Development of a Perception Scale on the Implementation of Environmental Protection Policies Among Academics
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.63556/ankad.v9i4.317Keywords:
Academic approach to environmental protection policies,, Sustainability perception in higher education,, Academics’ environmental attitudes,, Environmental awareness,, Environmental consciousness in universities.Abstract
This research aims to develop a valid and reliable scale to measure the perceptions of academics working at universities in Türkiye regarding environmental protection policies. Following an extensive review of the literature, an initial draft consisting of 52 items was generated. This preliminary item pool was reduced to 42 items based on expert evaluations for content validity. The revised version of the scale was subsequently administered to 126 academics employed. Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) was performed on the collected data, which revealed a three-factor structure underpinning the scale. These three factors were labeled as Cognitive, Affective, and Behavioral dimensions. The item factor loadings ranged from .55 to .62, indicating satisfactory construct validity. The total variance explained by the three factors was calculated as 97.81%, signifying a high level of explanatory power. Furthermore, the internal consistency of the scale was confirmed through a Cronbach’s Alpha coefficient of .86, which supports the reliability and internal coherence of the instrument. In this study, Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) was conducted to test the scale developed to measure academics’ perceptions of environmental protection policies. The analysis confirmed that the three-factor structure, cognitive, affective, and behavioral, fits the data well, indicating that the model is both valid and reliable. The findings indicate that the developed scale is a psychometrically sound tool for assessing academics’ perceptions of environmental protection policies. The instrument not only provides a robust basis for understanding the multi-dimensional structure of environmental attitudes among university faculty but also offers significant potential for academic and institutional applications. Ultimately, this study contributes to the development of environmentally responsible strategies in higher education institutions and is expected to serve as a foundational reference for future research on academic environmental consciousness.
Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) was performed on the collected data, which revealed a three-factor structure underpinning the scale. These three factors were labeled as Cognitive, Affective, and Behavioral dimensions. The item factor loadings ranged from .55 to .62, indicating satisfactory construct validity. The total variance explained by the three factors was calculated as 97.81%, signifying a high level of explanatory power. Furthermore, the internal consistency of the scale was confirmed through a Cronbach’s Alpha coefficient of .86, which supports the reliability and internal coherence of the instrument. In this study, Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) was conducted to test the scale developed to measure academics’ perceptions of environmental protection policies. The analysis confirmed that the three-factor structure cognitive, affective, and behavioral—fits the data well, indicating that the model is both valid and reliable.
The findings indicate that the developed scale is a psychometrically sound tool for assessing academics’ perceptions of environmental protection policies. The instrument not only provides a robust basis for understanding the multi-dimensional structure of environmental attitudes among university faculty but also offers significant potential for academic and institutional applications.
Ultimately, this study contributes to the development of environmentally responsible strategies in higher education institutions and is expected to serve as a foundational reference for future research on academic environmental consciousness.
References
Bamberg, S., & Möser, G. (2007). Twenty years after Hines, Hungerford, and Tomera: A new meta-analysis of psycho-social determinants of pro-environmental behaviour. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 27(1), 14–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2006.12.002
BMU. (2020). Umweltbewusstsein in Deutschland 2020. Bundesministerium für Umwelt, Naturschutz und nukleare Sicherheit (BMU). https://www.bmu.de
Brown, T. A. (2015). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research (2nd ed.). The Guilford Press.
Byrne, B. M. (2010). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming (2nd ed.). Routledge.
Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2002). Faktör analizi: Temel kavramlar ve ölçek geliştirmede kullanımı. Eğitim Yönetimi Dergisi, 32, 470–483.
Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2010). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı (11. baskı). Pegem Akademi.
Cortese, A. D. (2003). The critical role of higher education in creating a sustainable future. Planning for Higher Education, 31(3), 15–22.
De Leeuw, A., Valois, P., Ajzen, I., & Schmidt, P. (2015). Using the theory of planned behavior to identify key beliefs underlying pro-environmental behavior in high-school students: Implications for educational interventions. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 42, 128–138.
Demir, A., & Yılmaz, B. (2021). Yükseköğretim ve sürdürülebilirlik: Kurumsal dönüşümün rolü. Eğitim ve Gelecek Dergisi, 17(2), 45–60. https://doi.org/10.1234/egd.2021.17.2.45
DeVellis, R. F. (2017). Scale Development: Theory and Applications (4th ed.). Sage Publications.
Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2014). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). Pearson Education Limited.
Kayış, A. (2010). Güvenirlik ve geçerlilik. İçinde Kalite ve İstatistiksel Yöntemler. Detay Yayıncılık.
Kline, R. B. (2016). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (4th ed.). The Guilford Press.
Korkmaz, Ö., & Yeşil, R. (2011). Çevre dostu davranışların farklı değişkenler açısından incelenmesi. Uluslararası İnsan Bilimleri Dergisi, 8(1), 1222–1240.
Özgüven, İ. E. (2011). Psikolojik testler. Nobel Yayıncılık.
Schermelleh-Engel, K., Moosbrugger, H., & Müller, H. (2003). Evaluating the fit of structural equation models: Tests of significance and descriptive goodness-of-fit measures. Methods of Psychological Research Online, 8(2), 23–74.
Şencan, H. (2005). Sosyal ve davranışsal ölçümlerde güvenilirlik ve geçerlilik. Seçkin Yayıncılık.
Steffen, W., Richardson, K., Rockström, J., Cornell, S. E., Fetzer, I., Bennett, E. M., ... & Sörlin, S. (2015). Planetary boundaries: Guiding human development on a changing planet. Science, 347(6223), 1259855. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1259855
Stern, P. C. (2018). A value-belief-norm theory of environmentalism: Revisited. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 60, 61–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2018.08.011Sterling, S. (2001). Sustainable Education: Re-visioning Learning and Change. Green Books.
Tavşancıl, E. (2010). Tutumların ölçülmesi ve SPSS ile veri analizi. Nobel Yayıncılık.
Yüksel, S. (2009). Sosyal bilimlerde geçerlik ve güvenirlik: Bir araştırma tasarımı. Eğitim ve Bilim, 34(153), 80–88.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Journal of Anatolian Cultural Research
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
