See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/238102751

The Community Attitudes Toward Sex Offenders Scale: The Development of a

Psychometric Assessment Instrument

Article  in  Research on Social Work Practice · November 2007

DOI: 10.1177/1049731507310193

CITATIONS READS
63 2,785

5 authors, including:

Wesley T. Church II Carl B. Clements

Louisiana State University University of Alabama
57 PUBLICATIONS   382 CITATIONS    57 PUBLICATIONS   1,136 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Jaggers, J., Tomek, S., Hooper, L., Mitchell-Williams & Church (2016). The Effect of Delinquency and Anger on Parental Warmth View project

Jaggers, J., Tomek, S., Hooper, L., Mitchell-Williams, M. & Church, W (2016). What about the parental response? The effect of delinquency and anger on parental
monitoring View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Wesley T. Church II on 20 February 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Research on Social Work Practice
http://rsw.sagepub.com

The Community Attitudes Toward Sex Offenders Scale: The Development of a Psychometric
Assessment Instrument
Wesley T. Church, Emily E. Wakeman, Sarah L. Miller, Carl B. Clements and Fei Sun
Research on Social Work Practice 2008; 18; 251
DOI: 10.1177/1049731507310193

The online version of this article can be found at:

http://rsw.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/18/3/251

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com

Additional services and information for Research on Social Work Practice can be found at:

Email Alerts: http://rsw.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts

Subscriptions: http://rsw.sagepub.com/subscriptions

Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav

Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

Citations (this article cites 18 articles hosted on the

SAGE Journals Online and HighWire Press platforms):
http://rsw.sagepub.com/cgi/content/refs/18/3/251

Downloaded from http://rsw.sagepub.com at UNIV ALABAMA LIBRARY/SERIALS on August 1, 2008

© 2008 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution.
 The Community Attitudes Toward Sex Offenders Scale:
The Development of a Psychometric Assessment Instrument

Wesley T. Church II
Emily E. Wakeman
Sarah L. Miller
Carl B. Clements
Fei Sun
The University of Alabama

Objectives: The objective of this study was to examine the nature of individual attitudes toward sex offenders.
Because the term “sex offender” tends to evoke strong emotions, and given that open-ended self reports tend to be
highly subjective, particularly in the context of such pointed terminology, this study sought to develop an attitude
assessment tool that addresses specific domains found in the literature. Methods: Through a number of iterations,
the Community Attitudes Toward Sex Offenders Scale was developed. Results: Exploratory and subsequent confir-
matory factor analyses found a four-factor, 18-item version to best represent the domains of interest. Factor and
item characteristics are reported. Conclusions: Replication and extension to other populations appears warranted.

