Araştırma Makalesi


DOI :10.26650/SJ.2024.44.2.0076   IUP :10.26650/SJ.2024.44.2.0076    Tam Metin (PDF)

Üniversitelerde Sosyal Adalet Algısı Ölçeğinin Geliştirilmesi: Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Çalışması

Onur BalıNesip DemirbilekHasan Demirtaş

Bu araştırmanın amacı, üniversite öğrencilerinin öğrenim gördükleri üniversitelere yönelik sosyal adalet algılarını ölçmeyi amaçlayan, geçerli ve güvenilir bir ölçme aracı geliştirmektir. Araştırmanın verileri Bingöl Üniversitesi’nde öğrenim görmekte olan önlisans ve lisans öğrencilerinden elde edilmiştir. Araştırmada açımlayıcı ve doğrulayıcı faktör analizleri için iki farklı örneklem grubu kullanılmıştır. Araştırmanın birinci örneklem grubunda 602 öğrenci, ikinci örneklem grubunda ise 591 öğrenci bulunmaktadır. Yapılan açımlayıcı faktör analizi sonucunda, 25 madde ve üç faktörlü bir yapıya ulaşılmış ve bu yapının sosyal adalet algısına ilişkin varyansın yaklaşık %71’ini açıkladığı tespit edilmiştir. Doğrulayıcı faktör analizi sonucunda ise, üç faktörlü yapıya ilişkin ulaşılan model uyumu değerlerinin kabul edilebilir ve iyi düzeyde olduğu (x2 /sd = 3.942, p = .000, RMR = .08, SRMR = .04, GFI = .91, AGFI = .88, NFI = .94, NNFI = .95, CFI = .95, RMSEA = .06) tespit edilmiştir. Üç boyutlu yapıya ilişkin ulaşılan Cronbach’s Alpha iç tutarlık katsayıları ise, ölçeğin eşitlik, adalet ve destekleme alt boyutları için sırasıyla .93, .94 ve .88 olarak, ölçeğin tamamı için ise .96 olarak tespit edilmiştir. Araştırma bulgularından hareketle, “Üniversitelerde Sosyal Adalet Algısı Ölçeği’nin”, üniversite öğrencilerinin öğrenim gördükleri üniversitelere yönelik sosyal adalet algılarını ölçmede kullanılabilecek, geçerli ve güvenilir bir ölçme aracı olduğu sonucuna ulaşılmıştır. 

DOI :10.26650/SJ.2024.44.2.0076   IUP :10.26650/SJ.2024.44.2.0076    Tam Metin (PDF)

Development of the Scale of Social Justice Perception in Universities: Validity And Reliability Study

Onur BalıNesip DemirbilekHasan Demirtaş

The purpose of this research is to develop a valid and reliable measurement tool that measures the social justice perceptions of university students towards their universities. The data of the research were collected from associate and undergraduate students studying at Bingöl University. Two different samples were used for the exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses. There were 602 students in the first sample and 591 students in the second sample of the study. As a result of the exploratory factor analysis, a three-dimensional structure with 25 items was reached, and this structure explained approximately 71% of the variance in social justice perception. As a result of the confirmatory factor analysis, it was determined that the goodnessof-fit indices of the three-dimensional structure were at acceptable and good levels (x2 /df = 3.942, p = .000, RMR = .08, SRMR = .04, GFI = .91, AGFI = .88, NFI = .94, NNFI = .95, CFI = .95, RMSEA = .06). Cronbach’s Alpha internal consistency coefficients for the three-dimensional structure were determined as .93, .94 and .88 for the equality, justice and support dimensions of the scale, respectively, and .96 for the whole scale. Based on the research findings, it was concluded that the “Social Justice Perception in Universities Scale” is a valid and reliable measurement tool that can be used to measure the social justice perceptions of university students towards the universities they study at.


GENİŞLETİLMİŞ ÖZET


Introduction

The welfare of the society is related to the distribution of social resources among the members of the society. Questions about how social resources and services should be distributed among individuals are connected with the concept of social justice (Çoban Kaynak, 2017). John Ryan, an American Catholic priest, was the first one using the concept of social justice (Han ve Demirbilek, 2022). Ryan was also the first to use the concept of minimum wage. According to Ryan (1945), social justice is the regulation of the relations between individuals and the society for maintaining the collective good. In short, social justice can be expressed as the fair distribution of blessings and burdens in society. In this context, the presence of a social opinion that there is a fair share in the society is an indicator of the existence of social justice (Bell, 2007; Sunal, 2011).

