Üniversite Öğrencilerinin Çeşitli Kaynaklardan Aldıkları Evlilik Mesajlarına Göre Evliliğe İlişkin Tutumları

Year 2022, Volume: 12 Issue: 2, 76 - 90, 31.12.2022

Ekrem Sedat Şahin , Filiz Bilge

https://doi.org/10.17984/adyuebd.960114

Abstract

Bu araştırmada henüz evlenmemiş üniversite öğrencilerinin, evlilik mesajlarının kaynakları olan; aile, arkadaşlar, kitle iletişim araçları ve diğer kurumlardan, aldıkları evlilik mesajlarına göre evliliğe ilişkin tutumlarının değişip değişmediğinin incelenmesi amaçlanmıştır. Bu kapsamda Evlilik Mesajları Ölçeği (EMÖ) ve İnönü Evlilik Tutum Ölçeği (İETÖ) Ankara’da bulunan bir devlet üniversitesinde, 2018-2019 öğretim yılında öğrenim gören 654 kadın ve 359 erkek olmak üzere toplam 1013 üniversite öğrencisine uygulanmıştır. Öğrencilere ulaşmada elverişli/ uygun örnekleme yöntemi kullanılmıştır. Ölçme araçlarından elde edilen veriler SPSS 23.0 Programına girilerek değerlendirilmiştir. Verilerin çözümlenmesinde ikili grupların karşılaştırılmasında t testi kullanılmıştır. Gruplar arasında anlamlı farklılık olduğu durumlarda etki büyüklüğü istatistiği, Cohen d hesaplanarak incelenmiştir. Araştırma sonucunda aile, arkadaşlar, kitle iletişim araçları ve diğer kurumlardan evliliğe ilişkin üst düzeyde olumlu mesaj alan üniversite öğrencilerinin evlilik tutumlarının alt düzeyde olumlu mesaj alan öğrencilerden daha olumlu olduğu bulgusuna ulaşılmıştır. Araştırma bulguları alanyazın doğrultusunda tartışılarak; araştırmacılara, uygulayıcı ve politika belirleyicilere öneriler sunulmuştur.

Keywords

Evlilik mesajı kaynakları,, Alınan evlilik mesajları,, Evlilik tutumları

Supporting Institution

Yok

Project Number

Yok

Thanks

Yok

Marital Attitudes According To The Marital Messages of University Students From Various Sources

Abstract

The aim of this study is to examine whether single university students’ marital attitudes change according to the marital messages they receive from marital message sources such as friends, media, family, and other institutions. To this end, Marital Messages Scale (MMS) and Inonu Marital Attitudes Scale (IMAS) were applied to a total of 1013 university students (654 female and 359 male) enrolled at a state university in Ankara during the 2018-2019 academic year. Convenience sampling was used to reach students. Data obtained from the measuring tools were evaluated by using SPSS 23.0. T test was used in the comparison of binary groups in data analysis. When there was a significant difference between groups, impact magnitude statistics was examined by calculating the Cohen d. At the end of the study, it was found out that students who receive high level positive marital messages from their families, friends, media, and other institutions have a more positive marital attitude compared to those university students who receive a low level of positive message from these sources. Findings of the study was discussed in relation to the literature; suggestions were made for researchers, applicators, and policy makers.

Keywords

Received Marital Messages,, Received marital messages,, Marital attitudes

Project Number

Yok

References

• Akay, İ. (2006). Mass media in the process of socialization, (Master's thesis).Marmara Universty, Istanbul.
• Bayoğlu, F., & Atli, A. (2014). Inönü Marriage Attitude Scale: Validity and reliability analysis. Aegean Education Journal, 15(29), 397-415.
• Bener, M. (2011). The relationship between religiosity and mate choice (SDU example) (Master's thesis). Süleyman Demirel University, Isparta.
• Benson, M. J., Larson, J., Wilson, S., & Demo, D. H. (1993). Family of origin influences on late adolescent romantic relationships. Journal of Marriage & The Family, 55, 663-672.
• Blagojevic, M. (1989). The attitudes of young people towards marriage: From the change of substance to the change of form. Marriage & Family Review, 14(1-2), 217-238.
• Braaten, E. B., & Rosen, L. A. (1998). Development and validation of the Marital Attitudes Scale. Journal of Divorce & Remarriage. 29 (3/4). 83-91.
• Bradbury, N. B., Fincham, F. D., & Beach, S. R. (2002). Evlilik doyumunun doğası ve belirleyicileri üzerine araştırmalar: Son on yılın derlemesi. (Ş. Tutarel-Kışlak, Çev.). Türk Psikoloji Bülteni, 7 (24-25), 120-129.
• Bronfenbrenner, U. (1977). Toward an experimental ecology of human development. American Psychologist, 52, 513-531.
• Bronfenbrenner, U. (1986). Ecology of the family as a context for human development: research perspectives. [Electronic version]. Developmental Psychology. 22 (6), 723-742.
• Burgoyne, C. B., & Hames, R. (2002). Views of marriage and divorce: An in-depth study of young adults from intact and divorced families. Journal of Divorce & Remarriage, 37, 75-100.
• Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2010). Manual of data analysis for social sciences. Ankara: Pegem Academy Publishing.
• Büyüköztürk, Ş., Kılıç- Çakmak, E., Akgün, Ö. E., Karadeniz, Ş., & Demirel, F. (2014). Scientific research methods. Ankara: Pegem Academy Publishing.
• Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis fort he behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
• Cook, J. R., & Kilmer, R. P. (2010). Defining the scope of systems of care: An ecological perspective. Evaluation & Program Planning, 13, 18-20.
• Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research pattern. (Y. Dede & S. B. Demir, Eds.). Ankara: Anı Publishing.
• De Coninck, D., Van Doren, S., & Matthijs, K. (2021). Attitudes of young adults toward marriage and divorce, 2002–2018. Journal of Divorce & Remarriage, 62(1), 66-82.
• Espelage, D. L., & Swearer-Napolitano, S. M. (2003). Research on school bullying and victimization: What have we learned and where do we go from here? School Psychology Review, 12(3), 365-383.
• Fowers, B. J. (1993). Psychology as public philosophy: An illustration of the moral dimension of psychology with marital research. Journal of Theoretical & Philosophical Psychology, 13, 124-136.
• Gabardi, L., & Rosen, L. (1993). Intimate relationship: College students from divorced and intact families. Journal of Divorce & Remarriage, 18(3), 25-56.
• Ganong, L., Coleman, M., & Brown, G. (1981). Effect of family structure on marital attitudes of adolesscents. Adolescence, 16(62), 22-34.
• Glenn, N. D. (1991). The recent trend in marital success in the united states. Journal of Marriage & The Family, 53, 261-270.
• Gubernskaya, Z. (2010). Changing attitudes toward marriage and children in six countries. Sociological Perspectives, 53(2), 179- 200.
• Gülyüksel-Akdağ, F., & Cihangir-Çankaya, Z. (2015). Prediction of psychological well-being in married individuals. Journal of Mersin University Faculty of Education, 3, 646-662.
• Hansen, J.C., & L’abate, L. (1982). The classification of normal families: Functionality and dysfunctionality. Approaches To Family Therapy. Macmillan Publishing Co. Inc.
• Holman, C. L. (2003). The relationship between use of sexually suggestive media and sexual attitudes and behaviors among adolescents (Doctoral dissertation). Carbondale Southern Illinois Universty, USA.
• Jackl, J. A. (2016). “Love doesn’t just happen…”: Parent-child communication about marriage. Communication Quarterly, 64(2), 193-209. Jennings, A. M., Salts, C., & Smith, T. A. (1992). Attitudes toward marriage. Journal of Divorce & Remarriage, 17(1/2), 67-80.
• L’Abate, L. (1994). Family evaluation: A psychological approach. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
• Larson, J. H. (1988). Factors influencing college students’ perceived readiness for marriage. Family Perspective, 22, 145-157.
• Larson, J. H., Benson, M. J., Wilson, S. M., & Medora, F. (1998) Family of origin influences on marital attitudes and readiness for marriage in late adolescents. Journal of Family Issues, 19(6), 750-768.
• Larson, J. H., & Thayne, T. R. (1999). Marital attitudes and personal readiness for marriage of young adult children of alcoholics. Alcoholism Treatment Quarterly, 16(4), 59-73.
• Lillard, L.A., & Waite, L. J. (1995). "Til death do us part: Marital disruption and mortality." American Journal of Sociology, 100, 1131-1156.
• Maltby, J. (1999). The internal structure of a derived, revised, and amended measure of the religious orientation scale: The ‘‘AgeUniversal’’ I-E scale. Social Behavior, & Personality, 27, 407-412.
• Miles, N., & Servaty-Seib, H. L. (2010). Parental marital status and young adult offspring's attitudes about marriage and divorce. Journal of Divorce, & Remarriage, 5(4), 209-220.
• Miller, R. R., & Browning, S. L. (1999). Marital messages the case of black women and their children. Journal of Family Issues, 20(5), 633-647.
• Mosko, J. E., & Pistole, M. C. (2010). Attachment and religiousness: Contributions to young adult marital attitudes and readiness. Family Journal, 18, 127-135.
• Muslu, G. K., & Bolışık, B. (2009). Internet use in children and youth. TAF Preventive Medicine Bulletin, 8(5), 445-450.
• Nadolu, D., Runcan, R., & Bahnaru A (2020) Sociological dimensions of marital satisfaction in Romania. PLoS ONE 15(8): e0237923. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0237923
• Okutan, N., & Büyükşahin-Sunal, A. (2010). Attachment in romantic relationships: Perception of religiosity and stereotypes about romantic relationships. Turkish Psychological Articles, 13(26), 80-88.
• Özabacı, N., Körük, S., & Kara, A. (2018). Developing the Scale of Meaning Attributed to Marriage (SPS): Validity and reliability study. Turkish Journal of Psychological Counseling & Guidance, 8(50), 235-259.
• Peters, E. (2018). The influence of choice feminism on women’s and men’s attitudes towards name changing at marriage: An analysis of online comments on UK social media. Names, 1-10.
• Riggio, H. R., & Fite, J. E. (2006). Attitudes toward divorce: Embeddedness and outcomes in personal relationships. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 36(12), 2935-2962.
• Riggio, H. R., & Weiser, D. (2008). Attitudes toward marriage: Embeddedness and outcomes in personal relationships. Personal Relationships, 15(1), 123-140.
• Salcuni, S., Di Riso, D., Mazzeschi, C., & Lis, A. (2007). Parents' representations of their children: An exploratory study using the Osgood Semantic Differential Scales. Perceptual, & Motor Skills, 105, 39-46.
• Sandfort, M. H., & Haworth, J. G. (2002). Whassup? A glimpse into the attitudes and beliefs of the millennial generation. Journal of College, & Character, 3(3), 1-22.
• Santrock, J. W. (2014). Adolescencia. (D. M. Siyez, Trans.). Ankara: Nobel Academic Publishing.
• Segrin, C., & Nabi, R. L. (2002). Does television viewing cultivate unrealistic expectations about marriage? Journal of Communication, 52, 247-263.
• Segrin, C., Taylor, M. E., & Altman, J. (2005). Social cognitive mediators and relational outcomes associated with parental divorce. Journal of Social, & Personal Relationships, 22, 361-377.
• Shurts, W. M. (2004). The relationships among marital messages received, marital attitudes, relationship self-efficacy, and wellness among never-married traditional-aged undergraduate students. (Doctoral dissertation). University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina‎, USA.
• Shurts, W. M., & Myers, J. E. (2012). Relationships among young adults’ marital messages received, marital attitudes, and relationship self-efficacy. ADULTSPAN Journal, 11(2), 97-111.
• Şahin, E. S. (2019). Various sources of received marital messages and attitudes toward marriage of university, (Doctoral dissertation). Hacettepe University, Ankara.
• Şahin, E. S. & Bilge, F. (2020). Development, validity and reliability of the Marital Messages Scale (MMS). Mehmet Akif Ersoy University Journal of the Faculty of Education, 53, 137-163.
• Tissington, L. D. (2008). A Bronfenbrenner ecological perspective on the transition to teaching for alternative certification. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 34, 106-110.
• Trotter, P. (2010). The influence of parental romantic relationships on college students’ attitudes about romantic relationships. College Student Journal, 44(1), 71-83.
• Uçar, E. (2018). Religiosity, marital satisfaction and problem solving as predictors of psychological well-being. (Master's thesis). Istanbul Ticaret University, Istanbul.
• Valerian, A. V. (2001). The relationship between the family of origin processes and attitudes towards marriage and the likelihood to divorce among college students (Doctoral dissertation). Seton Hall University, South Orange, New Jersey, USA.
• Van Den Berghe, E. (2000). The enduring, happy marriage: Findings and implications from research. D. C. Dollahite (Ed.), Strengthening our families in. (18-20). Salt Lake City: Deseret Book.
• Waite, L.J. (1995) "Does marriage matter?" Demography, 32, 483-507.
• Waite, L.J., & Gallagher, M. (2000). The case for marriage: Why married people are happier, Healthier and Better Off Financially. Doubleday.
• Willoughby, B. J., Carroll, S. J., Vitas, J. M., & Hill, L. M. (2012). When are you getting married? The intergenerational transmission of attitudes regarding marital timing and marital importance. Journal of Family Issues, 33(2), 223-245.
• Woody, R. H., & Woody, J. D. (1973). Sexual, marital and familial relations. Illinois: Bannerstone House.