Keywords: sex offenders; instrument development; attitudinal scales; assessment

The term “sex offender” tends to evoke strong emotions
(Fedoroff & Moran, 1997); however, there is limited empir-
ical knowledge about public perceptions of these individu-
als. Given the subjectivity of personal reactions, particularly
when solicited about such sweeping terms, there is a need
for improved assessment tools that examine attitudes
toward sex offenders across specific and relevant domains.
Because attitudes can influence personal reactions, policies,
and legislative decision making, knowledge of how atti-
tudes are shaped is important. If attitudes are based, at least
in part, on myths or misinformation, subsequent legislative
policies and judicial decisions may not accurately reflect
societal needs. The consequences of such actions can be
damaging at individual, community, and societal levels.
WHAT DO WE KNOW ABOUT SEX
OFFENDERS?
The term “sex offender” encompasses an extremely
broad range of individuals. All have been convicted of
Authors’ Note: Correspondence may be addressed to Wesley Church, PhD,
The University of Alabama School of Social Work, Box 870314, Tuscaloosa,
AL 35487 or via e-mail using wchurch@sw.ua.edu.
Research on Social Work Practice, Vol. 18 No. 3, May 2008 251-259
DOI: 10.1177/1049731507310193
© 2008 Sage Publications
Downloaded from http://rsw.sagepub.com at UNIV ALABAMA LIBRARY/SERIALS on August 1, 2008
© 2008 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution.
sexual offenses, but they are otherwise heterogeneous
with regard to demographic (e.g., gender, age, socioeco-
nomic status, abuse history; Fedoroff & Moran, 1997),
offense-related (e.g., level of coercion, type and age of
victims; Quinn, Forsyth, & Mullen-Quinn, 2004), and
recidivism factors (e.g., type of offense, relationship to
victim; Becker & Murphy, 1998), among other vari-
ables. In their review of the sex offender literature,
Griffin and West (2006) found considerable discrepan-
cies between common perceptions and factual informa-
tion about this population. For instance, community
notification and civil commitment laws imply that an
extraordinary amount of supervision is required to pre-
vent sex offenders from engaging in additional sex
offenses, as though they are not amenable to change.
However, Griffin and West (2006) reported that, in com-
parison to other types of offenders (e.g., those who com-
mit drug offenses and theft), sex offenders have lower
rates of re-arrest for sex offenses, and their recidivism
rates can be significantly reduced through behaviorally
oriented treatments. This and other contradictions sug-
gest that public views of sex offenders may be inconsis-
tent with factual information about this group.
Of further note, the information currently available
from sex offender research has its limitations. Fedoroff
and Moran (1997) reported that socially and economi-
cally privileged individuals who commit sex offenses
tend to be excluded from sex offender research. One
251
252 RESEARCH ON SOCIAL WORK PRACTICE
could argue, then, that the basic findings on “who” sex
offenders are appears to suffer from sampling bias. If
researchers have difficulty defining and objectively study-
ing sex offenders, then the public is likely to share similar
problems in gaining accurate knowledge about, and thus
developing attitudes toward, this controversial population.
Limitations aside, the research that we do have suggests
that sex offenders are viewed negatively by members of
specific professions (e.g., mental health professionals and
researchers) and the public (Griffin & West, 2006). It
appears that sex offenders are often responded to stereo-
typically, without reference to the wide variation repre-
sented within this classification. This negativity, however,
seems to be tempered by individual experiences with or
exposure to sex offenders or sex offenses. Several empiri-
cal studies have explored attitudes toward this population,
discussed in detail below.
ATTITUDES OF THOSE WHO WORK
WITH SEX OFFENDERS
Hogue (1993) examined attitudes among several profes-
sional groups that interacted with sex offenders (e.g., police
officers, prison officers, probation officers, and psycholo-
gists), as well as attitudes of sex offenders themselves, using
an adapted version of the Attitudes Toward Prisoners Scale
(ATP; Melvin, Gramling, & Gardner, 1985). The 36 items
in Hogue’s measure, the Attitudes Toward Sexual Offenders
Scale (ATS), were rated on a 5-point Likert Scale and were
identical to those of the ATP except that “sex offenders” was
substituted for “prisoners.”
Hogue (1993) found that police officers had the most neg-
ative attitudes toward sex offenders, and, not surprisingly,
sex offenders themselves had the most positive attitudes.
Professionals who provided treatment to sex offenders (i.e.,
probation officers, psychologists, and treatment-providing
prison officers) had comparatively more positive attitudes
than police and prison officers who did not provide treat-
ment. Notably, the difference in attitudes between the two