Smith (2018) stated that concepts such as social cohesion, equality and fairness come to the fore in ensuring social justice and that the concept of social justice can be approached from different points of view. At this point, it can be said that since individuals are not equal at the beginning, equal distribution of resources can maintain inequality among individuals, but distribution of resources at different levels (fairly) in line with the needs of individuals can eliminate the inequality among individuals over time (Smith, 2018). However, social justice is a concept that expresses more than the distribution of resources among individuals and emphasises community rather than individuality (Turhan, 2007).

When the literature is examined, it is seen that the concept of social justice in education is tried to be explained by associating it with concepts such as multiculturalism, justice, equality and democratic society (Tomul, 2009). However, the difficulty in defining the concepts of justice and social justice is also seen in the definition of the concept of social justice in education. In general, social justice in education can be achieved if each individual has an education that is appropriate to his or her abilities and needs. (Polat, 2007). Social justice in education aims to reduce or eliminate the negative effects of individual differences on the success of students in the educational processes (Ocak & Yamaç, 2011). Bates (2006) positioned social justice at the centre of educational processes and argued that social justice should also be at the centre of educational administration practises.

When institutions are managed according to the principles of social justice, they are more adopted by people and people’s commitment to the institution increases. This is also true for universities. The higher education period is one of the most important phases of students’ life. The higher education period is not only a learning process but also a common living place where students experience and learn life as adults, have a profession, and interact with people from different cultures and environments. This common living place should be managed fairly and the resources should be shared fairly among the students. This can be possible with the establishment of social justice in all processes at the universities. Elimination of the negativities that may be caused by social injustice can only be possible with a good understanding of the concept of social justice. 

In a literature review of the available measures of social justice perception, it is noted that, although a limited number of scales have been developed to assess this perception, none of them appear to be intended to examine the social justice perceptions of university students towards their university. (Cırık, 2015; Demirdağ, 2017; Karacan, Bağlıbel & Bindak, 2015; Turhan, 2007). For this reason, there is a need for a valid and reliable measurement tool to be used in scientific studies on the subject. In line with this need, this research aims to develop a valid and reliable measurement tool to determine the social justice perceptions of university students towards their university.

Method

This study was carried out with an exploratory sequential design in a mixed method in which qualitative and quantitative research methods were used together. In the exploratory sequential design, after the qualitative data are collected and analysed, the quantitative stage of the research is carried out based on the qualitative data (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2018). 

The study was carried out with the data collected from two different samples. The first sample of the study consists of 602 and the second sample consists of 591 undergraduate and associate degree students studying at different faculties and colleges of Bingöl University. While determining both samples, convenient sampling method was used as it provides convenience in time, cost and data collection process (Büyüköztürk, Kılıç Çakmak, Akgün, Karadeniz, & Demirel, 2014).  

In the development process of the items, the theoretical background of the concept of social justice was determined by examining the similar studies in the literature (Bell, 2007; Boyles, Carusi, & Attick, 2009; Connell, 1993; Çetin, 2015; Çoban Kaynak, 2017; Demirbilek, Atila & Korkmaz, 2021; Polat, 2007; Schulz, 2007; Todd, 2015; Torres Harding, Siers, & Olson, 2012). In addition to these studies, other measurement tools aimed at determining the perception of social justice were examined (Cırık, 2015; Demirdağ, 2017; Karacan, Bağlıbel, & Bindak, 2015; Ludlow, Enterline, & CochranSmith, 2008; Torres Harding et al., 2012). Considering these studies, practises that could contribute to social justice in universities were determined and these were used in the preparation of the draft scale items. After the literature review, a draft scale consisting of 68 items was prepared. This form was simplified with expert reviews, and a final form consisting of 34 items was reached. 

Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses were used to test the construct validity of the scale, and Cronbach’s alpha internal consistency coefficients were calculated for reliability.

