IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/sagope/v7y2017i1p2158244016669549.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Validation of the Turkish Version of the Cognitive Test Anxiety Scale–Revised

Author

Listed:
  • Sati Bozkurt
  • Gizem B. Ekitli
  • Christopher L. Thomas
  • Jerrell C. Cassady

Abstract

The current study explored the psychometric properties of the newly designed Turkish version of the Cognitive Test Anxiety Scale–Revised (CTAR). Results of an exploratory factor analysis revealed an unidimensional structure consistent with the conceptualized nature of cognitive test anxiety and previous examinations of the English version of the CTAR. Examination of the factor loadings revealed two items that were weakly related to the test anxiety construct and as such were prime candidates for removal. Confirmatory factor analyses were conducted to compare model fit for the 25- and 23-item version of the measure. Results indicated that the 23-item version of the measure provided a better fit to the data which support the removal of the problematic items in the Turkish version of the CTAR. Additional analyses demonstrated the internal consistency, test–retest reliability, concurrent validity, and gender equivalence for responses offered on the Turkish version of the measure. Results of the analysis revealed a 23-item Turkish version of the T-CTAR is a valid and reliable measure of cognitive test anxiety for use among Turkish students.

Suggested Citation

  • Sati Bozkurt & Gizem B. Ekitli & Christopher L. Thomas & Jerrell C. Cassady, 2017. "Validation of the Turkish Version of the Cognitive Test Anxiety Scale–Revised," SAGE Open, , vol. 7(1), pages 21582440166, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:7:y:2017:i:1:p:2158244016669549
    DOI: 10.1177/2158244016669549
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2158244016669549
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/2158244016669549?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. John Horn, 1965. "A rationale and test for the number of factors in factor analysis," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 30(2), pages 179-185, June.
    2. Henry Kaiser, 1970. "A second generation little jiffy," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 35(4), pages 401-415, December.
    3. Rosseel, Yves, 2012. "lavaan: An R Package for Structural Equation Modeling," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 48(i02).
    4. Choi, Seung W. & Gibbons, Laura E. & Crane, Paul K., 2011. "lordif: An R Package for Detecting Differential Item Functioning Using Iterative Hybrid Ordinal Logistic Regression/Item Response Theory and Monte Carlo Simulations," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 39(i08).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Lau Lilleholt & Ingo Zettler & Cornelia Betsch & Robert Böhm, 2023. "Development and validation of the pandemic fatigue scale," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-19, December.
    2. Zaitun Mohd Saman & Ab Hamid Siti-Azrin & Azizah Othman & Yee Cheng Kueh, 2021. "The Validity and Reliability of the Malay Version of the Cyberbullying Scale among Secondary School Adolescents in Malaysia," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(21), pages 1-12, November.
    3. Carlos Miguel Lemos & Ross Joseph Gore & Ivan Puga-Gonzalez & F LeRon Shults, 2019. "Dimensionality and factorial invariance of religiosity among Christians and the religiously unaffiliated: A cross-cultural analysis based on the International Social Survey Programme," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(5), pages 1-36, May.
    4. Attanasio, Orazio & Blundell, Richard & Conti, Gabriella & Mason, Giacomo, 2020. "Inequality in socio-emotional skills: A cross-cohort comparison," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    5. Angel M. Dzhambov & Peter Lercher & Drozdstoy Stoyanov & Nadezhda Petrova & Stoyan Novakov & Donka D. Dimitrova, 2021. "University Students’ Self-Rated Health in Relation to Perceived Acoustic Environment during the COVID-19 Home Quarantine," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(5), pages 1-21, March.
