Turkish Version of the Mental Health-promoting Knowledge Scale: Validity and Reliability Study Among Adolescents
PDF
Cite
Share
Request
Original Article
P: 7-14
March 2022

Turkish Version of the Mental Health-promoting Knowledge Scale: Validity and Reliability Study Among Adolescents

Turk J Child Adolesc Ment Health 2022;29(1):7-14
1. Bilecik Şeyh Edebali Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Fakültesi, Çocuk Gelişimi Anabilim Dalı, Bilecik, Türkiye
2. Bilecik Şeyh Edebali Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Fakültesi, Sağlık Yönetimi Anabilim Dalı, Bilecik, Türkiye
No information available.
No information available
Received Date: 18.01.2021
Accepted Date: 24.03.2021
Publish Date: 21.03.2022
PDF
Cite
Share
Request

ABSTRACT

Objectives:

This study aims to test psychometric analysis of the Turkish version of “mental health-promoting knowledge scale (MHPK)” measuring adolescents’ knowledge on how they can obtain and maintain a good mental health.

Materials and Methods:

This study was conducted with 137 adolescents studying at a high school between November 1, 2020 and January 15, 2021.The data for the study were collected by using the socio-demographic characteristics and mental health information form and MHPK. Validity of the scale was assessed by the analyses of language, surface, content and construct validity. Construct validity was assessed by exploratory confirmatory factor analysis and known-groups validity. Reliability was assessed by item analysis relying on item-total correlation parameter, internal consistency analysis and test-retest reliability.

Results:

It was ascertained that the factor loads ranged from 0.541 to 0.795 in exploratory factor analysis. Confirmatory factor analysis showed that the scale had a fine goodness of fit with a single-factor structure. When the known groups were compared according to total average score of the scale, it was found that the difference between nursing students and adolescents included in the study was significant (p<0.000) and that the effect size was large (Cohens’ d=0.61). Cronbach alpha value of the scale was determined as 0.850. As a result of the test-retest reliability analysis of the scale, the intra-class correlation coefficient was found to have a statistically significant and strong positive correlation (r=0.902, p<0.001). The item-total correlation parameters of all the items of the scale ranged from 0.396 to 0.686.

Conclusion:

When the results of our study were considered, Turkish version of the MHPK was found to be valid and reliable.

