Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

Yeni Çevresel Paradigma Ölçeği İle Dağcıların Çevreye Yönelik Tutumlarının Değerlendirilmesi

Year 2018, Volume: 1 Issue: 1, 20 - 26, 15.06.2018

Abstract

Çalışmanın amacı, dağcıların çevreye
karşı tutumlarını yeni çevresel paradigma ölçeği kullanarak belirlemektir.
Dağcıların çevresel tutumunu belirleyen temel faktörleri ortaya koymak
amacıyla, “Yeni Çevresel Paradigma” (NEP) kullanılmıştır. Çalışmaya 112 erkek (
X yaş = 29.44±8.91) ve 46 kadın ( X yaş =
25.86±7.47) toplam 158 dağcı gönüllü katılmıştır. Toplanan verilerin faktör
analizine uygunluğunu belirlemek için Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) örneklem
uygunluğu testi yapılmış ve KMO ölçütünün kabul edilebilir (0.643) düzeyde
olduğu görülmüştür. Değişkenler arasındaki ilişkilerin anlamlı ve 0’dan farklı
olup olmadığı Bartlett testiyle bakılmış ve anlamlı olduğu belirlenmiştir
(p<0.001). Bu aşamalardan sonra faktör analizi gerçekleştirilmiştir.
Araştırma dağcıların çevre tutumunu belirlemeye yönelik olarak “ekolojik
tehlike” (possibility of eco-crisis), “insan üstünlüğü”
(anti-anthropocentrism), “doğanın dengesi” (fragility of nature’s balance) ve
“teknolojik üstünlük” olmak üzere dört faktör grubu saptanmıştır. Ölçek 158
dağcı için % 60’ını açıklamaktadır. Ölçeğe ilişkin elde edilen Cronbach alfa
güvenirlik katsayısı α=.65’dir. Sonuç olarak, Yeni Ekolojik Paradigma Ölçeği’nin
(YEPÖ) dağcıların çevreye yönelik tutumlarını ölçmek için geçerli ve güvenilir
bir ölçek olduğu söylenebilir. Yapılan analiz sonucunda dağcıların çevre
sorunlarına duyarlılık düzeylerinin ortalamanın üzerinde olduğu belirlenmiştir.