    6. Silvia Mariela Méndez-Prado & Vanessa Rodriguez & Kevin Peralta-Rizzo & Patricia Everaert & Martin Valcke, 2023. "An Assessment Tool to Identify the Financial Literacy Level of Financial Education Programs Participants’ Executed by Ecuadorian Financial Institutions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(2), pages 1-24, January.
    7. Simon Foster & Meichun Mohler-Kuo, 2020. "The proportion of non-depressed subjects in a study sample strongly affects the results of psychometric analyses of depression symptoms," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(7), pages 1-13, July.
    8. Adam P. McGuire & Candice L. Hayden & Rawda Tomoum & A. Solomon Kurz, 2022. "Development and Validation of the State Moral Elevation Scale: Assessing State-Level Elevation Across Nonclinical and Clinical Samples," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 23(6), pages 2923-2946, August.
    9. Szymon Zaleski & Rafał Michalski, 2021. "Success Factors in Sustainable Management of IT Service Projects: Exploratory Factor Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-28, April.
    10. Julia Krasko & Sabrina Intelisano & Maike Luhmann, 2022. "When Happiness is Both Joy and Purpose: The Complexity of the Pursuit of Happiness and Well-Being is Related to Actual Well-Being," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 23(7), pages 3233-3261, October.
    11. José Luis Carrasco-Sáez & Marcelo Careaga Butter & María Graciela Badilla-Quintana & Juan Molina-Farfán, 2021. "Analysis of Psychometric Properties and Validation of the Personal Learning Environments Questionnaire (B-PLE) in Higher Education Students," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-17, August.
    12. Tamara Gajić & Dragan Vukolić & Jovan Bugarčić & Filip Đoković & Ana Spasojević & Snežana Knežević & Jelena Đorđević Boljanović & Slobodan Glišić & Stefana Matović & Lóránt Dénes Dávid, 2024. "The Adoption of Artificial Intelligence in Serbian Hospitality: A Potential Path to Sustainable Practice," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(8), pages 1-26, April.
    13. Benjamin D. Schalet & Sangdon Lim & David Cella & Seung W. Choi, 2021. "Linking Scores with Patient-Reported Health Outcome Instruments:A VALIDATION STUDY AND COMPARISON OF THREE LINKING METHODS," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 86(3), pages 717-746, September.
    14. Venus, Thomas J. & Drabik, Dusan & Wesseler, Justus, 2018. "The role of a German multi-stakeholder standard for livestock products derived from non-GMO feed," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 58-67.
    15. Rikkert M. van der Lans & Ridwan Maulana & Michelle Helms-Lorenz & Carmen-María Fernández-García & Seyeoung Chun & Thelma de Jager & Yulia Irnidayanti & Mercedes Inda-Caro & Okhwa Lee & Thys Coetze, 2021. "Student Perceptions of Teaching Quality in Five Countries: A Partial Credit Model Approach to Assess Measurement Invariance," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(3), pages 21582440211, August.
    16. Dandara Gabriela Haag & Pedro Henrique Ribeiro Santiago & Davi Manzini Macedo & João Luiz Bastos & Yin Paradies & Lisa Jamieson, 2020. "Development and initial psychometric assessment of the race-related attitudes and multiculturalism scale in Australia," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(4), pages 1-19, April.
    17. Nichole Fairbrother & Fanie Collardeau & Arianne Albert & Kathrin Stoll, 2022. "Screening for Perinatal Anxiety Using the Childbirth Fear Questionnaire: A New Measure of Fear of Childbirth," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(4), pages 1-23, February.
    18. Henner Gimpel & Tobias Manner-Romberg & Fabian Schmied & Till J. Winkler, 2021. "Understanding the evaluation of mHealth app features based on a cross-country Kano analysis," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 31(4), pages 765-794, December.
    19. Nicola Magnavita & Carlo Chiorri, 2022. "Development and Validation of a New Measure of Work Annoyance Using a Psychometric Network Approach," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(15), pages 1-25, July.
    20. Jun Xie & Wataru Nozawa & Shunsuke Managi, 2023. "The nexus of top executives’ attributes, firm strategies, and outcomes: Large firms versus SMEs," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-15, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:7:y:2017:i:1:p:2158244016669549. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.