• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

浪漫关系破坏量表的土耳其语改编:效度与信度研究

Turkish Adaptation of Romantic Relationship Sabotage Scale: Validity and Reliability Study.

作者信息

Maden Özgür, Kahraman Burcu Bakar, Eroğlu Meliha Zengin

机构信息

University of Health Sciences, Sultan 2. Abdülhamid Khan Training and Research Hospital, Mental Health and Diseases Clinic, Istanbul, Turkey.

出版信息

Psychiatry Clin Psychopharmacol. 2023 Mar 1;33(1):48-57. doi: 10.5152/pcp.2023.22500. eCollection 2023 Mar.

DOI:10.5152/pcp.2023.22500
PMID:38764530
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11082595/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study is to perform the Turkish validity and reliability analyzes of the Romantic Relationship Sabotage Scale, which was developed to reveal why couples sabotage the relationship in romantic relationships, and to adapt this scale to Turkish culture.

METHODS

The study group consisted of 495 individuals who did not have any psychiatric disorders and had a romantic relationship. The similarity of the results obtained with the factor analysis with the original scale showed that the scale provided construct validity.

RESULTS

For the criterion correlation validity of the scale, the correlations between the Turkish Romantic Relationship Sabotage Scale-total score and Perceived Romantic Relationship Quality Scale ( = -.384, < .05), The Love Attitude Scale (altruistic love  = .163, < .05; friendship love  = -.151, < .05; passionate love  = -.435, < .05; practical love  = .220, < .05; game-playing love  = .213, < .05; possessive-dependent love  = .439, < .05), and Self-handicapping Scale ( = .443, < .05) were calculated. The reliability coefficient for the stability of the scale, which was administered to 102 participants twice with an interval of 4 weeks, was found to be 0.75, revealing that the scale was stable. The Cronbach's internal consistency coefficient on the scale was .81. There was a significant difference between the Turkish form of the Romantic Relationship Sabotage Scale-total score scores, the mean scores of defensiveness, and lack of relationship skills according to gender ( < .05).

CONCLUSION

This study confirms the validity and factor structure of the Turkish version of the Romantic Relationship Sabotage Scale, which is an acceptable tool that can be used to measure the sabotage levels of romantic relationships in individuals.

摘要

背景

本研究旨在对浪漫关系破坏量表进行土耳其语的效度和信度分析,该量表旨在揭示情侣在浪漫关系中破坏关系的原因,并使其适应土耳其文化。

方法

研究组由495名没有任何精神疾病且处于浪漫关系中的个体组成。通过因素分析获得的结果与原始量表的相似性表明该量表具有结构效度。

结果

为了评估量表的效标关联效度,计算了土耳其语浪漫关系破坏量表总分与感知浪漫关系质量量表(r = -.384,p <.05)、爱情态度量表(利他之爱r =.163,p <.05;友谊之爱r = -.151,p <.05;激情之爱r = -.435,p <.05;实用之爱r =.220,p <.05;游戏之爱r =.213,p <.05;占有 - 依赖之爱r =.439,p <.05)以及自我设限量表(r =.443,p <.05)之间的相关性。对102名参与者进行了为期4周的两次施测,以评估量表稳定性的信度系数为0.75,表明该量表具有稳定性。量表的Cronbach内部一致性系数为.81。根据性别,浪漫关系破坏量表土耳其语版总分得分以及防御性和缺乏关系技能平均得分之间存在显著差异(p <.05)。

结论

本研究证实了浪漫关系破坏量表土耳其语版的效度和因素结构,该量表是一种可接受的工具,可用于测量个体浪漫关系中的破坏水平。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4dcf/11082595/028bbc2b01e3/pcp-33-1-48_f001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4dcf/11082595/028bbc2b01e3/pcp-33-1-48_f001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4dcf/11082595/028bbc2b01e3/pcp-33-1-48_f001.jpg

