Development and validation of a self-report measure of perceived dehumanization from officers

IF 2.5 3区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL Journal of Clinical Psychology Pub Date : 2024-02-01 DOI:10.1002/jclp.23651
Morgan Robison, Thomas Baker, Frances P. Abderhalden, Jill A. Gordon, Thomas E. Joiner
{"title":"Development and validation of a self-report measure of perceived dehumanization from officers","authors":"Morgan Robison,&nbsp;Thomas Baker,&nbsp;Frances P. Abderhalden,&nbsp;Jill A. Gordon,&nbsp;Thomas E. Joiner","doi":"10.1002/jclp.23651","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Purpose</h3>\n \n <p>Emerging evidence indicates that incarcerated populations' perceptions of dehumanization by officers are prevalent, yet measures of it are few, and to our knowledge, no self-report measure of dehumanization from officers exists. To fill this gap, we have developed the Perceived Dehumanization from Officers Scale (PDOS), which is designed as a brief measure to assess perception of officer treatment as dehumanizing.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>In this article, we provide preliminary evidence from two studies examining the reliability and validity of the PDOS. In study 1, a jail sample (<i>n</i> = 411), we analyzed the exploratory factor structure, internal consistency, and discriminant validity (in relation to procedural justice [PJ]) of the PDOS. Additionally, using a cross-sectional ordinary least squares (OLS) regression analysis, we related independent variables with the PDOS, the dependent variable. In Study 2, a prison sample (<i>n</i> = 2993), we confirmed the findings from study 1.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>The PDOS appears to be a psychometrically sound measure of perceived dehumanization from officers with strong association between perceptions of PJ and perceived dehumanization from officers.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>The PDOS provides opportunity for future research, intervention through rehumanization efforts, and signals the important officer treatment. Importantly We close by discussing implications of these studies, limitations, and future research directions to further develop and test the PDOS.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":15395,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Psychology","volume":"80 5","pages":"1065-1078"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jclp.23651","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose

Emerging evidence indicates that incarcerated populations' perceptions of dehumanization by officers are prevalent, yet measures of it are few, and to our knowledge, no self-report measure of dehumanization from officers exists. To fill this gap, we have developed the Perceived Dehumanization from Officers Scale (PDOS), which is designed as a brief measure to assess perception of officer treatment as dehumanizing.

Methods

In this article, we provide preliminary evidence from two studies examining the reliability and validity of the PDOS. In study 1, a jail sample (n = 411), we analyzed the exploratory factor structure, internal consistency, and discriminant validity (in relation to procedural justice [PJ]) of the PDOS. Additionally, using a cross-sectional ordinary least squares (OLS) regression analysis, we related independent variables with the PDOS, the dependent variable. In Study 2, a prison sample (n = 2993), we confirmed the findings from study 1.

Results

The PDOS appears to be a psychometrically sound measure of perceived dehumanization from officers with strong association between perceptions of PJ and perceived dehumanization from officers.

Conclusions

The PDOS provides opportunity for future research, intervention through rehumanization efforts, and signals the important officer treatment. Importantly We close by discussing implications of these studies, limitations, and future research directions to further develop and test the PDOS.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
开发和验证军官非人化感知自我报告测量方法
新的证据表明,被监禁者普遍认为受到警官的非人性化对待,但对其进行测量的方法却很少,而且据我们所知,目前还没有关于警官非人性化对待的自我报告测量方法。为了填补这一空白,我们开发了 "感知警官非人性化行为量表"(PDOS),该量表旨在作为一种简短的测量方法,用于评估对警官非人性化待遇的感知。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Clinical Psychology
Journal of Clinical Psychology PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL-
CiteScore
5.40
自引率
3.30%
发文量
177
期刊介绍: Founded in 1945, the Journal of Clinical Psychology is a peer-reviewed forum devoted to research, assessment, and practice. Published eight times a year, the Journal includes research studies; articles on contemporary professional issues, single case research; brief reports (including dissertations in brief); notes from the field; and news and notes. In addition to papers on psychopathology, psychodiagnostics, and the psychotherapeutic process, the journal welcomes articles focusing on psychotherapy effectiveness research, psychological assessment and treatment matching, clinical outcomes, clinical health psychology, and behavioral medicine.
期刊最新文献
Expressive Suppression of Emotions in Bulimia Nervosa: An Electroencephalography Study. ACT for OCD: An Example of ACT and Values-Based Exposures. Strategies for Optimizing Traditional Exposure and Response Prevention: A Case Study Example in an Adolescent With Contamination-Based OCD. Forgiveness in Poland: Rye Forgiveness Scale Adaptation and Its Longitudinal Impact on Mental Health in HIV-Positive Individuals. Issue Information
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1