Citation
The development of an instrument to measure racial identity development in juvenile offenders

Material Information

Title:
The development of an instrument to measure racial identity development in juvenile offenders
Creator:
Sheperis, Carl
Publication Date:
Language:
English
Physical Description:
viii, 125 leaves : ; 29 cm.

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Adolescents ( jstor )
African American culture ( jstor )
African Americans ( jstor )
Delinquency ( jstor )
Juvenile courts ( jstor )
Psychological counseling ( jstor )
Questionnaires ( jstor )
Racial identity ( jstor )
White people ( jstor )
Young offenders ( jstor )
Adolescent Behavior -- statistics ( mesh )
African Americans -- statistics ( mesh )
Counselor Education thesis, Ph. D ( lcsh )
Demography -- statistics -- United States ( mesh )
Dissertations, Academic -- Counselor Education -- UF ( lcsh )
Ethnopsychology ( mesh )
Juvenile Delinquency ( mesh )
Psychometrics ( mesh )
Research ( mesh )
Statistics -- methods ( mesh )
Statistics, Nonparametric -- methods ( mesh )
City of Gainesville ( local )
Genre:
bibliography ( marcgt )
theses ( marcgt )
non-fiction ( marcgt )

Notes

Thesis:
Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Florida, 2001.
Bibliography:
Includes bibliographical references (leaves 115-124).
General Note:
Printout.
General Note:
Vita.
Statement of Responsibility:
by Carl John Sheperis.

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Florida
Holding Location:
University of Florida
Rights Management:
The University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries respect the intellectual property rights of others and do not claim any copyright interest in this item. This item may be protected by copyright but is made available here under a claim of fair use (17 U.S.C. §107) for non-profit research and educational purposes. Users of this work have responsibility for determining copyright status prior to reusing, publishing or reproducing this item for purposes other than what is allowed by fair use or other copyright exemptions. Any reuse of this item in excess of fair use or other copyright exemptions requires permission of the copyright holder. The Smathers Libraries would like to learn more about this item and invite individuals or organizations to contact the RDS coordinator (ufdissertations@uflib.ufl.edu) with any additional information they can provide.
Resource Identifier:
027954106 ( ALEPH )
49232613 ( OCLC )

Downloads

This item has the following downloads:


Full Text

PAGE 1

THE DEVELOPMENT OF AN INSTRUMENT TO MEASURE RACIAL IDENTITY DEVELOPMENT IN JUVENILE OFFENDERS By CARL JOHN SHEPERIS A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2001

PAGE 2

Copyright 2001 by Carl John Sheperis

PAGE 3

I To my wife, Shelly and my son Joe Lee. I find strength and energy in your love.

PAGE 4

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I wish to express deep gratitude and appreciation to Dr. Larry Loesch, the original Chair of my doctoral studies committee. Sincere appreciation also goes to the other members of my doctoral committee: Dr. David Miller, Dr. Woodrow M. Parker, and Dr. James Pitts. Special thanks are extended to Dr. M. Harry Daniels for agreeing to chair my committee in Dr. Loesch' s absence. 1 thank Dr. Joe Wittmer, for guiding me through the doctoral process and providing me with the requisite experiences to become a counselor educator. I thank Dr. Nick Hanna, for being an inspiration. I thank my son, Joe Lee, whose morning smiles help me start each day. Finally, I thank my wife. Shelly, whose love and undying support helped me to complete this project. iv

PAGE 5

TABLE OF CONTENTS page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS iv ABSTRACT vii CHAPTERS I INTRODUCTION ! 1 Purpose of the Study 8 Rationale for the Study 9 Research Questions 16 Definition of Terms 16 II REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE 20 Identification of Juvenile Offenders 22 Socio-ecological Factors in the Development of Delinquency 24 Race as a Psychological Construct 28 Racial Identity Development 30 RID Assessment Instruments 40 The Multigroup Ehnic Identity Measure 41 The African American Acculturation Scale n 43 The Themes Concerning Blacks Projective Technique 43 The Multi-construct African American Identity Questionnaire 44 The Adolescent Survey of Black Life 45 The Racial Identity Attitude Scale 46 Summary of Literature Review 48 III METHODOLOGY 50 Initial Development of the BARIS 5 1 Item Rationale 55 Population 55 Sampling Procedures 60 Procedures 62 Initial Study 64 Administration 65 Reliability 66 V

PAGE 6

Validation Studies 68 Scoring IV RESULTS 73 Demographic Data Analysis 73 Reliability Hypotheses 78 Validity Hypotheses and Exploratory Analyses 78 V DISCUSSION 82 BARIS Structure 84 Suggested Uses of the BARIS 86 Limitations and Suggestions for Further Research 88 Conclusions 91 APPENDICES A PARTICIPANT CONSENT AND ASSENT FORMS 92 B BARIS DEMOGRAPHIC FORMS 1 04 C BARIS INITIAL VERSION 1 05 D FEEDBACK FOR THE BARIS INITIAL STUDY 107 E REVISED BARIS 108 F VALIDATION INSTRUMENTS 1 09 REFERENCES 115 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH 1 25 vi

PAGE 7

Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy THE DEVELOPMENT OF AN INSTRUMENT TO MEASURE RACIAL IDENTITY DEVELOPMENT IN JUVENILE OFFENDERS By Carl John Sheperis August, 2001 Chair: M. Harry Daniels, Ph.D. Major Department: Counselor Education The purpose of this study was to develop a valid instrument to measure racial identity development (RID) in Black adolescent male juvenile offenders (BAMs). The Black Adolescent Racial Identity Scale (BARIS) was developed in several phases. Initial items for the BARIS were generated through a review of existing RID scales and with attention to the Tri-status Model of Racial Identity Development. The initial version of the BARIS, which was subjected to expert review, contained 59 items related to three RID statuses: Assimilation, Self-segregation, and Universal Acceptance. In the initial phase of this study, 327 participants from Mississippi school districts completed the BARIS and a feedback form. A factor analysis with orthogonal, Varimax rotation was used to identify the initial factor structure of the BARIS. Based on the respective factor loadings on the three BARIS factors, 37 items were eliminated from the initial version. vii

PAGE 8

In an attempt to establish the concurrent and divergent validity of the BARIS, a second phase of the study was conducted in which the BARIS was administered to 126 BAMs from juvenile offender programs in Mississippi, Florida, and Pennsylvania. One of three additional RID instruments was administered to subgroups of 25 participants along with the BARIS. The instruments included in this phase of the study were the Racial Identity Attitude Scale, the Multigroup Ethnic Identity Measure, and the Adolescent Survey of Black Life. In order to establish a reliability estimate, Cronbach's alpha was computed for BARIS scores from the second phase of the study. Demographic information related to age, racial designation, SES, arrests, and involvement in the juvenile justice system was collected from participants in the second phase of the study. This information was analyzed using Kruskal-Wallis tests. The results of this study showed statistically significant differences in scores based on demographic characteristics. With regard to concurrent validity, two statistically significant correlations emerged from the analysis. Evidence of divergent validity was demonstrated by the lack of statistically significant correlations between the BARIS Assimilation and Universal factor scores and all scales of the MEIM. The Alpha Coefficient for the BARIS was .68. viii

PAGE 9

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION A juvenile offender is an adolescent under the age of 18 who has committed a crime, been arrested, and processed through and classified by the juvenile court system. Juvenile offenders can be referred to as juvenile delinquents or delinquent youth (Board, 1999b). Juvenile crime is a substantial and costly problem in the United States. Juvenile courts are overburdened with cases and juvenile incarceration facilities are overflowing. For example, in fiscal year 1999, the state of Florida invested almost $640 million dollars in the Department of Juvenile Justice (Board, 1999b). Other states invested proportionately similar, if not greater, amounts of money. Throughout the 1990s, the federal government has invested more than 74 billion dollars to address juvenile crime (Miller, 1994). Costs per stay in juvenile facilities range from $300 in the least restrictive court diversion programs to $145,000 for the maximum sentence in the most restrictive setting (Board, 1999a). From 1980 to 1994, the total number of juvenile offenders arrested for crimes committed rose substantially each year, yet from 1994 to 1997 there were declines in the numbers of juveniles being arrested for violent offenses such as murder, forcible rape, robbery, and aggravated assault. However, even in light of these declines (3% in 1995, 6% in 1996, and 4% in 1997), the number of juvenile Violent Crime Index arrests in 1997 was 49% above the 1988 level. In comparison, the number of adult arrests for a Violent Crime Index offense in 1997 was only 19% greater than in 1988 (Snyder, 1997). ]

PAGE 10

2 According to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), law enforcement agencies in the United States made an estimated 2.8 million arrests of persons under age 18 in 1997. Juveniles accounted for 19% of all arrests and 17% of all violent crime arrests in that year. During 1996-1997, there were 1,427,384 youth between the ages of 10 and 17 in Florida. A total of 108,397 of those youth (8%) were charged with delinquency offenses and referred to the Florida Department of Juvenile Justice during that time period (Board, 1999a). Based on these numbers, the number of youth being referred to the juvenile justice system in the state of Florida parallels national trends. At present, the recidivism rate for juvenile offenders is 90% (Snyder, 1997). This means that nine out of ten juvenile offenders likely will have subsequent involvement and re-adjudication or conviction for an offense that occurs within 12 months of release from juvenile justice program involvement (Snyder, 1997). Based on these statistics, it is evident that a very significant problem exists that must be addressed. Many factors have been identified that contribute to juvenile delinquency. For example, frequently adolescents in the juvenile justice system have come from seriously dysfunctional family backgrounds (Board, 1999a, 1999b; Coie & Jacobs, 1993; Elliot, 1994; Loeber, Wung et al., 1993; Pope & Feyerherm, 1995; Scholte, 1992; Snyder, 1997; Tolan, Guerra, & Kendall, 1995). Evidence of addiction and alcoholism also is prevalent in the families of juvenile offenders. Concomitantly, families involved in the juvenile system are overwhelmingly in the poverty-level category. Although researchers have identified several factors that contribute to delinquency, the increasing recidivism rate across the United States suggests an important

PAGE 11

3 consideration may be being overlooked. It is possible that a pragmatic transition from identifying factors to utilizing them in treatment has not occurred. For example, while salient factors contributing to delinquency include drug and alcohol abuse, uncontrolled aggression, family and mental health problems, and poverty, and these issues are typically addressed in counseling programs utilized by juvenile offender treatment facilities, juvenile offender recidivism continues to increase. hi order to discuss effective attention to salient factors in the treatment of juvenile offenders, it is important to understand the structure of the juvenile justice system and also recidivism. The Department of Juvenile Justice (DJJ) maintains a restrictiveness level (treatment) system that increases the length of incarceration with the degree of severity of offense or with the number of offenses committed (based on a judicial scoring system). The restrictiveness system ranges from court diversion programs (low risk) to long-term residential commitment (maximum risk). There are five restrictiveness levels used in the state of Florida: 2 (low risk), 4, 6, 8, and 10 (maximum risk) (Board, 1999b). Juvenile offenders arrested in the state of Florida are brought to a Juvenile Assessment Center (J AC), which is a receiving, screening, and assessment facility funded and operated by local partnerships of law enforcement agencies, school districts, human service agencies, DJJ, and other stakeholders (Board, 1999b). Upon arrival, a comprehensive assessment is conducted to gather information for the evaluation of a juvenile offender's physical, psychological, educational, vocational, social, and family environment as they relate to the offender's need for services (Board, 1999b). Recommendations are then made to the court for the restrictiveness level for the juvenile offender.

PAGE 12

4 Offenders waiting for trial may be placed in a detention center, which is a staterun, temporary, hardware-secure holding facility for juvenile offenders comparable to a jail in the adult system. Detention may be used to punish delinquent and juvenile traffic violators or those youth found to have committed offenses involving firearms. Offenders may be held 21 days prior to their adjudicatory hearing unless the court grants a continuance. However, a child who is assigned to a level eight or ten commitment program and awaiting placement may be held in a secure detention facility indefinitely (Board, 1999b). Offenses such as first-time trespassing may result in a court diversion program. Diversion is a process by which a youth is channeled away from the judicial process by completion of a specified treatment plan designed to preclude further delinquent acts while meeting the individual needs of the child (Board, 1999b). This type of intervention can include Teen Court, a diversion program for youth who have admitted guilt as charged and agreed to be sentenced by a jury of their peers (Board, 1999b). Teen Court sentences typically involve serving on the jury for several other cases, making restitution and apologies to victims, and/or conducting community service. However, once a child has been found to have committed a violation of law or delinquent act, the judge can formally adjudicate the child as a prelude to commitment to custody of the DJJ (Board, 1999b). Once a youth is adjudicated, the range of restrictiveness varies according to the youth's severity score. Minimum-risk, nonresidential programs are used for committed youth who represent a minimum risk to themselves and public safety and who do not require placement and services in residential settings (Board, 1999b). Community control is an example of minimum-risk.

PAGE 13

non-residential commitment. It includes supervision of a youth by a DJJ juvenile probation officer. Supervision of the child by the juvenile probation officer requires contact with the child, the child's family, and the child's school, as well as other rehabilitative and punitive sanctions as specified in the court's disposition order. Typical rehabilitative sanctions include attending anger management classes or drug and alcohol counseling, and is comparable to adult probation (Board, 1999b). Low-risk residential (level 4 in Florida) programs are for committed youth who represent a low risk to themselves and public safety, yet require placement and services in residential settings. These settings include wilderness and work camps, family group homes, and group treatment homes (Board, 1999b). Such placements are typically of threeto six-month duration wherein the offender participates in individual and group counseling, anger management classes, family counseling, and drug and alcohol counseling. Moderate-risk residential programs (level 6 in Florida) are for committed youth who represent a moderate risk to public safety and who require 24-hour awake supervision, custody, care, and treatment. The facility may have a security fence around the perimeter. Program models include halfway houses, wilderness and work camps, and local residential programs (Board, 1999b). These programs typically use treatment approaches similar to those for low-risk residential programs, but extend over a longer time period. Offenders are typically sentenced from 6 to 18 months in a moderate-risk facility. Maximum-risk residential programs (level 10 in Florida) are for committed youth who require close supervision in a maximum-security, residential setting that provides

PAGE 14

24-hour-per-day secure custody, care, and supervision prompted by a demonstrated need to protect the public. Programs feature hardware-secure, long-term (e.g., 18-36 month) residential commitment facilities intended to provide a moderate overlay of educational, vocational, and behavioral modification services (Board, 1999b). However, these services are again similar to those provided at lower levels of restrictiveness. It is evident that some factors contributing to delinquency, such as drug and alcohol abuse and other family problems, are addressed on a regular and continuing basis at various levels of restrictiveness. However, the rate of recidivism continues to grow. Thus, identified factors contributing to delinquency are being addressed and yet treatment is continuing to be unsuccessful. Therefore, the possibility of a missing factor is likely. Recently, some researchers have begun to speculate that factors associated with race may be the missing consideration (Board, 1999a, 1999b; Pope & Feyerherm, 1995; Snyder, 1997). However, there has been no research that attempts to validate differences in recidivism on the basis of race. At present, the population of juvenile offenders in the United States is 56% Black/African American (Pope & Feyerherm, 1995; Snyder, 1997). The percentage of (all) minority juvenile offenders is an alarming over-representation (Board, 1999a, 1999b; Pope & Feyerherm, 1995; Snyder, 1997). This rate becomes even more frightfully disproportional as youth progress through the various levels of restrictiveness within the juvenile justice system (Board, 1999a; Pope & Feyerherm, 1995). However, there is no adequate research base to explain the over-representation of minorities. According to Budman et al. (1992), crazy means "doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." At present, a majority of juvenile offender

PAGE 15

7 treatment programs utilize edc approaches to rehabilitation. Etic is a term used to describe how cultures are examined in terms of similarities and dissimilarities in comparison to other cultures. This is often referred to as the universal approach. When comparisons are made within the cultural system in question, that is, by examining the culture itself, the result is referred to as the emic or culturally specific approach. In the case of juvenile offender treatment programs, an etic approach suggests that a rehabilitation or therapeutic program is applied to an entire population, regardless of presenting issues, developmental history, or racial status. For example, many juvenile offender programs teach communication skills, anger management classes, self-esteem enhancement, and impulse control skills regardless of how the juvenile offenders came to be in the program (Bierman et al., 1992; Coie & Jacobs, 1993; Scholte, 1992). Certainly, these are important skills for troubled adolescents to learn. However, the results of these interventions as rehabilitation efforts have not been promising. If "craziness" is in fact doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results, then it is time to take a different approach. One logical possibility is to include racial and cultural considerations as part of an emic perspective (Miller, 1994). A logical way to do this is to focus on racial identity development (RID). Although racial identity development is a process applicable to all racial groups, this study will focus on the RID of Black adolescent males (BAMs). According to Carter (1995), RID is a process of ego differentiation wherein a person's racial worldview moves toward maturity. Originally, RID was thought to develop linearly and in stages by completion of developmental tasks at each stage. However, current theory holds that it develops in "statuses" which are more pervious than

PAGE 16

8 stages and allow for overlap in completion of developmental tasks (Carter, 1991; Carter, 1995; Cross, 1977; Helms, 1986, 1990; Helms & Parham, 1990; Parham, 1989; Parham & Helms, 1985a; Poston, 1990). Less mature RID statuses reflect external sources of racial identity influence such as peers, media, family, or educational institutions. They also are simplistic, generally inaccurate, and include unexamined personal and group notions about race and race relations (Carter, 1995; Helms, 1990). More mature statuses are internal and derived from a personal process of exploration, discovery, integration, and maturation of self and personal racial identity (Carter, 1995). Also, at more mature levels, race is complex and dynamic, and based on accurate information and thoughtfully examined personal and racial group experiences (Carter, 1995). If juvenile offenders have completed the process of self-examination and moved toward higher statuses in RID, then etic approaches should be applicable to their respective rehabilitation efforts. However, etic approaches have not been effective thus far. Thus, by identifying levels of racial identity development in BAM juvenile offenders, specific treatment and recidivism issues related to race and culture can be identified. The eventual, long-term result should be greater success for clinicians and juvenile offenders. Purpose of the Study Understanding the true impact of racial identity on juvenile offenders and their respective rehabilitation efforts requires the use of a valid and reliable measuring instrument. Several instruments have been developed to test racial identity development in general populations (e.g.. Carter, 1991; Carter, 1995; Choney & Rowe, 1994; Cross, 1977; Helms, 1990; Helms & Parham, 1990; Ibrahim, Ohnishi, & Sing Sandhu, 1997; Mays, 1986; Nobles, 1989; Parham, 1989; Parham & Helms, 1985a, 1985b; Parks,

PAGE 17

9 Carter, & Gushue, 1996; Plummer, 1995; Ponterotto, 1989; Poston, 1990; Richardson & Molinaro, 1996; Shorter-Gooden & Washington, 1996; White & Parham, 1990). However, most of these instruments have not been designed to address RID in adolescents (i.e., they are intended for use with adult populations). Furthermore, the instruments specifically have not been tested on the juvenile offender population (Bierman et al., 1992; Board, 1999a, 1999b; Coie & Jacobs, 1993; DiLalla, Mitchell, Arthur, & Pagliocca, 1988; Hooper & Evans, 1984; Loeber, Wung et al., 1993; Miller, 1994; Snyder, 1997; Tolan et al., 1995). Assessment of RID among BAM juvenile offenders necessitates an instrument specifically appropriate to them. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to develop a valid and reliable instrument to assess racial identity development among BAM juvenile offenders. The Black Adolescent Racial Identity Scale (BARIS) will be developed to assess the racial identity statuses of BAM juvenile offenders. Rationale for the Study There is ample evidence that juvenile crime is a problem in the United States and that an overrepresentation of minorities exists in the juvenile offender population. It is also certain that many current rehabilitation efforts have been unsuccessful in regard to recidivism. It is further clear that many factors affect the rate of delinquency in the United States, but there is no clear and simple solution. With this in mind, some of the obvious factors must be examined to begin to find the solution. Issues such as drug and alcohol abuse, socio-economic status, and other family problems have been found to have strong correlations with developing delinquency. Many of these factors are addressed on a regular and continuing basis at various levels of restrictiveness in the juvenile justice system. However, the rate of recidivism continues

PAGE 18

10 to grow. Thus, identified factors contributing to delinquency are being addressed and yet treatment is continuing to be unsuccessful. Therefore, the possibility of a missing factor exists. Recently, some researchers have begun to speculate that factors associated with race may be the missing consideration (Board, 1999a, 1999b; Pope & Feyerherm, 1995; Snyder, 1997). However, there has been no research that attempts to validate differences in recidivism on the basis of race. In the context of these considerations, the development of a scale to measure racial identity in the BAM juvenile offender population is warranted. Considering the minority over-representation within the juvenile justice population, it is logical to examine socio-cultural factors inherent in the juvenile system that affect the outcome of treatment. Furthermore, the Department of Juvenile Justice has called for investigation into this over-representation. Even in light of this mandate, a majority of offender rehabilitation programs fail to include racial or cultural issues in their treatment efforts. The first step in investigation of race as a factor is to verify a need. That can be done through the assessment of racial identity attitudes. RID is a complex construct relating to how and when individuals come to understand themselves as racial/ethnic beings. Information derived from measures of it can be useful in all aspects of counseling processes, including juvenile offender rehabilitation. However, instruments currently available have been normed on adult populations and the information regarding their psychometric properties has been insufficient (Carter, 1995; Harris, 1995; Helms, 1990; Parham & Helms, 1985a; Ponterotto, 1989). It is clear that an instrument is needed to assess RID in adolescents and more specifically in adolescent juvenile offenders. The BARIS will provide an opportunity to