相似文献

1
Turkish Adaptation of Romantic Relationship Sabotage Scale: Validity and Reliability Study.浪漫关系破坏量表的土耳其语改编:效度与信度研究
Psychiatry Clin Psychopharmacol. 2023 Mar 1;33(1):48-57. doi: 10.5152/pcp.2023.22500. eCollection 2023 Mar.
2
The relationship sabotage scale: an evaluation of factor analyses and constructive validity.关系破坏量表:因子分析与构建效度评估。
BMC Psychol. 2021 Sep 19;9(1):146. doi: 10.1186/s40359-021-00644-0.
3
The scale of myths of romantic love: Evidence of validity and reliability of a brief scale in Peru.浪漫爱情神话的规模:秘鲁一个简短量表的效度和信度的证据。
J Marital Fam Ther. 2025 Jan;51(1):e12741. doi: 10.1111/jmft.12741. Epub 2024 Sep 18.
4
Cultural adaptation and Turkish version of Physical Activity Scale for Individuals with Physical Disabilities in individuals with spinal cord injury: a reliability and validity study.脊髓损伤个体中身体残疾者身体活动量表的文化适应及土耳其语版本:一项信效度研究
Disabil Rehabil. 2022 Oct;44(21):6414-6423. doi: 10.1080/09638288.2021.1964624. Epub 2021 Aug 20.
5
Reliability and Validity Study of the Turkish Version of the Perceptions of Love and Sex Scale.《爱情与性观念量表》土耳其语版本的信效度研究
Alpha Psychiatry. 2022 Nov 1;23(6):286-291. doi: 10.5152/alphapsychiatry.2022.22850. eCollection 2022 Nov.
6
Evaluation the validity and reliability of the perceived medical school stress scale in Turkish medical students.评估感知医学生压力量表在土耳其医学生中的有效性和可靠性。
PLoS One. 2023 Aug 11;18(8):e0288769. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0288769. eCollection 2023.
7
Validation of the Turkish version of the Quebec back pain disability scale for patients with low back pain.针对腰痛患者的魁北克腰痛残疾量表土耳其语版本的验证
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2009 Mar 15;34(6):E219-24. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181971e2d.
8
Reliability and validity of Family Caregiver Quality of Life Scale in heart failure.心力衰竭患者家庭照顾者生活质量量表的信效度研究
Turk Gogus Kalp Damar Cerrahisi Derg. 2018 Jan 9;26(1):73-80. doi: 10.5606/tgkdc.dergisi.2018.14998. eCollection 2018 Jan.
9
The reliability and validity of the Vertigo Symptom Scale and the Vertigo Dizziness Imbalance Questionnaires in a Turkish patient population with benign paroxysmal positional vertigo.眩晕症状量表和眩晕头晕失衡问卷在土耳其良性阵发性位置性眩晕患者群体中的信度和效度。
J Vestib Res. 2008;18(2-3):159-70.
10
Child-Adolescent Teasing Scale: psychometric properties of the Turkish version.儿童青少年取笑量表:土耳其语版本的心理测量特性
Child Adolesc Ment Health. 2018 Sep;23(3):283-290. doi: 10.1111/camh.12250. Epub 2017 Nov 7.

引用本文的文献

1
The Theory of Relationship Sabotage: A Preliminary Evaluation of Conceptual Models Expanding on Attachment and Goal-Orientation Frameworks.关系破坏理论:基于依恋和目标导向框架扩展的概念模型的初步评估
Behav Sci (Basel). 2025 Aug 12;15(8):1091. doi: 10.3390/bs15081091.

本文引用的文献

1
Development of relationship satisfaction across the life span: A systematic review and meta-analysis.一生中关系满意度的发展:系统评价与荟萃分析。
Psychol Bull. 2021 Oct;147(10):1012-1053. doi: 10.1037/bul0000342. Epub 2021 Dec 20.
2
The relationship sabotage scale: an evaluation of factor analyses and constructive validity.关系破坏量表:因子分析与构建效度评估。
BMC Psychol. 2021 Sep 19;9(1):146. doi: 10.1186/s40359-021-00644-0.
3
Adult attachment and trust in romantic relationships.成人依恋与浪漫关系中的信任。
Curr Opin Psychol. 2019 Feb;25:148-151. doi: 10.1016/j.copsyc.2018.08.004. Epub 2018 Aug 3.
4
Attachment, conflict and relationship quality: laboratory-based and clinical insights.依附、冲突与关系质量:基于实验室和临床的洞察。
Curr Opin Psychol. 2019 Feb;25:127-131. doi: 10.1016/j.copsyc.2018.04.002. Epub 2018 Apr 14.
5
Are adult attachment styles categorical or dimensional? A taxometric analysis of general and relationship-specific attachment orientations.成人依恋风格是分类的还是维度的?一般和关系特定依恋取向的分类分析。
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2015 Aug;109(2):354-68. doi: 10.1037/pspp0000027. Epub 2015 Jan 5.
6
Adolescent romantic relationships.青少年恋爱关系。
Annu Rev Psychol. 2009;60:631-52. doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.60.110707.163459.