References

  • Alnıaçık, Ü., ve Koç, F. (2009). Yeni çevresel paradigma ölçeği ile üniversite öğrencilerinin çevreye yönelik tutumlarının değerlendirilmesi. Bölgesel Kalkınma Kongresi, Balıkesir.
  • Amerigo, M., Aragones O. I., De Frutos B., Sevillaro V., ve Cortes B. (2007). Underlying dimension of ecocentric and antropocentric environmental beliefs, The Spanish Journal of Psycology, 10(1), 99-105.
  • Bechtel, R. B., Verdugo V. C., ve Pinheiro J. Q. (1999). Environmental Belief Systems United States, Brazil and Mexico, 30 (1), 122-128.
  • Boström, C., O’Brien, K., Roos, C., ve Ekebom, J. (2006). Environmental variables explaining structural and functional diversity of seagrass macrofauna in an archipelago landscape. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, 335, 52-73.
  • Brody, S. D., Highfield, W., ve Alston, L. (2004). Does location matter? Measuring environmental perceptions of creeks in two San Antonio watersheds. Environment and Behavior, 36(2), 229-250.
  • Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2004). Veri analizi el kitabı. Ankara: Pegem A Yayıncılık.
  • Chatzifotiou, A. (2006). Environmental education, national curriculum and primary school teachers. Findings of a research study in England and possible implications upon education for Sustainable Development. The Curriculum Journal, 17(4), 367-381.
  • Cordano, M., Welcomer, S. A., ve Scherer, R. F. (2003). An analysis of the predictive validity of the New Ecological Paradigm scale. Journal of Environmental Education, 34(3), 22-28.
  • Corral-Verdugo, V., ve Armendariz, L. I. (2000). The ‘‘new environmental paradigm’’ in a Mexican community. Journal of Environmental Education, 31, 25-31.
  • Creel, M., (2005). The endangered speciess culture garden: an interdisciplinary environmental art education curriculum for at-risk children. Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi, The Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL, USA.
  • Des Jardins, J. R. (2006). Çevre etiği. Ankara: İmge Kitabevi.
  • Demirel, M., Gürbüz, B., ve Karaküçük, S. (2009). Rekreasyonel aktivitelere katılımın çevreye yönelik tutum üzerindeki etkisi ve yeni ekolojik paradigma ölçeği’nin geçerliği ve güvenirliği. SPORMETRE Beden Eğitimi ve Spor Bilimleri Dergisi, VII(2), 47-50.
  • Deng, W. J., Louie, P. K. K., Liu, W. K., Bi, X. H., Fu, J. M., ve Wong, H. M. (2006). Atmospheric levels and cytotoxicity of PAHs and heavy metals in TSP and PM2.5 at an electronic waste recycling site in southeast China. Atmos Environ, 40,6945-6955.
  • Dietz, T., Kalof, L., ve Stern, P. C. (2002). Gender, values, and environmentalism. Social Science Quarterly, 83(1), 353-364.
  • Dunlap, R. E., ve Van Liere, K. D. (1978). The “New environmental paradigm”: A proposed instrument and preliminary results. Journal of Environmental Education, 9, 10-19.
  • Dunlap, R. E., Van Liere, K. D., Mertig, A. G. ve Jones, R. E. (2000). Measuring endorsement of the new ecological paradigm: A revised NEP scale. Journal of Social Issues, 56, 425-442.
  • Erdogan, N. (2009). Testing the new ecological paradigm scale: Turkish case. African Journal of Agricultural Research, 4(10), 1023-1031.
  • Erten, S. (2007). Çevre merkezli, insan merkezli ve çevreye yönelik antipatik tutum ölçeğinin Türkçe’ye uyarlama çalışması. EJER, 28,67-74.
  • Evans, G. W., Brauchle, G., Haq, A., Stecker, R., Wong, K., ve Shapiro, E. (2007). Young children’s environment attitudes and behaviors. Environment and Behavior, 39(5), 636-659.
  • Fernandez-Manzanal, R., Rodriguez-Barreiro, L., ve Carrasquer, J. (2007). Evaluation of environmental attitudes: analysis and results of a scale applied to university students. Science Education, 91(6), 988-1009.
