The validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the psychological preparedness for disaster threat scale
Open accessPublished version of a preprint
Abstract
Abstract The aim of this research was to investigate the validity and reliability of a Turkish version of the 26-item Australian Psychological Preparedness for Disaster Threat Scale (PPDTS). A cross-sectional study involving 530 university students and staff at Giresun University was conducted to establish the psychometric properties of the PPDTS. Content analysis, exploratory factor analysis, confirmatory factor analysis and Cronbach alpha values for reliability were used to analyze the data. Content analysis showed that one item needed to be dropped as it was not related to environmental threats to Turkish communities. The exploratory factor analysis indicated that 66% of the total variance was explained by three factors: (i) knowledge and management of the external situational environment, (ii) management of one’s emotional and psychological response, and (iii) management of one’s social environment. The confirmatory factor analysis showed acceptable overall goodness of fit for the three-factor model: CFI (0.908), RMSEA (0.074) for the 21 item scale. Cronbach's α coefficients of the subscales were 0.91, 0.93, and 0.83 respectively, while for the whole scale it was 0.95. Four items from the original PPDTS were deleted in the course of the analyses. It was concluded that the Turkish version (PPDTS-T21) is a valid and reliable assessment tool for the evaluation of levels of psychological readiness for disaster threats to Turkish communities and will be useful in policy making for community preparedness for disaster events.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The Turkish version PPDTS-T21 yielded a three-factor model excluding anticipatory coping as a distinct domain.
“For instance, the Turkish version (PPDTS-T21) yielded a three-factor model excluding anticipatory coping as a distinct domain [23].”
From Development and validation of the Japanese version of the psychological preparedness for disaster threat scale (2026) · cites this paper as [23]
The three-factor structure observed in this study mirrors both the Turkish version and the earlier two-factor model.
“Thus, the three-factor structure observed in this study mirrors both the Turkish version and the earlier two-factor model [10], which distinguished between 'Knowledge and Management of the Threat Situation' and 'Anticipation, Awareness and Self-Management.'”
From Development and validation of the Japanese version of the psychological preparedness for disaster threat scale (2026) · cites this paper as [23]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Climate Change 2022 – Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability
(IPCC), I. P. O. C. C. (2023) · doi:10.1017/9781009325844 · Cited by 8,473 · see citing works
A QUANTITATIVE APPROACH TO CONTENT VALIDITY<sup>1</sup>
LAWSHE, C. H. (1975) · Personnel Psychology · doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.1975.tb01393.x · Cited by 7,313 · see citing works
Factor-analytic methods of scale development in personality and clinical psychology
Comrey, A. L. (1988) · Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-006x.56.5.754 · Cited by 1,154 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 28
- Agarwal V Sharma S Gupta L Misra DP Davalbhakta S Agarwal V Goel A Aggarwal S COVID-19 and psychological disaster preparedness - an unmet need Disaster Med Public Health Prep 2020 14 3 387 390 10.1017/dmp.2020.219 32580799 PMC7385318 · DOI
- Boylan JL Lawrence C What does it mean to psychologically prepare for a disaster? a systematic review Int J Disaster Risk Reduct. 2020 15 101480 10.1016/j.ijdrr.2020.101480 · DOI · Paper page
- Every D McLennan J Reynolds A Trigg J Australian householders' psychological preparedness for potential natural hazard threats: An exploration of contributing factors Int J Disaster Risk Reduct 2019 38 101203 10.1016/j.ijdrr.2019.101203 · DOI
- Field A Discovering Statistics Using SPSS 2009 London SAGE 659
- Glanz, K., Rimer, B. K., & Viswanath, K. (Eds.). (2008). Health behavior and health education: theory, research, and practice. John Wiley & Sons
- Guadagnoli E Velicer WF Relation of sample size to the stability of component patterns Psychol Bull 1988 103 2 265 275 10.1037/0033-2909.103.2.265 3363047 · DOI · Paper page
- Hair JF, Black WC, Babin BJ, Anderson RE (2010) Multivariate data analysis: Pearson College Division.