Findings

The construct validity of the scale was first tested with exploratory factor analysis. Exploratory factor analysis was performed with 34 items and a sample of 602 students. The KMO and Bartlett tests were performed to check the sampling adequacy (KMO = .976; x2 = 19611.249; df = 561; p = .000). As a result of the factor analysis, a structure consisting of 19 items in three factors was reached, and these three factors explained 71.30% of the variance regarding the perception of social justice. The factor loadings of the items ranged from .58 to .87, the communalities of the items were between .58 and .83, and the item-total correlation values were between .54 and .82. These three factors were named as “equality”, “fairness” and “support”.

As a result of the confirmatory factor analysis performed with the data of 591 students, the goodness of fit indices for the scale were reached as x2 /df = 3.942, p = .000, RMR = .08, SRMR = .04, GFI = .91, AGFI = .88, NFI = .94, NNFI = .95, CFI = .95, RMSEA = .06. When the achieved values are compared with the reference values for the goodness of fit indices in the literature, it can be said that the scale has high construct validity. 

The reliability of the scale was examined with Cronbach’s Alpha internal consistency coefficients calculated using both exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses data. The Alpha coefficients of the entire scale and its dimensions were calculated between .88 and .96. In this respect, these Alpha coefficients can be inferred as evidence of the scale’s reliability.

Conclusion

This research aims to develop a valid and reliable scale to measure the social justice perceptions of university students towards their university. As a result of the analyses, significant results were reached regarding the validity and reliability of the scale. As a result, the Social Justice in Universities Scale was found to be a valid and reliable measurement tool that can be used to measure university students’ social justice perceptions regarding their universities. 

The increase in the scale scores is interpreted as the students’ perception of social justice is increasing, and the decrease in the scale scores is interpreted as the students’ perception of social justice is diminishing. There is no reverse-scored item or dimension in the scale.


