Kullanım İzni
Geliştirdiğim(iz) / uyarladığım(ız) ölçme aracının atıf gösterilmesi ve bilimsel araştırmalarla sınırlı olmak kaydıyla kullanılmasına izin veriyorum/z/. Araştırmanının başlangıcında araştırmanın amacı ile bir bilginin sorumlu yazara e-posta gönderilmesi yeterlidir.

---

---

Link: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7102/15/1/67

---

Ölçek Çeşidi: Uyarlama

---

Kategori(ler):

10 Psikoloji

40 Sosyal ve Beşeri Bilimler » 430 Yönetim ve Organizasyon » 480 İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler

---

Kaynak Türü: Makale

---

Kaynak/Referans:

Gurol, A., Ilhan-Findikoglu, D., Gurol, M., Findikoglu, F., & Yesilkaya, M. (2025). Work-domain goal orientation: A theoretical framework for the construct and Turkish adaptation of a Work-domain Goal Orientation Instrument. Education Sciences, 15(1), 67. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15010067

---

Geliştiren/Uyarlayan: Aysun Gürol, Dilek İlhan Fındıkoğlu, Mehmet Gürol, Fuat Fındıkoğlu, Mehmet Yeşilkaya

---

Yıl: 2025

---

Kaynak Adı: Work-Domain Goal Orientation: A Theoretical Framework for the Construct and Turkish Adaptation of a Work-Domain Goal Orientation Instrument

---

Dergi: Education Sciences

---

Cilt: 15

---

Sayı: 1

---

Sayfa Aralığı: 1-23

---

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15010067

---

Sorumlu Yazar: Fuat Fındıkoğlu

---

İletişim: fuatf@yildiz.edu.tr

---

Ölçülen Özellikler: İş Alanında Hedef Yönelimi

---

Alt Boyutlar: Kaçınma, Kanıtlama, Öğrenme

---

Ölçek Türü: Öz Bildirim

---

Kimlere Uygulanabilir: Üniversite Öğrecileri, Yetişkinler

---

Derecelendirme: 7'li Likert

---

Çeviri Süreci: The process of adapting the Work-Domain Goal Orientation instrument (İş Ortamı Hedef Yönelimi Ölçeği), developed by Don VandeWalle (1997), began by obtaining the necessary permission for adaptation. The author was contacted via email, and consent was granted to adapt the instrument for the Turkish context. Following this, the original English-language instrument was distributed to five lecturers of English as a Second Language (ESL), each possessing extensive proficiency in both English (the source language) and Turkish (the target language).

These five lecturers independently translated the instrument into Turkish. Subsequently, a review meeting was held, attended by the researchers, a translation expert, and a linguist specializing in Turkish. During this session, the various translated versions were cross-examined and evaluated, resulting in the final version of the Turkish translation.

To ensure accuracy, this final Turkish version underwent a back-translation process. A different translation expert, who had not been involved in the initial translation, translated the final Turkish version back into English. The back-translated version and the original English instrument were then carefully compared by two native English-speaking TESOL experts. Both experts confirmed that the original and back-translated versions were identical, demonstrating the fidelity of the translation.

With this validation process complete, the Turkish version of the instrument, titled İş Ortamı Hedef Yönelimi Ölçeği, was finalized and deemed ready for use with participants in this study.

---

Geçerlik: Following the exploratory factor analysis, the measurement model validity of the translated instrument was tested through confirmatory factor analysis (CFA).

The chi-square (χ²) value used to test the goodness-of-fit index and the proposed model in CFA was χ² = 149.681 with a degree of freedom (df) = 57, yielding a χ²/df ratio of 2.63. Since this value is below the threshold of five, it suggests an excellent goodness-of-fit index. Additionally, the Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) value was .047, further indicating a good fit [61].

The CFA resulted in outstanding goodness-of-fit indices: Normed Fit Index (NFI) = .967, Comparative Fit Index (CFI) = .979, Goodness-of-Fit Index (GFI) = .968, Adjusted Goodness-of-Fit Index (AGFI) = .950, and Incremental Fit Index (IFI) = .979. Values exceed-ing .90 for these indices suggest a perfect model fit.

CFA confirmed that the Turkish version (İş Ortamı Hedef Yönelimi Ölçeği) of the Work-Domain Goal Orientation instrument retained its 13-item, 3-factor structure, with all goodness-of-fit indices more than satisfactory. The results validated the hypothesized model of the original instrument, indicating that the translated version mirrors the structure of the original instrument. Overall, the goodness-of-fit indices obtained through CFA suggest that the translated instrument is a valid and reliable tool in the Turkish language context.

---

Güvenirlik: Exploratory Factor Analysis: The total scores for each item of the instrument were calculated, and skewness was analyzed using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test. According to the test results, the data obtained from the instrument were normally distributed (p > .05). Before proceeding with the factor analysis, the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) measure and Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity (BTS) were conducted to assess the adequacy of the sample size for factor analysis.

Bartlett’s Test yielded a significant result (χ² = 4455.002, p < .001), and the KMO coefficient for work-domain goal orientation was .863, confirming the appropriateness of the data for factor analysis. The KMO coefficient, which should range between .80 and .90, and the BTS value, which should be below .05, suggest a significant difference between the correlation matrix and the identity matrix at a confidence level of 99 per cent, indicat-ing that the data were suitable for factor analysis.

After confirming the data’s appropriateness, the initial eigenvalues were checked. The first eigenvalue was 4.29, the second 3.01, the third 1.58, and the fourth 0.64, validating the three-dimensional structure.

The scree plot and eigenvalues from the principal component analysis further confirmed that the instrument’s three-dimensional structure, composed of 13 items, was feasible. The factor loadings for the 13 items ranged from .70 to .86.

In this study, the three factors identified accounted for 68.4% of the variance, a satisfactory value. EFA results revealed that items 1 to 5 loaded onto the Learning factor, items 6 to 9 onto the Proving factor, and items 10 to 13 onto the Avoiding factor. Factor loadings ranged from .70 to .83 for Learning, from .79 to .86 for Proving, and from .79 to .86 for Avoiding, indicating moderate to very high loadings.

Internal consistency reliability was assessed using Cronbach’s alpha for the overall 13-item instrument and each of the three factors. For the full instrument, Cronbach’s alpha was .80, which is considered acceptable. The following shows the internal consistency reliability coefficients for each factor: Factor 1 (Learning) - .84; Factor 2 (Proving) - .86; Factor 3 (Avoidance) - .86.

---

Kullanılan Araştırmalar
scholar.google.com.tr