OBSERVARE
Universidade Autónoma de Lisboa
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 1
May-October 2025
38
A SCIENCE DIPLOMACY SCALE FOR HIGHER EDUCATION: A VALIDITY AND
RELIABILITY STUDY IN TÜRKIYE
SUAY NİLHAN AÇİKALİN
suaynilhan@gmail.com
Associate Professor at Ankara Hacıbayram Veli University (Turkey).
SEFİKA SULE ERÇETİN
sefikasule@gmail.com
Dean at Hacettepe University, Faculty of Education (Turkey).
ZEYNEP OLGUN
zeynepolgun@gmail.com
PhD Student at Hacettepe University, Department of Educational Management (Turkey).
Abstract
It is stated in the literature that scientific studies carried out by higher education institutions,
which are among the leading institutions that produce knowledge and science, are effective
in the development of science diplomacy practices. However, no research has been found in
Türkiye on the level of this effect. In this context, there was gap in the literature develop a
scale of science diplomacy in higher education in order to determine the extent to which
scientific studies carried out by higher education institutions affect science diplomacy
practices. The aim of the study was to develop a scale that can reveal the impact of scientific
studies conducted by higher education institutions on science diplomacy practices according
to the opinions of deans and vice deans. A total of 183 individuals participated in the
exploratory factor analysis (EFA) study and 246 individuals participated in the confirmatory
factor analysis (CFA) study using the simple random sampling method to create the study
group for the research. EFA, CFA, and Cronbach alpha values were examined for validity and
reliability analyses of the Science Diplomacy Scale in Higher Education. Four items were
redundant items in the factor analysis, and they were removed from the scale based on expert
opinion. The CFA results show that the goodness-of-fit indices of the model fall within the
reference ranges stated in the literature and that the model fits well with the research data.
The findings obtained, the scale is a valid and reliable measurement tool. As a result of the
research, a four-dimensional and 25-item Science Diplomacy Scale in Higher Education was
developed with 5-point Likert rating.
Keywords
Science Diplomacy, Scale Development, Higher Education, Dean, Türkiye.
Resumo
A literatura refere que os estudos científicos realizados por instituições de ensino superior,
que se encontram entre as principais instituições produtoras de conhecimento e ciência, são
eficazes no desenvolvimento de práticas de diplomacia científica. No entanto, não foi
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 1
May-October 2025, pp. 38-56
A Science Diplomacy Scale for Higher Education: a Validity and Reliability Study in Türkiye
Suay Nilhan Açikalin, Sefika Sule Erçetin, Zeynep Olgun
39
encontrada nenhuma investigação na Turquia sobre o nível deste impacto. Neste contexto,
havia uma lacuna na literatura no que diz respeito ao desenvolvimento de uma escala de
diplomacia científica no ensino superior, a fim de determinar em que medida os estudos
científicos realizados pelas instituições de ensino superior afetam as práticas de diplomacia
científica. O objetivo do estudo foi desenvolver uma escala capaz de revelar o impacto dos
estudos científicos realizados pelas instituições de ensino superior nas práticas de diplomacia
científica, de acordo com as opiniões dos reitores e vice-reitores. Um total de 183 indivíduos
participaram no estudo de análise fatorial exploratória (AFE) e 246 indivíduos participaram no
estudo de análise fatorial confirmatória (AFC), utilizando o método de amostragem aleatória
simples para criar o grupo de estudo para a investigação. Os valores da AFE, da AFC e do alfa
de Cronbach foram examinados para efeitos de análise da validade e da fiabilidade da Escala
de Diplomacia Científica no Ensino Superior. Quatro itens foram redundantes na análise
fatorial e retirados da escala com base na opinião de peritos. Os resultados da AFC mostram
que os índices de adequação do modelo estão dentro dos intervalos de referência indicados
na literatura e que o modelo se ajusta bem aos dados da investigação. De acordo com as
conclusões obtidas, a escala é um instrumento de medição válido e fiável. Como resultado da
investigação, foi desenvolvida uma Escala de Diplomacia Científica no Ensino Superior, de
quatro dimensões e 25 itens, com classificação de Likert de 5 pontos.
Palavras-chave
Diplomacia Científica, Desenvolvimento de Escala, Ensino Superior, Reitor, Turquia.
How to cite this article
Açikalin, Suay Nilhan, Erçetin, Sefika Sule & Olgun, Zeynep (2025). A Science Diplomacy Scale for
Higher Education: a Validity and Reliability Study in Türkiye. Janus.net, e-journal of international
relations. VOL. 16, Nº. 1. May-October 2025, pp. 38-56. DOI https://doi.org/10.26619/1647-
7251.16.1.3.
Article submitted on 25th May 2024 and accepted for publication on 14th September
2024.
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 1
May-October 2025, pp. 38-56
A Science Diplomacy Scale for Higher Education: a Validity and Reliability Study in Türkiye
Suay Nilhan Açikalin, Sefika Sule Erçetin, Zeynep Olgun
40
A SCIENCE DIPLOMACY SCALE FOR HIGHER EDUCATION: A
VALIDITY AND RELIABILITY STUDY IN TÜRKIYE
SUAY NİLHAN AÇİKALİN
SEFİKA SULE ERÇETİN
ZEYNEP OLGUN
Introduction
Diplomacy, a concept as ancient as the history of civilization, has numerous definitions
in the literature. Diplomacy is an attempt to find solutions through mutual negotiation to
issues that exist or may arise between states. In other words, diplomacy is the process
of relations conducted by state actors, taking into account the goals they set for
themselves and the capabilities they possess, as well as the goals and capabilities of
other states (Kerr & Wiseman, 2013, p. 164; Knight, 2022, p. 9).
