Validation of a Chinese Version of the Attitudes Toward Prisoners Scale
| Date | 01 November 2019 |
| Author | Kevin Kwok-yin Cheng,Wing Hong Chui |
| Published date | 01 November 2019 |
| DOI | 10.1177/0032885519875413 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
research-article2019
Article
The Prison Journal
2019, Vol. 99(5) 614 –635
Validation of a Chinese
© 2019 SAGE Publications
Article reuse guidelines:
Version of the Attitudes
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
https://doi.org/10.1177/0032885519875413
DOI: 10.1177/0032885519875413
journals.sagepub.com/home/tpj
Toward Prisoners Scale
Wing Hong Chui1
and Kevin Kwok-yin Cheng2
Abstract
Using a Hong Kong–sourced sample of participants, this study set out to
validate the Chinese version of the Attitudes Toward Prisoners (ATP-C)
Scale and evaluate its psychometric properties. To provide further evidence
for the ATP-C Scale’s validity, it was then administered to three groups
varying in their volunteering experience in Hong Kong. Exploratory factor
analysis revealed a four-factor structure that differs from the unidimensional
model proposed by the scale developers. Cronbach’s alpha values were
satisfactory for all four subscales, and construct validity of the ATP-C Scale
was also assessed with a second sample of participants. Implications for the
assessment of attitudes toward prisoners away from a one-dimensional
spectrum and further directions for cross-cultural studies on related topics
are discussed.
Keywords
Attitudes Toward Prisoners Scale, validation, volunteering, Chinese culture
1City University of Hong Kong, China
2The Chinese University of Hong Kong, China
Corresponding Author:
Wing Hong Chui, Department of Social and Behavioral Sciences, City University of Hong
Kong, Tat Chee Avenue, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Email: eric.chui@cityu.edu.hk
Chui and Cheng
615
Introduction
Attitudinal variables are thought to be relevant for answering some of the key
questions in the criminal justice system (Barretto, Miers, & Lambie, 2018;
Chui, Cheng, & Ong, 2015; Chui, Cheng, & Wong, 2013; Gottlieb, 2017;
Ortet-Fabregat, Perez, & Lewis, 1993). Therefore, more emphasis has been
placed on the study of attitudes toward crime and criminals in recent years.
One such attitude of interest is people’s attitude toward prisoners, which has
been found to be related to sentencing decisions (Carroll, Perkowitz, Lurigio,
& Weaver, 1987; Hogarth, 1974; Ortet-Fabregat et al., 1993), prisoners’ reha-
bilitation outcomes (Glaser, 1969; Kjelsberg, Skoglund, & Rustad, 2007;
Melvin, Gramling, & Gardner, 1985), and even the training of prison officers
(Fielding & Fielding, 1991; Ortet-Fabregat et al., 1993; Shannon & Page,
2014). These studies tapping into attitudes toward prisoners not only are
important theoretically but also have potential implications for policy making
and service provision. For instance, Kjelsberg et al. (2007) have reported that
the attitudes toward prisoners held by both prison officers and prisoners
themselves critically influence rehabilitation, because their attitudes would
determine the types of program being offered and the way that prisoners
respond to these programs. In addition, the success rate of rehabilitation
depends “upon the attitude held by the population into which prisoners would
be released” (Kjelsberg et al., 2007, p. 2). Thus, rehabilitation programs
should include elements that help promote positive attitudes toward prisoners
among prison officers, prisoners, and the general public.
Indeed, in Hong Kong, it has been observed that criminal justice agencies,
especially corrections, have placed the rehabilitation of offenders as their
primary objective (see, for example, Adorjan & Chui, 2012; Chui, 2001,
2017; Jones & Vagg, 2007). Chui (2002), for instance, noted that since its
inception, the probation system in Hong Kong has regarded its role as mainly
to assist offenders in their rehabilitation and reintegration. This is a marked
departure from the British system from which the Hong Kong probation ser-
vices were originally adopted. The slogan, “Give rehabilitated offenders a
second chance” by the Hong Kong Correctional Services, is another verifica-
tion of the primacy of rehabilitation and reintegration in Hong Kong’s crimi-
nal justice system (Hong Kong Correctional Services, 2018). Therefore, a
sound instrument to measure attitudes toward prisoners in the Chinese con-
text would be a useful addition to correction efforts in Hong Kong.
To the best of our knowledge, despite a widespread application of the
measurement of attitudes toward prisoners in English-speaking countries and
beyond, a Chinese version of the Attitudes Toward Prisoners (ATP-C) Scale
has not yet been validated. In this regard, this article’s main objective is to
616
The Prison Journal 99(5)
validate an operationalized ATP-C Scale for future use in Chinese criminal
justice research.
