Sensıtivity to Punishment In The Academic Context: It’s Relationship With Locus of Control, Gender and Grade Level / Akademik Bağlamda Ceza Hassasiyeti: Denetim Odağı, Cinsiyet ve Sınıf Düzeyiyle İlişkileri

Year 2015, Volume: 11 Issue: 4, 1475 - 1495, 28.09.2015

Ayşe Aypay

Abstract

Sensitivity to punishment can be defined as the sensitivity that results in being over sensitive to punishment and punishment stimuli, fear, anxiety, inhibition, and reactivity that is not functional. Despite the fact that punishment practices are frequently encountered in academic contexts, the review of literature has not revealed a measurement tool towards measuring students' sensitivity to punishment in the academic context. For this reason, in this study, the "Scale of Punishment Sensitivity in the Academic Context (SPSAC) for Middle School Students" to be used for measuring middle school students' sensitivity to punishment in the academic context was firstly developed. It was then determined whether internal-external locus of control was a variable predicting sensitivity to punishment in the academic context, and whether sensitivity to punishment differed based on gender and grade level variables. The population of this study consisted of the students studying at middle schools in the central districts of Eskisehir province. This study used the data gathered from 741 students of fifth, sixth, seventh and eighth grade studying at five middle schools selected using simple random sampling method among these schools. As a result of EFA, which was performed for construct validity, three factors having an eigenvalue higher than 1 and explaining 66% of the total variance were revealed. The goodness-of-fit indexes [χ²=41.03, p<.01, χ²/sd=1.75, GFI=0.96, AGFI=0.93, NFI=0.95, NNFI=0.97, SRMR=0.05, RMSEA=0.05, CFI=0.98] for the CFA model showed a good model-data fit. The split-half reliability coefficient for the SPSAC total scores was .83, the Alpha reliability coefficient was .80, and the test-retest reliability was .80. The analyses showed that the SPSAC scores significantly differed based on the gender and grade level variables, and internal-external locus of control was an important predictor of sensitivity to punishment (R = 0.545,  R² = 0.297, p<.01).

Keywords

Punishment sensitivity, locus of control, student, middle school, scale

AKADEMİK BAĞLAMDA CEZA HASSASİYETİ: DENETİM ODAĞI, CİNSİYET VE SINIF DÜZEYİYLE İLİŞKİLERİ

Abstract

Ceza hassasiyeti, cezaya ve ceza uyarıcılarına karşı aşırı duyarlı olma, korku, kaygı, ketlenme ve işlevsel olmayan tepkisellikle sonuçlanan bir hassasiyet olarak tanımlanabilir. Ceza uygulamalarına akademik bağlamlarda sıklıkla rastlanmasına karşın, literatür taramasında öğrencilerin akademik bağlama ilişkin ceza hassasiyetlerini ölçmeye yönelik bir ölçme aracına rastlanmamıştır. Bu nedenle bu çalışmada öncelikle ortaokul öğrencilerinin akademik bağlama ilişkin ceza hassasiyetlerini ölçmede kullanılacak “Ortaokul Öğrencileri İçin Akademik Bağlamda Ceza Hassasiyeti Ölçeği” (ABCHÖ ) geliştirilmiştir. Daha sonra iç-dış denetim odağının akademik bağlama ilişkin ceza hassasiyetini yordayan bir değişken olup olmadığı; ceza hassasiyetinin cinsiyet ve sınıf düzeyi değişkenlerine bağlı olarak farklılaşıp farklılaşmadığı da belirlenmiştir. Bu çalışmanın evrenini Eskişehir merkez ilçelerindeki ortaokullarda öğrenimini sürdüren öğrenciler oluşturmaktadır. Bu okullardan basit seçkisiz örnekleme yöntemi kullanılarak seçilmiş beş ortaokulda öğrenimini sürdüren, 5., 6., 7., 8. sınıf öğrencilerinin oluşturduğu 741 öğrenciden toplanan veriler kullanılmıştır. Yapı geçerliği için uygulanan AFA’da öz değeri 1’den büyük, toplam varyansın %66’sını açıklayan üç faktör elde edilmiştir. DFA’da modele ait uyum iyiliği indeksleri [χ2 =41.03, p < .01, χ2/sd=1.75, GFI=0.96, AGFI=0.93, NFI=0.95, NNFI=0.97, SRMR=0.05, RMSEA=0.05, CFI=0.98] model-veri uyumunun iyi olduğunu göstermiştir. ABCHÖ toplam puanı için iki yarı test güvenirlik katsayısı .83; Alpha güvenirlik katsayısı .80; test-tekrar test güvenirliği .80’dir. Analizler ABCHÖ puanlarının cinsiyet ve sınıf düzeyi değişkenlerine göre anlamlı biçimde farklılaştığını ve içdış denetim odağının ceza hassasiyetinin önemli bir yordayıcısı olduğunu (R = 0.545, R2 = 0.297, p < .01) göstermiştir.