Power is the combination of military, economic, political, and social resources possessed
by states. The elements of national power consist of factors such as geographical location,
natural resources, industrial capacity, economic development, military superiority, and
population. The instruments states use in their relations with other states, such as
coercion, deterrence, and creating pressure, are described as hard power; while
instruments such as influence, attraction, and encouragement are described as soft
power. Soft power allows desired outcomes to be achieved not through material
incentives and payments, but through a state's culture, norms, values, and attractive
international policies (Açıkalın & Sarı, 2021, p. 1693; Galluccio, 2021, p. 35; Wilson III,
2008, p. 111).
Nye noted that states can use soft power as a tool to garner public support. The concepts
of soft power and public diplomacy are complementary elements in obtaining public
support. Public diplomacy is a diplomatic method that translates soft power resources
and practices into policy. In other words, public diplomacy is the process by which states
and non-state actors establish positive relations with other societies. Public diplomacy
facilitates the recognition of values, traditions, social structures, and beliefs, and supports
the identification of common interests with other societies (Cull, 2009, p. 15; Hayden,
2011, p. 27; Nye, 1990, p. 15; Pavon Guinea & Codina, 2023, p. 8).
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 1
May-October 2025, pp. 38-56
A Science Diplomacy Scale for Higher Education: a Validity and Reliability Study in Türkiye
Suay Nilhan Açikalin, Sefika Sule Erçetin, Zeynep Olgun
41
Among the new types of public diplomacy seen in the present era, science diplomacy is
used to achieve international development through scientific collaborations. Although
science diplomacy is among the new types of diplomacy in this era, it is not a new
phenomenon when viewed historically. Great powers have invited renowned scientists of
the time to their countries to increase scientific research and gain respect for their
countries. However, innovations in diplomacy and science have elevated the concept of
science diplomacy to a more significant position in the 21st century (Moedas, 2016, p.
2; Turekian et al., 2015, p. 4; Pinto, 2022, p. 100).
Science Diplomacy
Science diplomacy is defined as the realization of foreign policy goals through science,
facilitating and enhancing international scientific cooperation. Science diplomacy serves
the function of building scientific bridges between states and societies. The instruments
of science diplomacy can be listed as:
− Inter-governmental scientific cooperation initiatives,
− Establishing partnerships for scientific endeavors that exceed individual country
budgets and require large investments,
− Collaboration between governments, civil society organizations, and scientists on
global issues such as health, environment, climate, security, mass migrations, and
education,
− Dissemination of scientific research and publications,
− Deployment of scientists abroad,
− Scholarship opportunities for international students or researchers (Galluccio, 2021,
p. 26; Flink & Rüffin, 2019, p. 106; Kıran & Açıkalın, 2021, p. 978; Ruffuni, 2017, p.
13; Turekian, 2018, p. 5; The Royal Society, 2010, p. 15).
Although science diplomacy is mostly considered as positive way of dialogue between
actors, there are also some criticisms may arise from the intersection of politics and
science. In this context, difficulties of implementing science diplomacy are mainly
discussed in the literature, highlighting several criticisms, including:
− Increasing competition and pressure between countries in the field of science and
technology,
− The perception of science as a tool for political action on the international stage,
− The possibility that political pressure might overshadow scientific autonomy,
− The potential for scientific research, knowledge production, and sharing to be hindered
or lose inclusivity in conflict-ridden environments,
− Scientists becoming dependent on project-based funding initiatives that serve foreign
policy objectives (Flink & Rüffin, 2019, pp. 16-17; Weis, 2005, p. 310).
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 1
May-October 2025, pp. 38-56
A Science Diplomacy Scale for Higher Education: a Validity and Reliability Study in Türkiye
Suay Nilhan Açikalin, Sefika Sule Erçetin, Zeynep Olgun
42
Unless this harmony is achieved, science diplomacy will face the risk of becoming
dysfunctional. Therefore, in order to have effective and positive science diplomacy
practices to be carried out through objective, transparent, critical, functional and
inclusive strategies should be developed between policy makers and the scientific
community (Flink, 2022, p. 197; Ruffini, 2020, p. 7).
Higher Education
Higher education institutions play a significant role in the development of international
networks within individual, knowledge, and communication flows, in the establishment
of new partnerships with the industry, especially in the cultural and scientific fields, and
in completing the diplomatic networks of states. Higher education institutions contribute
to the establishment of mutually beneficial relationships between close and distant
geographical regions through international projects in collaboration with NGOs,
accelerating global change with developments in communication and technology. Higher
education institutions also activate public diplomacy in solving global issues and economic
development (Erçetin, 2001, p. 77; Kitamura, 2015, p. 27; Moghimi et al, 2016, p. 200;
Moshtari & Safarpour, 2024, p. 90; Vinet, 2010, p. 6773).
When examining the literature, the internationalization process of higher education
institutions has been addressed within the framework of cultural diplomacy, which is
considered a tool of public diplomacy. Student and staff mobility, language learning,
internship programs, and efforts to attract foreign students to the country were examined
from a cultural perspective. Additionally, many activities such as creating brand
awareness in higher education, implementing success rankings and competitiveness
practices, collaborations with NGOs, local governments, and industries, public relations
efforts, and active use of media and digital channels were evaluated from the perspective
of cultural diplomacy (Gienow-Hecht & Donfried, 2010, p. 5; Férnandez, 2021, p. 32).