  • Flogaitis, E., ve Agelidou, E. (2003). Kindergarten teachers’ conceptions about nature and the environment. Environmental Education Research, 9(4), 125-136.
  • Hyun, E. (2005). How is young children’s intellectual culture of perceiving nature diff erent from adults?. Environmental Education Research, 11(2), 199-214.
  • Işıldar, G. Y. (2008). Meslek yüksekokulları boyutunda çevre eğitiminin çevreci yaklaşımlar ve davranışlar üzerindeki etkilerinin değerlendirilmesi. Türk Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 6(4), 759-778.
  • Johnson, C. Y., Bowker, J. M., ve Cordell, H. K. (2004). Ethnic variation in environmental belief and behavior: An examination of the New Ecological Paradigm in a social psychological context. Environment and Behavior, 36, 157-186.
  • Kaltenborn, B. P., ve Bjerke, T. (2002). Associations between environmental value orientations and landscape preferences. Landscape Urban Plan. 59, 1-11.
  • Kortenkamp, K. V., ve Moore, F. C. (2001). Ecocentrism and Anthropocentrism: Moral Reasoning About Ecological Commons Dilemmas. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 21, 261-272.
  • La Trobe, H. L., ve Acott, T. G. (2000). A modified NEP/DSP environmental attitudes scale. Journal of Environmental Education, 32(1), 12-20.
  • Lalonde, R., ve Jackson, E. L. (2002). The New Environmental Paradigm scale: Has it outlived its usefulness?. Journal of Environmental Education, 33, 28-36.
  • Rideout, B. E. (2005). The effect of a brief environmental problems module on endorsement of the New Ecological Paradigm in college students. The Journal of Environmental Education, 37(1), 3-11.
  • Ruff C. L., ve Olson M .A. (2009). The attitudes of interior design students towards sustainability. International Journal of Technology And Design Education, 19, 67-77.
  • Schuett, M. A., ve Ostergren, D. (2003). Environmental concern and involvement of individuals in selected voluntary associations. The Journal of Environmental Education, 34(4), 30-38.
  • Sherburn, M., ve Devlin, A. S. (2004). Academic major, environmental concern, and arboretum use. The Journal of Environmental Education, 35(2), 23-36.
  • Muderrisoglu, H. ve Altanlar, A. (2011). Attitudes and behaviors of undergraduate students toward environmental issues. International Journal of Science and Technology, 8(1), 159‐168.
  • Nikel, J. (2007). Making sense of education ‘responsibly’: fi ndings from a study of student teachers’ understanding (s) of education, sustainable development and education for sustainable development. Environmental Education Research, 12(1), 545-564.
  • Taskin, O. (2009). The environmental attitudes of Turkish senior high school students in the context of postmaterialism and the New Environmental Paradigm. International Journal of Science Education, 31(4), 481-502.
  • Tepe, H. (1999). Çevre etiği: ‘Toprak etiği’mi yoksa ‘insan etiği’mi?. Felsefelogos, 1, 41-55.
  • Thapa, B. (1999). Environmentalism: The relation of environmental attitudes and environmentally responsible behaviors among undergraduate students. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 19(5), 432-444.
  • Thapa, B. (2010). The mediation effect of outdoor recreation participation on environmental attitude-behavior correspondence. The Journal of Environmental Education, 41(3), 133-150.
  • Thompson, S. C. G., ve Barton, M. A. (1994). Ecocentric and anthrocentric attitudes toward the environment. Journal of Environmental Pschology, 14,149-157.
  • Tuna, M. (2006), Türkiye'de Çevrecilik. Ankara: Nobel Yayınları.
  • Ünder, H. (1996). Çevre Felsefesi. Ankara: Doruk Yayımcılık.
  • Vikan, A., Camino, C., ve Biaggio, A. (2004). Endorsement of the new ecological paradigm: A comparison of two Brazilian- and one Norwegian sample.(manuscrito não-publicado).