- Hu L Bentler PM Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives Struct Equat Modell 1999 6 1 55 10.1080/10705519909540118 · DOI · Paper page
- Inal E Dogan N Improvement of general disaster preparedness belief scale based on health belief model Prehosp Disaster Med 2018 33 6 627 636 10.1017/S1049023X18001012 30415647 · DOI
- Inal E Altintas KH Dogan N The development of a general disaster preparedness belief scale using the health belief model as a theoretical framework Int J Assess. Tools Educat 2018 5 1 146 158 10.21449/ijate.366825 · DOI
- Kasapoglu A Ecevit M Comparative behavioral response to future earthquakes: The cases of Turkey and USA Soc Behav Pers 2004 32 4 373 382 10.2224/sbp.2004.32.4.373 · DOI
- Kline RB Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling 1998 New York Guilford Press
- Kriston L Gunzler C Harms A Berner M Confirmatory factor analysis of the German version of the international index of erectile function (IIEF): a comparison of four models J Sexual Med 2008 5 92 99 10.1111/j.1743-6109.2007.00474.x 17466059 · DOI
- MacCallum RC Widaman KF Zhang S Hong S Sample size in factor analysis Psychol Methods 1999 4 1 84 99 10.1037/1082-989X.4.1.84 · DOI · Paper page
- Malkina-Pykh IG Pykh YA Evaluating psychological preparedness for the threat and impacts of climate change disasters and its change after intervention: an integrated modelling approach Disaster Manage Human Health Risk IV 2015 1 259 270 10.2495/dman150231 · DOI
- Martine Woolf JS Hazelwood M Palutikof J Boulter SL Ash AJ Smith MS Parry M Waschka M Guitart D Extremes, Disaster Management and Adaptation Climate Adaptation Futures 2013 New Jersey Wiley-Blackwell 353 361
- McGee TK Penning-Rowsell EC McGee T Penning-Rowsell E Environmental hazards today and tomorrow Handbook of Environmental Hazards and Society 2023 Abingdon-on-thames Routledge 1 9
- McLennan J Marques MD Every D Conceptualising and measuring psychological preparedness for disaster: The Psychological Preparedness for Disaster Threat Scale Nat Hazards 2020 101 1 297 307 10.1007/s11069-020-03866-4 PMC10191078 37360800 · DOI · Paper page
- McLennan J Bearman C Ryan B McGee T Penning-Rowsell E Evacuation vs. shelter-in-place under imminent threat from weather related and geophysical environmental hazards Handbook of Environmental Hazards and Society 2022 Abingdon-on-Thames Routledge 335 350
- Roudini J Khankeh HR Witruk E Disaster mental health preparedness in the community: a systematic review study Health Psychol Open 2017 4 1 1 12 10.1177/2055102917711307 PMC5489140 28680695 · DOI
- Schumacker RE, Lomax RG (2010) A beginner’s guide to structural equation modeling (3rd ed.). Routledge
- Sonmez ED Gokmenoglu T Understanding the teachers' disaster preparedness beliefs Int J Disaster Risk Reduct 2023 85 103511 10.1016/j.ijdrr.2022.103511 · DOI
- Spittal MJ Walkey FH McClure J Siegert RJ Ballantyne KE The earthquake readiness scale: the development of a valid and reliable unifactorial measure Nat Hazards 2006 39 1 15 29 10.1007/s11069-005-2369-9 · DOI · Paper page
- Suhaimi AW, Marzuki NA (2016) The Importance of Psychological Preparedness among Flood Victims. 10.15405/epsbs.2016.08.23 · DOI
- Tsai J Harpaz-Rotem I Armour C SouthwickSM RJ Krystal JH Pietrzak RH Dimensional structure of DSM-5 posttraumatic stress disorder symptoms: results from the National Health and Resilience in Veterans Study J Clin Psychiatry 2015 76 5 546 553 10.4088/JCP.14m09091 25562376 · DOI
- Yildiz CÇ Yildirim D The effects of disaster nursing education program on beliefs in general disaster preparedness, disaster response self-efficacy, and psychological resilience in nursing students: a single-blind, randomized controlled study Nurs Educ Perspect 2022 43 5 287 291 10.1097/01.NEP.0000000000001011 35790456 · DOI
- Zakour MJ (2023). Disasters and menral health. In T. McGee & E. Penning-Rowsell (Eds.). Handbook of Environmental Hazards and Society, Routledge (pp. 394–407).
- Zulch HR, Morrissey SA, Reser JP, Creed P (2012) Psychological Preparedness for Natural Disasters. In Proceedings of the First International Conference on Urban Sustainability and Resilience, UCL, London, UK.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Kubo, T., Takamoto, M., Suzuki, M., Takenouchi, K., & Sadamitsu, C. (2026) · BMC Psychology · doi:10.1186/s40359-026-05639-3 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
- Authors
- Türkdoğan Görgün, C., Koçak Şen, İ., & McLennan, J.
- Affiliations
- La Trobe University (AU)
- Venue
- Natural Hazards
- Published
- 2023-05-17
- Volume
- 118
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 331-346
- ISSN
- 0921-030X (ISSN-L)
- 1573-0840
- PMC
- PMC10191078
- OpenAlex
- W4376870833
- Cited by
- 34
- References
- 3
- Citations by year
- 2026: 13 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 9 · 2022: 3
- FWCI
- 10.66
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Natural Hazards (publishedVersion)
- Research Square (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Disaster Management and Resilience
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Research
- Keywords
- Turkish adaptation, disaster preparedness, psychological readiness, psychometric validation, scale reliability, factor structure, university students, community disaster preparedness, environmental hazards
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
