Turkish Journal of Geriatrics 2020 , Vol 23, Issue 4
A VALIDITY AND RELIABILITY STUDY OF THE TURKISH VERSION OF THE AMBIVALENT AGEISM SCALE
Ahu ÖZTÜRK1, Leman Pınar TOSUN1, Gamze ÖZDEMİR2, Merve ÇAVUŞOĞLU1, Kenan ALPARSLAN3, Dilan POLAT4, Sercan KARLIDAĞ5, Anıl KABLANOĞLU6, Muharrem Ersin KUŞDİL1
1RESEARCH ? ? ? ? Phone: +90 e-mail: Received: Accepted: 10.31086/tjgeri.2020.192 4): 534-545 Bursa UludaÄŸ University, Faculty of Arts & Sciences, Department of Psychology, Bursa, Turkey
2Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart University, Faculty of Arts & Science, Department of Psychology, Çanakkale, Turkey
3MuÅŸ Alparslan University, Faculty of Arts & Science, Department of Psychology, MuÅŸ, Turkey
4Bartın University, Faculty of Literature, Department of Psychology, Bartın, Turkey
5Altınbaş University, School of Economics, Administrative and Social Sciences, Department of Psychology, İstanbul, Turkey
6Süleyman Demirel University, Faculty of Arts & Sciences, Department of Psychology, Isparta, Turkey DOI : 10.31086/tjgeri.2020.192 Introduction: This study aimed to assess the psychometric properties of the Turkish version of the Ambivalent Ageism Scale, which measures 2 forms of ageism, namely benevolent and hostile ageism.

Materials and Methods: Data were collected from 222 adults through an online survey. Participants completed Turkish versions of the 13-item Ambivalent Ageism Scale and the Implicit Association Test adapted for ageism. Construct validity was assessed through confirmatory factor analyses. Internal consistency and split-half consistency were also calculated. Criterion validity was assessed by correlating ambivalent ageism and its subscales with implicit ageism scores.

Results: The results of confirmatory factor analysis of 12-items confirmed the original structure by exhibiting a good fit to the data (goodness of fit index = 0.93, p <.001, comparative fit index = 0.97, and root mean square error of approximation = 0.07). Internal consistency of the Ambivalent Ageism Scale and its 2 subscales were found to be satisfactory, with Cronbach"s alpha being .89 for benevolent ageism (9 items), .79 for hostile ageism (3 items), and .89 for the total scale. Scale had a high split-half reliability coefficient (0.95). Implicit ageism positively correlated with ambivalent ageism (total score) and both benevolent ageism and hostile ageism (.22, .21, and .16, respectively). Except for cognitive assistance/protection, which was a sub-factor of benevolent ageism, no age and gender difference was found in any of the ageism scores.

Conclusion: It was decided that the Turkish version of the Ambivalent Ageism Scale is a valid and reliable measure of negative attitudes toward older adults. Keywords : Ageism; Prejudice; Attitude; Reproducibility of Results