Investigation of the relationship between the agency and masculinity/femininity, collectivism/individualism in university students

The aim of this study is to examine the agency in university students in terms of some variables and to determine its relationship with individualism-collectivism and masculinity-femininity. For this purpose, a correlational survey model was utilized in the study. The study group consisted of 444 university students studying in various departments of universities in Turkey. To address the research questions, the "Multi-measure Agentic Personality Scale," adapted into Turkish by Atak, Kapçı, and Çok (2013), was used. Additionally, to test Hofstede's generalization on Turkish society, the "Masculinity-Femininity Level Form," developed by Sargut (1994), and the "IND-COL Scale," adapted into Turkish by Öztürk, Gökoğlu, and İnan (2018), were employed. In the study, descriptive analyses were conducted based on the total mean scores obtained from the relevant scales for the analysis of quantitative data. Pearson correlation analysis and stepwise regression analysis were performed to determine whether university students' masculinity/femininity orientations and individualism-collectivism situations predict their agency. When the mean scores obtained from Multi-measure Agentic Personality Scale was examined, it was seen that the lowest mean score was obtained in the life purpose dimension ( =2.98), while the highest mean score ( =3.45) was obtained in the self-esteem dimension. The total mean score for the agency scale was ( =3.23). Moreover, the mean score for individualism was ( =5.46), whereas the mean score for collectivism was ( = 5.23). Consequently, it is evident that students' levels of individualism were higher than their levels of collectivism. The research findings also revealed that university students' masculinity level was =3.26) and femininity level was ( =4.39), indicating that university students generally possessed a higher femininity. Additionally, significant positive relationships were found between agency and masculinity (r = .476), femininity (r = .324), individualism (r = .459), and collectivism (r = .383) variables (p < .05). A significant relationship was identified at the 0.05 level between the masculinity dimension and the agency dimension, indicating that 22% of the total variance in agency can be explained by the masculinity dimension. Moreover, a significant relationship at the 0.05 level was found between agency and masculinity, as well as between agency and individualism, revealing that 30% of the total variance in agency can be explained by masculinity and individualism dimensions. Furthermore, a significant relationship at the 0.05 level was observed among agency, masculinity, individualism, and femininity, indicating that 34% of the total variance in agency can be explained by masculinity, individualism, and femininity dimensions.