PAGE 19

11 reevaluate RID theory by controlling for some of the methodological problems inherent in other studies and also help to identify notable issues for the counseling process with Black adolescent males both in and out of the juvenile offender system. Therefore, in order to conduct this investigation, a model must be used to give basis to further study. Over the last 30 years, many models of racial-identity development have emerged. However, few of these models have undergone validation studies (Carter, 1991; Cross, 1977; Helms, 1986, 1990; Parham, 1989; Ponterotto, 1989; Vontress, 1996). In 1971, Thomas began to investigate the development of racial identity among Black/Afro-Americans (as cited in Carter, 1995). In his original model of Negromachy, he hypothesized that AfroAmericans, a term consistent with that time in American history, had developed a need to seek approval from whites in all activities. In turn, this need created a means by which Afro-Americans could measure their level of success or failure as human beings. Because of this external source of personal validation, the person's belief system led to repressed rage, compliance, subservience, and a high sensitivity to racial issues (Carter, 1995). Cross (1977), whose model of racial identity development (RID) is cited most often in the counseling literature, developed a five-stage developmental process that consists of (a) Pre-encounter, (b) Encounter, (c) Immersion Emersion, (d) Internalization, and (e) Internalization-Commitment. This model, termed Nigrescence, was designed to explain the process by which African Americans came to value their blackness and their culture. According to Helms (1994a), racial identity development is a process experienced by all individuals regardless of race, culture, gender, or social status. Much like the

PAGE 20

12 Cross' and Thomas" models, Helms identified levels of racial identity that develop in statuses. Helms (1994a) defined statuses as "the dynamic cognitive, emotional, and behavioral processes that govern a person's interpretation of racial information in her or his interpersonal environments" (p. 184). According to Helms, racial identity instruments identify schemata that are behavioral manifestations of the statuses. Rather than having to complete lower levels of development (much like Erikson's model of psychosocial development). Helms postulated that individuals might demonstrate behaviors and attitudes of several statuses at the same time but that the individuals will have a dominant status. Helms' model includes five statuses: Conformity (Pre-encounter), Dissonance, Immersion/Emersion, Internalization, and Integrative Awareness. In addition to the importance of identifying models of racial identity development in this study, it is also important to define accurately the social forces that impact an individual's development. These social forces have a direct impact on an individual's racial identity development (Helms, 1989b). Historical hostility is a theme suggested by Vontress and based on the theory of the collective unconscious espoused by Jung (Vontress & Epp, 1997). According to the theory of collective unconscious, human beings are affected by their personal histories as well as the history of the human race (Berger, 1988; Carver & Scheier, 1992; Liebert & Spiegler, 1990; Stone & Church, 1984). Archetypes, or the psychological traces of previous generations, have a direct impact on a human being's development from birth to death. Within this framework, it is plausible that individuals are impacted by potent experiences such as racism and oppression that may have occurred in past. Vontress (1997) claims that historical hostility differs from common day-to-day anger, hostility, rage, and other episodic

PAGE 21

13 negative events. Much like an archetype, historical hostility remains part of the collective "cultural" unconscious, and the message is automatically passed from generation to generation. This message lies dormant within each individual until it is made conscious by a powerful emotional experience. If Vontress were correct, then accurate identification of issues related to historical hostility would be very important in the treatment of juvenile offenders. Juvenile offender treatment programs exist to rehabilitate the population they serve. Therefore, the rehabilitation program efforts and curricula used should focus on the various issues faced by this population, hi order to identify these issues accurately, some measure must be employed. At present, there are many instruments that identify levels of delinquency and some issues faced by offenders. However, these instruments lack attention to racial and cultural issues. Many of the current rehabilitation programs available to juvenile offender treatment centers have been developed from anecdotal experiences. In other words, treatment programs have developed their curricula based on reports of "successful" treatment programs. There has been little attention paid to human factors in those effective reports and there have not been adequate validity studies conducted on the programs' effectiveness. Thus, replication of those programs has been difficult. Although identity development is a process that occurs across the lifespan, it can be particularly important during adolescence. According to Spencer (as cited in Harris, 1992), children begin to develop an awareness of self and others in the first two years of life. By the time a child reaches the age of five, there is an understanding of ethno-racial groups, although there may not be understanding of the permanence of belonging to these

PAGE 22

14 groups. By the time children reach adolescence, they are attempting to develop a sense of individuality while resisting pressures to belong to a group and to conform to expectations set forth by parents, peers, teachers, their ethno-racial group and others. Thus, although an adolescent's personality traits contribute to the manner in which their identity is formed, there are other factors that contribute as well; self-esteem, social context, race, ethnicity, and gender all play roles in identity formation. Black adolescent males comprise the majority of the juvenile offender population. Therefore, it makes good sense to address the issues that they face first. The focus should be not only on the individuals as juvenile offenders, but also as males in a race where 1 out of 4 spends time in jail and where 1 in 21 males will be murdered in their lifetime (Miller, 1994). It also makes sense to consider the history of oppression that has faced this population and the effects that this history can have on identity development (Vontress, 1996). Racial identity development is a complex constmct relating to how and when individuals come to understand themselves as racial/ethnic beings. Information derived from measures of it can be useful in all aspects of counseling processes, from supervision to identifying salient issues in treatment. However, the focus of current instruments has been on adult populations (Carter, 1991; Carter, 1995; Harris, 1995; Helms, 1989b, 1990; Parham, 1989; Parham & Helms, 1985a; Ponterotto, 1989). There also have been inherent methodological problems in the validity studies for existing instruments (Helms, 1989b; Ponterotto, 1989). The development of a scale to measure racial identity in the BAM juvenile offender population will provide an opportunity to control for some of the

PAGE 23

15 methodological problems inherent in other studies, but also will help identify notable issues for the counseling process. The development of a specific scale for BAM juvenile offenders will provide useful information in the areas of counselor training, juvenile justice program development, counseling research, and counseling practice. The development of this instrument will ultimately benefit the juvenile offenders who participate in culturally specific therapy and rehabilitation programs resulting from the identification of culturally relevant issues. Racial identity theory may be refined through the development of this instrument. Considering the long history of psychology as a discipline, racial identity research is relatively infantile (although new information is being gathered daily). If theory development is to continue to progress, then there must be valid and psychometrically sound measures of important constructs. Considering the current push for multicultural infusion into counselor preparation programs, research results from development of this instrument can have a direct impact on the ways in which counselors are trained. Counselor preparation programs will have a valid and reliable means to gather data from which to direct their suggested interventions with BAM juvenile offenders. Counselors using the BARIS will have a tool to identify salient issues in a quicker and more efficient manner. The instrument will serve as an aid in creating discussion around difficult and serious issues such as racism and prejudice, thus breaking down some barriers that may be inherent in the current juvenile justice treatment system. The dilemma of recidivism in the BAM juvenile offender population can be overcome. Culturally relevant treatment approaches are a viable alternative to etic

PAGE 24

16 approaches that have had Httle success. With psychometrically sound measurement tools, counselors working in these programs can develop a solid knowledge base to help formulate treatment goals and objectives. Research Questions 1. What is the initial factor structure of the BARIS? 2. What are the differences in BARIS factor scores based on socio-economic level? 3. What are the differences in BARIS factor scores between juvenile offenders and non-offenders? 4. What are the differences in BARIS factor scores based on level of offense? 5. What are the levels of validity and reliability coefficients for the BARIS? Definition of Terms Afrocentricity refers to "...a quality of thought and practice which is rooted on the cultural image and interest of African people and which represents and reflects the life experiences, history, and traditions of African people as the center of analyses" (Nobles, as cited in Harris, 1992, p. 158) Ascribed Identity is an individual's deliberate affiliation with or commitment to a particular group (Ferguson, 1997). BARIS is the acronym for the Black Adolescent Racial Identity Scale, which was developed through this research effort.

PAGE 25

17 Culture is the set of commonalties around which people develop values, norms, family life-styles, social roles, and behaviors in response to historical, political, economic, and social realities (Pigler Christensen, 1989). Culturally Different Groups are any groups whose styles of living, values, customs, traditions, language, and cultural practices are different from a person's own. Culturally Effective Persons are individuals who are sensitive to the needs, issues, and concerns of culturally diverse group members. Ego Status is "the dynamic cognitive, emotional, and behavioral processes that govern a person's interpretation of racial information in her or his interpersonal environments" (Helms, 1994b p.5). Emic is a perspective on cultures in which comparisons are made within a particular cultural system by examining the culture itself. It is often referred to as the culturalspecific approach. Ethnic Minority is a group who shares common characteristics, customs, and traditions that are different from those of the majority group. Ethnocentrism is the belief that a person's group (e.g., family, country, culture, religion, belief system, etc.) is right and to be defended. Etic is a perspective on cultures in which they are examined in terms of similarities and dissimilarities with other cultures. This is often referred to as the universal approach. Historical Hostility is a theme suggested by Vontress (1997) derived from the theory of collective unconscious espoused by Carl Jung. Vontress (1997) claimed that historical hostility differs from common day-to-day anger, hostility, rage, or other episodic, negative events. Much like an archetype, historical hostility remains part of the

PAGE 26

18 collective "cultural" unconscious and is automatically passed from generation to generation. A Juvenile is any youth under the age of 18. Juvenile Commitment Facility is a treatment program designed for adjudicated and committed delinquent offenders ranging from low risk non-residential to maximum risk residential (Board, 1999b). Minority is a group whose population is comprised of less than half of that of a total population. Multicultural Setting is any place, agency, or institution where culturally different group members comprise a portion of the population. Personal Identity is the personal feelings and attitudes held about oneself (Ferguson, 1997). Prejudice is an emotional response, usually based on fear, mistrust, and/or ignorance, directed at a racial, religious, national, or other cultural group. Race is "an arbitrary classification of population using actual or assumed genetic traits to classify populations of the world into a hierarchical order" (Pigler Christensen, 1989 p. 275). Racial Identity is the quality or manner of personal identification with a racial group. Racial Identity Status is comprised of attitudes, thoughts, feelings, and behaviors toward self as a member of a racial group and toward members of the dominant or nondominant racial group(s) (Carter, 1995). Racial Minority is a term to describe groups who are identified by distinctive physical characteristics and perceived as different from those of other members of society. Skin

PAGE 27

19 color, hair type, body structure, and shape of head or nose or eyes are common criteria applied in this context. Recidivism is when a person who has been convicted of a criminal act completes a treatment program and then re-offends. Reference Group Orientation is the context in which a person uses particular racial group behavior patterns to guide feelings, thoughts, and behaviors (Ferguson, 1997). Stereotype is an overgeneralization applied to an individual without regard to personal uniqueness.

PAGE 28

CHAPTER n REVffiW OF RELATED LITERATURE Understanding and assessing racial identity development in Black adolescent juvenile offenders requires exploration into several areas of knowledge. The literature reviewed for the purposes of this study, in relation to the development of the BARIS, is organized as follows: problems of and related to juvenile offenders, continued increases in recidivism despite attention to identified contributing factors, defining race as a psychological construct, theories of racial identity development, adolescents and identity development, historical context of racial identity research, racial and ethnic identity development scales, and a summary and critique. Before beginning, it is important to note that the purpose of this study is to develop a valid and reliable instrument to measure RID in juvenile offenders. Therefore, the initial task is to demonstrate the rationale behind the development of the BARIS. After the rationale has been delineated, the major emphasis of this review will be on literature related to the measurement of racial identity development. With regard to juvenile offenders and the issues related to the development of juvenile offender behavior, the literature available is immense. Because the major focus of this research is the development of a scale to measure racial identity development, and 20

PAGE 29

21 juvenile offenders are the population for which the instrument is being developed, it is necessary to review literature establishing a need for the development of the instrument. Racial identity development has been a growing topic in psychological literature since the 1970s (Atkinson, 1987; Cross, 1977; Howard-Hamilton, Ferguson, & Puleo, 1998; Patterson, 1996; Pigler Christensen, 1989; Sue, Arredondo, & McDavis, 1992). Over the last 30 years, numerous articles and reviews have been published that establish RE) as a viable and legitimate psychological construct (e.g., Carter & Helms, 1987; Helms & Parham, 1990; Nelville, Heppner, & Wang, 1997; Parham & Helms, 1985a; Ponterotto, 1989). However, there has not been a comprehensive review of the literature related to RID since Ponterotto (1991) completed an analysis of the literature from 1980 to 1990. This review is concentrated on articles related to RID instrument development and validity from 1990 to 2000. In addition, because the population on which BARIS is being normed is adolescent Black males between the ages of 1 3 and 20, this review addresses only articles related to the Black male population. The remainder of the chapter contains critical reviews of the contemporary literature from the past decade regarding racial identity development and the scales designed to measure it. As stated in Chapter I, examination of racial identity development is a relatively new, yet complicated process. As a result, many studies in this area have lacked appropriate methodology, sample size, and statistical rigor. Indeed, the literature related to scale development for the measurement of RID is replete with criticism (e.g., Helms, 1994a; Pederson, 1996; Phinney, 1990; Ponterotto, 1989; Pope, 1995; Poston, 1990; Sabnani & Ponterotto, 1992). For example. Helms (1989b) pointed out that a majority of research results in the study of RID remain suspect. Therefore, the

PAGE 30

22 review that follows is focused on problems in racial identity research and the development of instruments to measure it. Initial sections discuss the relevance of RID for juvenile offenders, gaps in current research, problems with methodology and sample size, limitations, and questions left unanswered by contemporary research in RID. The review concludes with a summary and critique of existing literature, followed by a discussion of the specific research questions suggested by the review and examined in this dissertation. Identification of Juvenile Offenders As noted in Chapter I, a juvenile offender is an adolescent under the age of 18 who has committed a crime, been arrested, and processed through and classified by the juvenile court system. Juvenile offenders can be referred to as juvenile delinquents or delinquent youth (Board, 1999b). Currently, juvenile offenders commit approximately 20% of this nation's crime. However, experts predict that the rate of crime committed by juvenile offenders will increase by up to 31% by the year 2010. At present, about 2.5 million youth are arrested for crimes in the United States each year (Snyder, 1997). Juveniles were involved in 14% of all murder and aggravated assault arrests, 37% of burglary arrests, 30% of robbery arrests, and 24% of weapons arrests in 1997 (Snyder, 1997). Arrests of juveniles accounted for 12% of all violent crimes cleared by arrest in 1997; specifically, 8% of murders, 1 1% of forcible rapes, 17% of robberies, and 12% of aggravated assaults (Snyder, 1997). In comparison to adult arrest rates, juvenile crime has continued to soar since the 1980s. The arrest rate for adults in 1994 was 200 per 100,000 while the arrest rate for juveniles was 500 per 100,000. Although the majority of violent crimes are not committed by delinquent youth, it can be noted that a 103% increase occurred in weapons law violations among juveniles

PAGE 31

23 from 1985 to 1994 (Snyder, 1997). It also can be noted that the number of murders committed by youth tripled over the same time period (Snyder, 1997). Although juveniles do not commit the majority of violent offenses, the numbers are still frightening. Elliot (1994) (who reported on the National Youth Survey, a national probability sample of youths age 11-17 conducted from 1976 to 1999) claimed the peak age for violent offenses among youth is 17. At that age, 36% of Black males and 25% of non-Hispanic white males report having committed one or more serious violent offenses. Much research has been focused on identification of factors leading to delinquency (e.g., Coie & Jacobs, 1993; Elliot, 1994; Loeber, Wung et al., 1993; Tolan et al., 1995). Tolan and Lorian (1988) found that age of onset of delinquent behavior is the best predictor of future delinquency proneness. According to Loeber et al. (1993), there are three developmental pathways toward delinquent behavior for adolescents, including (a) an early authority conflict pathway, involving oppositional and defiant types of behavior; (b) a covert pathway, including a more moderate to serious range of delinquent behaviors such as property damage; and (c) an overt pathway, which includes aggression and violent acts. Loeber, Wung, et al. (1993) claimed that adolescents who self-reported behaviors in all three pathways were the most likely to continue delinquent behavior and to commit violent acts. Klinteberg, Humble, and Schalling (1992) posited that theoretical models have stressed both social influences and/or genetic-biological factors in attempts to explain delinquent or antisocial behavior. Klinteberg et al. further argued that personality traits can be measured to identify "psychopathic" personality types in contrast to those individuals involved in criminal activity related to social influences such as parental loss.

PAGE 32

24 emotional deprivation, abuse issues, neglect, and parental rejection. They were able to differentiate three levels of psychopathology among participants in their study, indicating some argument for differential rehabilitative efforts for inmates. There have been continued efforts over the years to identify "delinquency proneness" and potential disruptive or delinquent behavior in adolescents (e.g., Bierman et al., 1992; Graham, 1981; Hooper & Evans, 1984; Loeber, Wung et al., 1993). Hooper and Evans (1984) studied 70 male adjudicated juvenile delinquents in an effort to determine the utility of demographic, intelligence, and personality measures to identify further problem behavior. The authors found some usefulness in various screening measures for the identification of further disruptive behavior. Socio-ecological Factors in the Development of Delinquency Although pathways to the development of disruptive behavior have been clearly identified, as have screening procedures for future disruptive behavior, there has been little published on the efficacy of treating it. Some researchers have even suggested that prevention is the only hope and that those already in the system are "hopeless" (e.g., Loeber, Wung et al., 1993; Scholte, 1992). However, others have begun to examine possible change in environmental and socio-ecological factors in the development and treatment of delinquency (Coie & Jacobs, 1993; DiLalla et al., 1988; Loeber, Wung et al., 1993; Scholte, 1992; Tolan et al., 1995). Coie and Jacobs (1993) concede that individual characteristics and problematic parenting styles have a large impact on the development of conduct disorder (CD). However, they call for attention to "broader social context. . .as a crucial determinant of (the) emergence, manifestation, and maintenance of conduct disorder" (Coie & Jacobs, 1993 p. 265). Conduct disorder is a primary diagnosis for many juvenile offenders

PAGE 33

25 (Loeber, Keenan, Lahey, Green, & Thomas, 1993). Some authors believe that peer networks, schools, neighborhoods, and the media play integral roles in modeling behavior for youth. If that modeling is of delinquent behavior, than attention must be aimed at those influences in its treatment. If the emphasis is to be prevention, then prevention programs must be "specifically designed" to the age group and level of the participants (Coie & Jacobs, 1993). In other words, although authorities typically do not mention race or racial identity, they call for an emic approach to prevention and rehabilitation. Coie and Jacobs (1993) go on to say that It may be the case that some neighborhoods are deeply enmeshed in a social context that turns the conventional dynamics of peer networks, social status, and delinquency on its head. When an entire community is besieged by violence, being aggressive or disruptive may represent not merely the path of least resistance but also the path of opportunity for children growing up in its midst. Within these communities, violence often is perceived as the only effective method for overcoming the many barriers to advancement. As a result, peer pressure and the desire to be accepted by friends actually may foster the sorts of behaviors that characterize CD and are typically considered deviant in more main stream settings. (p.271) Sutphen, Thyer, and Kurtz (1995) utilized a multisystemic treatment model to work with eight high-risk juvenile offenders over a 14-month period. They used a combination of case management, educational programming, family therapy, and nurturing programs to address delinquent behavior. Although the sample size for this study was very small and it contained several methodological problems, there was a promising result concerning recidivism. The authors conducted preand post-test assessments on 22 juvenile offenders for a control group in this study. In the end, the control group juvenile offenders had a 45% higher rate of recidivism over the length of the study.

PAGE 34

26 A majority of the articles addressing socio-ecological factors in delinquency have involved small samples and even more are simply calls to action for the professionals who interact with this population. Tolan, Guerra, and Kendall (1995) proposed a developmental-ecological perspective on the development of antisocial behavior in children and adolescents. They outline several suggested interventions and methods for prediction. However, what is most interesting about their approach is their call to researchers to "...examine whether the developmental course of antisocial behavior varies by ethnicity or gender" (Tolan et al., 1995 p.582). This is one of the few studies in the literature suggesting culture or race as a possible factor. As noted previously, although the professional literature regarding delinquency contains many models to explain its development, as well as factors related to its emergence and maintenance, there is a lack of explanation for continued overall recidivism and the evident over-representation of minorities in the juvenile justice system particularly Black males. Elliott (1994), in his presidential address to The American Society of Criminology, cited statistics indicating a 3-to-2 Black-to-White male differential in the prevalence for violent offending. However, he went on to caution researchers that discrepancies exist in the literature and that there should be scrutiny about generalizing interpretations regarding race and culture as factors without further study (1994). The U.S. Department of Justice reported that an over-representation of minorities in the juvenile justice system exists and that there is no viable explanation at this time. Thus, although researchers have begun to examine socio-ecological factors in the development and prevention of delinquency, most have failed to include race, culture, or

PAGE 35

27 ethnicity as factors in their research. In 1989, Federal guidelines required states to develop plans to decrease the number of minority juvenile offenders. However, by 1994 only 12 states had developed plans (Welsh, Harris, & Jenkins, 1996), and only one of those states published their intentions. Welsh, Harris, and Jenlcins (1996) reported on Pennsylvania's efforts to reduce minorities in juvenile justice. Initial examinations of minorities in Pennsylvania's juvenile justice system indicated that overrepresentation increased as offenders moved through the various levels of arrest and confinement described in Chapter 1 (Welsh et al., 1996). The authors, in their study of nine juvenile offender rehabilitation programs, did not give attention to cultural, racial, or ethnic issues. They did, however, ask the programs via survey if cultural awareness or diversity training was conducted. Unfortunately, they did not investigate the concepts further, thus leaving room for a wide range of interpretation. It is interesting that a statewide effort at reducing minority involvement in juvenile justice system fails to address issues related to the population being studied. Joseph (1995), in her study regarding juvenile delinquency among African Americans, claimed that, "one can understand delinquency among African Americans only by understanding the social context of this group and testing the theories of "White" delinquency for their relevance to delinquency among African Americans" (p.475). The study conducted by Joseph examines contemporary delinquency theories regarding social control and differential association with 190 males and 140 females. Nonetheless, Joseph's study used traditional methods of measurement. It did not appear from the report of her study that there was examination of the cultural relevance of questions. Additionally, it is difficult to interpret some of the data reported in Joseph's study

PAGE 36

28 because the author generated the assessment instruments used and no validity or reliabihty data were available. It also appears that although the overall sample size is adequate; the range to which it is applied is not. The sample contained children from elementary school age to college. Although this study is important in that it directs attention to the issues related to race, culture, and ethnicity in the juvenile offender population, it falls short of providing a clear bearing for further study. And although it is clear that overrepresentation of minorities in the juvenile justice system is a problem, it is not clear what the issues are or how to address them. Studies to date thus have failed to provide enough information or direction for researchers to increase the effectiveness of interventions and to reduce the population of minority offenders. It also is clear that issues related to race and ethnicity remain unanswerable at this time. If the population of minorities and their subsequent rate of recidivism are to be reduced, there must be accurate identification of issues related to the population. At present, no measures exist that are specifically designed to identify issues related to minority offenders. One feasible method would be to examine racial identity development of this population. Race as a Psychological Construct Before examining the process of racial identity development, it is necessary to demonstrate that race is an important psychological construct. Race has a long and confusing history in the psychological, anthropological, and social science literature. It has been identified as a simple, nominal construct based on physical appearance alone, as in "do you describe yourself as 1.) White 2.) Black 3.) Hispanic 4.) Native American 5.) Other?" It has also been studied in simulated settings such as university psychological laboratories. However, in these cases, the common focus is on relationships between majority and minority groups rather than comparisons of specific racial groups.