However, research projects based on international cooperation between higher education
institutions, science and technology centers, international education centers, binational
universities, and multinational expert networks have given diplomacy a scientific
dimension beyond cultural studies, ensuring the production, dissemination, and
utilization of knowledge. With the changing internationalization process dependent on
knowledge, innovation, economy, and technology development, the concept of science
diplomacy has gained importance in higher education. Especially in the 21st century,
international collaborative scientific studies by higher education institutions play an
important role in addressing global issues such as increasing global-scale migrations,
epidemic diseases, security, economic deprivation, environmental and climate change,
and natural disasters, and in generating global solutions (Adam, 2024, p. 510; Knight,
2014, p. 2; Sutton & Lyons, 2013, p. 6; Zakerian et al., 2017, p. 187).
Science Diplomacy Practices in Higher Education
The question about mission of higher education institutions is not easy task (Hashim,
2022). Although there various and newly discussed definitions it can be said that higher
education aim to educate and prepare the individuals of the future for their professions,
as well as to generate new scientific knowledge and present this knowledge for the benefit
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 1
May-October 2025, pp. 38-56
A Science Diplomacy Scale for Higher Education: a Validity and Reliability Study in Türkiye
Suay Nilhan Açikalin, Sefika Sule Erçetin, Zeynep Olgun
43
of societies (White, 1997; Barnett, 1998; Erçetin, 2001). From this standpoint, higher
education institutions can play an active role in increasing and developing science
diplomacy practices. Higher education institutions contribute to complementing the
diplomatic network of states, especially in the cultural and scientific fields, by developing
international networks within individual, knowledge, and communication flows, and
establishing new partnerships with industry (Kaliguna, 2020). They can also contribute
to create mutually beneficial relationships between close and distant geographical areas
through international projects in collaboration with NGOs, accelerating global change with
developments in communication and technology. Higher education institutions activate
science diplomacy in solving global issues and promoting economic development.
Therefore, in an international politics that transcends national borders and sometimes
leads to the formation of destructive regional blocs, significantly reshaping the world and
bringing about both competition and collaboration, the presence of higher education
institutions is profoundly felt (Moghimi et al., 2016, p. 201; Sandström & Hudson, 2018;
Vinet, 2010, p. 6773).
Science diplomacy practices conducted in higher education institutions can be listed as:
− International scientific publications, research, and reports by faculty members,
especially in the context of solving global-scale issues,
− Participation of faculty members as experts in making and implementing foreign policy
targets,
− Internationally collaborative symposia, workshops, and seminars organized in higher
education,
− The assignment of faculty members abroad for research and teaching,
− Programs and scientific projects aimed at attracting qualified students from foreign
countries,
− Scholarship opportunities for international students,
− International scientific collaboration projects conducted in partnership with various
industrial sectors,
− Contributing to international mission, promotion, and branding efforts (Asadi et al.,
2021, p. 41; Borchelt, 2008, p. 150; Knight, 2012, pp. 21-22; Kitamura, 2015, p. 29;
Moghimi et al., 2016, p. 202; Olgun & Erçetin, 2024, p. 1124; Sutton & Lyons, 2013,
p. 8; Tian & Liu, 2021, p. 199; Zakerian et al., 2017, p. 189).
Along with the discussion role of higher education institutions in science diplomacy, there
is limited literature on how it can be measured and it can be said that there is gap for
instruments and case studies related for it. In this context, the aim of the study is to
develop a scale that can reveal the impact of scientific studies conducted by higher
education institutions on science diplomacy practices according to the opinions of deans
and vice deans in Türkiye.
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 1
May-October 2025, pp. 38-56
A Science Diplomacy Scale for Higher Education: a Validity and Reliability Study in Türkiye
Suay Nilhan Açikalin, Sefika Sule Erçetin, Zeynep Olgun
44
Research Methodology
This section outlines the stages of development process for the Science Diplomacy Scale
(SDS) in Higher Education.
Study Group
The population of the study consisted of 531 deans and vice deans serving at universities
in Ankara during the academic year 2023-2024. There are various opinions in the
literature regarding the sample size for the scale development process. Hatcher (1994)
suggested that the sample size should be at least 5 times the number of items in the
scale or over 150 (Hatcher, 1994, p. 9). With the simple random sampling method, each
participant has an equal chance of being selected (Potas & Ok Akçil, 2020, p. 145). In
the study conducted based on the principle of voluntarism using the simple random
sampling method, 183 individuals participated in the exploratory factor analysis, and 246
individuals participated in the confirmatory factor analysis, comprising the study group
for the research.
Data Analysis
An extensive literature review was conducted during the process of developing the
Science Diplomacy Scale (SDS) in Higher Education. Articles, theses, domestic and
foreign books, and research reports in indexes such as Google Scholar, Tr Index, Scopus,
and Web of Science were examined. Keywords such as science diplomacy, public
diplomacy, and soft power were used for electronic sources. A pool of 33 items was
created, believed to reflect the level of impact of scientific studies conducted by higher
education institutions on science diplomacy. Five experts were consulted during
preparation of the scale. Each item was reviewed as "appropriate," "inappropriate," or
"modifiable." After expert review, items with consensus or divergence of opinion were
identified individually. Four items in the pool were revised and adjusted based on expert
opinions, resulting in a reduction to 29 items. Following the expert evaluations, a scale
was prepared using a five-point Likert scale ranging from "very highly effective (5), highly
effective (4), moderately effective (3), slightly effective (2), and ineffective (1)" options,
in line with the purpose of the research.
Research Ethics
In order to collect data for the study, approval was obtained from Ankara Hacı Bayram
Veli University Ethics Committee on 27/12/2023 with meeting decision number
2023/369.