PDF Görünüm

Referanslar

  • Ayalon, H., Grodsky, E., Gamoran, A., & Yogev, A. (2008). Diversification and inequality in higher education: A comparison of Israel and the United States. Sociology of Education, 81 (3), 211-241. google scholar
  • Balı, O. (2022). Eğitim ve öğrenme hakkı. H. Demirtaş (Ed.) içinde. Öğretmen eğitiminde etik ve ahlak (ss. 55-76). Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık. google scholar
  • Bates, R. (2006). Educational administration and social justice. Education, citizenship and social justice, 1(2), 141-156. google scholar
  • Bell, L. A. (2007). Theoretical foundations for social justice education. M. Adams, L. A. Bell, & P. Griffin (Eds.), Teaching for diversity and social justice içinde (ss. 1-14). New York: Routledge/ Taylor & Francis Group. google scholar
  • Boyles, D., Carusi, T., & Attick, D. (2009). Historical and critical interpretations of social justice. W. Ayers, T. Quinn, & D. Stoval (Ed.), Handbook of social justice in education içinde (s. 30-42). New York: Routledge. google scholar
  • Bursa, S. (2015). Sosyal bilgiler öğretmenlerinin sosyal adalet algı ve deneyimleri (Yüksek Lisans Tezi). Anadolu Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Eskişehir. google scholar
  • Büyüköztürk, Ş., Kılıç Çakmak, E., Akgün, Ö. E., Karadeniz, Ş., & Demirel, F. (2014). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri (16. Baskı). Ankara: Pegem Akademi. google scholar
  • Cırık, İ. (2015). Psychometric characteristics of the social justice scale’s Turkish form and a structural equation modeling. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 61, 23-44. google scholar
  • Comrey, A. L. (1988). Factor analytic methods of scale development in personality and clinical psychology. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 56, 754-761. google scholar
  • Comrey, A. L., & Lee, H. B. (1992). A first course in factor analysis (2. baskı). New Jersey: Lawrance Erlbaum Associates. google scholar
  • Connell, R. W. (1993). Schools and social justice. Philadelphia: Temple University Press. google scholar
  • Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage. google scholar
  • Çetin, H. (2015). Sosyal adalet, sosyal hizmetler ve bütçe. Toplum ve Sosyal Hizmet, 26(2), 145-157. google scholar
  • Çoban Kaynak, R. (2017). Sosyal adalet, eşitlik ve sosyal hizmet. Gümüşhane Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Dergisi, 6(4), 252-260. google scholar
  • Demirbilek, N., Atila, F., & Korkmaz, C. (2021). The concept of social justice from the perspective of university students. Education Quarterly Reviews, 4(3), 89-99. google scholar
  • Demirdağ, S. (2017). Çeşitlilik ve sosyal adalet ölçeğinin geliştirilmesi. Karaelmas Journal of Educational Sciences, 5(2017), 273-284. google scholar
  • DeVellis, R. F. (2003). Scale development: Theory and applications (2. baskı). Londra: Sage Publications. google scholar
  • Eren, E. (2020). Yeni Tip Koronavirüs’ün Türk eğitim politikaları uygulamalarına etkisi: Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı’nın ve Yükseköğretim Kurulu’nun yeni düzenlemeleri. Yükseköğretim Dergisi, 10(2), 153-162. google scholar
  • Erkut, E. (2020). Covid-19 sonrası yükseköğretim. Yükseköğretim Dergisi, 10(2), 125-133. google scholar
  • Ferreira, F. H., & Gignoux, J. (2010). Inequality of oppotunity for education: The case of Turkey. Washington: The World Bank. google scholar
  • Gökpınar, M. (2008). Adalet teorileri perspektifinden 1982 anayasamız. Türkiye Barolar Birliği Dergisi, (77), 214-235. google scholar
  • Gutfreund, S. (2006). Doing justice justice: Distinguishing social justice from distributive justice and the implications for bioethics (Yüksek Lisans Tezi). McGill University Department of Philosophy, Montreal, Kanada. google scholar
  • Güçlü, N., & Bayrakçı, M. (2004). Amerika Birleşik Devletleri eğitim sistemi ve hiçbir çocuğun eğitimsiz kalmaması reformu. Gazi Üniversitesi Kırşehir Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 5(2), 51-64. google scholar
  • Hair, J. F. Jr., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2014). Multivariate data analysis (7. Basım). Essex, Birleşik Krallık: Pearson. google scholar
  • Han, F., & Demirbilek, N. (2022). Perceptions of university students on the concept of social justice: A metaphor study, E-International Journal of Educational Research, 13(2), 163-179 google scholar
  • İlhan, M., & Güler, N. (2017). Likert tipi ölçeklerde olumsuz madde ve kategori sayısı sorunu: Rasch modeli ile bir inceleme. Journal of Measurement and Evaluation in Education and Psychology, 8(3), 321-343. google scholar
  • İnan, M., & Demir, M. (2018). Eğitimde fırsat eşitliği ve kamu politikaları: Türkiye üzerine bir değerlendirme. Ankara Hacı Bayram Veli Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 20(2), 337-359. google scholar
  • Kaiser, H. F., & Rice, J. (1974). Little Jiffy, Mark IV. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 34(1), 111-117. google scholar