groups of prison officers (those who provided sex offender
treatment and those who did not) suggests that more per-
sonal and habitual interaction with this population may
result in more positive views (Hogue, 1993).
Hogue’s (1993) measure has also been used by other
researchers with participants from different professional
backgrounds. Ferguson and Ireland (2006) used the ATS
to study the attitudes of college undergraduate students
and staff members who worked in various forensic set-
tings. The authors found some gender differences; males
viewed sex offenders more negatively than did females,
and males viewed child sex offenders more negatively
than offenders who committed stranger rape (Ferguson &
Downloaded from http://rsw.sagepub.com at UNIV ALABAMA LIBRARY/SERIALS on August 1, 2008
© 2008 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution.
Ireland, 2006). Females, however, did not differentiate
between the four types of sex offenses presented (child sex
offense, child incest offense, stranger rape, acquaintance
rape). The authors also found that working in a forensic
setting, having been a victim of sexual abuse, or being
close to a victim of sexual abuse yielded more favorable
attitudes toward sex offenders. Although the authors did
not have information about the extent of contact, if any,
the forensic staff had with sex offenders at their facility, it
appears that exposure to sex offenders (e.g., via personal
or vicarious experience) influences attitudes toward this
population, thereby decreasing the inclination to rely on
stereotypes (Ferguson & Ireland, 2006).
In another study using Hogue’s (1993) measure,
Nelson, Herlihy, and Oescher (2002) found that profes-
sional counselors had relatively positive attitudes
toward sex offenders. Specifically, the mean score on
the ATS (i.e., 3.34) was significantly different from the
mid-point of the 5-point ATS Likert Scale (i.e., 3.0 or
“Undecided”), indicating that these attitudes fell in the
positive direction. Additionally, the counselors had sig-
nificantly higher mean ATS scores than each of the pro-
fessional groups discussed in Hogue’s (1993) study,
previously described. Moreover, counseling experience
with sex offenders, current caseload of sex offender
clients, and feelings of preparation from training to
counsel sex offenders were positively correlated with
ATS scores, although these relations were considered to
be weak (Nelson et al., 2002). Consistent with findings
from other studies (e.g., Ferguson & Ireland, 2006), per-
sonal victimization from a sexual offense, or being close
to someone who was a victim of such a crime, was asso-
ciated with more positive attitudes toward sex offenders
(Nelson et al., 2002). It should be noted that, although
the participants’ mean score on the ATS fell in a positive
direction, it was not excessively positive (e.g., a “4” or
“5”). It is arguable that these attitudes may better be
described as “less negative” in comparison to other pro-
fessional groups (e.g., police officers) and they likely
reflect the influence of the counselors’ professional
training (Nelson et al., 2002).
Additional studies have used other measures of atti-
tudes toward sex offenders. Weekes, Pelletier, and
Beaudette (1995) examined a sample of Canadian cor-
rectional officers using an adapted instrument originally
devised to measure correctional officers’ attitudes
toward mentally ill offenders. They found a hierarchy of
negative attitudes in which sex offenders who had child
victims were considered to be more immoral and per-
ceived more negatively than sex offenders who had
adult women victims. Not surprisingly, the correctional
officers held the least negative attitudes toward non-sex
offenders (Weekes et al., 1995).
 Church II et al. / THE COMMUNITY ATTITUDES TOWARD SEX OFFENDERS SCALE 253
Lea, Auburn, and Kibblewhite (1999) reported qualita-
tive findings about the attitudes of various professionals
(e.g., police officers, prison officers, probation officers, and
psychologists), toward sex offenders. Using a one- to two-
hour, semistructured interview and performing thematic
content analysis, the authors found that these professionals
simultaneously held both positive (e.g., empathy) and neg-
ative (e.g., hatred) attitudes toward the sex offenders with
whom they worked. Importantly, they also found that the
most negative attitudes were held by police officers, who
also reported having had the least amount of experience
with this population. This lends further support to the find-
ing that personal knowledge or exposure is related to one’s
attitudes. It should also be noted that participants in this
study recognized some degree of diversity within the “sex
offender” classification, and the majority of their responses
suggested two subtypes of sex offenders: rapist and
pedophile (Lea et al., 1999). The participants differenti-
ated between these two groups by describing the rapist
as more violent and motivated by domination, whereas the
pedophile was viewed as less aggressive and motivated by
companionship (Lea et al., 1999).
Finally, using two similar vignettes that described