Findings
This section includes the validity and reliability analyses of the SDS. Factor analysis was
conducted to determine the structural validity of the SDS. Factor analysis is one of the
methods used to obtain evidence for construct validity in scale development or adaptation
studies. Rather than providing a single coefficient of validity for the measurement
purpose, factor analysis is applied to reveal the factor structure or confirm a previously
hypothesized factor structure (Hair et al., 1998). Both exploratory factor analysis (EFA)
and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) can be used for factor analysis. EFA allows us to
see the possible theoretical structure of the variables, while CFA provides experimental
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 1
May-October 2025, pp. 38-56
A Science Diplomacy Scale for Higher Education: a Validity and Reliability Study in Türkiye
Suay Nilhan Açikalin, Sefika Sule Erçetin, Zeynep Olgun
45
evidence to support the theoretical structure. In this study, principal component analysis
(varimax rotation) was used for exploratory factor analysis to test the structural validity
of the scale. SPSS 22.00 and AMOS 27.00 software programs were used for the validity
and reliability analyses in both EFA and CFA.
Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA)
Exploratory factor analysis was conducted to test the structural validity of the Science
Diplomacy Scale in Higher Education. In this analysis, items that do not measure the
same construct were removed, and the common factor variance, factor eigenvalues,
explained total variance ratio, and item factor loadings were examined. In this context,
attention was paid to common variance of items >.10, factor loading value of 1, explained
total variance ratio of >50%, and item factor loadings >.40, as well as a difference of
.10 between items loaded on multiple factors.
In order to test the suitability of the data for factor analysis, it is necessary to examine
the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) and Bartlett test analysis values. The KMO value is
expected be >.50, and the Bartlett value should be significant (Field, 2000, p. 424).
Table 1. KMO and Bartlett Test Analysis
Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy
.930
Bartlett's Test of Sphericity
Approx. Chi-Square
4419.392
df
406
Sig.
.000
In the study, according to Table 1, the KMO value of the scale was greater than .50
(KMO=.930), and the Bartlett test result was significant (X2=4419.392; p=.000). After
examining these values, the data were found to be suitable for factor analysis.
In Table 2, the communalities table is based on principal component analysis. After
reviewing this table, the values for the items ranged between .47 and .83. Since the item
factor loadings of the scale are greater than .40, no item was removed at this point, and
factor analysis continued.
In Table 3, five factors emerged with eigenvalues greater than 1, explaining a total
variance of 69.5%. Varimax rotation was applied to the component matrix to test the
scale's five-factor structure, and the results are presented in Table 4.
When there is a difference of less than .10 between the factor loading values of an item
across multiple factors, a collinearity issue arises. Since each item should measure only
one attribute in exploratory factor analysis, collinear items need to be removed from the
scale to ensure its construct validity. In this context, items 27, 23, and 19 in Table 4
were collinear. These collinear items were sequentially removed during the analysis.
Initially, item 27 was removed, and the analysis was repeated. Upon removing item 27
from the scale, items 10, 21, and 23 were collinear. Consequently, item 23 was first
removed, followed by item 21, and finally item 10, to refine the scale. With expert
consultation, a total of four items were removed from the scale. As a result, the analysis
was repeated for the scale consisting of 25 items after removing the four items.
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 1
May-October 2025, pp. 38-56
A Science Diplomacy Scale for Higher Education: a Validity and Reliability Study in Türkiye
Suay Nilhan Açikalin, Sefika Sule Erçetin, Zeynep Olgun
46
The KMO value of the scale was greater than .50 (KMO=,923), and the Bartlett test result
was significant (X2=3524.656; p=.000).
After examining Table 5, which shows the total explained variance after the removal of
collinear items, there were four factors with eigenvalues exceeding 1. These four factors
explain a total variance of 66.5%. According to the analysis, the scale has a four-
dimensional structure. In the first factor, there are a total of 10 items explaining 51% of
the variance; in the second factor, there are 5 items explaining 6.8% of the variance; in
the third factor, there are 5 items explaining 4.7% of the variance; and in the fourth
factor, there are 5 items explaining 4.4% of the variance. In the process of scale
development, it is necessary for the explained variance of the scale to exceed 2/3 of the
total variance; in other words, to be greater than 66%. The data obtained from the factor
analysis meet this criterion.
