Browsing by Author "Yalcindag, Bilge"

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3

Differences in the Self: Clinical Individuals Have Less Individuation and Promotion, but More Prevention
(Hogrefe Ag-Hogrefe Ag Suisse, 2023) Yalcindag, Bilge; Kahya, Yasemin; 01. Abdullah Gül University
Differences in the Self: Clinical Individuals Have Less Individuation and Promotion, but More Prevention
(HOGREFE AG-HOGREFE AG SUISSE, 2023) Yalcindag, Bilge; 0000-0001-7867-7845; AGÜ, İnsan ve Toplum Bilimleri Fakültesi, Psikoloji Bölümü; Yalcindag, Bilge; 01. Abdullah Gül University
This research aimed to compare two samples (clinical and university) in terms of basic self-orientations and self-regulation strategies. We expected lower scores on basic self-orientations and promotion, and higher scores on prevention in the clinical sample. The balanced model of self claims that the flourishing of basic self-orientations (individuation and relatedness) is related to better psychological functioning. However, this claim was never tested in a clinical sample. Additionally, the regulatory focus theory, a theory of self-regulation, claims that to reach desired end states, individuals use two systems: promotion (advancement, accomplishment) and prevention (conservation, security). Individuals with psychopathology symptoms may use promotion less and prevention more. The clinical sample consisted of 91 people (55 females, 36 males) who were under a psychological/psychiatric treatment due to various mental health complaints (Mage=29.3, SD=5.95, Range=18-42). Most of them had at least university degrees (69%). The second sample consisted of 94 university students (63 females, 30 males; Mage=23.9, SD=2.22, Range=22-34). The first MANCOVA, comparing clinical vs. university samples on individuation and relatedness controlling for age and gender, revealed a group effect (F(2,171)=4.751, p=.01, Wilks’ Lambda=0.95, partial η2=.53). Individuation was lower in clinical sample (M=4.90) than university sample (M=5.29). The second MANCOVA showed a group effect on the promotion and prevention (F(2,171)=13.574, p=.000, Wilks’ Lambda=0.86, partial η2=0.14). Promotion was lower in clinical sample (M=19.74) than in university sample (M=22.37), however prevention was higher (M=17.52) than university sample (M=15.56). The psychological symptoms varied in clinical sample, and were not assessed in university sample. Individuals in clinical sample were less likely to have an individuated self, to regulate themselves with promotion, but more likely to regulate themselves with prevention. Researchers and clinicians should work on thwarted self-orientations and dysfunctional self-regulation strategies.
Citation - WoS: 1
Re-Visiting Ambivalent Sexism Inventory (ASI): Construct Validity of Benevolent Sexism and Measurement Invariance of ASI
(Istanbul Univ, Fac Letters, dept Psychology, 2022) Aktan, Timucin; Yalcindag, Bilge; 01. Abdullah Gül University
The ambivalent sexism theory states that sexism comprises hostile and benevolent beliefs and that benevolent sexism is a second-order factor consisting of protective paternalism, complementary gender differentiation and heterosexual intimacy. The subdimensions of benevolent sexism toward women have recently piqued people's interest. The Turkish version of the ambivalent sexism inventory's (ASI's) construct validity should be reexamined in light of this apparent interest in contemporary studies. Accordingly, in the current study, the aim is to test the preferred structural model in which protective sexism was defined as a second-order factor consisting of protective patriarchy, complementary differentiation between genders and heterosexual intimacy. Moreover, measurement invariance analysis will be used to test the stability of the scale's structure in different samples. The data of 1803 participants from different studies conducted between 2009 and 2019 (1194 women and 593 men, 16 unidentified) were merged. Findings of the confirmatory factor analyses indicated that the four-factor solution (i.e. hostile sexism and three subfactors of benevolence) fitted the data better than the other models (i.e. one-factor and two-factor models, and the preferred structural model). Explanatory factor analysis via exploratory structural equation modeling revealed a two-factor solution composed of benevolence and hostility, but the findings also underlined two psychometrically weak items. Finally, measurement invariance analyses demonstrated full invariance between private and public university samples, and an invariance between women and men samples except for sample means. Only the means of the samples differed in the women-men comparison, but in a theoretically predicted way, and men had higher scores in all subscales except for complementary gender differentiation. In sum, our findings provided significant support for the construct validity and measurement invariance of ASI while raising questions about the theoretical construct measured and the items needed to be revised.