PubMed İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu / PubMed Indexed Publications Collection
Permanent URI for this collectionhttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11779/1928
Browse
2 results
Search Results
Article Citation - WoS: 4Citation - Scopus: 4Making the Myths of Dating Violence Visible: Developing a New Scale and Testing Its Psychometrics Through Cross-Sectional and Longitudinal Evidence(Sage Publications Inc, 2023-02-16) Aracı-İyiaydın, Ayşegül; Toplu-Demirtaş, Ezgi; Mesut, Cansel; Soysal, Demet EsraMyths refer to misperceptions, overgeneralizations, or ideas that most people believe in but do not necessarily reflect the truth. To date, research on the myths surrounding dating violence (DV) has not received much attention, most probably due to the lack of a validated measure. Thus, we developed a standardized measure to gauge DV myths and test its psychometrics. The instrument's design is based on three studies utilizing cross-sectional and longitudinal sets of data. In Study 1, in a sample of 259 emerging adults, predominantly college students, the explanatory factor analysis revealed a solid three-factor structure. In Study 2, in a separate sample of 330 emerging adults, primarily college students, we cross-validated the factor structure via confirmatory factor analysis. We also provided evidence for concurrent validity. In Study 3, we revealed that our newly developed scale had predictive validity among dating and non-dating emerging adults, mostly college students, via longitudinal data. Based on the findings from three studies, we can buoyantly announce that the Dating Violence Myths scale is a promising novel and standardized tool for measuring beliefs about DV. The cross-sectional and longitudinal evidence alludes to a need for DV myths to be debunked to reduce psychological DV attitudes, perceptions, and behaviors among emerging adults.Article Citation - WoS: 15Citation - Scopus: 19Crossing Boundaries: a Pilot Study of Maternal Attitudes About Child Maltreatment in Nine Countries(Elsevier, 2020-01-01) Emmen, R; Soares, I; Wang, L; Alink, L; Mesman, J; Mels, C; Asanjarani, F.; Carcamo, R; Hsiao, C; Selcuk, B; Branger, M.a, Woudstra, M.-L; Yavuz, Melis; Van Ginkel, J; Woudstra, Mi-lanBackground: Definitions of child maltreatment vary widely between studies, and even more so between different cultural contexts. Objective: In this pilot study, we examine between-country variations in maternal notions about what constitutes child maltreatment. Participants and setting: The sample consisted of 466 mothers recruited in Chile, China, Greece, Iran, the Netherlands, Portugal, South Africa, Turkey, and Uruguay. Methods: All mothers completed a new Q-sort measure, ranking 90 parenting behaviors linked to subtypes of maltreatment (emotional neglect, emotional abuse, physical neglect, and physical abuse) from least to most detrimental to child development. Results: Between-country agreement regarding the harmfulness of the parenting behaviors was high (r =.45), but there were different patterns of reported harmfulness of subtypes of maltreatment (although driven mostly by deviating patterns in the South African sample). Further, there were significant country effects on the number and type of behaviors labeled as maltreatment (p?2 =.15), and the number of items labeled as requiring intervention (p?2 =.19). Conclusions: Variations in conceptions of maltreatment need to be studied in larger more representative samples and taken into account in the assessment and treatment of child maltreatment across cultures.