Table 2. Communalities of the Science Diplomacy Scale (SDS) in Higher Education (YBDO)
Items
Initial
s1
1.000
s2
1.000
s3
1.000
s4
1.000
s5
1.000
s6
1.000
s7
1.000
s8
1.000
s9
1.000
s10
1.000
s11
1.000
s12
1.000
s13
1.000
s14
1.000
s15
1.000
s16
1.000
s17
1.000
s18
1.000
s19
1.000
s20
1.000
s21
1.000
s22
1.000
s23
1.000
s24
1.000
s25
1.000
s26
1.000
s27
1.000
s28
1.000
s29
1.000
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 1
May-October 2025, pp. 38-56
A Science Diplomacy Scale for Higher Education: a Validity and Reliability Study in Türkiye
Suay Nilhan Açikalin, Sefika Sule Erçetin, Zeynep Olgun
47
Table 3. Explained Total Variance of the Science Diplomacy Scale (SDS) in Higher Education
(YBDO)
Component
Initial Eigenvalues
Extraction Sums of
Squared Loadings
Rotation Sums of Squared
Loadings
Total
% of
Variance
Cumulative
%
Total
% of
Variance
Cumulative
%
Total
% of
Variance
Cumulative
%
1
15.032
51.834
51.834
15.032
51.834
51.834
4.995
17.223
17.223
2
1.731
5.969
57.803
1.731
5.969
57.803
4.608
15.890
33.113
3
1.189
4.099
61.901
1.189
4.099
61.901
4.341
14.970
48.083
4
1.135
3.915
65.816
1.135
3.915
65.816
3.580
12.344
60.426
5
1.094
3.771
69.587
1.094
3.771
69.587
2.657
9.161
69.587
6
.924
3.187
72.774
7
.865
2.982
75.756
8
.727
2.507
78.264
9
.688
2.373
80.636
10
.586
2.021
82.658
11
.535
1.846
84.504
12
.480
1.656
86.160
13
.428
1.476
87.636
14
.413
1.423
89.058
15
.384
1.325
90.383
16
.356
1.229
91.612
17
.329
1.135
92.747
18
.294
1.014
93.761
19
.271
.934
94.695
20
.233
.804
95.499
21
.203
.700
96.199
22
.201
.692
96.892
23
.179
.616
97.508
24
.168
.579
98.087
25
.142
.489
98.576
26
.122
.421
98.998
27
.114
.394
99.392
28
.092
.319
99.710
29
.084
.290
100.000
Table 4. Rotated Component Matrix Resulting from Factor Analyses
Item
No
Component
1
2
3
4
5
s5
.767
.338
.111
.282
s12
.755
.135
.214
.370
s13
.632
.614
.175
s22
.628
.403
.230
.360
.171
s8
.583
.461
.311
.286
s10
.545
.385
.347
.161
.204
s28
.263
.776
.201
.208
s24
.342
.676
.374
.300
s1
.299
.577
.125
.352
.116
s29
.503
.558
.108
.226
.219
s27
.547
. 545
.172
.421
s19
.459
.521
.412
.207
.235
s20
.209
.505
.331
.431
.181
s23
.472
.502
.469
.328
.176
s15
.252
.147
.706
.254
.208
s16
.127
.316
.687
.307
.268
s14
.546
.213
.664
.164
.119
s2
.355
.606
.399
.123
s17
.452
.394
.519
.204
s18
.125
.170
.220
.669
.263
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 1
May-October 2025, pp. 38-56
A Science Diplomacy Scale for Higher Education: a Validity and Reliability Study in Türkiye
Suay Nilhan Açikalin, Sefika Sule Erçetin, Zeynep Olgun
48
s7
.160
.141
.664
.170
s9
.368
.158
.251
.623
s25
.428
.377
.599
s4
-.153
.415
.567
.377
s21
.360
.205
.228
.430
.265
s3
.290
.114
.210
.209
.753
s6
.342
.305
.329
.175
.613
s11
.180
.335
.318
.505
s26
.339
.457
.323
.465
Table 5. Total Explained Variance after Removal of Collinear Items
Component
Initial Eigenvalues
Extraction Sums of
Squared Loadings
Rotation Sums of Squared
Loadings
Total
% of
Variance
Cumulative
%
Total
% of
Variance
Cumulative
%
Total
% of
Variance
Cumulative
%
1
12.677
50.708
50.708
12.677
50.708
50.708
5.595
22.380
22.380
2
1.686
6.744
57.452
1.686
6.744
57.452
4.281
17.122
39.502
3
1.166
4.665
62.117
1.166
4.665
62.117
3.383
13.533
53.035
4
1.112
4.448
66.565
1.112
4.448
66.565
3.383
13.530
66.565
5
.980
3.921
70.486
6
.846
3.382
73.869
7
.807
3.228
77.097
8
.683
2.731
79.828
9
.598
2.391
82.219
10
.563
2.251
84.470
11
.430
1.721
86.191
12
.416
1.665
87.856
13
.395
1.582
89.437
14
.359
1.434
90.871
15
.350
1.400
92.271
16
.314
1.254
93.525
17
.276
1.105
94.631
18
.254
1.014
95.645
19
.227
.908
96.553
20
.195
.782
97.335
21
.174
.697
98.032
22
.148
.594
98.626
23
.129
.518
99.144
24
.121
.484
99.628
25
.093
.372
100.000
The results of the scree plot showing four factors with eigenvalues above 1 are presented
in Figure 1.
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 1
May-October 2025, pp. 38-56
A Science Diplomacy Scale for Higher Education: a Validity and Reliability Study in Türkiye
Suay Nilhan Açikalin, Sefika Sule Erçetin, Zeynep Olgun
49
Figure 1. Scree Plot After Removal of Cross-Loadings
Table 6. Rotated Component Matrix Resulting from Factor Analysis after Removal of Cross-
Loadings
Component
1
2
3
4
s28
.743
.208
.223
.122
s24
.714
.395
.144
.312
s29
.709
.199
.352
.158
s22
.634
.355
.362
.247
s1
.632
.171
.184
.318
s25
.625
.175
.109
.455
s5
.602
.307
.532
s8
.590
.426
.451
s19
.589
.468
.350
.223
s20
.527
.322
.166
.448
s14
.372
.771
.267
.144
s13
.337
.762
.232
.101
s15
.165
.707
.230
.342
s16
.244
.630
.225
.447
s17
.501
.596
.165
.183
s3
.112
.199
.784
.301
s6
.293
.324
.677
.280
s12
.447
.267
.615
s26
.445
.331
.518
.128
s11
.334
.490
.347
s18
.235
.152
.226
.704
s7
.171
.128
.699
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 1
May-October 2025, pp. 38-56
A Science Diplomacy Scale for Higher Education: a Validity and Reliability Study in Türkiye
Suay Nilhan Açikalin, Sefika Sule Erçetin, Zeynep Olgun
50
s4
-.101
.354
.300
.625
s2
.252
.520
.526
s9
.383
.289
.521
The four underlying factors resulting from exploratory factor analysis were named as
dimensions based on the content of the items constituting the factors and their factor
loading values. In this context, the first dimension was named "collaboration and
scientific work" (10 items), the second dimension was "partnership and societal
contribution" (5 items), the third dimension was "education and teaching" (5 items), and
the fourth dimension was "institutional internationalization" (5 items).
