Turkish Version of the Career Adapt-Abilities Scale (CAAS): The Validity and Reliability Study

  • Ahmet Akın
  • Çınar Kaya
  • Serhat Arslan
  • Taner Demir
  • Hakan Sarıçam
  • Recep Uysal
Conference paper
Part of the Springer Proceedings in Complexity book series (SPCOM)

Abstract

The aim of this research is to examine the validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the Career Adapt Abilities Scale (CAAS; Savickas and Porfeli, Vocat Behav 80:661–673, 2012). The sample of this study consisted of 320 (146 female and 174 male) teachers. The results of confirmatory factor analysis demonstrated that the 24 items loaded on four factors and the four-dimensional model was well fit (x 2 = 504.48, df = 240 p = .00, RMSEA = .059, NNFI = .92, CFI = .93, IFI = .93, and SRMR = .049). The internal consistency coefficients were.82, .84, .86, and .85 for four subscales respectively, was .93 for the overall scale. The corrected item-total correlations of CAA ranged from .42 to .67. The t-test results differences between each item’s means of upper 27 % and lower 27 % points were significant. Overall findings demonstrated that this scale is a valid and reliable instrument for assessing the career adapts abilities. CAAS can be utilized in various areas like workforce management, social policies and leadership research.

Keywords

Confirmatory Factor Analysis Item Total Correlation Career Transition Career Life Turkish Version 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Bentler PM, Bonet DG (1980) Signifcance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychol Bull 88:588–606CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Büyüköztürk Ş (2010) Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı. Pegem Akademi yayınları, AnkaraGoogle Scholar
  3. Djaló A (2012) Career adapt-abilities scale–Portugal form: psychometric properties and relationships to employment status. J Vocat Behav 80(3):725–729CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Duarte ME, Soares MC, Fraga S, Rafael M, Lima MR, Paredes I, Agostinho R, Djaló A (2012) Career Adapt-Abilities Scale – Portugal Form: Psychometric properties and relationships to employment status. J Vocat Behav 80:725–729CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dufy RD (2010) Sense of control and career adaptability among undergraduate students. J Career Assess 18(4):420–430CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Ford DH (1994) Humans as self-constructing living systems, 2nd edn. IDEALS, State CollegeGoogle Scholar
  7. Hu LT, Bentler PM (1999) Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structural analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct Equ Model 6:1–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Klehe U, Zikic J, Van Vianen AEM, De Pater IE (2011) Career adaptability, turnover and loyalty during organizational downsizing. J Vocat Behav 79:217–229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Kline P (2000) Handbook of psychological testing. Routledge, LondonGoogle Scholar
  10. Nota L, Ginevra MC, Soresi S (2012) The career and work adaptability questionnaire (CWAQ): a first contribution to its validation. J Adolescence (article in press) 1–13Google Scholar
  11. Pouyaud J, Vignoli E, Dosnon O, Lallemand N (2012) Career adapt-abilities scale-France form: psychometric properties and relationships to anxiety and motivation. J Vocat Behav 80(3):692–697CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Rossier J, Zecca G, Stauffer SD, Maggiori C, Dauwalder JP (2012) Career adapt-abilities scale in a French-speaking Swiss sample: psychometric properties and relationships to personality and work engagement. J Vocat Behav 80(3):734–743CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Savickas ML (2005) The theory and practice of career construction. In: Lent RW, Brown SD (eds) Career development and counseling: putting theory and research to work. Wiley, Hoboken, pp 42–70Google Scholar
  14. Savickas ML, Porfeli EJ (2012) The career adapt-abilities scale: construction, reliability, and measurement equivalence across 13 countries. J Vocat Behav 80:661–673CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Savickas ML, Nota L, Rossier J, Dauwalder JP, Duarte ME, Guichard J, Soresi S, Van Esbroeck R, van Vianen AEM (2009) Life designing: a paradigm for career construction in the 21st century. J Vocat Behav 75:239–250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Schermelleh-Engel K, Moosbrugger H (2003) Evaluating the fit of structural equation models: tests of significance and descriptive goodness-of-fit measures. Meth Psychol Res Online 8(2):23–74Google Scholar
  17. Soresi S, Nota L, Ferrari L (2012) Career adapt-abilities scale-Italian form: psychometric properties and relationships to breadth of interests, quality of life, and perceived barriers. J Vocat Behav 80(3):705–711CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Sullivan A, Sheffrin SM (2003) Economics: principles in action. Pearson Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle RiverGoogle Scholar
  19. Teixeira MAP, Bardagi MP, Lassance MCP, Magalhães MO, Duarte ME (2012) Career adapt-abilities scale—Brazilian form: psychometric properties and relationships to personality. J Vocat Behav 80(3):680–685CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Van Vianen AEM, Klehe UT, Koen J, Dries N (2012) Career adapt-abilities scale – Netherlands form: psychometric properties and relationships to ability, personality, and regulatory focus. J Vocat Behav 80(3):716–724CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Yousefi Z, Abedi M, Baghban I, Eatemedi O, ve Abedi A (2011) Personal and situational variables, and career concerns: predicting career adaptability in young adults. Span J Psychol 14(1):263–271CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ahmet Akın
    • 1
  • Çınar Kaya
    • 1
  • Serhat Arslan
    • 1
  • Taner Demir
    • 1
  • Hakan Sarıçam
    • 2
  • Recep Uysal
    • 1
  1. 1.Sakarya University Educational Sciences DepartmentSakaryaTurkey
  2. 2.Dumlupınar University Educational Sciences DepartmentSakaryaTurkey

Personalised recommendations