Keywords

Ceza hassasiyeti, denetim odağı, öğrenci, ortaokul, ölçek

References

• Abrahamson, L., Seligman, Y. & Teasdale, M. (1978). Learned helplessness in humans: Critique and reformulation. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 87, 49-74.
• Ahmad, I., Said , H. & Khan, F. (2013). Effect of corporal punishment on students’ motivation and classroom learning. Review of European Studies, 5(4), 130-134.
• Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. (1984). The effect of sampling error on convergence, improper solutions, and goodness-of-fit indices for maximum likelihood confirmatory factor analysis. Psychometrika, 49, 155-173.
• Arif, M.S. & Rafi, M.S. (2007). Effects of corporal punishment and psychological treatment on students’ learning and behavior. Egitimde Kuram ve Uygulama -Journal of Theory and Practice in Education, 3(2),171-180.
• Burns, M.J. & Dillon, F.R. (2005). AIDS health locus of control, self-efficacy for safer sexual practices, and future time orientation as predictors of condom use in african american college students. Journal of Black Psychology, 31 (2), 172-188.
• Carver, C. S. & White, T. L. (1994). Behavioral inhibition, behavioral activation, and affective responses to impeding reward and punishment: The BIS/BAS Scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 319–333.
• Ching, G. S. (2012). Looking into the issues of rewards and punishment in students. International Journal of Research Studies in Psychology, 1(2), 29-38. Retrieved on August 2, 2015.
• <http://www.consortiacademia.org/index.php/ijrsp/article/download/44/65>
• Colder, C. R. & O'Connor, R. M. (2004). Gray’s reinforcement sensitivity model and child psychopathology: laboratory and questionnaire assessment of the BAS and BIS. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 32, 435–451.
• Cole, D. A. (1987). Utility of confirmatory factor analysis in test validation research. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 55, 1019-1031.
• Coplan, R.J., Wilson, J., Frohlick, S.L. & Zelenski, J. (2006). A person-oriented analysis of behavioral inhibition and behavioral activation in children. Personality and Individual Differences, 41,917–927.
• Corr, P. J., Pickering, A. D. & Gray, J. A. (1997). Personality, punishment, and procedural learning: A test of J. A. Gray’s anxiety theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 337-344.
• Covington, M.V. (2000). Goal theory, motivation, and school achievement: an integrative review. Annual Review of Psychology, (51), 171-200.
• Crowne, D. P. & Liverant, S. (1963). Conformity under varying conditions of personal commitment. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 66(6), 547-555.
• Dökmen, Z.Y. (1991). Bem cinsiyet rolü envanteri kadınsılık ve erkeksilik ölçekleri Türkçe formunun psikometrik özellikleri. Kriz Dergisi 7(1), 27-40.
• Farmer, R.F. (2005). Temperament, reward and punishment sensitivity, and clinical disorders: Implications for behavioral case formulation and therapy. International Journal of Behavioral Consultation and Therapy, 1(1), 56-76.
• Gilligan, C. (1982). In a different voice: Psychological theory and women's development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
• Gray, J. A. (1970). The psychophysiological basis of introversion-extraversion. Behavior Research and Therapy, 8, 249-266.
• Gray, J. A. (1973). Causal theories of personality and how to test them. In J. R. Royce (Ed.), Multivariate analysis and psychological theory (pp. 409-451). New York: Academic Press.
• Gray, J. A. (1981). A critique of Eysenck's theory of personality. In H. Eysenck (Ed.), A model for personality (pp. 264-276). New York: Springer-Verlag.
• Gray, J. A. (1987). The psychology of fear and stress (2nd ed.). New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Gray, J. A. (1990). Brain systems that mediate both emotion and cognition. Cognition and Emotion, 4, 269-288.
• Gray, J. A. & McNaughton, N. (2000). The neuropsychology of anxiety (2nd ed.) London: Oxford University Press.
• Gorsuch, R. L. (1983). Factor analysis (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
• Guneri, O., Sumer, Z. & Yıldırım, A. (1999). Sources of self-identity among Turkish adolescents, Adolescence, 34(135), 535-546.
• Hu, L.T. & Bentler, P.M. (1999). "Cutoff Criteria for Fit Indexes in Covariance Structure Analysis: Conventional Criteria Versus New Alternatives," Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1-55.
• Jöreskog, K., & Sörbom, D. (2001). LISREL 8.51. Mooresvile: Scientific Software.
• Kline, P. (1994). An easy guide to factor analysis. New York, NY: Routledge.
• Lefcourt, H. M. (1976). Locus of control. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
• Luman, M., van Meel, C.S., Oosterlaan, J. & Geurts, H.M. (2012). Reward and punishment sensitivity in children with adhd: Validating the sensitivity to punishment and sensitivity to reward questionnaire for children (SPSRQ-C). Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology. 40(1), 145–157.
• Marsh, H. W., Balla, J. R., & McDonald, R. P. (1988). Goodness-of-fit indexes in confirmatory factory analysis: The effects of sample size. Psychological Bulletin, 103 (3), 391-410.
• Muris, P., Meesters, C., de Kanter, E. & Timmerman, P.E. (2005). Behavioral inhibition and behavioral activation system scales for children: Relationships with Eysenck’s personality traits and psychopathological symptoms. Personality and Individual Differences, 38, 831–841.
• Naz, A., Khan, W., Daraz, U., Hussain, M. & Khan, Q. (2011). The impacts of corporal punishment on students’ academic performance/career and personality development up-to secondary level education in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Pakistan. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 2(12), 130-140.
• Öngen, D. (2003). Denetim odağı ölçeği'nin geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi, 35, 436-447.
• Reimer, M. S. (1996). Sinking into the ground: The development and consequences of shame in adolescence. Developmental Review, 16, 321-363.
• Reimer, M., Overton, W. F., Steidl, J., Rosenstein, D. & Horowitz, H. (1996). Familial responsiveness and behavioral control: Influences on adolescent psychopathology, attachment, and cognition. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 6, 87–112.
• Rolison, M.R. & Scherman, A. (2002). Factors influencing adolescents’ decisions to engage in risk-taking behavior. Adolescence, 37 (147), 585-596.
• Rotter, J. (1966). Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcements, Psychological Monographs: General and Applied, 80(1), 1-28.
• Schumacker, R. E., & Lomax, R. G. (1996). A beginner’s guide to structural equation modeling. Hilsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
• Segarra, P., Ross, S.R., Pastor, M.C., Montan˜e´s, S., Poy, R. & Molto´, J. (2007). MMPI-2 predictors of Gray’s two-factor reinforcement sensitivity theory. Personality and Individual Differences 43, 437–448.
• Seligman, M. E. P. (1974). Depression and learned helplessness. In R. J. Friedman & M. M. Katz (Eds.), The psychology of depression: Contemporary theory and research (pp. 83-113). Washington, DC: Winston.
• Skinner, B. F. (1971). Beyond freedom and dignity. New York: Knopf.
• Tabachnick, B.G. & Fidell, L.S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics (5th ed.). New York: Allyn and Bacon.
• Torrubia, R., Ávila, C., Moltó, J. & Caseras, X. (2001) The Sensitivity to Punishment and Sensitivity to Reward Questionnaire (SPSRQ) as a measure of Gray's anxiety and impulsivity dimensions. Personality and Individual Differences, 31(6), 837-862.
• Weiner, B. (1985). An attributional theory of achievement motivation and emotion. Psychological Review, 92(4), 548-573.
• Weiner, B., & Graham, S. (1984). An attributional approach to emotional development. In C. Izard, J. Kagan, & R. Zajonc (Eds.), Emotion, cognition and behavior (pp. 167-191). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.