To confirm whether the factor structure emerging from the exploratory factor analysis of
the Science Diplomacy Scale in Higher Education will be validated, confirmatory factor
analysis was conducted.
Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA)
Confirmatory factor analysis was used to determine the construct validity of the scale.
The most commonly used goodness-of-fit indices in CFA, which are also used as
references in this study, are listed as follows: chi-square test statistic (χ²), degrees of
freedom (df), chi-square/degrees of freedom ratio (χ²/df), normed fit index (NFI), and
comparative fit index (CFI). A sample of 246 participants was used for confirmatory factor
analysis of the scale. In this study, the goodness-of-fit indices for the four-dimensional
scale structure were calculated. The absolute fit indices of the scale included
CMIN/DF=3.38; RMSEA=0.099; incremental fit indices included NFI=0.911; and
parsimony fit indices included CFI=0.935; RFI=90; IFI=0.935; and TLI=0.928. The
model obtained from the confirmatory factor analysis shows that the goodness-of-fit
indicators fall within the reference ranges stated in the literature, indicating a good fit
with the research data. The standardized path diagram obtained from CFA is presented
in Figure 2.
Figure 2. Path Diagram for the Science Diplomacy Scale in Higher Education (YBDO)
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 1
May-October 2025, pp. 38-56
A Science Diplomacy Scale for Higher Education: a Validity and Reliability Study in Türkiye
Suay Nilhan Açikalin, Sefika Sule Erçetin, Zeynep Olgun
51
Reliability Analysis
In order to determine whether the scale is a reliable measure, Cronbach's alpha reliability
coefficient was calculated. The results are presented in Table 7.
Table 7. Cronbach's Alpha Values for the Scale and Dimensions
Dimensions
Cronbach’s Alpha Reliability Coefficient
Collaboration and Scientific Work
.97
Partnership and Social Contribution
.97
Education and Teaching
.95
Institutional Internationalization
.96
Total
.99
According to Table 7, the Cronbach's alpha reliability coefficients for the Science
Diplomacy Scale in Higher Education were calculated as follows: 0.97 for collaboration
and scientific work dimension, 0.97 for partnership and social contribution dimension,
0.95 for education and teaching dimension, 0.96 for institutional internationalization
dimension, and 0.99 for the total scale. This result indicates that the data obtained from
the scale are reliable.
Conclusion
Higher education is one of the key actors that contribute to diplomatic relations with
state, non-state actors, and civil society organizations by producing knowledge and
science. Many international activities such as research, projects, scientific publications
developed to solve global problems around the world, cooperation with the sector and
NGOs, provision of scientific data for foreign policy targets, scientific studies of students
and faculty members within the scope of international exchange programs, financial and
technological support provided for conducting research in developing countries are
carried out more efficient in higher education institutions.
In this context, it is believed that the scientific studies conducted by higher education,
which are among the leading centers of science production, have an impact on the
practices of science diplomacy. However, current literature has gap addressing measure
tool on role of higher education institutions . In this respect, scale of science diplomacy
in higher education in order to determine the level to which scientific studies conducted
by higher education institutions affect science diplomacy practices.
The aim of the study was to develop a scale that can reveal the impact of scientific
research conducted by higher education institutions on science diplomacy practices,
based on the opinions of deans and vice deans. The study is limited to the views of deans
and vice deans serving at universities in Ankara. The evaluations made within the scope
of the research are limited to the time period in which the scale was implemented, the
data obtained from the scale form, and the results of the data.
The validity and reliability analyses for the Science Diplomacy Scale in Higher Education
were examined. The KMO value of the scale was greater than .50, and the Bartlett test
result was significant. As a result of EFA, the scale has a four-factor structure with
eigenvalues greater than 1, explaining 66.5% of the total variance. According to EFA
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 1
May-October 2025, pp. 38-56
A Science Diplomacy Scale for Higher Education: a Validity and Reliability Study in Türkiye
Suay Nilhan Açikalin, Sefika Sule Erçetin, Zeynep Olgun
52
data, four items in the scale were overlapping items, and these overlapping items were
sequentially removed during the analysis. Four items were removed from the scale based
on expert opinions, and the analyses were repeated for the 25-item scale. The CFA results
show that the goodness-of-fit indices of the model fall within the reference ranges stated
in the literature and that the model fits well with the research data. In the study,
Cronbach's alpha reliability coefficient was calculated to determine whether the scale is
reliable, and the scale had a high level of reliability.
In conclusion, the scale consists of four dimensions and 25 items. In this context, there
are 10 items in the dimension of cooperation and scientific research, 5 items in the
dimension of partnership and societal contribution, 5 items in the dimension of education
and teaching, and 5 items in the dimension of institutional internationalization. The items
in the scale are rated on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from ineffective (1), low level of
effectiveness (2), moderate level of effectiveness (3), high level of effectiveness (4), to
very high level of effectiveness (5). The highest possible score that can be obtained from
the scale is 125, and the lowest score is 25.
Consequently, Developed scale will contribute to the literature and to the determination
of the current situation in higher education institutions within the framework of science
diplomacy practices. The study was limited to the opinions of deans and assistant deans
working in Türkiye. To contribute to the validity and reliability of the scale, it can be
applied to groups with different sizes and characteristics such as rectors vice rectors, and
institute directors, and academic staff such as faculty members and research assistants.