Evaluating Mountaineers’ Attitudes towards Environment by Using the New Environmental Paradigm Scale

Year 2018, Volume: 1 Issue: 1, 20 - 26, 15.06.2018

Abstract

The
aim of this study is to determine the environmental attitudes and sensitivity
levels of the mountaineers by the New Environmental Paradigm. The purpose of
this study was to test the reliability and validity of the “New Ecological
Paradigm Scale” and compare the effects of the mountaineers on individuals’
environmental attitudes. 112 male (Mage= 29.44± 8.91) and 46 female (Mage=
25.86± 7.47) totally 158 in the people doing mountaineering sports to this
study. Principle Component factor analysis was performed with 15 items in order
to identify the underlying dimensions of the “New Ecological Paradigm Scale”
(NEP). The loading matrix supported 4 factor (possibility of eco-crisis,
anti-anthropocentrism, fragility of nature’s balance, technological precedence)
structure and 13 items explains 60 % of variance. The Cronbach alfa reliability
coefficients of the scale is α=.65. It can be concluded that the NEP is a
reliable and valid instrument to assess the environmental attitudes of
mountaineers. Data analyses revealed that considerable environmental concern
exists among the respondents.

References

  • Alnıaçık, Ü., ve Koç, F. (2009). Yeni çevresel paradigma ölçeği ile üniversite öğrencilerinin çevreye yönelik tutumlarının değerlendirilmesi. Bölgesel Kalkınma Kongresi, Balıkesir.
  • Amerigo, M., Aragones O. I., De Frutos B., Sevillaro V., ve Cortes B. (2007). Underlying dimension of ecocentric and antropocentric environmental beliefs, The Spanish Journal of Psycology, 10(1), 99-105.
  • Bechtel, R. B., Verdugo V. C., ve Pinheiro J. Q. (1999). Environmental Belief Systems United States, Brazil and Mexico, 30 (1), 122-128.
  • Boström, C., O’Brien, K., Roos, C., ve Ekebom, J. (2006). Environmental variables explaining structural and functional diversity of seagrass macrofauna in an archipelago landscape. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, 335, 52-73.
  • Brody, S. D., Highfield, W., ve Alston, L. (2004). Does location matter? Measuring environmental perceptions of creeks in two San Antonio watersheds. Environment and Behavior, 36(2), 229-250.
  • Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2004). Veri analizi el kitabı. Ankara: Pegem A Yayıncılık.
  • Chatzifotiou, A. (2006). Environmental education, national curriculum and primary school teachers. Findings of a research study in England and possible implications upon education for Sustainable Development. The Curriculum Journal, 17(4), 367-381.
  • Cordano, M., Welcomer, S. A., ve Scherer, R. F. (2003). An analysis of the predictive validity of the New Ecological Paradigm scale. Journal of Environmental Education, 34(3), 22-28.
  • Corral-Verdugo, V., ve Armendariz, L. I. (2000). The ‘‘new environmental paradigm’’ in a Mexican community. Journal of Environmental Education, 31, 25-31.
  • Creel, M., (2005). The endangered speciess culture garden: an interdisciplinary environmental art education curriculum for at-risk children. Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi, The Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL, USA.
  • Des Jardins, J. R. (2006). Çevre etiği. Ankara: İmge Kitabevi.
  • Demirel, M., Gürbüz, B., ve Karaküçük, S. (2009). Rekreasyonel aktivitelere katılımın çevreye yönelik tutum üzerindeki etkisi ve yeni ekolojik paradigma ölçeği’nin geçerliği ve güvenirliği. SPORMETRE Beden Eğitimi ve Spor Bilimleri Dergisi, VII(2), 47-50.
  • Deng, W. J., Louie, P. K. K., Liu, W. K., Bi, X. H., Fu, J. M., ve Wong, H. M. (2006). Atmospheric levels and cytotoxicity of PAHs and heavy metals in TSP and PM2.5 at an electronic waste recycling site in southeast China. Atmos Environ, 40,6945-6955.
  • Dietz, T., Kalof, L., ve Stern, P. C. (2002). Gender, values, and environmentalism. Social Science Quarterly, 83(1), 353-364.
  • Dunlap, R. E., ve Van Liere, K. D. (1978). The “New environmental paradigm”: A proposed instrument and preliminary results. Journal of Environmental Education, 9, 10-19.
  • Dunlap, R. E., Van Liere, K. D., Mertig, A. G. ve Jones, R. E. (2000). Measuring endorsement of the new ecological paradigm: A revised NEP scale. Journal of Social Issues, 56, 425-442.
  • Erdogan, N. (2009). Testing the new ecological paradigm scale: Turkish case. African Journal of Agricultural Research, 4(10), 1023-1031.
  • Erten, S. (2007). Çevre merkezli, insan merkezli ve çevreye yönelik antipatik tutum ölçeğinin Türkçe’ye uyarlama çalışması. EJER, 28,67-74.
  • Evans, G. W., Brauchle, G., Haq, A., Stecker, R., Wong, K., ve Shapiro, E. (2007). Young children’s environment attitudes and behaviors. Environment and Behavior, 39(5), 636-659.