References

1Hurley D, Swann C, Allen MS, Ferguson HL, Vella SA. A Systematic Review of Parent and Caregiver Mental Health Literacy. Community Ment Health J. 2020;56:2-21.
2Attygalle UR, Perera H, Jayamanne BDW. Mental health literacy in adolescents: ability to recognise problems, helpful interventions and outcomes. Child Adolesc Psychiatry Ment Health. 2017;11:38.
3Seedaket S, Turnbull N, Phajan T, Wanchai A. Improving mental health literacy in adolescents: systematic review of supporting intervention studies. Trop Med Int Health. 2020;25:1055-1064.
4Coles ME, Ravid A, Gibb B, George-Denn D, Bronstein LR, McLeod S. Adolescent Mental Health Literacy: Young People’s Knowledge of Depression and Social Anxiety Disorder. J Adolesc Health. 2016;58:57-62.
5Lubman DI, Cheetham A, Jorm AF, Berridge BJ, Wilson C, Blee F, Mckay-Brown L, Allen N, Proimos J. Australian adolescents’ beliefs and help-seeking intentions towards peers experiencing symptoms of depression and alcohol misuse. BMC Public Health. 2017;17:658.
6Cotton SM, Wright A, Harris MG, Jorm AF, McGorry PD. Influence of gender on mental health literacy in young Australians. Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 2006;40:790-796.
7Bröder J, Okan O, Bauer U, Bruland D, Schlupp S, Bollweg TM, Saboga-Nunes L, Bond E, Sørensen K, Bitzer EM, Jordan S, Domanska O, Firnges C, Carvalho GS, Bittlingmayer UH, Levin-Zamir D, Pelikan J, Sahrai D, Lenz A, Wahl P, Thomas M, Kessl F, Pinheiro P. Health literacy in childhood and youth: a systematic review of definitions and models. BMC Public Health. 2017;17:361.
8Liddle SK, Deane FP, Batterham M, Vella SA. A brief sports-based mental health literacy program for male adolescents: a cluster-randomized controlled trial. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology. 2019;25:20-44.
9Bjørnsen HN, Eilertsen MEB, Ringdal R, Espnes GA, Moksnes UK. Positive mental health literacy: development and validation of a measure among Norwegian adolescents. BMC Public Health. 2017;17:717.
10González-Cutre D, Romero-Elías M, Jiménez-Loaisa A, Beltrán-Carrillo VJ, Hagger M. Testing the need for novelty as a candidate need in basic psychological needs theory, Motivation and Emotion. 2020;44.
11Erişen MA, Kesen NF, Daşbaş S. Psikoloji, PDR ve sosyal hizmet öğrencilerinin duygu stilleri, olumsuz değerlendirilme korkusu ve algılanan sosyal yetkinlik düzeylerinin çeşitli değişkenlere göre incelenmesi. Toplum ve Sosyal Hizmet. 2020;31:1599-1623.
12Özdemir Y, Çok F. Ergenlikte özerklik gelişimi. Turkish Psychological Counseling and Guidance Journal. 2016;4:152-162.
13Lee HY, Hwang J, Ball JG, Lee J, Albright DL. Is health literacy associated with mental health literacy? Findings from Mental Health Literacy Scale. Perspect Psychiatr Care. 2020;56:393-400.
14Zenas D, Nielsen MG, Fonager K, Petersen KS, Szulevicz T, Overgaard C. Assessing mental health literacy among Danish adolescents - development and validation of a multifaceted assessment tool (the Danish MeHLA questionnaire). Psychiatry Res. 2020;293:113373.
15Karakoç FY, Dönmez L. Ölçek geliştirme çalışmalarında temel ilkeler, Tıp Eğitimi Dünyası. 2014;13:39-49.
16Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. 2nd ed. Hillsdale: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates. Erişim tarihi: 9.01.2021.
17Oral B. Çoban A. Kuramlardan uygulamaya eğitimde bilimsel araştırma, 1. Baskı. Ankara: Pegem Akademi, 2020;10-127.
18Büyüköztürk Ş, Çakmak EK, Akgün ÖE, Karadeniz Ş, Demirel F. Eğitimde bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri, 29. Baskı. Ankara: Pegem Akademi; 2020. p. 111-128.
19Akbaş G, Korkmaz L. Ölçek uyarlaması (adaptasyon), Türk Psikoloji Bülteni. 2007;13:15-16.
20Yeşilyurt S, Çapraz C. Ölçek geliştirme çalışmalarında kullanılan kapsam geçerliği için bir yol haritası. Erzincan Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi. 2018;20:251-264.
21Sönmez V, Alacapınar FG. Örneklendirilmiş bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri, Gözden Geçirilmiş 7. Baskı. Ankara: Ant yayıncılık; 2019. p. 143-165.
22Alpar, R. Uygulamalı çok değişkenli istatistiksel yöntemler, 5.Baskı. Ankara: Detay Yayıncılık; 2017.
23Esin MN. Hemşirelikte araştırma. Veri toplama yöntem ve araçları, veri toplama araçlarının güvenirlik ve geçerliliği, I.Baskı. İstanbul: Nobel Tıp Kitapevi; 2014. p. 223-231.
24Gürbüz S, Şahin F. Sosyal bilimlerde araştırma yöntemleri. Felsefe-yöntem ve analiz, Gözden Geçirilmiş ve Güncellenmiş 4. Baskı. Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık; 2017. p. 317-343.
25Büyükozturk Ş. Testlerin geçerlik ve güvenirlik analizlerinde kullanılan bazı istatistikler. İçinde: Sosyal Bilimler İçin Veri Analizi El Kitabı, 15. baskı. Ankara: Pegem Akademi; 2011. p. 167-182.
26Yaşlıoğlu MM. Sosyal bilimlerde faktör analizi ve geçerlilik: keşfedici ve doğrulayıcı faktör analizlerinin kullanılması. İstanbul Üniversitesi İşletme Fakültesi Dergisi. 2017;46:74-85.
27Koğar H. R ile geçerlik ve güvenirlik analizleri: klasik test kuramı, Faktör Analizi Yaklaşımı ve Madde Tepki Kuramı Uygulamaları. 1. Baskı. Ankara: Pegem Akademi; 2020. p. 90-91.
28Şencan H. Sosyal ve davranışsal ölçümlerde güvenilirlik ve geçerlilik. 1.Baskı. Ankara: Seçkin Yayınevi; 2005. p. 147.
29Yaşar M. İstatistiğe yönelik tutum ölçeği: geçerlilik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi. 2014;36:59-75.
Article is only available in PDF format. Show PDF
2024 ©️ Galenos Publishing House