In addition, through the mentioned scale, science diplomacy practices of higher education
institutions in Türkiye and foreign countries can be analyzed comparatively.
References
Açıkalın, Ş.N., & Sarı, E. (2021). Post-truth and digital diplomacy. Nevşehir Hacı Bektaş
Veli Üniversitesi SBE Dergisi, 11(4), 1689-1701.
https://doi.org/10.30783/nevsosbilen.982260
Adam, E. (2024). Mastering Fortuna: higher education as an international relations
strategy for diplomacy, development, and sustainability. Higher Education, 87:509–513.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-023-01020-0
Asadi, M., Gholami, K., Salimi, J., & Taskoh, A.K. (2021). Knowledge diplomacy
development model in the context of internationalization of educational studies in Iranian
higher education system. Journal of Educational Planning Studies, 9(18), 39-75.
https://doi.org/10.22080/EPS.2021.18507.1903
Barnett, R. (1988). Does higher education have aims. Journal of Philosophy of
Education, 22(2), 239-250.
Borchelt, R.E. (2008). Public relations in science: managing the trust portfolio routledge.
Bucchi, M., & Trench, B. (Eds.), Handbook of public communication of science and
technology (pp. 147-158). Taylor&Francis.
Cull, N. J. (2009). Public diplomacy: lessons from the past. Figueroa Press.
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 1
May-October 2025, pp. 38-56
A Science Diplomacy Scale for Higher Education: a Validity and Reliability Study in Türkiye
Suay Nilhan Açikalin, Sefika Sule Erçetin, Zeynep Olgun
53
Erçetin, Ş.Ş. (2001). Biz akademisyenler geleceğin yükseköğretim kurumlarını
yaratmaya hazır mıyız? Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi, (25), 75-86.
Férnandez, Silvia María González (2021). The role of the cultural and creative industries
in cultural diplomacy and soft power between China and the European Union. Janus.net,
e- journal of international relations. 12(1), 31-61. https://doi.org/10.26619/1647-
7251.12.1.3
Field, A. (2000). Discovering statistics using SPSS for windows. Sage Publications.
Flink, T. (2022). Taking the pulse of science diplomacy and developing practices of
valuation. Science and Public Policy, 49, 191-200.
https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scab074
Flink, T., & Rüffin, N. (2019). The current state of the art of science diplomacy. Dagmar,
S., & Kuhlmann, S., Stamm, J., & Canzler, W. (Eds.), Handbook on science and public
policy (pp. 104-121). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Galluccio, M. (2021). Science and diplomacy. Negotiating essential alliances. Belgium:
Springer.
Gienow-Hecht, J., & Donfried, M. (2010). Searching for a cultural diplomacy. Berghahn
Books.
Hair Jr, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (1998). Multivariate data
analysis. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Hashim, M. J. (2022). The aim of higher education. Pak J Med Health Sci Vol, 16(08).
Hatcher, L. (1994). A step-by-step approach to using the sas(r) system for faktor analysis
and structural equation modeling. SAS Institute.
Hayden, C. (2011). The rhetoric of soft power: public diplomacy in global contexts.
Lexington.
Kalugina, T. (2019). Network Cooperation of Higher Education Institutions Under the
Conditions of Globalization: Search for Strategies of Educational Partnership. Available
at SSRN 3517500.
Kerr, P., & Wiseman, G. (2013). Diplomacy in a globalizing world: theories and practices.
Oxford University Press.
Kıran, Y.S., & Açıkalın, Ş.N. (2021). New tools of soft power: Turkey’s education and
science diplomacy. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi. 36(4), 977-985.
https://doi.org/10.16986/HUJE.2021072717
Kitamura, Y. (2015). International competition and cooperation in higher education in
east asia: some reflection based on the concept of knowledge diplomacy. Center For
Excellence in School Education Graduate School Of Education The University of Tokyo
Research Bulletin, 25-53.
Knight, J. (2012). Student mobility and internationalization: trends and tribulations.
Research in Comparative and International Education. 7(1), 20-33.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2304/rcie.2012.7.1.20
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 1
May-October 2025, pp. 38-56
A Science Diplomacy Scale for Higher Education: a Validity and Reliability Study in Türkiye
Suay Nilhan Açikalin, Sefika Sule Erçetin, Zeynep Olgun
54
Knight, J. (2014). Higher education and diplomacy. Canadian Bureau for International
Education CBIE Briefing Note, 1-3. Retrieved March 10, 2024 https://cbie.ca/wp-
content/uploads/2016/07/Jane-Knight-Briefing-Oct-2014.pdf
Knight, J. (2022). Knowledge diplomacy in international relations and higher education.
Springer.
Moedas, C. (2016). Science diplomacy in the European Union: Science & Diplomacy, 5(1),
1-9.
https://www.sciencediplomacy.org/sites/default/files/science_diplomacy_in_the_europe
an_union_science__diplomacy.pdf
Moghimi, T., Arasteh, H., & Mohamadkhani, K. (2016). A Model for improving science
diplomacy through interdisciplinary aspects in higher education and foreign policy
systems: Case Study of K.N. Toosi University. Interdisciplinary Studies in the Humanities,
8(4), 195-224.
Moshtari, M., & Safarpour A. (2024). Challenges and strategies for the
internationalization of higher education in low‐income East African countries. Higher
Education, 87:89–109. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-023-00994-1
Nye, J. S. (1990). Bound to lead: The changing nature of American power. Basic Books.