PAGE 37

29 Regardless, in simulated settings, it is difficult to represent differences between racial groups accurately, and even more difficult to represent within group differences accurately (Helms, 1994a). Race as a constaict has been all together circumvented in other cases. Often, researchers avoid the difficulty of defining race by using terms such as culture or ethnicity. These terms have become confused in the psychological literature. Race is not as simple as a nominal identification and it is more complex than can be adequately reconstructed in a laboratory setting. It is important to identify and clearly define race as a psychological construct separate from culture or ethnicity. For the purposes of this study, race is defined as, "an arbitrary classification of population using actual or assumed genetic traits to classify populations of the world into a hierarchical order" (Pigler Christensen, 1989 p. 275). In order to understand further the construct of race, it is necessary to understand the role of history in hierarchical classification. According to the theory of collective unconscious, human beings are affected by their personal histories as well as the history of the human race. Archetypes, which are psychological traces of previous generations, have a direct impact on a human being's development from birth to death. With that in mind, it is plausible that individuals also are impacted by powerful experiences such as racism and oppression that may have occurred in generations past. Vontress (1996) calls this "historical hostility," a process that differs from common day-to-day anger, hostility, rage, and other episodic negative events. Much like a Jungian archetype, historical hostility remains part of the collective "cultural" unconscious and the message is automatically passed from generation to generation. This message lies dormant within each individual until it is made conscious by a powerful emotional experience.

PAGE 38

30 It should be noted that theories such as that of historical hostility do not have an empirical basis, which leaves room for questions regarding their validity. Thus, it has been difficult for researchers to agree on the nature and definition of race. Some have included socio-political issues, while others have simplified it as was described earlier. In order to clarify this discrepancy, theorists sought to examine how individuals identify themselves as racial beings. Racial Identity Development The term racial identity, according to Helms, "refers to a sense of group or collective identity based on one's perception that he or she shares a common racial heritage with a particular racial group" (Helms, 1993 p.5). Helms (1993) further states that racial identity also includes the "quality or manner of one's identification with the respective racial groups" (p.5). However, before exploring the nature of individual identification with racial groups, it is important to understand the concept of identity, and more specifically identity development. Erikson is commonly thought of as the generator of identity theory. Erikson first coined the term "identity crisis" in his treatment of World War II veterans. Since then, much theory and research have evolved on the concept of identity development. A majority of Erikson's work was focused on white, middle-class males. Later, Gilligan posited a theory of identity development that included women. However, there was a lack of attention from both to identity development with regard to the self as a racial being in theoretical generation. Although there was no attention to minority populations or to the construct of race, both theorists saw adolescence as a critical time in the process of identity formation. According to Adams (1992),

PAGE 39

31 identity is conceptualized as an internalized, self-selected regulatory system that represents an organized and integrated psychic structure that requires the developmental distinction between the inner self and outer social world. Identity formation is seen as an evolutionary process of differentiation and integration, synthesis and resynthesis, and increasing cognitive complexity, (p.l) The goal for adolescents is to achieve a positive, coherent identity. They do this by sifting through the experiences of childhood in relation to their parents, friends, school, and society at large. They encounter various sets of values and ideals and must pick and choose the ones that have a "best fit" for who they are and who they want to become. These values may have inherent messages with regard to race and culture depending on the experiences of the individual and the people and institutions they encounter. Overall, adolescents must accomplish various psychosocial tasks in their work toward identity achievement (Harris, 1995). In an attempt to research some of Erikson's theories, Marcia (1966) developed a model that included four identity statuses: achievement, moratorium, foreclosure, and diffusion. According to Marcia's model, identity achievement indicates resolution of the crisis and commitment to an identity, moratorium occurs when an individual remains uncommitted after having explored options, foreclosure occurs when an individual prematurely ceases exploration, and diffused status occurs when, after exploration, the individual is unable to reconsolidate the ego (Spencer & MarkstromAdams, 1990). Marcia (1966) conducted research utilizing this four-status model and found some interesting results. He discovered that minority adolescents tend to score higher in foreclosure than White adolescents. He further found that male minority adolescents had significantly higher scores on ideological diffusion than did minority females and White males and females. These results indicate possible problem development related to

PAGE 40

32 socio-ecological experiences with discrimination and prejudice and lend credence to the purpose of this study. Racial identity theories generally describe a variety of modes of identification. For example, Black racial identity theories attempt to explain the various ways in which Blacks can identify (or not identify) with other Blacks and/or adopt or abandon identities resulting from racial victimization, including that experienced in generations past. Although the RID process of was discussed in Chapter I, it is important to emphasize some concepts again in order to fully understand the issues related to the measurement of RID. As stated in Chapter I, Thomas' model of Negromachy focused on Blacks' need for validation from the majority population. Because of this external source of personal validation, Black individuals have had a tendency to develop repressed rage, compliance, subservience, and a high sensitivity to racial issues (Carter, 1995). Some of these attitudes and beliefs are transgenerational. Cross' (1977) model of racial identity development (CRID) is cited most often in the counseling literature and has been the foundation for a majority of the empirical analysis on RID in general that has taken place thus far. It is from the CRID model, including Nigrescence, that a majority of RID researchers have attempted to examine how African Americans come to value their blackness and their culture. Although Cross is not the only author to develop a model of Nigrescence, his work is the most frequently cited. It is important to note that other researchers who have developed models of Nigrescence have attained a common set of assumptions relating to the process of identity development (e.g., racial identity is a sequential stage-wise process, movement from stage to stage is directly related to experiences in the social environment of the

PAGE 41

33 individual, and stage-wise progression develops from a negative to positive perspective) (Parham & Williams, 1993). According to Helms (1994b p.l27) Although it is possible for each of the racial-group appropriate statuses to develop in a person and govern her or his race-related behavior, whether or not they do depends on a combination of life experiences, especially intrapsychic dissonance and race-related environmental pressures, as well as cognitive readiness... the statuses are hypothesized to develop or mature sequentially. Helms (1994b) defined statuses as "the dynamic cognitive, emotional, and behavioral processes that govern a person's interpretation of racial information in her or his interpersonal environments" (p. 184). As stated in Chapter I, Helms postulated that individuals may demonstrate behaviors and attitudes of several statuses at the same time, but individuals will have a dominant status. Helms' five-status model includes: Conformity (Pre-encounter), Dissonance, Immersion/Emersion, InternalizaUon, and Integrative Awareness. The influence of RID in various aspects of counseling related activities has been examined over the past few years. However, because empirical analysis for this concept is only in its infancy, many of the studies have inherent design and/or statistical methodology problems. Although they are valuable as beginning endeavors, they do not lend a great deal of evidence to the validity of the effects of RID. This is not to say that an effect does not exist, but rather to call for more detailed investigation into the matter. Furthermore, a majority of the research in RID has been focused on adult and college-age populations (Plummer, 1995). There are few articles available that examine RID in adolescents empirically. Thompson, Neville, Weathers, Poston, and Atkinson (1990) examined cultural mistrust and racism reaction (aspects of RID) among African American students at a

PAGE 42

34 predominantly White university. Although their research contained a very small sample (n = 87 African American students and 70 Euro-American students) and was conducted at one university with students in psychology classes, the results are suggestive. The researchers examined the idea of a "healthy cultural paranoia," which is defined as, "the anxiety and suspiciousness that some African Americans develop as a result of ongoing exposure to a culture or ecosystem they cannot trust" (Thompson et al., 1990 p. 163). The authors referred to this phenomenon as racism reaction . This concept is important for the examination of racial experiences of minorities in the juvenile justice system. The authors of this study found that the "generalized mistrust" of Euro-Americans in educational settings is a direct result of perceived differential and inferior treatment on the part of African Americans (Thompson et al., 1990). These results, however, are not generalizable. Aside from the lack of an adequate sample, the researchers did not use fully validated instruments to collect their data. Biaforia, Taylor, Warheit, Zimmerman, and Vega (1993) did a much better job examining racial mistiust with regard to utilizing valid instruments. These authors sampled 1,328 multiethnic Black adolescent boys from Dade County, Florida in a longitudinal study. Some of the results lend credence to the development of an instrument to measure RID in BAMs in the juvenile offender population. For example, the authors found that 16.9% of the sample believed that Black parents should teach their children not to trust Whites and 31.4% believed that Blacks should be suspicious of a White person who tries to be friendly. Further, 73.2% of the sample believed that all Blacks are brothers and sisters. Last, an overwhelming majority (8 1 %) of the sample wanted to know more about how Blacks have overcome problems in America. These

PAGE 43

35 results demonstrate RID in action. With regard to the historical and transgenerational effects of racism and prejudice, 62% of the participants reported having had family discussions on the issue, thus lending possible validation to the tenets of historical hostility. In another article on the same study, Biafora, Warheit, Zimmerman, Gil, Apospori, and Taylor (1993) found a strong relationship between racial mistrust and delinquent behavior. In their article, they claimed that racial mistrust has been identified as an antecedent to many of the problems that plague Black adolescents in American society (e.g., poor school performance, drug and alcohol abuse, and other illicit behaviors). These authors proposed that racism reaction is generally a healthy defense mechanism that may aid individuals to palliate negative self-images and apply appropriate responsibility for prejudice and racial attitudes on the part of majority individuals. However, racism reaction can also be a detriment. It can be a motivation for individuals to withdraw from mainstream society and interactions with the majority culture, resulting in lost opportunities for advanced identity development processes. In their study, Biafora et al. (1993) found a statistically significant correlation between racial mistrust and deviant behavior, thus indicating a need to include issues related to race in the prevention and treatment of juvenile offenders. However, it should be noted that although these authors included a scale to measure minor deviance in their sample, they did not specifically identify individuals who had been a part of the juvenile justice system. The sample was derived from all of the middle school students in Dade County, Florida. This means that individuals incarcerated during the data collection were

PAGE 44

36 excluded from the results. Therefore, it is impossible to generalize these findings to the juvenile offender population at large. Plummer (1995) attempted a direct examination of RID in adolescents and found an overwhelming identification with internalizafion attitudes based on Helms' model. However, much like other RID studies, this study also had significant flaws. The sample for this research was large enough for a preliminary study, but it was not a typical sample. The sample was 285 African American adolescents enrolled at private schools in Ohio. Furthermore, the authors collected data for the study using the Black Racial Identity Attitude Scale (RIAS-B), an instrument that only has available validity data for adult populations. Other researchers have attempted to examine the role of RID in psychosocial competence and psychological well-being (e.g.. Carter, 1991; Carter, 1997; Johnson & Greene, 1991; McCreary, Slavin, & Berry, 1996). The results have been mixed. McCreary, Slavin, and Berry (1996) found statistically significant, low magnitude correlations between "attitudes toward African Americans" and both self esteem and problem behavior. However, these researchers sampled 613 African American students who had attended a Baptist church sponsored weekend retreat. Because of the "positive" nature of this activity, it is possible that troubled adolescents would not be the majority participants in this study. Johnson and Greene (1991) found that African American males who chronically suppress anger when dealing with stress have greater problems with interpersonal relationships and fewer outlets for frustration. Black adolescent males who adopt this pattern of behavior tend to have symptoms of "cardiovascular arousal, sleep disturbances,

PAGE 45

37 and stressful life events" (Johnson & Greene, 1991 p. 47). Although these results seem to make logical sense, the researchers failed to use a large enough sample to fully support the results. Furthermore, measures of heart rate and blood pressure were only conducted on one day, leaving room for a wide variety of intervening variables. In a study that added support for the findings of Johnson and Greene (1991), Neville, Heppner, and Wang (1997) found a statistically significant relationship between racial identity attitudes and both general and culture-specific stressors. Although these authors were focused on the needs of Black college students in predominantly White institutions, their results indicated a need to examine stress from a culturally specific standpoint. Unfortunately, the small sample size (90) in this study may have limited the authors' ability to generalize the results past the institutions from which the population was sampled. Carter (1991), who is a leading author in the RID field, began to examine the relationship between racial identity attitudes and psychological functioning in 1991. In his initial article, Carter (1991) reiterated the lack of conclusive evidence regarding the relationship between psychological functioning and race. Earlier studies (e.g.. Carter & Helms, 1987; Parham & Helms, 1985a, 1985b) claim to have found that racial identity attitudes were related to psychological functioning. However, as was the case with this study, lack of an adequate sample and the use of untested instruments leave results questionable. Carter (1997) examined the relaUonship between racial identity and psychosocial competence in 1997. The results of mulfiple regression analyses were not significant, indicating a lack of associadon between an individual's self-percepfion of psychosocial

PAGE 46

38 competence and Black racial identity attitudes. However, once again these results must be interpreted with caution. The author used the RIAS-B as the primary instrument for assessing racial identity attitudes. This instrument, although the most widely used, is replete with criticism and must be revised before results can be considered valid. In addition, the sample size for this study was 103 Black undergraduates at two predominantly White institutions, thus leaving questions about the generalizability of the findings even if the instruments were credible. Most of the studies presented regarding racial identity and its correlates share similar strengths and weaknesses. In this case, as was the case with a majority of the studies published in the psychological literature over the last 10 years, the studies examined have had small sample sizes and utilized instruments that have questionable reliability and validity. Despite their methodological problems, however, most tentatively point to similar conclusions. All of the studies examined lend support for future research on the racial identity development of Black adolescent males. Additionally, these studies demonstrate some evidence for examining culturally specific differences with regard to social support and socio-ecological factors in adolescent identity formadon. Parham and Williams (1993) conducted a study to examine the relationship of demographic and background factors to racial identity attitudes. In their research, they included questions regarding racial designation (e.g.. Black, Colored, Negro, or African American). While there was at least one participant in each category, a majority of participants (63%) identified themselves as Black. Other authors have established links between class, race, gender, and culture in the formation of identity (Robinson, 1993). As a result, according to Robinson (1993),

PAGE 47

39 "to empower clients and attend to them as whole persons, counselors in training and practicing counselors need to be aware of their perceptions and assumptions about differences" (p.56). A lack of understanding with regard to these issues and other issues related to RID validates the need for further research on within-culture issues. In sum, it is logical to examine the racial identity of Black adolescent male juvenile offenders. This group is engaged in a critical stage of identity formation in a presumably oppressive atmosphere. They represent the largest minority population being served by the juvenile justice system and rehabilitation efforts for them have been less than adequate. Finally, there is evidence that socio-ecological factors, along with prejudice and discrimination, affect the racial identity process. However, before racial identity development can be examined in this population, the availability of reliable and valid instruments must be addressed. RID Assessment Instruments In 1992, Sabnani and Ponterotto (1992) conducted a review of eight instruments specifically developed for racial/ethnic minority research. The authors included reviews of the scales along with critiques and recommendations for future research. These authors reviewed the Cultural Mistrust Inventory (Terrell & Terrell, 1981), the African Self-Consciousness Scale (Baldwin & Bell, 1985), the Cross-Cultural Counseling Inventory-Revised (LaFromboise, Coleman, & Hernandez, 1992), the Modem Racism Scale (McConahay, 1986), The Value Orientation Scale (Szapocznik, Scopetta, Kurtines, & Arnalde, 1978), the Acculturation Rating Scale for Mexican Americans (Cuellar, Harris, & Jasso, 1980), the Racial Identity Attitude Scale (Parham & Helms, 1981), and the Developmental Inventory of Black Consciousness (Millions, 1980).

PAGE 48

40 As was the case with research examining RID and its psychological correlates, the methodological rigor in the development of the instruments reviewed by Sabnani and Ponterotto (1992) is questionable and the lack of adequate sample size limits the generalizability of results. The largest sample size in their review was 879 White adults, while the largest sample size involving persons of color was 325. There were no instruments reviewed aimed specifically at adolescent populations. As is the case with other research on RID, the majority of samples were taken from the college student populations, thus limiting the generalizability of results even further. However, the instruments reviewed provide a foundation for future research. In fact, the RIAS (Parham & Helms, 1981) has been revised and is currently the most widely used instrument for assessing Black RID. This is in part due to the extensive studies with regard to reliability and validity of this instrument. The results of these studies will be discussed later in this chapter. Over the last 10 years, several instruments have been developed to assess racial identity in Blacks (e.g., \Smith, 1997 #566; Resnicow, 1999 #639; Phillips-Smith, 1997 #578; Landrine, 1995 #609; Helms, 1996 #604; White, 1995 #626]. In contrast to the instruments discussed in Sabnani and Ponterotto's (1992) review, several measures were developed specifically for Black adolescent youth. Although none of these instruments addressed issues in the juvenile offender population specifically, they have added important information to the knowledge base for racial identity research. For the purpose of this study, similar to that of Sabnani and Ponterotto (1992), six instruments are selected for review: The Survey of Black Life (Resnicow, Soler, Braithwaite, Selassie, & Smith, 1999), the Multi-construct African American Identity

PAGE 49

41 Questionnaire (Phillips-Smith & Brookins, 1997), the Themes Concerning Blacks Projective Technique (White, Olivieira, Strube, & Meertens, 1995), The African American Acculturation Scale (Landrine & Kionoff, 1995), the Multigroup Ethnic Identity Measure (Phinney, 1992), and the Racial Identity Attitude Scale (Helms & Parham, 1993). The section that follows will contain specific reviews for each of the instruments with attention to theoretical underpinnings, psychometric properties, methodological and statistical rigor, and sample size. Since the development of the BARIS is based in part on the RIAS-Long Form, greater attention is paid to the research on that instrument. The Multigroup Ethnic Identity Measure Phinney (1992), attempted to assess both culture specific and universal issues with regard to ethnic self-identification and ethnic identity development, and created the Multigroup Ethnic Identity Measure (MEIM). The MEIM is designed to assess individual's attitudes toward their own ethnic status as well as identification and interactions with members of ethnic groups other than their own. The MEIM is a 14-item instrument assessing three aspects of ethnic identity. Items on the instrument are rated on a four-point, Likert scale ranging from strongly agree to strongly disagree. The instrument was developed and revised over a five-year period. Five pilot studies were used to revise the instrument and included undergraduate subjects from several institutions. In efforts to establish reliability of the instrument, Phinney (1992) administered the MEIM to 417 high school students at an urban school with "an ethnically diverse student body (p. 163)" as well as with 136 college participants at one university.

PAGE 50

42 Overall reliability estimates for the 14-item scale were .81 for the high school sample and .90 for the college sample. Two subscales also were assessed for reliability. The Ethnic Behavior subscale had no reliability coefficients calculated because it only contained two items. The Affirmation / Belonging subscale reliability coefficients were .75 and .86 for the high school and college samples, respectively. For the Ethnic Identity Achievement subscale, the reliabilities were .75 and .86. For both samples, a two-factor solution was chosen. Although the research on this instrument appears to be promising, caution is warranted in the interpretation of the results. As was the case with other research efforts on RID, the sample for this research was one of convenience and did not represent national interests. Furthermore, the initial development of the instrument was focused solely on undergraduate students. However, Phinney (1992) attempted to conduct validity studies using both high school and college samples. Ultimately, they also included samples that were too small to establish generalizable. On a positive note, Phinney (1992) did establish extensive efforts to develop the instrument and provided an excellent basis for further research on instrument development for the assessment of RED. The African American Acculturation Scale II Based on the process of acculturation (i.e., the extent to which members of ethniccultural groups participate in their own or the majority group's cultural traditions, values, or beliefs), Landrine and Klonoff (1995) developed the African American Acculturation Scale. The 74-item AAAS was found to have eight subscales with high internal consistency, group differences, and concurrent validity. The authors conducted a crossvalidation study among a second independent group of 1 75 African American adults in order to create a short form of the scale. The correlation was r = .94 between the long-

PAGE 51

43 form and the short-form of the AAAS, thus indicating a viable alternative to the 74 item instrument. The split half reliability of the short form was .78. The use of the AAAS can be helpful to determine the extent to which individuals from ethnic minority backgrounds identify with cultural practices. In essence, the issues reflected in the AAAS are part of racial and ethnic identity development. However, the change from longto short-form changed the factors associated with the instrument and the Health Beliefs / Practices subscale was eliminated. Therefore, caution is warranted in consideration of the sample size used to establish reliability and validity data for this instrument. Although the authors were deliberate in their use of a different sample for the cross validation study, the size of the sample does not allow for generalized results. The Themes Concerning Blacks Projective Technique In response to cultural limitations of Murray's (1943) Thematic Apperception Test (TAT), White, Olivieira, Strube, and Meertens (1995) developed the Themes Concerning Blacks Projective technique (TCB). The TCB, a series of 20 charcoal drawings depicting "various aspects of Black culture and lifestyles in rural and urban areas" (White et al., 1995 p. 105), was initially standardized on 64 African American children. Further research was then done to standardize the instrument on 120 African Americans ranging in age from 5 to 80. The current form of this instrument also was given to 109 adults in order to address lack of research on cards 16 through 20 and to sample adults from the general population. The authors of the TCB did not achieve expected results in their standardization efforts. There was a lack of difference between racial groups on most of the cards in regard to theme. In other words, there was a lack of Afrocentric content in the responses. Only three of the cards produced differences with regard to Afrocentric content and the

PAGE 52

44 differences were not overwhelmingly significant. As a result, the use of the TCB should be avoided until further research is conducted regarding its applicability to racial identity issues. The Multi-Construct African American Identity Questionnaire In their early work on racial identification and ethnic identity, Clark and Clark (1939a; 1939b; 1940) used dolls as projective tools to extrapolate children's preferences for race and ethnic backgrounds. The results of their work have stimulated continued research. Smith and Brookins (1997) developed the Multi-Construct African American Identity Quesfionnaire based, in part, on the studies of Clark and Clark. In an effort to develop an instrument that would assess racial identification at a crucial stage of development (i.e., adolescence), the authors created a pool of 40 items (later reduced to ! 21) to be measured on a five-point, Likert scale ranging from strongly agree to strongly disagree. The authors, as stated in the title of their article ( Toward the development of an ethnic identity measure for African American youth ), are only in the beginning stages of development for the MCAIQ. However, although the instrument is only in the beginning stages of development, the reliability and validity data are promising. The coefficient alphas for the total scale and subscales ranged from .54 to .87, while the test-retest reliability of the MCAIQ was found to be .65. Considering these data, the MCAIQ could prove to be a useful instrument for assessing RID and ethnic identity after further revisions and distribution among a much larger sample size. The Adolescent Survey of Blacli Life Most of the RID assessment instruments discussed thus far have been normed on adult populations and neglect to incorporate issues specifically related to adolescent ego

