Reliability and Validity of the Spiritual Care-Giving Scale in a Turkish Population
- 437 Downloads
This study aimed to adapt an English version of the survey tool Spiritual Care-Giving Scale for Turkish students and to evaluate its psychometric properties. Spiritual care is a central element of holistic nursing, but is not often made explicit in the theoretical and practical components of preregistration nursing programs. A composite scale will assist in identifying students’ perceptions and issues to be addressed in curricula and practice settings in Turkey. The scale was composed of 35 items and five subscales. Cronbach’s α reliability coefficient was .96, and item–total point correlations were between .37 and .77. In addition, split-half reliability coefficient was .88. The Spiritual Care-Giving Scale was found to be a valid and reliable instrument for measuring the multifaceted perspectives of spirituality and spiritual care in practice by students. Further testing of this scale is required with other student populations and clinicians.
KeywordsSpirituality Care Nursing Scale
The authors acknowledge the contributions of all students who took part in the study, all specialists from whom submissions were taken about the validity of the scale, and the Lay Hwa Tiew and Debra K. Creedy who are developers of the SCGS.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of interest
- Burkhardt, M. A., & Nagai-Jacobson, M. G. (2005). Spirituality and health. In B. Dossey, L. Keegan, & C. Guzzetta (Eds.), Holistic nursing: A handbook for practice (pp. 137–168). Boston: Jones & Bartlett.Google Scholar
- Gozum, S., & Aksayan, S. (2003). A guide for transcultural adaptation of the scale II. Psychometric characteristics and crosscultural comparison. The Turkish Journal of Research and Development in Nursing, 5, 3–14.Google Scholar
- Karasar, N. (2008). Scientific research methods concepts (18th ed., pp. 48–58). Ankara: Nobel Release Distribution.Google Scholar
- Lin, Y. H., Liou, S. H., & Chen, C. H. (2008). Spiritual care in nursing practice. The Journal of Nursing, 55(3), 69–74.Google Scholar
- Norman, G. R., & Streiner, D. L. (2008). Biostatistics. The bare essentials (3rd ed., pp. 194–209). Hamilton: BC Decker Inc.Google Scholar
- Seker, H., & Gençdoğan, B. (2006). In psychology and educational measurement tool development (pp. 34–51). Ankara: Nobel Release Distribution.Google Scholar
- Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (Eds.). (2010). Sage handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research (2nd ed., pp. 505–530). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
- Taylor, E. J. (2002). Spiritual care: Nursing theory, research, and practice (pp. 50–67). Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar