Turkish Validity and Reliability of the Hikikomori (Social Withdrawal) Scale (HQ-25)


Abstract views: 326 / PDF downloads: 128

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.58600/eurjther.20232903-1596.y

Keywords:

Hikikomori, social withdrawal, validity, reliability, nursing

Abstract

Objective: This study was conducted to determine the validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the Hikikomori (HQ-25) scale.

Participants: The sample of the study consisted of 418 nursing students.

Methods: Language and content validity and exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis were used in the validity-reliability analysis of scale. In addition, Cronbach's Alpha coefficient, item-total score correlation, and test-retest reliability methods were used. CFA, it was observed that three-factor structure of scale was preserved in the Turkish sample as well. Significant correlations were found between the scale and other scales (p<0.01).

Results: As a result, it was adapted into Turkish, revealing that the scale is valid and reliable in measuring the social withdrawal behavior of individuals. It is recommended to evaluate using the scale in risky groups in terms of social withdrawal.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

References

Teo AR, Stufflebam K, Saha S, et al. Psychopathology associated with social withdrawal: Idiopathic and comorbid presentations. Psychiatry Research. 2015b; 228(1):182-183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2015.04.033

Teo AR, Chen JI, Kubo H, et al. Development and validation of the 25-item hikikomori questionnaire (HQ-25). Psychiatry Clin Neurosci. 2018;72(10):780-788. https://doi.org/10.1111/pcn.12691

Kato TA, Kanba S, Teo AR. Hikikomori : Multidimensional understanding, assessment, and future international perspectives. Psychiatry Clin Neurosci. 2019;73(8): 427-440. https://doi.org/10.1111/pcn.12895

Teo AR, Fetters MD, Stufflebam K, et al. Identification of the hikikomori syndrome of social withdrawal: Psychosocial features and treatment preferences in four countries. Int J Soc Psychiatry. 2015a;61(1): 64-72. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020764014535758

Kato TA, Kanba S, Teo AR. Defining pathological social withdrawal: proposed diagnostic criteria for hikikomori. World Psychiatry. 2020a;19(1): 116-117. https://doi.org/10.1002/wps.20705

Malaón-Amor Á, Martín-López LM, Córcoles D, González A, Bellsolà M, Teo AR, Pérez V, Bulbena A, Bergé D. A A 12-month study of the hikikomori syndrome of social withdrawal: clinical characterization and different subtypes proposal. Psychiatry Res. 2018; 270:1039-46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2018.03.060.

Kato TA, Kanba S, Teo AR. Hikikomo ri: experience in Japan and international relevance. World Psychiatry. 2018;17(1): 105-106. https://doi.org/10.1002/wps.20497. PMID: 29352535. PMCID: PMC5775123

Malagón-Amor Á, Córcoles-Martínez D, Martín-López LM, Pérez-Solà V. Hikikomori in Spain: A descriptive study. Int J Soc Psychiatry. 2015; 61(5):475-483. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020764014553003

Stip E, Thibault A, Beauchamp-Chatel A, Kisely S. Internet addiction, hikikomori syndrome, and the prodromal phase of psychosis. Front Psychiatry. 2016;7:6. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2016.00006

Esin MN. Veri toplama yöntem ve araçları & Veri toplama araçlarının güvenirlik ve geçerliği- Hemşirelikte araştırma- süreç, uygulama ve kritik. Erdoğan S, Nahcivan N, Esin MN. (Eds). 2018; (3rd.Ed., pp 216-232). Nobel Tıp Kitapevleri: Ankara;

Tabachnick BG, Fidell LS. Using multivariate statistics 2007; (5th ed.). Allyn & Bacon/Pearson Education.

Comrey AL, Lee HB. A first course in factor analysis (2nd ed.). 1992. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Erkuş A. Psikolojide ölçme ve ölçek geliştirme-I.. (2nd Ed.). Ankara: Pegem Akademi; 2014;ISBN: 978-605-364-311-1

Tateno M, Teo AR, Ukai W, et al. Internet addiction, smartphone addiction, and hikikomori trait in Japanese young adult: Social ısolation and social network. Front Psychiatry. 2019;10: 455. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2019.00455

Zimet GD, Dahlem NW, Zimet SG, Farley GK. The Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support. Journal of Personality Assessment 1988;52:30-41.

