Keywords
system justification theory
marital system justification
scale development
validity
reliability
How to Cite
Abstract
The aim of this study is to develop a measurement tool for the legitimation of marriage, which can be considered as an institution. In the study conducted to determine how legitimate and fair the institution of marriage is perceived and with what motivations marriage is legitimized, the Marriage System Legitimization Scale, İnönü Marriage Attitude Scale and Demographic Information Form were applied to the participants. A total of 326 university students, 249 females (76.4%) and 77 males (23.6%) aged between 17 and 59, participated in the study. Of the participants, 138 (42.3%) stated that they had a romantic relationship, and 188 (57.7) stated that they were not. The duration of relationship ranged from 1 to 360 months (Mean = 20.61; S = 40.20). The results of the exploratory factor analysis showed that the scale exhibited a single factor structure and the results of the confirmatory factor analysis showed that this single factor and this structure consisting of 21 items had acceptable values. The Cronbach alpha internal consistency reliability coefficient of the scale is .94. The factor loads of the items also vary between .60 and .79. The two-half test reliability coefficient of the scale was found to be .88, and the test-retest reliability coefficient was found to be .90. All findings revealed that the Marriage System Justification Scale is a valid and reliable instrument to be used in the literature.
References
Agadullina, E. R. (2023). The role of income in system justification. Psychology in Russia: State of the Art, 16,(1), 66-76.
Bayoğlu, F. ve Atlı, A. (2014). İnönü Evlilik Tutum Ölçeği: Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Analizleri. Ege Eğitim Dergisi, 15(2), 397-415.
Bird, G. W. ve Melville, K. (1994). Families and intimate relationships. McGraw-Hill College.
Deiner, E., Suh, E.M., Lucas, R. E. ve Smith, H. L. (1999). Subjective Weil-Being: Three Decades of Progress. Psychological Bulletin, 125(2), 276-302.
DePaulo, B. M. ve Morris, W. L. (2005). Singles in society and in science. Psychological Inquiry, 16, 57–83.
DePaulo, B. M. ve Morris, W. L. (2005). The Unrecognized Stereotyping and Discrimination Against Singles. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 15(5), 251- 254.
Günay, G. ve Bener, Ö. (2013). Gençlerin Evlilik ve Aile Yaşamına İlişkin Tutumları. Karabük Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 3(1), 1-16.
İşmen Gazioğlu A.E. (2006). Genç yetişkinlerin evlilik ve aile hayatına ilişkin görüşlerinin değerlendirilmesi, Marmara Üniversitesi Atatürk Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 23, 107-123.
Jost, J. T. ve Banaji, M. R. (1994). The role of stereotyping in system-justification and the production of false consciousness. British Journal of Social Psychology, 33, 1-27.
Jost, J. T. (1995). Negative illusions: conceptual clarification and psychological evidence concerning false consciousness. Political Psychology, 16, 397-424.
Jost, J. T., Banaji, M. R. ve Nosek, B. A. (2004). A decade of system justification theory: Accumulated evidence of conscious and unconscious bolstering of the status quo. Political Psychology, 25, 881-919
Jost, J. T. ve Hunyady, O. (2002). The psychology of system justification and the palliative function of ideology. European Review of Social Psychology, 13, 111-153.
Jost, J. T. ve Thompson, E. P. (2000). Group-based dominance and opposition to equality as independent predictors of self-esteem, ethnocentrism, and social policy attitudes among African Americans and European Americans. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 36, 209–232.
Jost, J. T. ve Hunyady, O. (2005). Antecedents and consequences of system-justifying ideologies. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 14, 260-265.
Jost, J. T. ve Kay, A. C. (2005). Exposure to benevolent sexism and complementary gender stereotypes: consequences for specific and diffuse forms of system justification. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88(3), 498-509.
Jost, J.T. (2019), A quarter century of system justification theory: Questions, answers, criticisms, and societal applications. British Journal of Social Schology, 58, 263-314.
Kay, A. C. ve Jost, J. T. (2003). Complementary justice: effects of “poor but happy” and “poor but honest” stereotype exemplars on system justification and implicit activation of the justice motive. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(5), 823-837.
Li, W., Wu, J. ve Kou, Y. (2020). System Justification Enhances Life Satisfaction of High- and Low Status People in China. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 11(5), 588–596.
Major, B. (1994). From social inequality to personal entitlement: The role of social comparisons, legitimacy apprasials, and group memberships. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 26, 293-355.
Morris, W. L., DePaulo, B. M., Hertel, J. ve Taylor, L. C. (2008). Singlism—another problem that has no name: Prejudice, stereotypes, and discrimination against singles. In T. G. Morrison ve M. A. Morrison (Eds.), The psychology of modern prejudice (pp. 165–194). Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science.
Mouafo, A. V. D. ve Nzekaih, H. K. E. (2021). Gender system justification, gender differences and attitudes towards women’ victimization. Social Sciences. 10, (2), 67-73.
Stutzer, A. ve Frey, B. S. (2004). Does marriage make people happy, or do happy people get married? The Journal of Socio-Economics, 35 (2006), 326–347.
Tabachnick, B.G. ve Fidell, L.S. (2001) Using Multivariate Statistics. 4th Edition, Allyn and Bacon, Boston.
Van der Toorn, J., Berkics, M. ve Jost, J. T. (2010). System justification, satisfaction, and perceptions of fairness and typicality at work: A cross-system comparison involving the US and Hungary. Social Justice Research, 23(2-3), 189-210.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Copyright (c) 2023 Nesne Psikoloji Dergisi