişsel Davranışçı Psikoterapi ve Araştırmalar Dergisi. 2018;7:19-30.
40
Moos RH. Copingresponsesınventory – youth form manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources; 1993.
41
Koca Ballı Aİ, Kılıç KC. Stresle başa çıkma yöntemleri ölçeğinin Türkçe’ye uyarlanması: geçerlilik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Çukurova Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi. 2016; 25:273-86.
42
Şahin NH, Durak A. Stresle başa çıkma tarzları ölçeği: üniversite öğrencileri için uyarlanması. Türk Psikoloji Dergisi. 1995;10:56-73.
43
De Keyser V, Hansez I. Versune perspective transactionnelledustressautravail: Pistesd’évaluation sméthodologiques. Cahiers de Médecinedu Travail. 1996;33:133-44.
44
Rodríguez I, Kozusznik M, Peiró JM. Development andvalidation of the Valencia eustress-distressappraisalscale. Int J StressManage. 2013;20:279-308.
45
Hargrove MB, Casper WJ, Quick JC. Scale validation for the self-report stres response questionnaire (SRSRQ). Annual Conference of theSociety of Industrial and Organizational Psychologists, Honolulu, HI; 2014.
46
Folkman S. Positive psychological states and coping with severe stress. Soc Sci Med. 1997;45:1207-21.
47
McGowan J, Gardner G, Fletcher R. Positive and negative affective outcomes of occupational stress. New Zeal J Psychol. 2006;35:92-8.
48
Branson V, Turnbull D, Dry MJ, Palmer E. How do young people experience stress? A qualitative examina- tion of thein dicators of distress and eustress in adolescence. Int J Stress Manage. 2018;26:321-9.
49
Aypay A. Genel öz yeterlik ölçeği’nin (GÖYÖ) Türkçe’ye uyarlama çalışması. İnönü Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi. 2010;11:113-32.
50
Büyüköztürk Ş. Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı istatistik, araştırma deseni SPSS uygulamaları ve yorum. (15.baskı). Ankara: Pegem Akademi; 2011.
51
Kalaycı Ş. SPSS uygulamalı çok değişkenli istatistik teknikleri. (9.baskı). Ankara: Dinamik Akademi; 2018.
52
Büyüköztürk Ş, Şekercioğlu G, Çokluk Ö. Sosyal Bilimler İçin Çok Değişkenli İstatistik SPSS ve LISREL Uygulamaları. Ankara: Pegem Akademi Yayıncılık; 2016.