Data Analysis
The collected data were analyzed using the SPSS (Statistical Package for the Social Sciences) for Windows 25.0 program. Descriptive statistics of the data (frequency, percentage, mean, and standard deviation) were calculated.
CVI was calculated for each item of the scale. CVI values were calculated with the following formula: [(number of experts with rating “completely suitable” + number of experts with rating “highly suitable/minor revision required)/total number of experts]. Items with CVI values greater than 0.80 were accepted to indicate sufficient content validity.25
To test the construct validity of the scale, an exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) were conducted. The EFA and CFA were carried out on separate datasets. For the separation of these datasets, the data points were listed as even and odd numbers in SPSS. The points corresponding to odd numbers were used for EFA (n=199), while those corresponding to even numbers were used for CFA (n=199). The suitability of the data for factor analysis was tested with the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) sample adequacy test and Bartlett’s test of sphericity. A lower eigenvalue threshold of 1 and scree plots were used to confirm the number of factors. Principal component analysis was used as the factorization method, while varimax rotation, which is an orthogonal rotation method, was selected as the rotation method. The threshold of factor load values for each item was determined as a minimum of 0.40.20,24,26 As model fit indicators in CFA, χ2/df values smaller than five and RMSEA values smaller than 0.08 are accepted to show a high goodness-of-fit. It was accepted that CFI and GFI values needed to be greater than 0.09.20,27-30
The reliability of the scale was tested with Cronbach’s alpha and item analyses. The response bias of the scale was tested using Hotelling’s T². The homogeneity of the distribution of responses to each item was tested to analyze response bias. This process involved checking whether the mean scores of the items were significantly different from each other. To determine whether the scale items were suitable for obtaining a total score, Turkey’s test of additivity was carried out.31-34