Eker D, Arkar H. Factorial structure, validity, and reliability of the multidimensional scale of perceived social support. Türk Psikoloji Dergisi. 1995;10(34):17-25.

Eker D, Arkar H, Yaldız H. Çok boyutlu algılanan sosyal destek ölçeğinin gözden geçirilmiş formunun faktör yapısı, geçerlik ve güvenirliği. Türk Psikoloji Dergisi. 2001;12:17–25.

Erpay T, Atik G. Tek başına olmayı tercih etme ölçeği: Türkçe formunun geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Kastamonu Education Journal. 2019;27(6):2493-2500. https://doi.org/10.24106/kefdergi.3371

Burger JM..Individual differences in preference for solitude. Journal of Research in Personality. 1995;29(1): 85-108. https://doi.org/10.1006/jrpe.1995.1005

Doğan T, Akıncı-Çötok N, Göçet-Tekin E. Reliability and validity of the Turkish Version of the UCLA Loneliness Scale (ULS-8) among university students. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences. 2011;15:2058–2062. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.04.053

Gatignon H. Statistical analysis of management data. 2011; (pp.267-268). London: Springer;

Ergin DY. Ölçeklerde geçerlik ve güvenirlik. Mustafa Kemal Üniversitesi Atatürk Eğitim Fakültesi Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi. 1995;7:125-148.

Ercan İ, Kan İ. Ölçeklerde güvenirlik ve geçerlik. Uludağ Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Dergisi. 2004;30(3):211-216.

Akgül A. Tıbbi araştırmalarda istatistiksel analiz teknikleri ve SPSS uygulamaları. 2003;(3rd.Ed., pp 86-92). Ankara: Emek Ofset;

Şencan H. Sosyal ve davranışsal ölçümlerde güvenilirlik ve geçerlilik. 2005; (pp 408-410). Seçkin Yayıncılık:Ankara;

Özdamar K. Paket programlar ile istatistiksel veri analizi. 2004; (5th Ed., pp 345-500). Kaan Kitabevi: Eskişehir

Michalak EE, Murray G. Collaborative research team to study psychosocial issues in biissuesdisorder (CREST.BD). Development of the Qol.BD: QoLisorder-specific scale to assess quality of life in bipolar disorder. Bipolar Disorders. 2010;12:727–740.

Çapik C. (2014). Geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışmalarında doğrulayıcı faktör analizinin kullanımı. Anadolu Hemşirelik ve Sağlık Bilimleri Dergisi. 2014; 17(3):196-205.

Gürbüz S, Şahin F. Sosyal bilimlerde araştırma yöntemleri. Seçkin Yayıncılık:Ankara; 2015.

Hu L-t, Bentler PM. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, A Multidisciplinary Journal. 1999;6(1):1-55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118

Kline RB. Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. 2005. London: Sage.

Karagöz Y. SPSS ve AMOS uygulamalı istatistiksel analizler, Nobel Akademik Yayıncılık: Ankara; 2016.

Çokluk Ö, Şekercioğlu, G, Büyüköztürk Ş. Sosyal bilimler için çok değişkenli istatistik: SPSS ve LISREL uygulamaları. 2010. Ankara: Pegem Akademi Yayıncılık.

Dempsey PA., Dempsey AD. Using nursing research–process. Critical evaluation and utilization. 2000. 5th Edition. Lippincott. Philadelphia-New York.

Polit DF, Hungler BP. Nursing research: Principles and methods. 2001 (4th Ed., pp 597-607). J.B. Lippincott Company. Philadelphia.

Büyüköztürk Ş. Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı. (2015). (21. Baskı). Ankara: Pegem Yayınları

Tavşancıl E. Tutumların ölçülmesi ve SPSS ile veri analizi.2019. Ankara: Nobel Yayıncılık

Downloads

Published

2023-06-08

How to Cite

Kaya, R., Tanrıverdi, D., & Özgüç, S. (2023). Turkish Validity and Reliability of the Hikikomori (Social Withdrawal) Scale (HQ-25). European Journal of Therapeutics, 29(3), 469–479. https://doi.org/10.58600/eurjther.20232903-1596.y

Issue

Section

Original Articles