PAGE 53

45 identity development. However, Resnicow, Soler, Braithwaite, Selassie, and Smith (1999) developed an 18-item instrument (later reduced to 16 items) specifically to identify pro-Black, anti-White, and racism awareness attitudes in two samples of adolescents (n = 286 and n = 60) in the Atlanta area. The ASBL, which contains three subscales, is based in part on the Adult Survey of Black Life developed by Resnicow and Ross in 1997 (1997). In their survey of related literature, the authors discovered three common, distinct themes related to racial ethnic identification (REI): (a) beliefs about being Black; (b) attitudes toward Whites; and (c) recognition and perceptions of racism on the social, institutional, and individual levels. Resnicow, Soler, et al. (1999) cautioned readers to temper findings related to the ASBL due to the lack of adequate sample size, cross-sectional design, and, "the inconsistency and magnitude of the observed correlations" (p. 172). However, the development of the ASBL is very important for future studies of Black adolescent RID. The authors took substantial steps toward identification of key elements in Black adolescent RID. The three factors of the ASBL yielded alpha coefficients of .69, .55, and .58, respectively, and accounted for 44% of the total variance. These three factors support the supposition that RID is a multidimensional construct (Burlew & Smith, 1991). Furthermore, the subscales of the ASBL appear to be related to the various subscales of other RID assessment instruments, particularly the RIAS. This provides future researchers with an example for adapting adult questions related to RID to adolescent populations. The Racial Identity Attitude Scale Helms (1994a) claimed that racial identity development is a process experienced by all individuals regardless of race, culture, gender, or social status. Based in part on the

PAGE 54

46 work of Cross and Thomas (1977), Helms created a theory of RID that emphasized status rather than stage development. Helms (1994a) defined statuses as "the dynamic cognitive, emotional, and behavioral processes that govern a person's interpretation of racial information in her or his inteipersonal environments" (p. 184). Helms and Parham (1993) developed the Racial Identity Attitude Scale (RIAS) as a means of identifying schemata that are behavioral manifestations of the statuses. According to Helms' theory, rather than having to complete lower levels of development (much like Erikson's model of psychosocial development), individuals may demonstrate behaviors and attitudes of several statuses at the same time (but will have a dominant status). Helms' original model included five statuses: Conformity (Pre-encounter), Dissonance, Immersion/Emersion, Internalization, and Integrative Awareness. Although the RIAS is, and will most likely continue to be, the most widely used instrument in RID studies, it has been fraught with criticism (Ponterotto & Wise, 1987). Helms and Parham have begun work on revising the RIAS (BRIAS) in order to address the criticisms that have emerged over the past 10 years (Carter, 1995). Their current efforts do not include the Intemalization-Commitment status and do not attempt to measures phases within each status (Carter, 1995). Many studies have been conducted to analyze the factors involved in the RIAS and to assess the reliability and validity of the instrument (e.g., Fischer, Tokar, & Serna, 1998; Lemon & Waehler, 1996; Ponterotto & Wise, 1987; Tokar & Fischer, 1998; Yanico, Swanson, & Tokar, 1994). The results have been less than positive. One of the consistent findings of researchers examining the RIAS has been a lack of support for the

PAGE 55

47 Encounter status (Fischer et al., 1998; Ponterotto & Wise, 1987; Tokar & Fischer, 1998; Yanico et al., 1994). It is interesting that Helms and Parham, in their current work on the BRIAS, have ignored the findings regarding the Encounter status and have excluded Internalization-Commitment. In addition to a lack of support for the Encounter status, Yanico (1994) discovered that a three-factor solution was the most interpretable, but only accounted for 20. 1 % of the total variance. Helms and Parham made attempts to rectify the problems with the RIAS by developing a shorter form (RIAS-B). Again, there was very little empirical support for this effort. Yanico (1994) investigated the psychometric properties of the short form and discovered internal problems with the structure of the scale, unequal support for the subscales, and unequal scoring practices between the two scales. Further, test-retest reliabilities for the RIAS were below .70, which is the typical minimum requirement for temporal stability (Lemon & Waehler, 1996). Although the RIAS has faced a great deal of criticism, it remains the most often used instrument in the study of RID. This is due in part to the exposure the instrument has received and the potential uses of the instrument. Although there is construct contamination and lack of stability, the instrument can still be useful in identifying salient issues for the participant. The most important point in regard to the RIAS is that Helms and Parham provided the most consistent effort at developing a valid and reliable measure of RID. Their efforts thus provide ground rules and guidelines for further research.

PAGE 56

48 Summary of Literature Review It is clear that RID is a complex construct relating to how and when individuals come to understand themselves as racial/ethnic beings. It is also clear that information derived from measures of it can be useful in all aspects of counseling processes. However, instruments currently available have been normed on adult populations and the information regarding their psychometric properties has been insufficient (Carter, 1995; Harris, 1995; Helms, 1990; Parham & Helms, 1985a; Ponterotto, 1989). It is clear that an instrument is needed to assess RID in adolescents and more specifically in adolescent juvenile offenders. There also is ample evidence that juvenile crime is a problem in the United States and that an overrepresentation of minorities exists in the juvenile offender population. It is also certain that many current rehabilitation efforts have been unsuccessful in regard to recidivism. In the context of these considerations, the development of a scale to measure racial identity in the BAM juvenile offender population is warranted. The BARIS will provide an opportunity to reevaluate RID theory by controlling for some of the methodological problems inherent in other studies and also help to identify notable issues for the counseling process with Black adolescent males both in and out of the juvenile offender system.

PAGE 57

CHAPTER m METHODOLOGY Juvenile crime is a considerable and costly problem in the United States, but it has begun to receive adequate attention aimed at its reduction only recently. There have been some gains in juvenile crime reduction rates over the past few years, but the problems remain serious. Unfortunately, the juvenile justice system has been unable to identify the factors that have facilitated the reduction. Thus, the change remains unexplained, and the potential for further and greater reduction is left unachieved. It is clear that minority populations, especially Black juvenile males, continue to be over-represented within the juvenile justice system. Unfortunately, however, in the attempts to understand this situation, little attention has been paid to the relevance of cultural issues that might contribute to their delinquency or to their rehabilitation. Researchers in the field of multicultural psychology and counselor preparation have demonstrated the relationship between "success" in counseling and attention to cultural issues, yet that information has not been widely applied to juvenile offender rehabilitation efforts. Therefore, justification is needed for the juvenile justice system to enforce their call to action for investigation of cultural issues related to juvenile offenses. In order to provide that support, a valid and appropriate instrument is needed to assess racial issues from the perspectives of juvenile offenders. The BARIS was developed in response to this need. 49

PAGE 58

50 Presented first in this chapter is the development of the BARIS, including the development of the item pool and a reading level analysis. Following that is information about the validity and reliability data for the instrument. Also included is information about the subjects, setting, independent variables, measures, procedures, and statistical analyses. Initial Development of the BARIS Development of the BARIS was based on sound theoretical and psychometric theory. The first step in the development of the BARIS was to identify the areas to be assessed. In their review of the RID literature, Resnicow and Ross (1997) identified three themes for racial ethnic identification (REI), including (a) beliefs about being Black; (b) attitudes toward Whites; and (c) recognition and perceptions of racism on the social, institutional, and individual levels. These themes were used as a conceptual framework for creation of an item pool for the BARIS. The BARIS Items and their associated themes and theoretical bases are delineated in Table 3.1. Each of the 70 items in the BARIS item pool was developed with consideration of possible reading difficulties among the juvenile offender population. Therefore, a sixthgrade reading level was chosen as the maximum acceptable level to allow adequate comprehension of the items. Each item was reviewed by an independent, certified reading specialist and determined to be below the sixth-grade reading level; most of the items in the pool fell at or below the fourth-grade reading level. A four-point, Likert scale was selected as the most appropriate response format, including the following response choices: agree, sort of agree, sort of disagree, disagree. Because RID is based on statuses rather than stage-wise progression, BARIS responses were scored with regard to overall factor scores to indicate specific factor dominance.

PAGE 59

51 Each of the individual items in the BARIS question pool was generated through review of existing instruments and a review of the related literature. All of the items are based on the dynamics of RID espoused in the Cross (Cross, Parham, & Helms, 1991) model of Nigrescence. The stages of Nigrescence were put into measurable form by Helms and Parham (1993). However, RID researchers have yet to present an instrument having widely accepted psychometric credibility. As noted, in recent years, a consistent set of three factors has been evident in RID research. The questions in the BARIS are related to these three factors. As is this case with other research into racial identity statuses, individuals may possess qualities in all three statuses while also demonstrating dominance in a particular status. The Tri-Status model in Figure 3.1 depicts these possibilities. It is evident that by generating items that address issues in each of the three statuses, a clear picture of the individual's racial identity attitudes can be determined and, subsequently, therefore a specific counseling intervention can be devised that takes these issues into consideration. The first status. Assimilation, is characterized by adaptation of White lifestyles and development of a belief system that values the "White" culture while denigrating elements of the Afrocentric culture. This status includes behaviors such as listening to "White" music, attending predominantly "White" social functions, and a desire to have more Caucasian-like physical features. The second status, Self-Segregation, is characterized by a change from assimilation into the dominant (White) culture to immersion in Afrocentric belief systems. Individuals with dominance in this status of identity development have developed an awareness of Black history, have come to value themselves as racial beings.

PAGE 60

52 Table 3.1 BARIS Question Pool Beliefs About Being Black Assimilation: 1 . Rock music is good. 2. Whiles are more trustworthy than Blacks. 3. White areas are good places to live. 4. Whites are smarter than Blacks. 5. White schools are better than Black schools. 6. White counselors are better than Black counselors. 7. White friends are better than Black friends. 8. Whites speak better than Blacks. 9. It is better to have lighter skin. 10. It is better to be White than Black. 11. It is better to be more like Whites. 1 2. It is important to learn about Black history. Self-Segregation: 1 . All my friends are Black. 2. It is easier to get along with Black people. 3. It is important to learn as much as possible about being Black. 4. Teenagers should only date people from the same race. 5. It is important to tell people what you think, no matter what happens (e.g., suspension, arrest, etc.). 6. Black radio stations play good music. 7. Rap music is good. 8. It is important to belong to a Black church. 9. The church is important to the Black community. 10. Words like "phat," "dope." and " slow jam" make sense. 11. It is good to eat soul food. 12. It is easier to get along with Black people. 13. Families should follow African American traditions. 14. Children should know what it means to be Black. 15. It feels good to be Black. Universal Acceptance: 1 . A counselor's race doesn't matter. 2. It is good to be around Blacks and other races. 3. Black and White music are good. 4. It is good to have friends from different races and backgrounds. 5. A teacher's race doesn't matter. 6. People should be proud of their race. 7. Blacks can become whatever they want. 8. People from all races have good things about them. 9. It is good to get along with all kinds of people. 10. All races are important. 11. It is good to do things with people from all types of backgrounds. 1 2. It is OK to date somebody from another race. Assimilation: 1 . Whites are better than Blacks. 2. White counselors understand kids better than Black counselors. 3. Whites are smarter than Blacks. 4. Most of my friends are White. 5. Whites look better. 6. Pop music is good.

PAGE 61

53 7. Whites speak better than Blacks. 8. Whites have nicer hair than Blacks. Self-Segregation: 1 . It is important to take part in Black activities. 2. It is important to take a stand against the system. 3. It is important to take a stand against White people's ideas. 4. It is OK to call White people names like, "cracker, honkey, etc." Universal Acceptance: 1 . It is important to value people from all races and backgrounds. 2. People from all races should get along. 3. Every person can give something to society. 4. It's OK for Whites and Blacks to mix. Recognition and Perceptions of Racism Assimilation: 1 . In order to solve problems. Blacks should be more like Whites. Self-Segregation: 1 . Blacks should get more help today because of slavery. 2. It is harder for Blacks to get ahead. 3. It is easier for Whites to get a job. 4. It is easier for Whites to get a good education 5. Whites get more chances in life. 6. Most Whites are against people from other races and backgrounds. Universal Acceptance: 1 . People should treat all people the same. 2. Everyone should get a fair chance. 3. There are rules for everybody. 4. It is good to learn about the race and background of others. 5. It is good to honor being different. and have developed a sense of distrust and anger toward the majority (White) culture. A movement toward multicultural competence characterizes the third status, Universal Acceptance, hi other words, individuals whose attitudes are dominant in this status are more likely to be open-minded toward experiences with people from other cultures. These individuals also are more tolerant of differences and place greater value on people from all types of backgrounds. As individuals develop dominance in this status, they become more likely to have a multicultural circle of friends and ability to interact with individuals from all cultures and races.

PAGE 62

54 Item rationale Each of the items generated for the BARIS was intended to uncover the components of an individual's "inner self at the point of assessment. Change is an inevitable condition in the human process; thus, it is important to view the assessment of racial identity attitudes as an overall "snapshot" of a moment in an individual's life. Although the model presented to depict RID addresses only the processes within the inner and outer selves, it should be noted that environment factors play an important role in the development of RID. For example, environmental factors such as school setting, family values, friendship circles, and the media can effect an individual's RID. The items in the BARIS were organized according to the three themes commonly used in RID assessment: Beliefs about being Black, Attitudes toward Whites, and Recognition and perceptions of racism (see Table 3.2). BARIS items thus were constructed to reflect attitudes in each of the Tri-Status Model areas: Assimilation, SelfSegregation, and Universal Acceptance. Population The population for this study consisted of Black, adolescent males, from the states of Florida, Mississippi, and Pennsylvania, ranging in age from 11 to 18, who were attending school, part of a church youth group, community activity program or actively involved in a juvenile justice program. Members of the International Association of Addiction and Offenders Counselors were contacted to obtain participants from offender programs with which they were affiliated. Participation in this study was voluntary.

PAGE 63

55 Outer Self Inner Self The outer self includes physical attributes, behaviors, and attitudes as verbalized. It is the concrete side of self as a racial being. However, the separation between the outer and inner selves is permeable. Behaviors stem from attitudes, and vice versa. Thus, the outer self influences the inner self. The inner self includes all of the ideas and attitudes possessed regarding self and others as racial beings (racial identity attitudes). This side is not readily accessible to others. In the measurement of RID attitudes, items regarding attitudes toward Blacks and Whites, and recognition and perceptions of racism, give clues to the dominant racial identity status of the individual Tri-Status model of RID depicting Assimilation dominance nner Self Outer Self Figure 3.1 Tri-Status Model of RID

PAGE 64

56 Table 3.2 BARIS Item Themes Beliefs about being Black: Assimilation Items Source 1 . Rock music is good. Author generated 2. Whites are more trustworthy than Blacks. rdrapnidScU (^nCIITlS
PAGE 65

57 Item 1 3. Families should follow African American traditions. Paraphrased (Helms & Parham. 1996; Landrine & MOnOIT, IWD, rnilllpS-omiin OC DrOOKinS. lyy/, Phinney, 1992; Resnicow et al., 1999) 14. Children should know what it means to be Dlack. Author generated 15. Black counselors understand kids better than white counselors. Author generated 16. It feels good to be Black. Paraphrased (Helms & Parham, 1996; Landrine & Kionoff, 1995; Phillips-Smith & Brookins, 1997; Phinney, 1992: Resnicow et al., 1999) Universal Acceptance Item Source 1 . A counselor's race doesn't matter. Author generated 2. It is good to be around Blacks and other races. Paraphrased (Helms & Parham, 1996; Landrine & Kionoff, 1995; Phillips-Smith & Brookins, 1997; Phinney, 1992; Resnicow et al., 1999) 3. Black and White music are good. Paraphrased (Landrine & Kionoff, 1995; Smith & Brookins, 1997) 4. It is good to have friends from different races and backgrounds. Paraphrased (Phinney, 1992; Smith & Brookins, 1997) 5. A teacher's race doesn't matter. Author generated 6. People should be proud of their race. Paraphrased (Helms & Parham, 1996; Landrine & Kionoff, 1995; Phillips-Smith & Brookins, 1997; Phinney, 1992; Resnicow et al., 1999; Smith & Brookins, 1997) 7. Blacks can become whatever they want. Paraphrased (Helms & Parham, 1996; Resnicow et al., 1999; Smith & Brookins, 1997) 8. People from all races have good things about them. Paraphrased (Helms & Parham, 1996; Phinney, 1992) 9. It is good to get along with all kinds of people. Author generated 10. All races are important. Author generated 11. It is good to do things with people from all types of backgrounds. Author generated 12. It is OK to date somebody from another race. Paraphrased (Resnicow et al., 1999) Attitudes toward Whites Assimilation Items Source 1 . Whites are better than Blacks. Paraphrased (Helms & Parham, 1996; Resnicow et al., 1999; Smith & Brookins, 1997) 2. While counselors understand kids better than Black counselors. Author generated 3. Whites are smarter than Blacks. Paraphrased (Helms & Parham, 1996; Smith & Brookins, 1997) 4. Most of my friends are White. Paraphrased (Landrine & Kionoff, 1995) 5. Whites look better. Paraphrased (Smith & Brookins, 1997) 6. Pop music is good. Author generated 7. Whites speak better than Blacks. Paraphrased (Helms & Parham, 1996; Smith & Brookins, 1997) 8. Whites have nicer hair than Blacks. Paraphrased (Smith & Brookins, 1997)

PAGE 66

58 Self-Segregation Items Source 1 . It is important to take part in Black activities. Paraphrased (Helms & Parham, 1996: Landrine & Kionotf, 1995; Phillips-Smith & Brookms. 1997: Phinney, 1992; Resnicow et al,. 1999; Smith & Brookms, 1997) 2. It is important to take a stand against the system. Paraphrased (Helms & Parham, 1996) 3. It is important to lake a stand against White people's ideas. Paraphrased (Helms & Parham, 1996) 4. It is OK to call White people names like, "cracker, honkey, etc." Paraphrased (Helms & Parham, 1 996) Universal Acceptance Items Source 1 . It is important to value people from all races and backgrounds. Paraphrased (Helms & Parham, 1996; Phinney, 1992) 2. People from all races should get along. Paraphrased (Helms & Parham, 1996; Phinney, 1992) 3. Every person can give something to society. Author generated 4. It's OK for Whites and Blacks to mix. Author generated Recognition and Perceptions of Racism: Assimilation Items Sources 1 . In order to solve problems, Blacks should be more like Whites. Author generated Self-Segregation Items Sources 1 . Blacks should get more help today because of slavery. Paraphrased (Resnicow et al., 1999) 2. It is harder for Blacks to get ahead. Paraphrased (Resnicow et al., 1999) 3. It is easier for Whites to get a job. Paraphrased (Resnicow et al., 1999) 4. It is easier for Whites to get a good education Author generated 5. Whites get more chances in life. Author generated 6. Most Whites are against people from other races and backgrounds. Paraphrased (Helms & Parham, 1996) Universal Acceptance Items Sources 1 . People should treat all people the same. Author generated 2. Everyone should get a fair chance. Author generated 3. There are rules for everybody. Author generated 4. It is good to learn about the race and background of others. Paraphrased (Phinney, 1992) 5. It is good to honor being different. Author generated

PAGE 67

59 According to Sudman (1976), at least 100 subjects from each major subgroup, as well as an additional 20 to 50 subjects for each minor subgroup, were needed for effective survey research. In this study there were two major subgroups (juvenile offenders and non-offenders) and at least five minor subject groups. Thus, the resulting sample should have contained no less than 300 subjects. However, in order to compensate for the lack of a random sample, a larger sample size was sought. Sudman (1976) further stated that when sampling a special population on a national level, the number of participants should be 500 or greater. Thus, the total sample needed to generalize this study to the BAM population within the United States was a minimum of 500 Black adolescent males. Another consideration in the decision about sample size was the type of statistical analyses to be performed on the data. In this case, a factor analysis with orthogonal, Varimax rotation was proposed to identify the initial factor structure of the BARIS. When conducting a factor analysis, the general guideline is to have a minimum of five participants per item (Crocker & Algina, 1986). In this case, the initial version of the BARIS contained 59 items, thus resulting in the need for 295 participants in order to satisfy the minimum requirements for factor analysis. The resulting sample for the initial study was 327 Black, adolescent males from the state of Mississippi. This sample thus met Crocker and Algina' s criterion for sample size but not that of Sudman. Sampling Procedures The development of the BARIS involved two phases of research. An initial study was conducted with both offenders and non-offenders. Participants were recruited for the initial study from both rural and urban school districts in Mississippi. These school districts were selected on the basis of access and willingness to participate. Each of the

PAGE 68

60 school districts' populations was primarily Black. The total population of Black students in all three school districts was 3500. In general, Mississippi public schools serve students from a lower economic base. Two of these school districts were located in the Mississippi delta area. This section of the country receives the most federal aid annually. Several information-gathering meetings were held with each school district in an effort to increase participation. Descriptions of the research project and consent forms were sent home to every Black male student between the ages of 12 and 18 who attended school in one of these districts at the time of the study. A total of 1735 information packets and consent forms were distributed. The return rate for consent forms for the initial project was 22% (n = 379). All students who turned in consent forms also assented to participating in the research project. However, 52 BARIS instruments were deemed unusable due to missing data points. Thus, the resulting sample for the initial study was 327 BAMs. Once revisions were made to the original 59-item BARIS, a second study was conducted in order to establish the validity of the resulting 22-item BARIS. This study involved juvenile offenders from Pennsylvania, Mississippi, and Florida. This sample did not include serious offenders such as murderers, rapists, or arsonists. Mississippi participants for this phase of the study were recruited from a statewide adolescent offender program. This program served juvenile offenders between levels four and six. In other words, these offenders were found to be of medium risk to the community. The Florida participants for this phase of the study were recruited from a teen court program in North Central Florida. These offenders were considered to be of