  • Karacan, H., Bağlıbel, M., & Bindak, R. (2015). Okullarda sosyal adalet ölçeğinin geliştirilmesi. Mustafa Kemal Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 12(31), 54-68. google scholar
  • Karadağ, E., & Yücel, C. (2020). Yeni tip Koronavirüs pandemisi döneminde üniversitelerde uzaktan eğitim: Lisans öğrencileri kapsamında bir değerlendirme çalışması. Yükseköğretim Dergisi, 10(2), 181-192. google scholar
  • Kline, R. B. (2016). Principals and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling (4. Baskı). New York: Guilford. google scholar
  • Kondakçı, Y., & Beycioğlu, K. (2020). Social justice in Turkish education system: Issues and Interventions. In Papa, R. (Ed.) Handbook on promoting social justice in education (ss. 303-329). Springer, Cham. google scholar
  • Ludlow, L. H., Enterline, S. E., & Cochran-Smith, M. (2008). Learning to teach for social justice-beliefs scale: An application of rasch measurement principles. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 40(4), 194-214. google scholar
  • Meydan, C. H., & Şeşen, H. (2011). Yapısal eşitlik modellemesi AMOS uygulamaları. Ankara: Detay Yayıncılık. google scholar
  • Miller, D. (2001). Principles of social justice. Massachusetts: Harvard University Press google scholar
  • Ocak, G., & Yamaç, A. (2011). Öğretmen ve velilerin kayıt bölgeleri uygulamasına yönelik tutumlarının incelenmesi. Dumlupınar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, (31), 357-374. google scholar
  • Özdemir, M., & Fidan, M. (2016). Eğitimde sosyal adalet liderliğinin kavramsal gelişimi: Gerçekler ve düşler. XV. Uluslararası Katılımlı Sınıf Öğretmenliği Sempozyumu (11-14 Mayıs 2016), Muğla Sıtkı Koçman Üniversitesi. google scholar
  • Özdemir, M., & Kütküt, B. (2015). Sosyal adalet liderliği ölçeğinin (SALÖ) geliştirilmesi: Geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Kırşehir Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi (KEFAD). 16(3), 201-218. google scholar
  • Pallant, J. (2010). SPSS survival manual (4. Baskı). Berkshire, İngiltere: McGraw-Hill. google scholar
  • Polat, S. Y. (2007). Eğitim politikalarının sosyal adalet açısından sonuçları konusunda yönetici ve öğretmen görüşleri (Doktora Tezi). Ankara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara. google scholar
  • Ryan, J. A. (1945). Roosevelt and social justice. The Review of Politics, 7(3), 297-305. google scholar
  • Schulz, D. (2007). Stimulating social justice theory for service learning practice. J. Z. Calderon (Ed.). Race, poverty, and social justice, multidisciplinary perspectives through service learning (ss. 23-35). Stylus. google scholar
  • Seçer, İ. (2013). SPSS ve LISREL için pratik veri analizi analiz ve raporlaştırma. Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık. google scholar
  • Smith, E. (2018). Key issues in education and social justice (2. baskı). Londra: Sage. google scholar
  • Sunal, O. (2011). Sosyal politika: Sosyal adalet açısından kuramsal bir değerlendirme. Ankara Üniversitesi SBF Dergisi, 66(3), 283-305. google scholar
  • Şimşek, Ö. F. (2007). Yapısal eşitlik modellemesine giriş: Temel ilkeler ve LISREL uygulamaları. Ankara: Ekinoks Yayıncılık. google scholar
  • Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2013). Using multivariate statistics (6. baskı). Boston: Pearson. google scholar
  • Tansel, A. (2015). Inequality of opportunities of educational achievement in Turkey over time. IZA Discussion Papers, No. 9005. Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA), Bonn. Received from https:// www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/110732/1/dp9005.pdf google scholar
  • Tinsley, H. E. A., & Tinsley, D. J. (1987). Uses of factor analysis in counseling psychology research. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 414-424. google scholar
  • Todd, S. (2015). Social justice and social action: Organizing for change. L. Dominelli (Ed.), International encyclopedia of social and behavioral sciences içinde. Londra: Elsevier. google scholar
  • Tomul, E. (2009). İlköğretim okullarındaki sosyal adalet uygulamalarına ilişkin yönetici görüşleri. Eğitim ve Bilim, 34(152), 126-137. google scholar
  • Torres-Harding, S. R., Siers, B., & Olson, B. D. (2012). Development and psychometric evaluation of the social justice scale (SJS). American Journal of Community Psychology, 50(1-2), 77-88. doi:10.1007/s10464-011-9478-2 google scholar
  • Turhan, M. (2007). Genel ve mesleki lise yöneticilerinin etik liderlik davranışlarının okullardaki sosyal adalet üzerindeki etkisi (Doktora Tezi). Fırat Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Elazığ. google scholar
  • Türk Dil Kurumu. (2021). Güncel Türkçe sözlük. https://sozluk.gov.tr/ adresinden erişilmiştir. google scholar
  • Yamamoto, G. T., & Altun, D. (2020). Coronavirüs ve çevrimiçi (online) eğitimin önlenemeyen yükselişi. Üniversite Araştırmaları Dergisi, 3(1), 25-34. google scholar