  • Fernandez-Manzanal, R., Rodriguez-Barreiro, L., ve Carrasquer, J. (2007). Evaluation of environmental attitudes: analysis and results of a scale applied to university students. Science Education, 91(6), 988-1009.
  • Flogaitis, E., ve Agelidou, E. (2003). Kindergarten teachers’ conceptions about nature and the environment. Environmental Education Research, 9(4), 125-136.
  • Hyun, E. (2005). How is young children’s intellectual culture of perceiving nature diff erent from adults?. Environmental Education Research, 11(2), 199-214.
  • Işıldar, G. Y. (2008). Meslek yüksekokulları boyutunda çevre eğitiminin çevreci yaklaşımlar ve davranışlar üzerindeki etkilerinin değerlendirilmesi. Türk Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 6(4), 759-778.
  • Johnson, C. Y., Bowker, J. M., ve Cordell, H. K. (2004). Ethnic variation in environmental belief and behavior: An examination of the New Ecological Paradigm in a social psychological context. Environment and Behavior, 36, 157-186.
  • Kaltenborn, B. P., ve Bjerke, T. (2002). Associations between environmental value orientations and landscape preferences. Landscape Urban Plan. 59, 1-11.
  • Kortenkamp, K. V., ve Moore, F. C. (2001). Ecocentrism and Anthropocentrism: Moral Reasoning About Ecological Commons Dilemmas. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 21, 261-272.
  • La Trobe, H. L., ve Acott, T. G. (2000). A modified NEP/DSP environmental attitudes scale. Journal of Environmental Education, 32(1), 12-20.
  • Lalonde, R., ve Jackson, E. L. (2002). The New Environmental Paradigm scale: Has it outlived its usefulness?. Journal of Environmental Education, 33, 28-36.
  • Rideout, B. E. (2005). The effect of a brief environmental problems module on endorsement of the New Ecological Paradigm in college students. The Journal of Environmental Education, 37(1), 3-11.
  • Ruff C. L., ve Olson M .A. (2009). The attitudes of interior design students towards sustainability. International Journal of Technology And Design Education, 19, 67-77.
  • Schuett, M. A., ve Ostergren, D. (2003). Environmental concern and involvement of individuals in selected voluntary associations. The Journal of Environmental Education, 34(4), 30-38.
  • Sherburn, M., ve Devlin, A. S. (2004). Academic major, environmental concern, and arboretum use. The Journal of Environmental Education, 35(2), 23-36.
  • Muderrisoglu, H. ve Altanlar, A. (2011). Attitudes and behaviors of undergraduate students toward environmental issues. International Journal of Science and Technology, 8(1), 159‐168.
  • Nikel, J. (2007). Making sense of education ‘responsibly’: fi ndings from a study of student teachers’ understanding (s) of education, sustainable development and education for sustainable development. Environmental Education Research, 12(1), 545-564.
  • Taskin, O. (2009). The environmental attitudes of Turkish senior high school students in the context of postmaterialism and the New Environmental Paradigm. International Journal of Science Education, 31(4), 481-502.
  • Tepe, H. (1999). Çevre etiği: ‘Toprak etiği’mi yoksa ‘insan etiği’mi?. Felsefelogos, 1, 41-55.
  • Thapa, B. (1999). Environmentalism: The relation of environmental attitudes and environmentally responsible behaviors among undergraduate students. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 19(5), 432-444.
  • Thapa, B. (2010). The mediation effect of outdoor recreation participation on environmental attitude-behavior correspondence. The Journal of Environmental Education, 41(3), 133-150.
  • Thompson, S. C. G., ve Barton, M. A. (1994). Ecocentric and anthrocentric attitudes toward the environment. Journal of Environmental Pschology, 14,149-157.
  • Tuna, M. (2006), Türkiye'de Çevrecilik. Ankara: Nobel Yayınları.
  • Ünder, H. (1996). Çevre Felsefesi. Ankara: Doruk Yayımcılık.
  • Vikan, A., Camino, C., ve Biaggio, A. (2004). Endorsement of the new ecological paradigm: A comparison of two Brazilian- and one Norwegian sample.(manuscrito não-publicado).
There are 42 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Subjects Sports Medicine
Journal Section Research Article
Authors

Fatih Bektaş

Erkan Faruk Şirin

Publication Date June 15, 2018
Acceptance Date May 1, 2018
Published in Issue Year 2018 Volume: 1 Issue: 1

Cite

APA Bektaş, F., & Şirin, E. F. (2018). Yeni Çevresel Paradigma Ölçeği İle Dağcıların Çevreye Yönelik Tutumlarının Değerlendirilmesi. Türk Spor Bilimleri Dergisi, 1(1), 20-26.

TÜBİTAK-ULAKBİM DERGİPARK AKADEMİK bünyesinde kurulan Türk Spor Bilimleri Dergisi Doçentlik başvurusu Ulusal Makale b maddesi kapsamındadır.