U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

NCJRS Virtual Library

The Virtual Library houses over 235,000 criminal justice resources, including all known OJP works.
Click here to search the NCJRS Virtual Library

Development and Confirmatory Factor Analysis of the Community Norms of Child Neglect Scale

NCJ Number
217306
Journal
Child Maltreatment Volume: 12 Issue: 1 Dated: February 2007 Pages: 68-85
Author(s)
Rebecca Goodvin; David R. Johnson; Sam A. Hardy; Michelle I. Graef; Jeff M. Chambers
Date Published
February 2007
Length
18 pages
Annotation
This article describes the development and validation of the Community Norms of Child Neglect Scale (CNCNS), a brief survey that assesses individuals' perceptions of potentially neglectful behaviors.
Abstract
The testing shows that the CNCNS is promising as a brief measure of community norms and individual perceptions of the seriousness of subtypes of child neglect. Using this scale, a broad community sample distinguished among a set of child-neglect subtypes. The sample involved in the testing of the CNCNS was diverse in terms of rural-urban, socioeconomic, and demographic characteristics other than race/ethnicity. The CNCNS should support researchers' capacities to assess community perceptions of child neglect norms. It deserves further research and validation. The CNCNS differentiates among four subtypes of neglect: failure to provide for basic needs, lack of supervision, emotional neglect, and educational neglect. Scenarios that varied in their seriousness for each of these subtypes were presented to a large community sample (n=3,809). The measurement equivalence of the CNCNS was tested across individuals who worked with children and lay community respondents, as well as across rural and urban respondents. As part of a larger study of community differences in the incidence, identification, and reporting of child neglect, the CNCNS was included in a telephone survey in 50 communities in a Midwestern State. There were approximately 75 respondents in each community represented. 8 tables and 40 references