Atıflar

Biçimlendirilmiş bir atıfı kopyalayıp yapıştırın veya seçtiğiniz biçimde dışa aktarmak için seçeneklerden birini kullanın


DIŞA AKTAR



APA

Balı, O., Demirbilek, N., & Demirtaş, H. (2025). Üniversitelerde Sosyal Adalet Algısı Ölçeğinin Geliştirilmesi: Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Çalışması. İstanbul Üniversitesi Sosyoloji Dergisi, 44(2), 825-847. https://doi.org/10.26650/SJ.2024.44.2.0076


AMA

Balı O, Demirbilek N, Demirtaş H. Üniversitelerde Sosyal Adalet Algısı Ölçeğinin Geliştirilmesi: Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Çalışması. İstanbul Üniversitesi Sosyoloji Dergisi. 2025;44(2):825-847. https://doi.org/10.26650/SJ.2024.44.2.0076


ABNT

Balı, O.; Demirbilek, N.; Demirtaş, H. Üniversitelerde Sosyal Adalet Algısı Ölçeğinin Geliştirilmesi: Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Çalışması. İstanbul Üniversitesi Sosyoloji Dergisi, [Publisher Location], v. 44, n. 2, p. 825-847, 2025.


Chicago: Author-Date Style

Balı, Onur, and Nesip Demirbilek and Hasan Demirtaş. 2025. “Üniversitelerde Sosyal Adalet Algısı Ölçeğinin Geliştirilmesi: Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Çalışması.” İstanbul Üniversitesi Sosyoloji Dergisi 44, no. 2: 825-847. https://doi.org/10.26650/SJ.2024.44.2.0076


Chicago: Humanities Style

Balı, Onur, and Nesip Demirbilek and Hasan Demirtaş. Üniversitelerde Sosyal Adalet Algısı Ölçeğinin Geliştirilmesi: Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Çalışması.” İstanbul Üniversitesi Sosyoloji Dergisi 44, no. 2 (Feb. 2025): 825-847. https://doi.org/10.26650/SJ.2024.44.2.0076


Harvard: Australian Style

Balı, O & Demirbilek, N & Demirtaş, H 2025, 'Üniversitelerde Sosyal Adalet Algısı Ölçeğinin Geliştirilmesi: Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Çalışması', İstanbul Üniversitesi Sosyoloji Dergisi, vol. 44, no. 2, pp. 825-847, viewed 4 Feb. 2025, https://doi.org/10.26650/SJ.2024.44.2.0076


Harvard: Author-Date Style

Balı, O. and Demirbilek, N. and Demirtaş, H. (2025) ‘Üniversitelerde Sosyal Adalet Algısı Ölçeğinin Geliştirilmesi: Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Çalışması’, İstanbul Üniversitesi Sosyoloji Dergisi, 44(2), pp. 825-847. https://doi.org/10.26650/SJ.2024.44.2.0076 (4 Feb. 2025).


MLA

Balı, Onur, and Nesip Demirbilek and Hasan Demirtaş. Üniversitelerde Sosyal Adalet Algısı Ölçeğinin Geliştirilmesi: Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Çalışması.” İstanbul Üniversitesi Sosyoloji Dergisi, vol. 44, no. 2, 2025, pp. 825-847. [Database Container], https://doi.org/10.26650/SJ.2024.44.2.0076


Vancouver

Balı O, Demirbilek N, Demirtaş H. Üniversitelerde Sosyal Adalet Algısı Ölçeğinin Geliştirilmesi: Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Çalışması. İstanbul Üniversitesi Sosyoloji Dergisi [Internet]. 4 Feb. 2025 [cited 4 Feb. 2025];44(2):825-847. Available from: https://doi.org/10.26650/SJ.2024.44.2.0076 doi: 10.26650/SJ.2024.44.2.0076


ISNAD

Balı, Onur - Demirbilek, Nesip - Demirtaş, Hasan. Üniversitelerde Sosyal Adalet Algısı Ölçeğinin Geliştirilmesi: Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Çalışması”. İstanbul Üniversitesi Sosyoloji Dergisi 44/2 (Feb. 2025): 825-847. https://doi.org/10.26650/SJ.2024.44.2.0076



ZAMAN ÇİZELGESİ


Gönderim23.08.2024
Kabul01.12.2024
Çevrimiçi Yayınlanma03.01.2025

LİSANS


Attribution-NonCommercial (CC BY-NC)

This license lets others remix, tweak, and build upon your work non-commercially, and although their new works must also acknowledge you and be non-commercial, they don’t have to license their derivative works on the same terms.


PAYLAŞ




İstanbul Üniversitesi Yayınları, uluslararası yayıncılık standartları ve etiğine uygun olarak, yüksek kalitede bilimsel dergi ve kitapların yayınlanmasıyla giderek artan bilimsel bilginin yayılmasına katkıda bulunmayı amaçlamaktadır. İstanbul Üniversitesi Yayınları açık erişimli, ticari olmayan, bilimsel yayıncılığı takip etmektedir.