Measuring Attitude Toward Prisoners
To facilitate research on attitudes toward prisoners, researchers needed a psy-
chometrically sound assessment tool. Seeing this need, Melvin, Gramling,
and Gardner (1985) developed the Attitudes Toward Prisoners (ATP) Scale, a
36-item scale rated on a 5-point Likert-type scale.
Using exploratory factor analysis (EFA), they discovered that all items
loaded significantly on a single dimension, reflecting people’s general posi-
tive or negative attitudes toward prisoners. Later validation studies also con-
firmed the unidimensional nature of the scale (Kerce, Magnusson, & Rudolph,
1994; Kjelsberg et al., 2007; Ortet-Fabregat et al., 1993). Because both posi-
tive items (e.g., only a few prisoners are really dangerous) and negative items
(e.g., most prisoners are stupid) belong to the same factor, negative items
would be reverse-scored before all items were added up. Then, a constant of
36 would be subtracted from the total, giving a possible range of scores from
0 to 144 (Melvin et al., 1985).
Subsequent studies demonstrated satisfactory reliability and validity of
the ATP Scale. For instance, Melvin et al. (1985) reported high split-half (r =
.84-.92) and test–retest (r = .82) reliability when they first constructed the
scale. They also confirmed the scale’s validity using the method of contrasted
group. Later studies also reported Cronbach’s alphas ranging from .88
(Kjelsberg et al., 2007) to .95 (Ortet-Fabregat et al., 1993), which lent further
support for the scale’s reliability.
Due to its good psychometric properties, the ATP Scale has been used
widely in the study of attitudes toward prisoners in empirical studies
(Barnett, Brodsky, & Davis, 2004; Ireland & Quinn, 2007; Kerce et al.,
1994; Kjelsberg et al., 2007; Morgan, Beer, Fitzgerald, & Mandracchia,
2007; Na & Loftus, 1998; Ortet-Fabregat et al., 1993; Trevethan, Rastin,
Bell, & Gillis, 2004). Moreover, many studies have gone beyond measuring
attitudes toward prisoners per se, instead using the ATP Scale to measure
attitudes toward sex offenders (Church, Wakeman, Miller, Clements, &
Sun, 2008; Ferguson & Ireland, 2006; Kjelsberg & Loos, 2008; Nelson,
Herlihy, & Oescher, 2002), attitudes toward juvenile sex offenders
(Sahlstrom & Jeglic, 2008), attitudes toward offenders (Murphy & Brown,
2000), and attitudes toward offender patients (Boothyby & Overduin, 2007;
Moore et al., 2002).
Although the ATP Scale is a reliable and valid assessment tool that is pop-
ular among criminal justice researchers, all these studies have been conducted
Chui and Cheng
617
in Western societies. Little effort has been devoted to the validation and
application of the ATP Scale in non-Western cultures, such as Hong Kong.
Attitudes Toward Prisoners in a Chinese Cultural
Context
Previous studies have all confirmed the unidimensional factor structure pro-
posed by Melvin et al. (1985). However, because the scale was originally
developed and validated in a Western environment, it is uncertain whether this
factor structure is applicable in a Chinese cultural context. There is evidence
that Westerners’ crime-related attitudes could be quite different from those
held by the Chinese (Brody & Luo, 2009). For example, due to their emphasis
on interpersonal relationships (i.e., guanxi), the Chinese often regard crimes
such as fraud as socially acceptable ways to maintain good guanxi with peers
or bosses. This suggests that the set of cultural and ethical beliefs held by the
Chinese could be so different from that of Westerners that a direct application
of Western findings in Chinese culture would be inappropriate.
One related study worth mentioning is Na and Loftus’ (1998) investiga-
tion of university students’ attitudes toward prisoners in Korea, a country
which has many cultural similarities to China. They found that Koreans
tended to hate the act of crime but not the offenders. Also, Koreans were
more likely than Americans to be sympathetic toward prisoners. This is yet
another piece of evidence that Westerners’ attitudinal dimensions (i.e., a sim-
ple division between positive and negative attitudes toward prisoners) might
not be the same as attitudes in other cultures, particularly Asian cultures.
Elements such as sympathy might also be included as factors underlying
people’s attitudes in other cultures. Although it is tempting to generalize
Korea’s case to the Chinese context, we should note that there are still cross-
regional differences that cannot be ignored. Therefore, it is necessary to con-
duct research to explore the model underlying attitudes toward prisoners
unique to the Chinese culture.
The Chinese dialectical way of thinking is also revealed in past studies
measuring Chinese punitive attitudes and views of...
To continue reading
Request your trial