PAGE 69

61 minimum risk to the community. Most of these offenders had been arrested one or two times. In most cases, this was the offender's first involvement in the juvenile justice system. Juvenile offenders from Pennsylvania were recruited from a citywide juvenile offender initiative in a large, Western Pennsylvania city. This program was designed to provide alternative services to juvenile offenders in an effort to reduce future involvement in the juvenile justice system. The offenders in this program were also considered to be a minimum risk to the community. Information gathering meetings were held with each organization in an effort to increase participation. Descriptions of the research project and consent forms were sent home to the parents of every Black male between the ages of 12 and 18 who was involved in one of these programs at the time of the study. 1200 information packets and consent forms were distributed. The return rate for this study was 12.5% (n = 150). All students who turned in consent forms also assented to participating in the research project. However, 24 BARIS instruments were deemed unusable due to missing data points. Thus, the resulting sample for the validity study was 126 BAMs. The purpose of generating the sample from the locations cited was to account for potential differences within the BAM population across several regions. Individuals were solicited from both rural and urban areas. Procedures Independent reviewers who had demonstrated expertise in the areas of multicultural and racial identity development (e.g., had publications related to the topic area, made professional presentations related to the topic area, or held membership in

PAGE 70

62 professional organizations related to the topic area) evaluated the content validity, consistency, format, and clarity of wording of the BARIS. Three independent reviewers were recruited at the American Counseling Association's annual conference. All three reviewers were involved in the Association for Multicultural Counseling and Development (AMCD). One of the reviewers was a professor of counselor education who taught courses in multicultural counseling and was actively involved in AMCD. The second reviewer was a school guidance counselor who had conducted workshops on multicultural and racial identity issues and was actively involved in AMCD. The third reviewer was a doctoral student in a CACREP accredited graduate program in counselor education. The doctoral student was conducting dissertation research on racial identity issues at the time of the review and was actively involved in AMCD. The reviewers received copies of the BARIS, the demographic form, an explanation of the Tri-Status model, and the scoring sheet. The reviewers were specifically asked to evaluate the BARIS and its related forms for adequate sampling of the issues related to each of the statuses within the Tri-Status model of RID, clarity of presentation, redundancy, and content validity. Each reviewer was asked to provide detailed feedback on each of these areas. Upon examination of the feedback, eight of the items in the initial pool were determined by the reviewers to be redundant and thus were removed from the initial version of the BARIS. In general, the reviewers determined that the BARIS adequately sampled the domain of issues related to RID and that the structure of the instrument had

PAGE 71

63 adequate content validity. They did not suggest changes in regard to the clarity or format of the instrument. After completion of the initial revisions, an initial study was conducted to evaluate the need for further revisions. The administration procedures used in the initial study also were used for the actual field test of the instrument. Initial Study In order to evaluate the nascent factor structure of the 59-item BARIS, an initial study was conducted. Participants were asked to respond to each item using a Likert Scale with a range of 1 = Strongly Disagree to 4 = Strongly Agree. The BARIS was administered to 379 BAMs from three school districts in Mississippi. Items on each completed BARIS were screened for scoring errors, missing values, or out-of-range items. The missing values on each instrument were examined and it was determined that no discernable pattern, other than participant error, accounted for the data errors. However, any instrument with missing data points was excluded from the data analyses. A total 52 scales thus were determined to be unusable, which resulted in a total sample of 327 participants. The final item to participant ratio was 5:1, which met the criterion for minimum sample size recommended by Crocker and Algina (1986). It should be noted that a sample was selected prior to this initial study, the results from which had to be discarded (n = 375) because one school district failed to follow the procedures and training instructions provided. Therefore, their data were deemed unusable. A principal components analysis (PCA) was used to determine the factor structure of the instrument. Eighteen factors with eigenvalues greater than 1.0 were found for the initial rotation. Upon examination of the scree plot, it was determined that a distinct

PAGE 72

64 "elbow" occurred between the third and fourth factors, thus suggesting that a three-factor solution was appropriate (Cattell, 1966). The respective factor loadings of the items on these three factors were then examined. Items that loaded at .40 or above on two or more components were eliminated (Hair, Anderson, Tatham, & Black, 1998). According to a formula provided by Stevens (1996), a sample size of 327 requires a factor loading of at least .30 for the item to be valid. However, since other instruments developed within the field of RID research have failed to provide adequate psychometric properties, a more conservative factor loading of .50 was established to retain items on the BARIS. In order to determine the applicability of an orthogonal rotation, inter-factor correlations were examined. None of the intercorrelations were found to be statistically significant which suggests that all three factors are independent. Thus a three factor solution was maintained. This solution accounted for 36% of the total variance. Using the criteria described above, 37 items were eliminated from the final form of the BARIS, which resulted in a 22-item scale, including nine items related to assimilation, six items related to Self-segregation, and seven items related to Universal Acceptance. Although three factors emerged in the analysis, it is important to note that the order of the factors with regard to strength of presence on the Scree Plot was Dominant Affiliation, Universal Acceptance, and Self-Segregation. Administration The BARIS was administered in group situations by assistants following specific instructions provided online through a website constructed specifically for this research project. Individual counselors from schools and agencies agreeing to participate in the research were trained in the administration of the BARIS via the website. In particular.

PAGE 73

65 these assistants were instructed to read the instrument aloud to the group in order to compensate for any physical disability and/or inability to read. They also were trained to avoid bias in presentation by reading each item in a controlled, neutral tone and with a consistent pace. The assistants were directed to report any problems regarding the administration or completion of the BARIS. They also were instructed to avoid discussion of individual items. Upon completion of the respective administrations, the assistants visually scanned instruments to check for responding errors. Participants were asked to complete any items omitted, if they so desired at that time. All information collected was held as confidential as was legally possible. Only the assistants and the researcher saw the questionnaires. Individually identifying information for each respondent was not obtained. At the time of the initial study, participants also were asked to complete an evaluation form. The participants were asked to report any items that were difficult to answer, any words that they did not understand, their understanding of instructions on how to complete the instrument, their impression of it, and any additional comments they had. The results of the feedback were overwhelmingly positive, hidividual participants believed that this was a worthwhile project and that it was beneficial to them. There were no adjustments made to the BARIS as a result of information from the feedback form. Reliability In order to establish a reliability estimate, Cronbach's alpha coefficient was computed for BARIS scores from the second administration of the instrument.

PAGE 74

66 Table 3.3 Factor Loadings for a Varimax, Orthogonal, Three-Factor Solution for the Black Adolescent Racial Identity Scale (N = 327) Factor Loading Item 1 2 3 Communality 3. It is important to take part in Black .209 -.006 .503 .296 activities. 5. Whites get more chances in life. .007 .564 .006 .327 6. It is good to be around Blacks and other -.594 .016 .187 .398 races. 7. Whites are more trustworthy than Blacks. .009 .613 .003 .386 8. It is easier to get along with Black .141 .516 -.276 .363 people. 17. People should be proud of their race. .009 -.172 .549 .339 18. Teenagers should only date people from .622 .002 -.321 .490 the same race. 22. People from all races have good things -.140 -.353 .599 .504 about them. 25. It is good to get along with all kinds of -.736 .102 -.007 .557 people. 27. Children should know what it means to .121 .276 .526 .367 be Black. 29. White Counselors are better than Black .661 -.003 .125 .453 counselors. 30. It is good to do things with people from -.569 .293 .319 .512 all types of backgrounds. 32. It is OK to date somebody from another -.588 .195 .387 .534 race. 1 34. White friends are better than Black .595 -.005 .101 .367 friends 35. People from all races should get along. -.101 -.005 .751 .576 42. It's OK for Whites and Blacks to mix. -.007 -.187 .569 .364 43. Black counselors understand kids better .188 .601 -.006 .400 than White counselors 46. h is better to have lighter skin .592 .235 -.007 .410 47. Whites have nicer hair than Blacks .529 .204 -.116 .334 49. It is important to belong to a Black .007 .594 -.008 .364 church. 52. It is good to learn about the race and -.003 -.120 .520 .286 background of others. 54. It is better to be more like Whites. .265 .612 -.195 .483 Note. Boldface indicates highest factor loadings

PAGE 75

67 Validation Studies In Older to establish the concurrent validity of the BARIS, a second study was conducted in which the following three self-report instruments were administered, alternately, to subgroups of 25 participants each along with the BARIS (n = 126): The Racial Identity Attitude Scale (RIAS) (n = 25) (Helms & Parham, 1993), The Adolescent Survey of Black Life (ASBL) (n = 25) (Resnicow et al., 1999), and the Multi Group Ethnic Identity Measure (MEIM) (n = 25) (Phinney, 1992). Participants for this study were selected from juvenile offender programs in Mississippi, Pennsylvania, and Florida. The RED instruments used in the second study were selected based on their coverage of issues related to RID and their psychometric properties. As noted in Chapter II, these instruments could be of questionable psychometric credibility. However, in consideration of the lack of better instruments, special population being studied, and need for methodological flexibility, these instruments were the best that could be used for the purposes of this study (Helms, 1989b). Correlations were computed in order to assess the relationship between the factors of the BARIS and scores from each of these instruments. Each of the three instruments administered along with the BARIS represented some measure of ethnic or racial identity development. The MEIM assesses ethnic identity along three factors (e.g.. Affirmation and Belonging to an ethnic group. Ethnic Identity within a group, and demonstration of Ethnic Behavior). Each of these factors helps assess the degree to which an individual identifies with his or her own group. The RIAS assesses an individual's status level within RID. It is based on four factors very similar to those in the BARIS (e.g., Pre-Encounter, Encounter, Immersion/Emmersion, and Internalization). However, since researchers have not found evidence to support a fourth factor. Encounter was dropped from this study. The ASBL takes a more ethnic

PAGE 76

68 Stance in that it identifies beliefs about the "Black self, attitudes toward Whites, and perceptions of racism. Scoring The initial item pool for the BARIS was based on the Tri-status model of RID and therefore scoring of the BARIS was directly related to each of the three statuses. Because each of the statuses is permeable and they may overlap, it is important to recognize status dominance and salient characteristics of a score within each status area. Thus, a separate score for each status area is produced. The resulting scores are compared in an effort to identify status dominance. Since the BARIS identifies issues within each status area and not an overall level of RID, a total score is not valid in this case. Identification of salient issues can also be done through review of the characteristics of each status and individual item responses. In order to score the BARIS, individual item responses (raw scores) were recorded on the score sheet in the box with the corresponding question number (e.g., the score from question three on the BARIS was entered in the Assimilation column next to question three). After entering all raw scores from the BARIS, the entries for each column on the score sheet were totaled and then divided by the total number of items in that column in order to create equity in possible scores (e.g., column one was divided by 18, column two was divided by 27, and column three was divided by 21.) The resulting scores provided evidence of the individual respondent's status dominance and relative standing on the remaining statuses within the Tri-status model. After completion of the initial study, the scoring method was revised to account for changes in the BARIS. Revisions were made based on item and factor analyses. Specifically, the initial version of the BARIS was reduced from 59 to 22 items. Thus,

PAGE 77

69 those items that were ehminated from the BARIS were also ehminated from the revised score sheet. Items 1,2,4,9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 19,20,21,23,24,26,28,31,33, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41 , 44, 45, 48, 50, 5 1 , 53, 55, 56, 57, 58, and 59 were eliminated based on factor loadings and communalities. Although the rationale for scoring remained the same, the procedure changed to reflect the number of items in each column (e.g., column one was divided by nine, column two was divided by seven, and column three was divided by six.) Also, the initial PCA produced four significant, negative factor loadings on the Assimilation factor. Thus items 3, 9, 12, and 13 were reverse scored on the 22item BARIS.

PAGE 78

70 Table 3.4 59-Item BARIS Score Sheet Assimilation Self-Segregation Universal Acceptance 1. 3. 2. 7. 4. 6. 10. 5. 9. 13. 8. 11. 19. 12. 15. 21. 14. 17. 24. 16. 20. 29. 18. 22. 34. 23. 25. 37. 26. 28. 38. 27. 30. 41. 31. 32. 46. 33. 35. 47. 36. 39. 51. 40. 42. 54. 43. 44. 58. 49. 45. 50. 48. 53. 52. 55. 56.

PAGE 79

71 57. 59. Raw Score Raw Score Raw Score Divide by 18 Divide by 27 Divide by 21 Factor Score (AS) Factor Score (SS) Factor Score (UA) Table 3.5 Revised BARIS Score Sheet Dominant Affiliation Self-Segregation Universal Acceptance *3. 2. 1. 7. 4. 6. *9 5. 8. 11. 17. 10. *12. 20. 15. *13. 22. 16. 14. 21. 18. 19. Raw Score Raw Score Raw Score Divide by 9 Divide by 6 Divide by 7 Factor Score (AS) Factor Score (SS) Factor Score (UA) * Items are reverse scored.

PAGE 80

CHAPTER IV RESULTS In order to establish the concurrent vaHdity of the BARIS, a second study was conducted in which the following three self-report instruments were administered, alternately, to subgroups of 25 participants each along with the revised BARIS: The Racial Identity Attitude Scale (RIAS) (Helms & Parham, 1993), The Adolescent Survey of Black Life (ASBL) (Resnicow et al., 1999), and the Multi Group Ethnic Identity Measure (MEIM) (Phinney, 1992). Participants for this study were selected from juvenile offender programs in Mississippi, Pennsylvania, and Florida. In order to meet the criteria for subsequent factor analysis, the revised BARIS was administered to a total of 327 BAMs. Demographic Data Analysis In order to examine the nature of the demographic characteristics, the resulting 22-items of the BARIS were extracted from the original sample of 327 and analyzed. The sample for this study consisted mostly of individuals between 1 1 and 14 years of age (n = 176, 53.8%). A majority of participants identified themselves as Black (n = 224, 68.5%), a trend consistent with recent survey data on Black Americans (Parham & Williams, 1993). Most of the participants identified themselves as middle class (n = 227, 69%). However, considering the nature of the population of the areas in which the data were collected, and the SES of families in those areas, it is highly likely that these data are not accurate. Social desirability may have prevented participants from accurately reporting their socio-economic status. 72

PAGE 81

73 Another demographic characteristic that is likely to be inaccurate is that of history of arrest. Participants were asked to respond to whether they have ever been arrested. The participants were supposed to respond by checking either yes or no. In the second phase of data collection, most respondents were involved in the juvenile justice system, thus indicating they had indeed been arrested. However, only 58 out of 327 participants checked yes for this question (18%). Thus, it is difficult to accurately identify differences between those individuals who had been arrested and those who had not. Juvenile offender participants in this study had been arrested between one and five times (18%) and the majority of juvenile offender participants were involved in some type of court initiated alternative services program (15%). It should be noted that respondents were asked to place a check next to the type of program with which they were involved. Several participants marked a number of spaces, indicating several levels of involvement. In these cases, the highest level of involvement marked was used to compute the data analyses. In order to determine if differences existed on the basis of demographic characteristics of the sample, several statistical analyses were conducted. However because there was an unequal number of participants in each demographic category (e.g., age, location, number of arrests, and level of involvement) and unequal variances, it was necessary to perform non-parametric tests (Shavelson, 1996). Kruskal-Wallis tests were performed to determine whether differences between BARIS factor scores were statistically significant based on each demographic characteristic and the results of the analyses are shown in Tables 4.4 through 4.8, respectively. Demographic characteristic one (age) did not yield statistically significant results. Thus, differences were found on

PAGE 82

74 the BARIS due to age. However, statistically significant results were detected for every other demographic characteristic (e.g., racial designation, socio-economic status, involvement in juvenile justice system, number of arrests, and types of programs). Table 4.3 Demographic data for participants by program or school (N = 1 26) n 11 /V Age at time of survey (years) 11-12 93 28 13-14 83 25 15-18 151 46 Racial Designation Black 224 69 African American 100 31 Negro J
PAGE 83

75 Table 4.4 Racial designations of Black adolescent males aged 1 1 18 on the three BARIS Factors Number of arrests Participants Mean Rank (n = 327) Factor 1 4.10 1 244 169.67 2 100 149.68 3 3 217.67 Factor 2 .44 1 244 165.89 2 100 160.52 3 3 138.67 Factor 3** 16.09 1 244 176.56 2 100 131.90 3 3 146.67 1 = Black, 2 = African American, and 3 = Negro **p< .01 Table 4.5 Number of arrests for black adolescent males aged 1 1 18 on the three BARIS Factors Number of arrests Participants Mean Rank (n = 327) Factor 1** 19.39 1 40 144.63 2 227 154.76 3 60 211.89 Factor 2* 8.29 1 40 140.18 2 227 173.93 3 60 142.30 Factor 3 .37 1 40 169.98 2 227 162.21 3 60 158.60 1 = poor, 2 = middle class, and 3 = well off **p<.01 * p < .05 Although only 75 participants completed one of the three additional self-report instruments, the BARIS was administered to 126 participants in the second phase of the

PAGE 84

76 research project in an effort to further examine the factor structure of the instrument. A subsequent factor analysis was performed on the 22-item scale to determine if the exclusion of items markedly affected the factor structure. The factor structure resulting from this analysis was nearly identical to the original in regard to eigenvalues and communalities. The factor analysis of the 22-item, three-factor BARIS yielded eigenvalues of 4.6, 2.9, and 2.5 respectively. This form accounted for 45% of the total variance, an increase from 36% in the original scale. Table 4.6 Differences in BARIS factor scores between offenders and non-offenders Number of arrests Participants Mean Rank X' (n = 327) Factor 1** 17.14 1 59 209.96 2 228 153.88 Factor 2** 27.06 1 59 221.69 2 228 151.30 Factor 3* 3.96 1 59 184.20 2 228 157.67 1 = offender and 2 = non-offender **p<.01 * p < .05 Decisions for maintaining and discarding items on the BARIS were made on a statistical rather than conceptual basis. However, the items and the factors also corresponded to information reported in the literature reviewed. For example, all items were created according to the three recurring themes for racial ethnic identification (REI) discovered by Resnicow and Ross (1997), including (a) beliefs about being Black; (b) attitudes toward Whites; and (c) recognition and perceptions of racism on the social, institutional.

PAGE 85

77 and individual levels. Additionally, review of research studies on other racial identity instruments such as the RIAS, MEM, and ASBL support a three factor solution (Phinney, 1992; Resnicow et al., 1999). The resulting factors of the BARIS were named: Dominant Affiliation, Self-segregation, and Universal Acceptance. Table 4.7 Number of arrests for black adolescent males aged 1 1 1 8 on the three BARIS Factors Number of arrests Participants (n = 327) Mean Rank X Factor 1** 21.74 0 268 152.84 1 42 207.40 2 17 232.74 Factor 2** 30.06 0 35 150.68 1 51 228.60 2 13 214.47 Factor 3* 6.98 0 35 156.14 1 51 188.48 2 13 197.50 0 = no arrests, 1 = : 1-3 arrests, 2 = 4 or more arrests ** p< .01 * p < .05 I Table 4.8 Eigenvalues, Percentages of Variance, and Cumulative Percentages for Rotated Factors of the 22-Item Black Adolescent Racial Identity Scale Factor Eigenvalue % of variance Cumulative % AS 5.25 23.86 23.86 UA 3.20 14.53 38.39 SS 2.47 11.24 49.63 Reliability Hypotheses The mean BARIS score for the Dominant Affiliation subscale was 1 .72 (SD = .55, Alpha = .81). The mean BARIS score for the Self-segregation subscale was 2.09 (SD = .62, Alpha = .72). The mean BARIS score for the Universal Acceptance subscale

PAGE 86

78 was 3.53 (SD = .43, Alpha = .73). The overall reliability of the BARIS resulted in a Coefficient Alpha of .68 (N= 327). As stated earlier moderate correlations were detected between factors two and three and between factors one and two, thus lending some credence to the nature of theory related to RID statuses. Overall, these results indicate that the internal consistency of the BARIS was relatively moderate for preliminary research. Table 4.9 Level of incarceration for black adolescent males ages 1 1 1 8 on the three BARIS Factors BARIS Factors Level of Participants Mean Rank X~ incarceration (n = 327) Dominant 0 272 153, .09 23.42 Affiliation** 1 18 205, .31 2 14 222, ,79 3 14 218, .57 4 2 182, .50 5 6 242, .08 6 1 295, .50 Self0 272 151, .99 32.45 Segregation** 1 18 246, .22 2 14 181, .04 3 14 218, ,96 4 2 187, ,50 5 6 261, .25 6 1 313, ,00 Universal 0 272 156, ,18 12.96 Acceptance* 1 18 215, ,11 2 14 181, ,61 3 14 152, ,32 4 2 214, .00 5 6 224. .33 6 1 289. ,50 0 = no involvement, 1 = house an^est, 2 = teen court, 3 = alternative services, 4 = level 6, 5 = level 8, and 6 = level 10 ** p<.01 *p < .05

PAGE 87

I 79 Validity Hypotheses and Exploratory Analysis In order to test the hypotheses regarding validity of the BARIS, three other instruments were administered to subgroups of 25 individuals along with the BARIS. Correlations were calculated between the BARIS scores and scores for each of these I I instruments. Means and standard deviations for the subscales of each instrument are reported in Table 4.7. It was hypothesized that the MEM, based on its factor structure, would have factors that both correlated with and lacked correlation with the BARIS factors. It also was hypothesized that correlations would exist between the three BARIS factors and the three reported factors for both the ASBL and RIAS, thus providing evidence of both divergent and concurrent validity. Table 4.10 Means and Standard Deviations for Four measures of Racial Identity Development Measure M SD Black Adolescent Racial Identity Scale Dominant Affiliation 2.71 .28 Self-Segregation 3.46 .46 Universal Acceptance 2.15 .57 Racial Identity Attitude Scale Pre-Encounter 1.86 .38 Immersion/Emmersion 3.20 .57 Internalization 3.70 .66 Adolescent Survey of Black Life Pro Black 2.83 .28 Anti White 2.84 .23 Racism Awareness 1.44 .30 Multi-Group Ethnic Identity Measure Affirmation 3.58 .22 Ethnic Identity 2.78 .24 Ethnic Behavior 2.68 .54 With regard to divergent validity, it was hypothesized that a low, statistically nonsignificant relationship would exist between the Dominant Affiliation and Universal

PAGE 88

80 factors of the BARIS and the Affirmation (AF) and Ethnic Identity (EI) factors of the MEM. The results confirmed that a non-significant correlation exists between the BARIS Dominant Affiliation scale and the AF and EI scales of the MEIM (Affirmation = .03, Ethnic Idenfity = -.19). Results also confirmed that a low, non-significant relationship existed between the BARIS Universal Acceptance scale and all scales of the MEIM (Affirmation (r = -.13), Ethnic Idenfity (r = -.01), Ethnic Behavior (r = -.32)). These results lend support to the divergent validity of the BARIS. With regard to concurrent validity, two significant correlations emerged from the analyses. Results demonstrated a significant, negative correlafion between the PreEncounter subscale of the RIAS and the Dominant Affiliation subscale of the BARIS (r = .69, p < 01). This correlafion indicates consistency across scales with regard to individuals who provide responses about denigration of Afrocentric beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors in relation to those individuals who provide responses related to the value of all things Black or Afrocentric. Table 4.11 [ntercorrelations for factor scores on the BARIS and the MEIM Measure 1 2 3 4 5 6 Affirmation .013 .003 .249 .027 -.188 .590** -.002 .038 .247 -.127 -.014 -.318 184** .053 -.230** Ethnic Identity Ethnic Behavior Dominant Affiliation SelfSegregation Universal Acceptance Coefficients are significant at p < .01.