Olgun, Z., & Erçetin, Ş. Ş. (2024). Türkiye’de yükseköğretim kurumlarının bilim
diplomasisi uygulamaları. Yönetim Bilimleri Dergisi, 22(53), 1118-1138.
https://doi.org/10.35408/comuybd.1434721
Pavon Guinea, A. & Codina, M. (2023). Public diplomacy: a framework‐based literature
review and decentering research agenda. Place Branding and Public Diplomacy.
https://doi.org/10.1057/s41254-023-00319-0
Pinto, João Mourato (2022). Portuguese science diplomacy and the networks of
Portuguese professionals, researchers and graduate students abroad: from the escape
to the circulation of brains. In Janus.net, e-journal of international relations. 13(1), 98-
116. https://doi.org/10.26619/1647-7251.13.1.7
Potas, N., & Ok Akçil, M. (2020). Örnekleme yöntemleri. Erçetin, Ş.Ş. (Ed.), Araştırma
Teknikleri (pp. 144-161). Nobel.
Ruffini, P. B. (2020). Conceptualizing science diplomacy in the practitioner-driven
literature: a critical review. Humanities & Social Sciences Communications, 7(124), 1-8.
https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-020-00609-5
Ruffini, P. B. (2017). Science and diplomacy. A new dimension of international relations.
Springer.
Sandström, A. M., & Hudson, R. (2018). The EAIE Barometer: internationalisation in
Europe (second edition). The European Association for International Education (EAIE).
Retrieved March 5, 2024 https://www.eaie.org/our-
resources/library/publication/Research-and-trends/eaie-barometer-money-
matters.html
Sutton, S.B., & Lyons, E.E. (2013). Unintentional diplomats: international science
engagement and science diplomacy by u.s. higher education institutions. Association of
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 1
May-October 2025, pp. 38-56
A Science Diplomacy Scale for Higher Education: a Validity and Reliability Study in Türkiye
Suay Nilhan Açikalin, Sefika Sule Erçetin, Zeynep Olgun
55
International Education Administrators, 1-21.
https://doi.org/10.3152/030234210X12778118264530
Tian, L. & Liu, N.C. (2021). Inward international students in China and their contributions
to global common goods. Higher Education, 81:197–217.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-020-00522-5
The Royal Society. (2010). New frontiers in science diplomacy. Navigating the changing
balance of power. Retrieved March 5, 2024
https://www.aaas.org/sites/default/files/New_Frontiers.pdf
Turekian, V. C. (2018). The evolution of science diplomacy. Global Policy, 9(3), 5-7.
https://doi.org/10.1111/1758-5899.12622
Turekian, V. C., Macindoe, S., Copeland D., Davis, L. S., Patman, R. G. & Pozza, M.
(2015). The emergence of science diplomacy. Davis, L. S., & Patman, R. G. (Ed.), Science
diplomacy new day or false dawn? World scientific publishing. (pp. 3-24). World
Scientific.
Vinet, L. (2010). Universities and knowledge diplomacy. Procedia Social & Behavioral
Sciences, (41), 6772–6776. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.05.023
Weiss, C. (2005). Science, technology and international relations. Technology in Society,
27, 295–313.
White, J. (1997). Philosophy and the aims of higher education. Studies in Higher
Education, 22(1), 7-17.
Wilson III, E. J. (2008). Hard power, soft power, smart power. The ANNALS of the
American Academy of Political and Social Science, (616), 110-124.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716207312618
Zakerian, M., Sadoughi,Z., Nabavi, A., & Mahdi, R. (2017). Realization of peace from
the perspective of the role of higher education in the field of diplomacy: experience of
academic diplomacy in Iran. Journal of Fundamental and Applied Sciences, 9(1S), 184-
203. http://dx.doi.org/10.4314/jfas.v9i1s.686
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 1
May-October 2025, pp. 38-56
A Science Diplomacy Scale for Higher Education: a Validity and Reliability Study in Türkiye
Suay Nilhan Açikalin, Sefika Sule Erçetin, Zeynep Olgun
56
Attachment: Science Diplomacy Scale in Higher Education (SDS)
Item No.
Cooperation and Scientific Work
S28
Presentation of scientific information and suggestions by faculty members at your
faculty for the resolution of international issues
S24
International promotional activities of your faculty
S29
Adaptation ability of faculty members at your faculty to the European Higher
Education Area
S22
International mission of your faculty
S1
Scientific studies such as international symposiums, workshops, seminars
organized at your faculty
S25
International diploma equivalence provided by your faculty
S5
International publications authored by faculty members at your faculty
S8
International scientific projects conducted by faculty members at your faculty
S19
Scientific collaboration studies conducted between your faculty and international
higher education institutions
S20
Scientific collaboration studies conducted between your faculty and international
non-governmental organizations
Item No
Partnership and Societal Contribution
S14
Participation status of your faculty in international R&D funds
S13
Budget used by your faculty in international scientific studies
S15
Participation status of students at your faculty in techno-parks or socio-parks
projects
S16
International scientific collaboration projects conducted by your faculty with the
business world (sector)
S17
International alumni network (communication network) of your faculty
Item No
Education and Teaching
S3
Student exchange programs implemented at your faculty
S6
Faculty exchange programs implemented at your faculty
S12
Use of foreign language by faculty members at your faculty in producing scientific
knowledge
S26
Assignment of faculty members at your faculty as consultants in various
institutions as part of scientific studies
S11
Visibility of faculty members at your faculty in the media
Item No
Institutional Internationalization (5 item)
S18
Programs conducted in foreign languages at your faculty
S7
Foreign national faculty members working at your faculty
S4
Scholarship opportunities provided to international foreign national students at
your faculty
S2
Activities such as international competitions, Olympiads, festivals organized at
your faculty
S9
Internationally accredited programs at your faculty