either a sexual or a physical assault, Harnett (1997) found
that residential care workers on an adolescent unit rated
sexual assaults as more serious and sexual perpetrators as
more dangerous in comparison to physical assaults and
the perpetrators who commit them. Additionally, a mod-
erate positive correlation was found between ratings of
seriousness for both types of assaults and length of employ-
ment in residential care (Harnett, 1997). At first glance, this
result seems to contradict findings from other studies that
increased exposure to sex offenders yields more favorable
attitudes toward this population. However, no information
was provided about the level of exposure that the partici-
pants had with sex offenders (Harnett, 1997). Thus, while
it is possible that participants who worked longer in the
residential care field had more exposure to sex offenders,
this cannot be determined from the information presented
in the article.
ATTITUDES OF THE GENERAL PUBLIC
Based on the above research, it appears that experience
with sex offenders, both professional and to some extent
personal, leads to more favorable attitudes. However, the
majority of the general public is unlikely to have such
knowledge or experience. The research examining the atti-
tudes of the general public has been limited primarily to
a few studies involving college undergraduates.
For example, Valliant, Furac, and Antonowicz (1994)
surveyed female psychology students to determine the
Downloaded from http://rsw.sagepub.com at UNIV ALABAMA LIBRARY/SERIALS on August 1, 2008
© 2008 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution.
effect of personality and years of education on attitudes
toward sex offenders. The authors found that, despite sig-
nificant differences in personality (e.g., third-year students
had more tolerant and psychologically mindful personali-
ties than first-year students) and education, all of the par-
ticipants agreed upon a minimum period of incarceration
and only 60% and 50% (first- and third-year students,
respectively) of each group indicated that sex offenders
should receive parole (Valliant et al., 1994). It is notewor-
thy that, although the authors used established measures
with acceptable reliability ratings to assess participant per-
sonality, a previously established measure was not used to
assess attitudes toward sex offenders. Rather, the authors
created a questionnaire for this study, and no reliability
analyses were reported.
Research on the views of the general public has also
expanded into the area of treatment for sex offenders.
Brown (1999) conducted a survey of randomly selected
residents from a large city in the United Kingdom and
found that the majority of participants viewed treatment
favorably, but they believed that it should occur in addition
to punishment (e.g., incarceration) and, predominantly,
outside of their community. Of the participants opposed to
the development of a treatment center near their residence,
64% reported that they would actively oppose such a cen-
ter, notably by starting or joining a campaign or signing a
petition. On the other hand, participants who supported
the development of a local treatment center were less
likely to become actively involved in support of this move-
ment. Despite their support for treatment, the majority of
participants indicated that they would not rent an apart-
ment to a convicted sex offender (Brown, 1999), further
illustrating negative views toward this population. It is
noted, however, that these results are descriptive in nature
and thus may not reflect statistically significant findings.
One psychometric instrument has been developed to
assess public attitudes toward the treatment of sex offenders
(Wnuk, Chapman, & Jeglic, 2006). This measure, the
Attitudes Toward the Treatment of Sex Offenders (ATTSO)
Scale, consists of three factors (Incapacitation, Treatment
Ineffectiveness, and Mandated Treatment) and appears to be
a promising means to assess public and professional atti-
tudes. In addition to scale development, preliminary find-
ings indicated that beliefs about mandatory treatment were
not, in fact, related to beliefs about the effectiveness of such
treatment (Wnuk et al., 2006).
THE NEED FOR A SEX
OFFENDER–SPECIFIC MEASURE
One limitation common to the previously described
sex offender research (with the exception of Wnuk et al.,
254 RESEARCH ON SOCIAL WORK PRACTICE
2006); is that none of these studies used measures devel-
oped specifically to address attitudes toward sex offend-
ers. Instead, these measures have typically substituted the
term “sex offender” for target groups in the original
scales (e.g., for “prisoners” [Hogue, 1993] or “mentally
ill offenders” [Weekes et al., 1995]) or relied on qualita-
tive methods (e.g., Lea et al., 1999). The development of
a tailored measure to assess attitudes toward sex offend-
ers would allow researchers to examine specific compo-
nents of and nuances in these attitudes. Given the extreme
negativity toward sex offenders in the media and society
generally, it is reasonable to expect that more focused and