PAGE 89

81 Table 4.12 Intercorrelations for factor scores on the BARIS and the RIAS Measure 1 2 3 Dominant — Affiliation Self.184** segregation Universal -.283** -.230** Acceptance Internalization -.116 .08 .303 Immersion / .038 .047 -.002 Emmersion Pre-Encounter .159 .089 -.064 .388 -.502** .445 **Coefficients are significant at p < .01. Table 4.13 Intercorrelations for factor scores on the BARIS and the ASBL Measure 1 Dominant Affiliation Self.184** segregation Universal -.283 Acceptance Attitudes .060 about being Black Attitudes -.126 toward Whites Perceptions -.176 of racism -.230** -.042 -.426 .371 ,160 .185 .008 .443 .516 -.411 ** Coefficients are significant at p < .01. The second significant correlation that emerged from the data analyses indicated a positive relationship between the Dominant Affiliation subscale of the BARIS and the Ethnic Behavior subscale of the MEIM (r = .59, p < .01). this correlation indicates a positive relationship between individuals who have strong beliefs about ethnic identity and those who have strong attitudes about the dominant culture.

PAGE 90

CHAPTER V Discussion I This research was focused on the development of the BARIS and examination of its psychometric properties. The research questions were (a) what is the initial factor structure of the BARIS?, (b) What are the differences in BARIS factor scores based on socio-economic level?, (c) What are the differences in BARIS factor scores between juvenile offenders and non-offenders?, (d) What are the differences in BARIS factor scores based on level of offense?, and (e) what are the levels of validity and reliability for the BARIS? The results of this study suggest that the BARIS has a, three-factor structure, as hypothesized. The revised 22-item BARIS scale accounted for 45% of the total variance and had an Alpha Coefficient of .68. The revised BARIS provides an opportunity for relatively easy assessment of issues related to RID among BAM juvenile offenders. The BARIS appears to have achieved a good balance of items to address three domains of RID status. The elimination of cross-loadings in the revised scale allows clear identification of issues related to each factor. The three-factor structure of the BARIS is consistent with other research within the field of RID. However, the complete application of this factor structure across different populations or situations is yet to be tested. In this particular case, the application of a three-factor RID solution with juvenile offenders is evident. Analyses of demographic data resulted in findings of significant differences on all BARIS factor 82

PAGE 91

83 scores between offenders and nonoffenders. As hypothesized, offenders scored higher on all three BARIS factors thus providing evidence that racial issues are salient with the offender population. As stated, analyses of demographic data produced statistically significant differences in all but one category, age. However, because the sample for this study was relatively small, the need for further research exists. Reliability of the BARIS was found to be sufficient. However, evidence of concurrent validity of the BARIS is tentative. As stated earlier, two significant correlations emerged between factors of the BARIS and the other three instruments administered in the second phase of the study. There are several possible explanations for this result. Because the sample was composed of juvenile offenders, there is a possibility of antisocial behaviors related to disorders of conduct. Individuals with such behavior disorders may intentionally provide confusing data as a rebellious act. A second potential explanation is that the lack of psychometric credibility of the instruments used in the second study made it difficult to analyze the validity of the BARIS. Furthermore, adolescence is a time of confusion and continued identity formation. The inconsistency of responses may reflect this process within the sample. At the same time, the concurrent validity of the BARIS may truly be low. In order to evaluate this phenomenon, further research needs to be conducted. As anticipated, evidence of the divergent validity of the BARIS was more promising. A low, statistically non-significant relationship existed between the Universal Acceptance factor of the BARIS and the factors of the MEIM. Thus, a significant relationship did not exist between individuals who demonstrated awareness of cultural I

PAGE 92

84 competence and those individuals who demonstrated high involvement or immersion in their own cultures. The results also confirmed that a non-significant correlation existed between the BARIS Dominant Affiliation scale and the AF and EI scales of the MEM. These results lend support to the divergent validity of the BARIS. BARIS Structure Race is often seen as "an arbitrary classification of population using actual or assumed genetic traits to classify populations of the world into a hierarchical order" (Pigler Christensen, 1989 p. 275). However, the ways in which people view themselves and others as racial beings can have more compelling effects than race itself. As a result, racial identity development, or the quality or manner of personal identification with a racial group, is an important concept for research. Racial Identity Status is comprised of attitudes, thoughts, feelings, and behaviors toward self as a member of a racial group and toward members of dominant or minority racial group (Carter, 1995). The Black Adolescent Racial Identity Scale (BARIS) was developed as an instrument to identify racial statuses within individuals in the juvenile offender population. Individuals may possess qualities in all three statuses but also may demonstrate dominance in a particular status. Thus, the BARIS was developed based on the Tri-Status model of racial identity development. The factors derived from this empirical analysis of the BARIS are Dominant Affiliation, Self-segregation, and Universal Acceptance. The first status. Dominant Affiliation, is characterized by adaptation of White (majority) lifestyles and development of a belief system that values "White" culture and denigrates anything Afrocentric. This status includes behaviors such as listening to "White" music, attending predominantly "White" social functions, and the desire to have

PAGE 93

j 85 Caucasian-like physical features. The BARIS items related to this factor included statements such as, "White counselors are better than Black counselors" and "White friends are better than Black Friends." These individuals would have a propensity to value programs presented from a majority viewpoint. In general, counselors working with an individual who primarily identified with this status may be able to utilize traditional approaches effectively. However, Black counselors engaging a client with a dominant Dominant Affiliation status would have to address issues of trust on a scale greater than usual. The second status, Self-segregation, is characterized by a move from Dominant Affiliation into the dominant culture to immersion in Afrocentric belief systems. Individuals with dominance in this status of identity development have unearthed an awareness of Black history, have come to value themselves as racial beings, and have developed a sense of distrust and anger toward the majority culture. Based on scores derived from a racial identity attitude measure such as the BARIS, the level of a person's commitment to a certain status can be assessed as well as their movement into other statuses. The BARIS items related to this factor included statements such as, "It's easier to get along with Black People" and "Black counselors understand kids better than White counselors." Juvenile offenders who demonstrate dominance in this status are likely to be opposed to traditional therapeutic approaches. Individuals strongly identifying with this status might have a difficult time developing a therapeutic alliance with a White counselor. General approaches to rehabilitation such as anger management, conflict resolution, and drug and alcohol awareness should have culturally specific components in

PAGE 94

86 order to engage these individuals. Traditional approaches to therapy should be either abandoned or adapted for culturally specific interventions. A movement toward multicultural competence characterizes the third status, Universal Acceptance. In other words, individuals whose attitudes are dominant in this status are more likely to be open-minded toward experiences with people from other cultures. These individuals are tolerant of differences and value people from all types of backgrounds. As individuals develop dominance in this status, they become more likely to have a multicultural circle of friends and have an ability to interact with individuals from all cultures and races. The BARIS items related to this factor included statements I such as, "People should be proud of their race" and "People from all races should get along." Juvenile offenders identifying Universal Acceptance as their dominant status would be amenable to universal approaches to treatment. These individuals place a sense of value in all races, culture, and people. As a result, traditional therapeutic approaches are acceptable for this population. Furthermore, counselor/client matches regarding race and culture are not a base issue. When considering racial identity statuses and interventions for juvenile offenders, it should be emphasized that individuals are likely to have issues stemming from all three statuses. The dominant status is merely a framework from which the individual operates in most occasions. Lidividuals interpreting RID assessment instruments are cautioned to use several different assessment tools in conjunction with the BARIS as a means to providing a more holistic picture of individual functioning Suggested Uses of the BARIS The purpose for development of the BARIS was to enable identification of salient issues related to race and culture for juvenile offenders. By identifying issues such as

PAGE 95

87 Strong feelings about race, more effective treatment interventions could be designed. The results of this research appear to be promising. This study suggests that racial issues are salient with the juvenile offender population. However, further research needs to be conducted before the BARIS can be widely used in juvenile offender settings. Although results from this study are promising, a number of similar studies need to be conducted in order to perform confirmatory factor analyses and further validity studies. If future studies confirm the psychometric properties of the BARIS, it may be used as an assessment tool within juvenile offender treatment programs. In the beginning phase of treatment, results from the BARIS may help clinicians develop culturallyspecific treatment plans. Racial identity issues have been shown to have an impact on the therapeutic process (Carter, 1995). Thus, it is safe to assume that those same issues affect the therapeutic process with juvenile offenders. For example, if a juvenile offender was to agree strongly with the statement, "It is important to take part in Black activities," a counselor could help the client to become involved with positive leaders in the community. The counselor also might find it helpful to work with the client to identify specific activities in which the client could participate. For example, perhaps the identification of a positive mentor from the Black community would prove to be a useful intervenfion in such a situation. Some of the areas identified in the BARIS may provide a clinician with insight regarding the client's presenting issues. For example, if a juvenile offender was to agree strongly with the statement, "Whites get more chances in life," the clinician could explore the roots of this thought process and help the client work toward a sense of hope. If a juvenile offender believes that s/he has no chance for success, then rehabilitation

PAGE 96

88 efforts will surely fail. Thus, it is important for clinicians who work with BAMs in the juvenile justice system to be aware of the systemic effects of oppression and the impact of history on an individual's outlook in order to make an accurate diagnosis. Results from this study also may help assignment of clinician caseloads. A body of research is emerging that supports paired counselor/client dyads on the basis of RID (Carter, 1995). Clients who agree strongly to either, "White counselors are better than Black counselors" or "Black counselors understand kids better than White counselors" should be paired with a counselor who either matches the beliefs of the client or who possesses a level of cultural competence that could address these trust issues in the therapeutic process adequately. Racial issues are often difficult to discuss. Thus, it becomes even more difficult if an individual's counselor is from a racial or ethnic background that the individual does not trust. Although Universal acceptance is a goal for everyone, change is a process that occurs at a different rate for every individual. Counselors must respect that rate of change and be willing to work on these sensitive issues from within the client's worldview. Limitations and Suggestions for Furtlier Research The development of an instrument such as the BARIS requires attention to inherent and potential limitations. These limitations are specifically related to sampling, procedures, instrumentation, and response errors. Although every effort was made to control for some of these potential ambient factors, it is important to discuss them and their possible effects. One initial potential limitation stems from the sample. Because participation in this research was voluntary, the possibility of selection bias arises. Characteristics of

PAGE 97

individuals who volunteer may be, and often are, different from those who do not. This effect also can limit the generalization of the results. The sampling procedures for the development of the BARIS also introduced potential limitations. Because validation studies utilizing factor analyses require a large sample size, and because BAMs are a special population, the use of random selection of participants was not possible. The procedures for administration of the BARIS and the other instruments also presented potential limitations. Instruments administered in large groups may produce different results than for instruments administered in other ways. In order to compensate for this potential problem, trained research aides administered the instruments and used various methods of administration including reading the questions aloud. Although potential limitations existed with regard to the use of research aides, these limitations were controlled for due to the existing connection the aides had with the participants. Additional limitations existed due to general procedures. The BARIS is an instrument that identifies racial attitudes and the questions may have been considered threatening by some respondents. Bradburn and Sudman (as cited in Gall, Borg, & Gall, 1996) stated that assurance of confidentiality increases response rates when threatening questions are present. Confidentiality information was stated clearly in the parent consent form, participant assent form, and instructions read to the participants. Refining administration methods after the initial study and independent reviews controlled some of the limitations. Therefore, feelings of threat among the respondents should have been minimal.

PAGE 98

90 In order to validate the BARIS, subgroups received an additional instrument to complete. The ability to generalize results obtained from these subgroups was limited because of the characteristics of the groups and the number of participants in each subgroup. An attempt was made to utilize subgroups representative of the population in order to compensate for potential problems in this area. However, the number of participants in each cell did not meet the recommended statistical power. Thus, additional research should be conducted to investigate further the validity of the BARIS. The additional instruments used to validate the BARIS also may be sources of potential limitations. The instruments were chosen based on their reading level, relationship to RID in BAMs, ease of administration, simplicity of format, and length of time required. These are not the only instruments available for these populations. However, these instruments were a "best fit" based on a review of the related literature. The adequacy of the instruments chosen to validate the BARIS was limited by the psychometric properties of each individual instrument. As noted, RID assessment instruments have not proven to be psychometrically sound in previous research. Therefore, the use of current RID assessment instruments in this study limited the generalization of results. All of the instruments included in this research are paper-and-pencil, self-report measures. Thus, a potential existed for response effect, which is, "the tendency of the respondent to give inaccurate or incorrect responses. " (Gall et al., 1996 p.448). This type of error may be related to predispositions of the respondent. According to Gall, Borg, and Gall (1996) the following examples of respondent predispositions can lead to errors:

PAGE 99

91 1 . The respondent is suspicious of or hostile to the research. 2. Is indifferent or not motivated to cooperate. 3. Lacks the information the interviewer is seeking. 4. Wants to please the interviewer or be accepted by the interviewer. 5. Wants to present himself or herself in favorable terms (p. 448). Through carefully developed procedures for administration of the instruments, these potential effects were minimized. Because juvenile offenders were the primary participants in this research project, hostility and lack of motivation were potential problems. Thus, it was important to have clear guidelines for administration and thorough cooperation from juvenile justice agencies, schools, and other groups participating in the research. Although these guidelines were followed closely, inconsistencies in responses lend support to the potential effects described above. Another potential limitation stems from the potentially low reading level of participants in this study. Although most of the BARIS items fell at a fourth grade reading level, this research project did not account for differentiation between regular education and special education classifications among participants. Thus, some of the problems with response inconsistency could have been due to confusion or misunderstanding of the material. Conclusions Results of this study provide initial evidence of the psychometric promise of the Black Adolescent Racial Identity Scale. The BARIS provides empirical support for the Tri-status Model of Racial Identity Development and with current beliefs within the field of RID. The initial data suggest that the items on the BARIS adequately sample the RID domains. In sum, this study lends support to the Tri-status Model of Racial Identity Development. Future research should be conducted to further substantiate the results

PAGE 100

92 presented in this study and to expand the application of results by conducting research on larger and different samples. Through this and future research on BAM juvenile offenders more effective treatment strategies may be generated.

PAGE 101

APPENDIX A PARTICIPANT CONSENT AND ASSENT FORMS Parent Consent for Son to Participate (community programs) Dear Parent or Guardian: I am a graduate student in the Department of Counselor Education at the University of Florida, conducting research on racial identity attitudes under the supervision of Dr. Larry C. Loesch. The purpose of this project is to develop an instrument that will ask questions about attitudes regarding culture, race, prejudice, and discrimination. The results of this study may help determine more effective methods of helping Black adolescent males who are involved in the juvenile justice system. As you may know, Black male youth have an overwhelming representation in the juvenile justice system but there aren't any known answers as to why. This research project, called "The development of an instrument to measure racial identity attitudes in Black adolescent male juvenile offenders," will help us to identify some of the issues that may be important to youth who have experienced problems with the law. It also may help to create a more effective rehabilitation program for minority youth involved in the juvenile justice system, thus reducing the overwhelming representation of Black youth. What is involved? Adolescent boys who participate will be asked to spend a total of about 20 minutes completing a questionnaire. The questionnaire focuses on awareness of racial identity attitudes. Typical questions will ask your son to identify the role of the church in his life, the value he places on being Black, or his ability to interact with people from other cultures. Potential Benefits and Concerns. In order to complete the survey, your son may have to miss part of an activity. A possible benefit of participation may be that the questionnaires encourage adolescents to become more aware of their racial backgrounds and belief systems. Participation is voluntary. Mr. Sheperis has been approved to conduct this research by your son's program. However, your son's participation in this study is completely voluntary. There will be no penalty if you do not wish your son to be in this study, and he may withdraw at any time during the study and/or refuse to answer any of the questions. Individuals will not be paid in any way for their participation in this research project. Information is confidential. All information will be held as confidential as is legally possible. Only the assistants and the researcher will see the questionnaires. Results will only be reported in the form of group data. Participation or non-participation in this study will not affect your son's placement in any programs. All participants will remain anonymous. 92

PAGE 102

93 Questions? We would appreciate it if you would return the form on the back of this page whether or not you would like your son to participate, so that we know this information has reached you. You may keep the attached copy of this letter for your records. If you have any questions, please feel free to call Mr. Carl Sheperis (352) 336-6455. I can arrange for you to see the questionnaires in advance if you wish. The Institutional Review Board at the University of Florida can also answer questions about the rights of participants in this research. They can be reached at the UFIRB office. University of Florida, Box 1 12250, Gainesville, FL 326 11, (352) 392-0433. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Carl J. Sheperis, M.S.Ed., N.C.C. Graduate Student Department of Counselor Education Please check the appropriate boxes and send this form back to your son's school or program: cm I have read the procedures described above, I voluntarily give consent for my son to participate in Carl Sheperis' research study. I I I have received a copy of Mr. Sheperis' letter for my records. I I I would like more information before giving consent for my son to participate in this study. Call me at I — I I do not wish my son to participate in this study. Parent' s Signature/Date 2"'' Parent / Witness Adolescent's Name Please send this form back to the school or program with your son. Thanks!!!

PAGE 103

94 Assent form for adolescents (community programs) Participant Assent Form Study Title: The Development of an Instrument to Measure Racial Identity Attitudes in Juvenile Offenders Investigator: Carl J. Sheperis, M.S.Ed., N.C.C. (352) 336-6455 I am being asked to help Mr. Sheperis in a project. The goal of this project is to make a questionnaire about the way adolescents think about race, culture, prejudice, and discrimination. This questionnaire will be used to help identify important issues to talk about with juvenile offenders. If I decide to participate, my part in the project will take no more than 20 minutes total. I will be asked to fill out one questionnaire. I understand that thinking about the way I understand culture, race, prejudice, and discrimination may help me to better understand myself and others around me. This project has been explained to me and I have been allowed to ask questions about it. I understand that I do not have to fill out the questionnaires if I don't want to and no one will treat me badly because of my choice. I can stop part way through if I want to and skip questions I don't want to answer. I further understand that I will not be paid in any way for my participation in this project. I have read this form and agree to participate. Student Date I have read this form and do not wish to participate. Student Date Investigator Date

PAGE 104

95 Parent Consent for Son to Participate (juvenile justice programs) Dear Parent or Guardian: I am a graduate student in the Department of Counselor Education at the University of Florida, conducting research on racial identity attitudes under the supervision of Dr. Larry C. Loesch. The purpose of this project is to develop an instrument that will ask questions about attitudes regarding culture, race, prejudice, and discrimination. The results of this study may help determine more effective methods of helping Black adolescent males who are involved in the juvenile justice system. As you may know. Black male youth have an overwhelming representation in the juvenile justice system but there aren't any known answers as to why. This research project, called "The development of an instrument to measure racial identity attitudes in Black adolescent male juvenile offenders," will help us to identify some of the issues that may be important to youth who have experienced problems with the law. It also may help to create a more effective rehabilitation program for minority youth involved in the juvenile justice system, thus reducing the overwhelming representation of Black youth. What is involved? Adolescent boys who participate will be asked to spend a total of about 20 minutes completing a questionnaire. The questionnaire focuses on awareness of racial identity attitudes. Typical questions will ask your son to identify the role of the church in his life, the value he places on being Black, or his ability to interact with people from other cultures. Potential Benefits and Concerns. Although we will schedule completing the questionnaires so that your child does not miss important activities, he may have to make up missed work. A possible benefit of participation may be that the questionnaires encourage adolescents to become more aware of their racial backgrounds and belief systems. Participation is voluntary. Mr. Sheperis has been approved to conduct this research by your son's program. However, your son's participation in this study is completely voluntary. There will be no penalty if you do not wish your son to be in this study, and he may withdraw at any time during the study and/or refuse to answer any of the questions. Individuals will not be paid in any way for their participation in this research project. Participation will not affect your son's parole or release date. Information is confidential. All information will be held as confidential as is legally possible. Only the assistants and the researcher will see the quesfionnaires. Results will only be reported in the form of group data. Participation or non-participation in this study will not affect your son's placement in any programs. All participants will remain anonymous. Questions? We would appreciate it if you would return the form on the back of this page whether or not you would like your son to participate, so that we know this information has reached you. You may keep the attached copy of this letter for your records. If you

PAGE 105

96 have any questions, please feel free to call Mr. Carl Sheperis (352) 336-6455. I can arrange for you to see the questionnaires in advance if you wish. The Institutional Review Board at the University of Florida can also answer questions about the rights of participants in this research. They can be reached at the UFIRB office, University of Florida, Box 11 2250, Gainesville, FL 3261 1, (352) 392-0433. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Carl J. Sheperis, M.S.Ed., N.C.C. Graduate Student Department of Counselor Education Please check the appropriate boxes and send this form back to your son's school or program: I I I have read the procedures described above, I voluntarily give consent for my son to participate in Carl Sheperis' research study. I — I I have received a copy of Mr. Sheperis' letter for my records. I — I I would like more information before giving consent for my son to participate in this study. Call me at I — I I do not wish my son to participate in this study. Parent's Signature/Date Adolescent's Name Please send this form back to the school or program with your son. 2 Parent / Witness. I Thanks!!!

PAGE 106

97 Participant Assent Form (juvenile justice) Study Title: The Development of an Instrument to Measure Racial Identity Attitudes in Juvenile Offenders Investigator: Carl J. Sheperis, M.S.Ed., N.C.C. (352) 336-6455 I am being asked to help Mr. Sheperis in a project. The goal of this project is to make a questionnaire about the way adolescents think about race, culture, prejudice, and discrimination. This questionnaire will be used to help identify important issues to talk about with juvenile offenders. If I decide to participate, my part in the project will take no more than 20 minutes total. I will be asked to fill out one questionnaire. If I miss part of an activity, I may have to make up the work I miss. I also understand that thinking about the way I understand culture, race, prejudice, and discrimination may help me to better understand myself and others around me. This project has been explained to me and I have been allowed to ask questions about it. I understand that I do not have to fill out the questionnaires if I don't want to and no one will treat me badly because of my choice. I can stop part way through if I want to and skip questions I don't want to answer. I further understand that I will not be paid in any way for my participation in this project. I also understand that participation will not affect my parole or release date. I have read this form and agree to participate. Student , Date I have read this form and do not wish to participate. Student Date Investigator Date

PAGE 107

98 Parent Consent for Son to Participate (schools) Dear Parent or Guardian: I am a graduate student in the Department of Counselor Education at the University of Florida, conducting research on racial identity attitudes under the supervision of Dr. Larry C. Loesch. The purpose of this project is to develop an instrument that will ask questions about attitudes regarding culture, race, prejudice, and discrimination. The results of this study may help determine more effective methods of helping Black adolescent males who are involved in the juvenile justice system. As you may know. Black male youth have an overwhelming representation in the juvenile justice system but there aren't any known answers as to why. This research project, called "The development of an instrument to measure racial identity attitudes in Black adolescent male juvenile offenders," will help us to identify some of the issues that may be important to youth who have experienced problems with the law. It also may help to create a more effective rehabilitation program for minority youth involved in the juvenile justice system, thus reducing the overwhelming representation of Black youth. What is involved? Adolescent boys who participate will be asked to spend a total of about 20 minutes completing a questionnaire. The questionnaire focuses on awareness of racial identity attitudes. Typical questions will ask your son to identify the role of the church in his life, the value he places on being Black, or his ability to interact with people from other cultures. Potential Benefits and Concerns. Although we will schedule completing the questionnaires so that your child does not miss important lessons, he may have to make up missed work. A possible benefit of participation may be that the questionnaires encourage adolescents to become more aware of their racial backgrounds and belief systems. Participation is voluntary. Mr. Sheperis has been approved to conduct this research by your son's school. However, your son's participation in this study is completely voluntary. There will be no penalty if you do not wish your son to be in this study, and he may withdraw at any time during the study and/or refuse to answer any of the questions. Individuals will not be paid in any way for their participation in this research project. Information is confidential. All information will be held as confidential as is legally possible. Only the assistants and the researcher will see the questionnaires. Results will only be reported in the form of group data. Participation or non-participation in this study will not affect your son's grades or placement in any programs. All participants will remain anonymous. Questions? We would appreciate it if you would return the form on the back of this page whether or not you would like your son to participate, so that we know this information has reached you. You may keep the attached copy of this letter for your records. If you

PAGE 108

99 have any questions, please feel free to call Mr. Carl Sheperis (662) 325-9840. I can arrange for you to see the questionnaires in advance if you wish. The Institutional Review Board at the University of Florida can also answer questions about the rights of participants in this research. They can be reached at the UFIRB office, University of Florida, Box 11 2250, Gainesville, FL 326 11, (352) 392-0433. Thank you for your consideration. I Sincerely, Carl J. Sheperis, M.S.Ed., N.C.C. Graduate Student Department of Counselor Education Please check the appropriate boxes and send this form back to your son's school: I I I have read the procedures described above, I voluntarily give consent for my son to participate in Carl Sheperis' research study. I — I I have received a copy of Mr. Sheperis' letter for my records. I — I I would like more information before giving consent for my son to participate in this study. Call me at I — I I do not wish my son to participate in this study. Parent's Signature/Date 2"^* Parent / Witness Adolescent's Name Please send this form back to the school or program with your son. Thanks!!!

PAGE 109

100 Participant Assent Form (schools) Study Title: The Development of an Instrument to Measure Racial Identity Attitudes in Juvenile Offenders Investigator: Carl J. Sheperis, M.S.Ed., N.C.C. (662) 325-9840 I am being asked to help Mr. Sheperis in a project. The goal of this project is to make a questionnaire about the way adolescents think about race, culture, prejudice, and discrimination. This questionnaire will be used to help identify important issues to talk about with juvenile offenders. If I decide to participate, my part in the project will take no more than 20 minutes total. I will be asked to fill out one questionnaire. If I miss part of a class, I may have to make up the work I miss. I also understand that thinking about the way I understand culture, race, prejudice, and discrimination may help me to better understand myself and others around me. This project has been explained to me and I have been allowed to ask questions about it. I understand that I do not have to fill out the questionnaires if I don't want to and no one will treat me badly because of my choice. I can stop part way through if I want to and skip questions I don't want to answer. I further understand that I will not be paid in any way for my participation in this project. I have read this form and agree to participate. Student Date I have read this form and do not wish to participate. Student Date Investigator Date

PAGE 110

101 Parent Consent for Son to Participate (validity study) Dear Parent or Guardian: 1 am a graduate student in the Department of Counselor Education at the University of Florida, conducting research on racial identity attitudes under the supervision of Dr. Larry C. Loesch. The purpose of this project is to develop a survey that will ask questions about attitudes regarding culture, race, prejudice, and discrimination. The results of this study may help determine more effective methods of helping Black adolescent males who are involved in the juvenile justice system. As you may know. Black male youth have an overwhelming representation in the juvenile justice system but there aren't any known answers as to why. This research project, called "The development of an instrument to measure racial identity attitudes in Black adolescent male juvenile offenders," will help us to identify some of the issues that may be important to youth who have experienced problems with the law. It also may help to create a more effective rehabilitation program for minority youth involved in the juvenile justice system, thus reducing the overwhelming representation of Black youth. What is involved? Adolescent boys who participate will be asked to spend a total of about 40 minutes completing two questionnaires. Each of the questionnaires focuses on awareness of racial identity attitudes. Typical questions will ask your son to identify the role of the church in his life, the value he places on being Black, or his ability to interact with people from other cultures. Potential Benefits and Concerns. Although we will schedule completing the questionnaires so that your son does not miss important lessons, he may have to make up missed work. A possible benefit of participation may be that the questionnaires encourage adolescent boys to become more aware of their racial backgrounds and belief systems. Participation is voluntary. Mr. Sheperis has been approved to conduct this research by your son's school. However, your son's participation in this study is completely voluntary. There will be no penalty if you do not wish your son to be in this study, and he may withdraw at any time during the study and/or refuse to answer any of the questions, hidividuals will not be paid in any way for their participation in this research project. Information is confidential. All information will be held as confidential as is legally possible. Only the assistants and the researcher will see the questionnaires. Results will only be reported in the form of group data. Participation or non-participation in this study will not affect your son's grades or placement in any programs. All participants will remain anonymous Questions? We would appreciate it if you would return the form on the back of this page whether or not you would like your son to participate, so that we know this information has reached you. You may keep the attached copy of this letter for your records. If you

PAGE 111

102 have any questions, please feel free to call Mr. Carl Sheperis (662) 325-9287. I can arrange for you to see the questionnaires in advance if you wish. The Institutional Review Board at the University of Florida can also answer questions about the rights of participants in this research. They can be reached at the UFIRB office. University of Florida, Box 112250, Gainesville, FL 3261 1, (352) 392-0433. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Carl J. Sheperis, M.S.Ed., N.C.C. Graduate Student Department of Counselor Education Please check the appropriate boxes and send this form back to your son's school or program: I have read the procedures described above, I voluntarily give consent for my son to participate in Carl Sheperis' research study. I I I have received a copy of Mr. Sheperis' letter for my records. I I I would like more information before giving consent for my son to participate in this study. Call me at I — I I do not wish my son to participate in this study. Parent' s Signature/Date 2"^* Parent / Witness Adolescent's Name Please send this form back to the school or program with your son. Thanks!!!

PAGE 112

103 Assent form for adolescents (validity study) Participant Assent Form Study Title: The Development of an Instrument to Measure Racial Identity Attitudes in Juvenile Offenders Investigator: Carl J. Sheperis, M.S.Ed., N.C.C. (662) 325-9287 I am being asked to help Mr. Sheperis in a project. The goal of this project is to make a questionnaire about the way adolescents think about race, culture, prejudice, and discrimination. This questionnaire will be used to help identify important issues to talk about with juvenile offenders. If I decide to participate, my part in the project will take no more than 40 minutes total. I will be asked to fill out two questionnaires. If I miss part of a class, I may have to make up the work I miss. I also understand that thinking about the way I understand culture, race, prejudice, and discrimination may help me to better understand myself and others around me. This project has been explained to me and I have been allowed to ask questions about it. I understand that I do not have to fill out the questionnaires if I don't want to and no one will treat me badly because of my choice. I can stop part way through if I want to and skip questions I don't want to answer. I further understand that I will not be paid in any way for my participation in this project. I have read this form and agree to participate. Student Date I have read this form and do not wish to participate. Student Date Investigator Date

PAGE 113

APPENDIX B BARIS DEMOGRAPHIC FORM BARIS STUDENT DEMOGRAPHICS Instructions: Please mark the answer that fits best for you. 1 . My age is z. iviy idCc IS Black African American Negro Colored Biracial Other 3. My family is Poor Middle Class Well off 4. Have you ever been arrested? Yes No If yes, continue with If no, STOP! Wait the rest of this for further section. instructions. 5. How many times have you been arrested? 1-2 _ 5-6 . 3-4 7 or more 6. Which of these programs have you been in? (check all that apply) House arrest Alternative Level 8 Services (JASP) (secure detention) ^Teen Court Level 6 Level 10 (day program) (Maximum) 104

PAGE 114

APPENDIX C BARIS INITIAL VERSION BARIS Instructions: Each item may or may not be true for you. To the right of each item is a set of choices that describes how you think about the item. Select one of the choices by circling the number below it: Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree 4 3 2 1 Please answer every item, and make only one choice per item. There are no right or wrong answers. If a question does not seem to apply to you, imagine a time that it might and answer the question based on your thought. Sample Question: Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree A. I like pizza. 4 3 2 1 Question: Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Stronplv Disagree 1 . Rock music is good. 4 3 2 2. A counselor's race doesn't matter. 4 3 2 3. It is important to take part in Black activities. 4 3 2 4. All my friends are Black. 4 3 2 5. Whites get more chances in life. 4 3 2 6. It is good to be around Blacks and other races. 4 3 7. Whites are more trustworthy than Blacks. 4 3 8. It is easier to get along with Black people. 4 3 2 9. Black and White music are good. 4 3 2 10. Whites are better than Blacks. 4 3 2 11. It is good to have friends from different races and backgrounds. 4 3 2 1 2. It is easier for Whites to get a good education 4 3 2 13. White areas are good places to live. 4 3 2 14. It is important to learn as much as possible about being Black. 4 3 2 15. A teacher's race doesn't matter. 4 3 2 16. It feels good to be Black. 4 3 2 17. People should be proud of their race. 4 3 2 1 8. Teenagers should only date people from the same race. 4 3 2 19. Whites are smarter than Blacks. 4 3 2 20. Blacks can become whatever they want. 4 3 2 21 . White counselors understand kids better than Black counselors. 4 3 2 105

PAGE 115

106 22. People from all races have good things about them. 4 3 2 1 23. It is important to tell people what you think, no matter what happens (e.g.. suspension, arrest, etc.). 4 3 2 z^. wniie scnoois are oeiier man r>idCK sciiuuia. A 4 J z i Z.J. 11 IS goou lo gel along wun an kiiius oi pcupic. A J z j 26. It is easier for Whites to get a job. 4 3 2 1 27. Children should know what it means to be Black. 4 3 2 1 28. All races are important. 4 3 2 1 29. White counselors are better than Black counselors. 4 3 2 1 30. It is good to do things with people from all types of backgrounds. 4 3 2 1 j> 1 . 11 IS naruer lor oiacKS lo get aneau. 4 J z j 32. It is OK to date somebody from another race. 4 3 2 1 33. Black Families should follow Black traditions. 4 3 2 1 34. White friends are better than Black friends. 4 3 2 \ 35. People from all races should get along. 4 3 2 36. It is important to take a stand against White people's ideas. 4 3 2 37. Whites speak better than Blacks. 4 3 2 ^ 38. In order to solve problems, Blacks should be more like Whites. 4 3 2 39. Every person can give something to society. 4 3 2 40. It is OK to call White people names like, "cracker, honkey, etc." 4 3 2 [ 41. Most of my friends are White. 4 3 2 1 42. It's OK for Whites and Blacks to mix. 4 3 2 1 43. Black counselors understand kids better than White counselors. 4 3 2 1 *+*-!. l^VCiyuilC oilUUlU ^Cl a Idll L-UallCL. A 4 -3 J z *tJ. rCUpiC aliUUlU UCdl all pCUpiC IIIC SalllC A 4 3 2 4n It ic npftpr tr\ h?ivp Iiohfpr clt'in A 4 J 1 A/ Wnitpc nnvp niof*r hmir than Rlar'l'c 't f . vv iiiivo iiuVC' iiiv/Ci Hull lllull iJictL'No. 4 J z 48. There are rules for everybody. 4 3 2 1 49. It is important to belong to a Black church. 4 3 2 50. Rap music is good. 4 3 2 J 51. Whites look better. 4 3 2 52. It is good to learn about the race and background of others. 4 3 2 53. Words like "phat," "dope," and " slow jam" make sense. 4 3 2 54. It is better to be more like Whites. 4 3 2 55. It is good to eat soul food. 4 3 2 56. It is good to honor being different. 4 3 2 57. Most Whites are against people from other races and backgrounds. 4 3 2 58. It's Ok to call Black people names like, "nigger, spook, etc." 4 3 2 59. Blacks should get more help today because of slavery. 4 3 2

PAGE 116

APPENDIX D FEEDBACK FOR THE BARIS INITIAL STUDY 1 . Were there any words on the BARIS that you did not understand? If so, what were they? 2. Were there any items that were hard to answer? If so, which ones and why? 3. Did you understand how to fill out the BARIS? If not. Why? 4. Was this fun? Boring? Too long? Too Short? 5. Do you have anything you would like to say about the BARIS? If so, please write your answer below. 107

PAGE 117

APPENDIX E REVISED BARIS BARIS Instructions: Each item may or may not be true for you. To the right of each item is a set of choices that describes how you think about the item. Select one of the choices by circling the number below it: Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree 4 3 2 1 Please answer every item, and make only one choice per item. There are no right or wrong answers. If a question does not seem to apply to you, imagine a time that it might and answer the question based on your thought. Sample Question: Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree A. I like pizza. 4 3 2 1 1 Question: Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree 1 . It is important to take part in Black activities. 4 3 2 2. Whites get more chances in life. 4 3 2 3. It is good to be around Blacks and other races. 4 3 2 4. Whites are more trustworthy than Blacks. 4 3 2 5. It is easier to get along with Black people. 4 3 2 6. People should be proud of their race. 4 3 2 7. Teenagers should only date people from the same race. 4 3 2 8. People from all races have good things about them. 4 3 2 9. It is good to get along with all kinds of people. 4 3 2 10. Children should know what it means to be Black. 4 3 2 1 1 . White counselors are better than Black counselors. 4 3 2 12. It is good to do things with people from all types of backgrounds. 4 3 2 1 3. It is OK to date somebody from another race. 4 3 2 14. White friends are better than Black friends. 4 3 2 15. People from all races should get along. 4 3 2 16. It's OK for Whites and Blacks to mix. 4 3 2 17. Black counselors understand kids better than White counselors. 4 3 2 1 8. It is better to have lighter skin. 4 3 2 19. Whites have nicer hair than Blacks. 4 3 2 20. It is important to belong to a Black church. 4 3 2 21. It is good to learn about the race and background of others. 4 3 2 22. It is better to be more like Whites. 4 3 2 1 108

PAGE 118

APPENDIX F VALIDATION INSTRUMENTS Adolescent Survey of Black Life Instructions: Please mark how you feel about each statement with an "X". If you can't say or you do not understand the question leave it blank. It is okay for Black people to date or marry White people Agree a lot Agree Disagree Disagree a lot 2. It is important to learn about African history. Agree a lot Agree Disagree Disagree a lot 3. Most White people feel they are better than Black people. Agree a lot Agree Disagree Disagree a lot 4. I would like to have an African name. Agree a lot Agree Disagree Disagree a lot S.White people still owe African Americans something 1 lecause of slavery. Agree a lot Agree Disagree Disagree a lot 6. 1 would like to have more friends who are White. Agree a lot Agree Disagree Disagree a lot 7. I care what happens to Black people in Africa. Agree a lot Agree Disagree Disagree a lot 8. Things in America are getting worse for Black people. Agree a lot Agree Disagree Disagree a lot 9. 1 am proud to be an African American. Agree a lot Agree Disagree Disagree a lot 10. In America it is harder for Black people to succeed than for White people. Agree a lot Agree Disagree Disagree a lot 1 1 . Being Black is very important to me. 1 Agree a lot Agree Disagree Disagree a lot 109

PAGE 119

no 12. I trust Black people more than I trust White people. Agree a lot Agree Disagree Disagree a lot 13. I trust White people more than I trust Black people. Agree a lot Agree Disagree Disagree a lot 14. Most White people are prejudice a gainst Blacks. Agree a lot Agree Disagree Disagree a lot 15. I would like to live in a neighborhood that has White and Black people in it Agree a lot Agree Disagree Disagree a lot 16. My parents are jroud to be Black. Agree a lot Agree Disagree Disagree a lot 17. Most of my friends are Black. Agree a lot Agree Disagree Disagree a lot 18. There is a lot of racism and prejudice in this country Agree a lot Agree Disagree Disagree a lot 9. For my career, I would like to work on improving things in the Black community Agree a lot Agree Disagree Disagree a lot 20. It is important to shop in Black-owned stores Agree a lot Agree Disagree Disagree a lot 21 I would like to attend an historically Black College or University. Agree a lot Agree Disagree Disagree a lot 22. Earning a lot of money is important to me. Agree a lot Agree Disagree Disagree a lot 23. Getting in touch with my African ancestry is important to me. Agree a lot Agree Disagree Disagree a lot 24. Black people complain too much about racism. Agree a lot Agree Disagree Disagree a lot |

PAGE 120

Ill 25. Blacks can be close friends with Whites. Agree a lot Agree Disagree Disagree a lot 26. It is important to learn about African culture. Agree a lot Agree Disagree Disagree a lot 21. If I had a lot of money I would buy things for myself. Agree a lot Agree Disagree Disagree a lot 28. 1 think police treat Blacks unfairly. Agree a lot Agree Disagree Disagree a lot 29. If I had a lot of money I would donate some of it to African American causes. Agree a lot Agree Disagree Disagree a lot 30. Sometimes I wish I was White. Agree a lot Agree Disagree Disagree a lot

PAGE 121

112 Multigroup Ethnic Identity Measure In this country, people come from a lot of different cultures and there are many different words to describe the different backgrounds or ethnic groups that people come from. Some examples of the names of ethnic groups are Mexican-American, Hispanic, Black, Asian-American, American Indian, Anglo-American, and White. Every person is born into an ethnic group, or sometimes two groups, but people differ on how important their ethnicity is to them, how they feel about it, and how much their behavior is affected by it. These questions are about your ethnicity or your ethnic group and how you feel about it or react to it. Please fill in: In terms of ethnic group, I consider myself to be Use the numbers given below to indicate how much you agree or disagree with each statement. 4: Strongly 3: Somewhat 2: Somewhat 1: Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Disagree 1 . I have spent time trying to find out more about my own ethnic group, such as its history, traditions, and customs 2. I am active in organizations or social groups that include mostly members of my own ethnic group. 3. I have a clear sense of my ethnic background and what it means to me. 4. I like meeting and getting to know people from ethnic groups other than my own. 5. I think a lot about how my life will be affected by my ethnic group membership. 6. I am happy that I am a member of the ethnic group I belong to. 7. I sometimes feel it would be better if different ethnic groups didn't try to mix together. 8. I am not very clear about the role of my ethnicity in life. 9. I often spend time with people from ethnic groups other than my own. 10. I really have not spent much time trying to learn more about the culture and history of my ethnic group. 1 1 . I have a strong sense of belonging to my own ethnic group. 12. I understand pretty well what my ethnic group membership means to me, in terms of how to relate to my own group and other groups. 13. In order to learn more about my ethnic background, I have often talked to other people about my ethnic group. 14. I have a lot of pride in my ethnic group and its accomplishments 15. I don't try to become friends with people from other ethnic groups. 16. I participate in cultural practices of my own group, such as special food, music, or customs. 17. I am involved in activities with people from other ethnic groups. 18. I feel a strong attachment towards my own ethnic group. 19. I enjoy being around people from ethnic groups other than my own. 20. I feel good about my cultural or ethnic background 21. My ethnicity is: ( 1 ) Asian, Asian-American, or Oriental (2) Black, or African American (3) Hispanic or Latino (4) White, Caucasian, European, not Hispanic (5) American Indian (6) Mixed, parents are from two different groups (7) Other (write in) 22. My father's ethnicity is (use numbers above) 23. My mother's ethnicity is (use numbers above)

PAGE 122

113 Racial Identity Attitude Scale This questionnaire is designed to measure people's social and political attitudes. There are no right or wrong answers. Use the scale below to respond to each statement. On your answer sheet, blacken the number of the box that best describes how you feel. Question Strongly Disagree 1 Disagree 2 Uncertain 3 Agree 3 Strongly Agree 4 1. I believe that being Black is a positive experience. 2. I know through experience what being Black in America means. 3. I feel unable to involve myself in white experiences and am increasing my involvement in Black experiences. 4. I believe that large numbers of Blacks are untrustworthy. 5. I feel an overwhelming attachment to Black people. 6. I involve myself in causes that will help all oppressed peopl e. 7. I feel comfortable wherever I am. 8. I believe that White people look and express themselves better than Blacks 9. I feel very uncomfortable around Black people. 10. I feel good about being Black, but do not limit myself to Black activities. I often find myself referring to White people as honkies. devils, pigs, etc. 12. I believe that to be Black is not necessarily good. 13. I believe that certain aspects of the Black experience apply to me. and others do not. 14. I frequently confront the system and the man. 5. I constantly involve myself in Black political and social activities (art shows, political meetings, Black theater, etc.) 16. I involve myself in social action and political groups, even if there are no other Blacks involved 17. 1 believe the Black people should learn to think and experience life in ways which are similar to White people 18. I believe that the world should be interpreted from a Black perspective 19. I have changed my style of life to fit my beliefs about Black people. 20. I feel excitement and joy in Black surroundings. 21.1 believe that Black people came from a strange, dark, and uncivilized continent. 22. People, regardless of their race, have strengths and limitations. 23. I find myself reading a lot of Black literature and thinking about being Black. 24. I feel guilty and/or anxious about some of the things I believe about Black people. 25. I believe that a Black person's most effective weapon for solving problems is to become part of the White person's world. 26. I speak my mind regardless of the consequences (e.g., being kicked out of school, being imprisoned, being exposed to danger). 27. I believe that everything Black is good, and consequently, I limit myself to Black activities. 28. I am determined to find my Black identity. 29. I believe that White people are intellectually superior to Blacks. 30. I believe that because I am Black, I have many strengths. 31.1 feel that Black people do not have as much to be proud of as white people do. 32. Most Blacks I know are failures. 33. I believe that White people should feel guilty about the way they have treated Blacks in the past. 34. White people can't be trusted. 35. In today's society if Black people don't achieve, they have only themselves to blame. 36. The most important thing about me is that I am Black. 37. Being Black just feels natural to me. 38. Other Black people have trouble accepting me because my life experiences have been so different from their experiences. 39. Black people who have any White people's blood should be ashamed of it.

PAGE 123

114 40. Sometimes. I wish I belonged to the White race. 41 . The people I respect most are White. 42. A person's race usually is not important to me. 43. I feel anxious when White people compare me to other members of my race. 44. I can't feel comfortable with either Black people or White people. 45. A person's race has little to do with whether or not he/she is a ^ood person. 46. When I am with Black people. I pretend to enjoy the things they enjoy. 47. When a stranger who is Black does something embarrassing in public, I get embarrassed. 48. I believe that a Black person can be close friends with a White person. 49. I am satisfied with myself. 50. I have a positive attitude about myself because I am Black. I

PAGE 124

REFERENCES Adams, G. R., Gullotta, T. P., & Montemayor, R. (Eds.). (1992). Adolescent identity formation . Newbury Park, CA: SAGE. Atkinson, D. R. (1987). Counseling Blacks: A review of relevant research. Journal of College Student Personnel, 28 , 552-558. Baldwin, J. A., & Bell, Y. R. (1985). The African Self-Consciousness Scale: An Africentric personality questionaire. The Western Journal of Black Studies, 9 , 61-68. Berger, K. S. (1988). The developing person through the life span . New York: Worth Publishers, Inc. Biafora, F. A., Taylor, D. L., Warheit, G. J., & Zimmerman, R. S. (1993). Cultural mistrust and racial awareness among ethnically diverse Black adolescent boys. Journal of Black Psychology. 19 (3). 266-281. Biafora, F. A., Warheit, G. J., Zimmerman, R. S., & Gil, A. G. (1993). Racial mistrust and deviant behaviors among ethnically diverse Black adolescent boys. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 23 (1 1). 891-910. Bierman, K. L., Coie, J. D., Dodge, K. A., Greenberg, M. T., Lochman, J. E., & Mcmahon, R. J. (1992). A developmental and clinical model for the prevention of conduct disorder: The fast track program. Development and Psychopathology, 4 , 509527. Board, J. J. A. (1999a). 1999 Outcome evaluation report: Youth released from juvenile justice programs July 1, 1996 through June 30, 1997 . Tallahassee, FL: Florida Legislature. 115

PAGE 125

116 Board, J. J. A. (1999b). Annual report and juvenile justice fact book (99-001JJAB). Tallahassee: Florida Legislature. Budman, S. H., Hoyt, M. F., & Friedman, S. (1992). The first session in brief therapy . New York: The Guilford Press. Burlew, A. K., & Smith, L. R. (1991). Measures of racial identity: An overview and a proposed framework. Journal of Black Psychology, 17 (2), 53-7 1 . Carter, R. T. (1991). Racial identity attitudes and psychological functioning. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 19 , 105-113. Carter, R. T. (1995). The influence of race and racial identity in psychotherapy : toward a racially inclusive model . New York: Wiley. Carter, R. T. (1997). Black racial identity and psychosocial competence: A preliminary study. Journal of Black Psychology, 23 (1 ), 58-73. Carter, R. T., & Helms, J. E. (1987). The relationship between racial identity attitudes and social class. Journal of Negro Education, 57 (1), 22-30. Carver, C. S., & Scheier, M. F. (1992). Perspectives on personality (2nd ed. ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Cattell, R. B. (1966). The scree test for the number of factors. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 1 , 245-276. Choney, S. K., & Rowe, W. (1994). As.sessing white racial identity: The White Racial Consciousness Development Scale (WRCDS). Journal of Counseling & Development, 73 (1), 102-104. Clark, K. B., & Clark, M. K. (1939a). The development of consciousness of self and the emergence of identification in Negro preschool children. Journal of Social Psychology. 10 , 591-599. Clark, K. B., & Clark, M. K. (1939b). Segregation as a factor in the racial identification of Negro preschool children. Journal of Experimental Education, 8 , 161163. Clark, K. B., & Clark, M. K. (1940). Skin color as a factor in racial identification of Negro preschool children. Journal of Social Psychology, 11 , 159. Coie, J. D., & Jacobs, M. R. (1993). The role of social context in the prevention of conduct disorder. Development and Psvchopathology, 5 , 263-275.

PAGE 126

117 Crocker, L., & Algina, J. (1986). Introduction to classical & modem test theory . Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College Publishers. Cross, W. E., Jr. (1977). The Thomas and Cross models of psychological Nigrescence: A review. Journal of Black Psychology, 5 , 13-31. Cross, W. E., Parham, T. A., & Helms, J. E. (1991). Stages of Black identity development: Nigrescence models. In R. L. Jones (Ed.), Black Psychology (3 ed., pp. 319-338). New York: Harper & Row. Cuellar, I., Harris, L. C, & Jasso, R. (1980). An acculturation scale for Mexican American normal and clinical populations. Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 2 , 199-217. DiLalla, L. P., Mitchell, C. M., Arthur, M. W., & Pagliocca, P. M. (1988). Aggression and delinquency: Family and environmental factors. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 17 (3), 233-246. Elliot, D. S. (1994). Serious violent offenders: Onset, developmental course, and termination The American society of criminology 1993 presidential address. Criminology, 32 (1), 1-21. Ferguson, A. (1997). Black Racial Identity . Gainesville: University of Florida. Fischer, A. R., Tokar, D. M., & Serna, G. S. (1998). Validity and construct contamination of the Racial Identity Attitude Scale— Long Form. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 45 (2), 212-224. Gall, M. D., Borg, W. R., & Gall, J. P. (1996). Educational research: An introduction (6 ed.). White Plains: Longman Publishers. Graham, S. A. (1981). Predictive and concurrent validity of the jesness inventory asocial index: When does a delinquent become a delinquent. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 49 (5). 740-742. Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (1998). Multivariate data analysis (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Harris, D. J. (1992). A cultural model for assessing the growth and development of the African-American female. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development. 20, 158-167. Harris, S. M. (1995). Psychosocial development and black male masculinity: Implications for counseling economically disadvantaged African American male adolescents. Journal of Counseling & Development, 73 (3), 279-287.

PAGE 127

118 Helms, J. E. (1986). Expanding racial identity theory to cover counseling process. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 33 . 62-64. Helms, J. E. (1989). Considering come methodological issues in racial identity counseling research. The Counseling Psychologist, 17 , 227-252. Helms, J. E. (1990). An overview of Black racial identity theory. In J. E. Helms (Ed.), Black and White racial identity: Theory, research, and practice (pp. 9-3 1 ). New York: Greenwood Press. , Helms, J. E. (Ed.). (1993). Black and white racial identity: Theory, research, and practice . Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers. Helms, J. E. (1994a). The conceptualization of racial identity and other "racial" constructs, hi E. J. Trickett, R. J. Watts et al. (Eds.), Human diversity: Perspectives on people in context (pp. 285-31 1). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Inc, Publishers. Helms, J. E. (1994b). Helms's racial identity theory. Paper presented at the Annual Multicultural Winter Roundtable, Teacher's College, Columbia University, New York. Helms, J. E., & Parham, T. (1990). The relationship between Black racial identity attitudes and cognitive styles. In J. E. Helms (Ed.), Black and White racial identity: Theory, research, and practice (pp. 1 19-131). New York: Greenwood Press. Helms, J. E., & Parham, T. A. (1993). The Racial Identity Attitude Scale (RIAS). In R. L. Jones (Ed.), Handbook of Black personality measures . New York: Harper & Row. Helms, J. E., & Parham, T. A. (1996). The development of the Racial Identity Attitude Scale. In R. L. Jones (Ed.), Handbook of tests and measurements for Black people (Vol. 2, pp. 167-174). Hampton, VA: Cobb & Henry. Hooper, F. A., & Evans, R. G. (1984). Screening for disruptive behavior of institutionalized juvenile offenders. Journal of Personality Assessment, 48 (2). 159-161. Howard-Hamilton, M. P., Ferguson, A., & Puleo, S. G. (1998). Multicultural counseling: Future considerations. In W. M. Parker (Ed.), Consciousness raising: A primer for multicultural counseling (2 ed.). Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas. Ibrahim, F., Ohnishi, H., & Sing Sandhu, D. (1997). Asian Americans identity development: A culture specific model for South Asian Americans. Journal of Muhicultural Counseling and Development. 25 . 34-50.

PAGE 128

119 Johnson, E. H., & Greene, A. F. (1991). The relationship between suppressed anger and psychosocial distress in African American male adolescents. Journal of Black Psychology. 18 ( 1 ), 47-65. Joseph, J. (1995). Juvenile delinquency among African Americans. Journal of Black Studies, 25 (4), 475-491. Klinteberg, B. A., Humble, K., & Schalling, D. (1992). Personality and psychopathy of males with a history of early criminal behavior. European Journal of Personality. 6 , 245-266. LaFromboise, T. D., Coleman, H., & Hernandez, A. (1992). Development and factor structure of the Cross-Cultural Counseling Inventory-Revised. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice. 22 (5), 380-388. Landrine, H., & Kionoff, E. A. (1995). The African American Acculturation Scale 11: Cross validation and short form. The Journal of Black Psychology, 21 (2), 124-152. Lemon, R. L., & Waehler, C. A. (1996). A test of stability and construct validity of the Black Racial Identity Attitude Scale, Form B (RIAS-B) and the White Racial Identity Attitude Scale (WRIAS). Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development. 29 . 77-85. Liebert, R. M., & Spiegler, M. (1990). Personality: Strategies and issues (6 ed.). Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole Publishing Company. Loeber, R., Keenan, K., Lahey, B. B., Green, S. M., & Thomas, C. (1993). Evidence for developmentally based diagnoses of oppositional defiant disorder and conduct disorder. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 21 (4), 377-410. Loeber, R., Wung, P., Keenan, K., Giroux, B., Stouthamer-Loeber, M., Van Kammen, W. B., & Maughan, B. (1993). Developmental pathways in disruptive child behavior. Development and Psychopathology, 5 . 101-133. Marcia, J. E. (1966). Development and validation of ego identity status. Journal of Youth and Adolescence. 13 . 419-438. Mays, V. M. (1986). Identity development of Black Americans: The role of history and the importance of ethnicity. American Journal of Psychotherapy. 40 . 582-593. McConahay, J. B. (1986). Modern racism, ambivalence, and the modern racism scale. In J. F. Dovidio & S. L. Gaertner (Eds.), Prejudice, discrimination, and racism (pp. 91-125). New York: Academic Press.

PAGE 129

120 McCreary, M. L., Slavin, L. A., & Berry, E. J. (1996). Predicting problem behavior and self-esteem among African American adolescents. Journal of Adolescent Research, 11 (2). 216-234. Miller, J. G. (1994). From social safety net to dragnet: African American males in the criminal justice system. Washington and Lee Law Review (Spring), 479-490. Millions, J. (1980). Construction of a Black consciousness measure: Psychotherapeutic implications. Psychotherapv: Theory, research, and practice, 17 , 175182. Murray, H. A. (1943). Thematic Apperception Test manaual . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Nelville, H. A., Heppner, P. P., & Wang, L.-f. (1997). Reflections among racial identity attitudes, perceived stressors, and coping styles in African American college students. Journal of Counseling & Development, 75 (4), 303-31 1. Nobles, W. W. (1989). Psychological nigrescence: An africentric review. The Counseling Psychologist, 17 (2), 253-257. Parham, T. A. (1989). Cycles of psychological nigrescence. The Counseling Psychologist, 17 (2). 187-226. Parham, T. A., & Helms, J. E. (1981). The influence of Black students' racial identity attitudes on preferences for counselor's race. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 28(3), 250-257. Parham, T. A., & Helms, J. E. (1985a). Relation of racial identity attitudes to selfactualization and affective states of Black students. Journal of Counseling Psychology. 32, 431-440. Parham, T. A., & Helms, J. E. (1985b). Attitudes of racial identity and self-esteem of Black .students: An exploratory investigation. Journal of College Student Personnel, 26, 143-147. Parham, T. A., & Williams, P. T. (1993). The relationship of demographic and background factors to racial identity attitudes. Journal of Black Psychology, 19 (1). 7-24. Parks, E. E., Carter, R. T., & Gushue, G. V. (1996). At the crossroads: Racial and womanist identity development in Black and White women. Journal of Counseling & Development. 74 (6). 624-631. Patterson, C. H. (1996). Multicultural counseling: From diversity to universality. Journal of Counseling & Development. 74 (31. 227-231.

PAGE 130

121 Pederson, P. (1996). The importance of both similarities and differences in multicultural counseling: Reaction to C. H. Patterson. Journal of Counseling & Development. 74 (3), 236-237. Phillips-Smith, E., & Brookins, C. C. (1997). Toward the development of an ethnic identity measure for African American youth. The Journal of Black Psychology, 23(4), 358-377. Phinney, J. (1990). Ethnic identity in adolescents and adults: Review of research. Psychological Bulletin. 108 . 499-514. Phinney, J. S. (1992). The Multigroup Ethnic Identity Measure: A new scale for use with diverse groups. Journal of Adolescent Research. 7 (2), 156-176. Pigler Christensen, C. (1989). Cross-cultural awareness: A conceptual model. Counselor Education and Supervision. 28 , 270-287. Plummer, D. L. (1995). Patterns of racial identity development of African American adolescent males and females. Journal of Black Psychology. 21 (2), 168-180. Ponterotto, J. G. (1989). Expanding directions for racial identity research. The Counseling Psychologist, 17 (2), 264-272. I Ponterotto, J. G., & Casas, J. M. (1991). Handbook of racial / ethnic minority counseling research . Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas. Ponterotto, J. G., & Wise, S. L. (1987). Construct validity study of the Racial Identity Attitude Scale. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 34 , 218-223. Pope, C. E., & Feyerherm, W. (1995). Minorities and the juvenile justice system: Research summary (NCJ 145849). Washington, D.C.: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, U.S. Department of Justice. Pope, M. (1995). The "salad bowl" is big enough for us all: An argument for the inclusion of lesbians and gay men in any definition of multiculturalism. Journal of Counseling & Development, 73 (3). 301-304. Poston, W. S. C. (1990). The biracial identity development model: A needed addition. Journal of Counseling and Development. 69 . 152-162. Resnicow, K., & Ross-Gaddy, D. (1997). Development of a racial identity questionnaire for African American adults. Journal of Black Studies. 23 (2). 239-254. Resnicow, K., Soler, R. E., Braithwaite, R. L., Selassie, M. B., & Smith, M. (1999). Development of a racial and ethnic identity scale for African American adolescents: The survey of Black life. Journal of Black Psychology, 25 (2). 1 7 1 1 89.

PAGE 131

122 Richardson, T. Q., & Molinaro, K. L. (1996). White counselor self-awareness: A prerequisite for developing multicultural competence. Journal of Counseling & Development, 74 (3). 238-242. I Robinson, T. (1993). The intersection of gender, class, race, and culture: On seeing clients whole. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 21 , 50-58. Sabnani, H. B., & Ponterotto, J. G. (1992). Racial/ethnic minority-specific instrumentation in counseling research: A review, critique, and recommendations. Measurement & Evaluation in Counseling & Development, 24 (4), 161-187. Scholte, E. M. (1992). Prevention and treatment of juvenile problem behavior: A proposal for a socio-ecological approach. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 20 (3), 247-262. Shavelson, R. J. (1996). Statistical reasoning for the behavioral sciences (3 ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Shorter-Gooden, K., & Washington, N. C. (1996). Young, Black, and female: the challenge of weaving an identity. Journal of Adolescence, 19 , 465-475. Smith, E. P., & Brookins, C. C. (1997). Toward the development of an ethnic identity measure for African American youth. Journal of Black Psychology, 23 (4), 358377. Snyder, H. N. (1997). Juvenile Justice Bulletin . The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. Available: http://www.oiidp.ncirs.org/ijbulletin/9812 2/intro.html [1998, December]. Spencer, M. B., & MarkstromAdams, C. (1990). Identity processes among racial and ethnic minority children in America. Child Development, 61 , 290-310. Stevens, J. (1996). Applied multivariate statistics for the behavioral sciences (3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers. Stone, L. J., & Church, J. (1984). Childhood and adolescence: A psychology of the growing person (5 ed.). New York: Random House. Sudman, S. (1976). Applied sampling . New York: Academic Press. Sue, D. W., Arredondo, P., & McDavis, R. J. (1992). Multicultural counseling competencies and standards: A call to the profession. Journal of Counseling and Development. 70 . 477-486.

PAGE 132

123 Sutphen, R. D., Thyer, B. A., & Kurtz, P. D. (1995). Multisystemic treatment of high-risk juvenile offenders. International Journal of Offender Therapy & Comparative Criminologv. 39 (4). 327-334. Szapocznik, J., Scopetta, M. A., Kurtines, W., & Arnalde, M. (1978). Theory and measurement of acculturation. Interamerican Journal of Psychology. 12 . 1 13-130. Terrell, F., & Terrell, S. (1981). An inventory to measure cultural mistrust among Blacks. The Western Journal of Black Studies. 5 . 180-185. Thompson, C, Neville, N., Weathers, P., Poston, C, & Atkinson, D. (1990). Cultural mistrust and racism reaction among African-American students. Journal of College Student Development. 31 , 162-168. Tokar, D. M., & Fischer, A. R. (1998). Psychometric analysis of the Racial Identity Attitude Scale Long Form. Measurements and Evaluations in Counseling and Development . Tolan, P. H., Guerra, N. G., & Kendall, P. C. (1995). A developmental-ecological perspective on antisocial behavior in children and adolescents: Toward a unified risk and intervention framework. Journal of Counseling and Clinical Psychology, 63 (4). 579-584. Tolan, P. H., & Lorion, R. P. (1988). Multivariate approaches to the identification of delinquency proneness in adolescent males. American Journal of Community Psychology. 16 (4). 547-561. Vontress, C. E. (1996). A personal retrospective on cross-cultural counseHng. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 24 . 156-166. Vontress, C. E., & Epp, L. R. (1997). Historical hostility in the African American client: Implications for counseling. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development. 25 . 170-183. Welsh, W. N., Harris, P. W., & Jenkins, P. H. (1996). Reducing overrepresentation of minorities in juvenile justice: Development of community-based programs in Pennsylvania. Crime & Delinquency. 42 (1). 76-98. White, A. M., Olivieira, D. F., Strube, M. J., & Meertens, R. H. (1995). The Themes Concerning Blacks (TCB) projective technique as a measure of racial identity: An exploratory cross-cultural study. The Journal of Black Psychology, 21 (2). 101-103. White, J. L., & Parham, T. A. (1990). The struggle for identity congruence in African Americans. In J. L. White & T. A. Parham (Eds.), The Psychology of Blacks (pp. 41-54). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

PAGE 133

124 Yanico, B. J., Swanson, J. L., & Tokar, D. M. (1994). Psychometric evaluation of the Black Racial Identity Attitude Scale Form B. Journal of Vocational Behavior. 44 , 218-234.

PAGE 134

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Carl John Sheperis was bom in Pittston, PA, on July 31, 1967. After graduating from Pittston Area High School in June 1985, he attended Kutztown State University where he received a bachelor's degree in political science in 1989. In 1994, Dr. Sheperis obtained a Master of Science degree in counselor education from Duquesne University. Following his undergraduate degree, Dr. Sheperis began working with adolescents involved in the juvenile justice system. In 1992, Dr. Sheperis began working as a mental health counselor while pursuing his master's degree. Upon graduation. Dr. Sheperis moved to Gainesville, Florida, to pursue a doctoral degree in community counseling at the University of Florida. After finishing the formal coursework and proposing his dissertation. Dr. Sheperis accepted a position as full-time instructor at Mississippi State University in the Department of Counselor Education and Educational Psychology. After completing his doctoral degree in August of 2001, Dr. Sheperis was promoted to Assistant Professor and continues to teach, conduct research, and write at Mississippi State University. Dr. Sheperis enjoys outdoor activities, sports, and spending time with his family. 125

PAGE 135

I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion it conforms to acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully adequate, in scopejind quality, as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy M. Harry Daiiiel^, Chair Professor of Counselor Education I certify that I have read this study and that in m> opinion it conforms to acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and quality, as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy David Miller Professor of Educational Psychology I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion it conforms to acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully adequateJiLSfiope and quality, as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Max Parj^ Professor oi 'ounselor Education I certify that 1 have read this study and that in my opinion it conforms to acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and quality, as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosoph James/A. Pitts AssQiciat/Professor of Counselor Education This dissertation was submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the College of Education and to the Graduate School and was accepted as partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy August, 2001 Dean, College of Education Dean. Graduate School