sex offender–specific items are required to truly distin-
guish feelings and opinions about this group.
Moreover, based on the findings of their review, Griffin
and West (2006) suggested that researchers study the atti-
tudes of community members toward sex offenders in
order to estimate how much knowledge people have about
this population and how their knowledge or lack thereof
translates into emotional reactions and firmly held atti-
tudes. Such research requires a measure specifically
focused on attitudes toward sex offenders. It was the aim
of this study to create and validate such a measure.
METHOD
Following approval from the University Institutional
Review Board, the current study was conducted in two
phases. Phase I was the initial development and data
reduction, and Phase II was a preliminary confirmatory
analysis and final data reduction.
Phase I—Exploratory Factor Analysis
Phase I item generation and selection. Item genera-
tion was based upon review of the literature and consul-
tation with experts in the area of sexual offending. The
researchers attempted to develop categories from which
to derive the questions. Six experts provided verbal
feedback, and, based on consensus, 15 general cate-
gories were used for the development of the items.
These domains included such issues as family/social
history, relation to mental illness, community notifica-
tion, and sex offender rights. Within these 15 categories,
an initial pool of 332 items was generated by the
authors. Preliminary reviews resulted in 231 items being
eliminated from the initial draft due to repetitiveness
and ambiguity, resulting in a final list of 101 items.
A pilot study was conducted to determine the clarity
of the 101 items. Thirty-three psychology and six social
work undergraduate students responded to the items
using a 6-point Likert Scale with the following response
Downloaded from http://rsw.sagepub.com at UNIV ALABAMA LIBRARY/SERIALS on August 1, 2008
© 2008 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution.
options: strongly disagree, disagree, probably disagree,
probably agree, agree, and strongly agree. Based upon
feedback from these participants, the wording of items
was clarified and four items were eliminated due to
ambiguity, resulting in a measure of 97 items used in
Phase I of the study.
Phase I participants and procedure. The sample con-
sisted of 347 undergraduate students enrolled in several
Introduction to Psychology classes at a major southern
university. These students chose to participate in this
study as part of their course research requirement; each
received credit for his or her participation. All data were
collected online through an encrypted server. The mean
age of the students was 19.4 years with a range of 17 to
47 years. The majority of the participants were fresh-
men (63%), female (70%), and Caucasian (79%). The
remainder of the respondents racially identified them-
selves as African American (15%), Asian (2%), and
other ethnicities (1%).
Phase I Results
Exploratory factor analysis. An exploratory factor analy-
sis (EFA) was conducted on the 97 items of the Community
Attitudes Toward Sex Offenders (CATSO) using an a priori
ratio of five observations per variable, which was deemed
sufficient (e.g., Costello & Osborne, 2005; Hair, Anderson,
Tatham, & Black, 1998). Preliminary analysis of the 97
items was conducted through a visual inspection of individ-
ual item distribution. A normal distribution is important in
that it allows one to draw more general conclusions from
the data. Among several approaches, the most common
is based on assuming that data in the population have a
certain normal or Gaussian distribution. Under this
assumption, and due to lack of normalcy, 20 items were
found to have highly skewed responses (i.e., 80% of the
responses for these items were strongly disagree and
disagree or strongly agree and agree) and were
removed, reducing the number of viable items to 77.
Based on an a priori Measure of Sampling Adequacy
(MSA) value of less than .35 (Hair et al., 1998), 47 addi-
tional items were removed due to low factor loadings. Prior
to running the EFA the researchers examined the adequacy
of the data for EFA. The remaining 30 items had individ-
ual MSA values greater than .35, the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin
(KMO) was .831, and Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity was sig-
nificant, χ2(435) = 2,956.68, p < .001. At this point, an EFA
using principal axis factoring with OBLIMIN rotation was
performed. Because the researchers anticipated that they
would be conducting structural equation modeling (SEM)
in the future, principal axis factoring (PAF) rather than
principal components analysis (PCA) was used in Phase I
 Church II et al. / THE COMMUNITY ATTITUDES TOWARD SEX OFFENDERS SCALE 255

of the study. This method allows the researcher to exam- TABLE 1: 30-Item CATSO Four-Factor Pattern Matrix
ine factor loadings of indicator variables to determine if Factor Loadings Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3 Factor 4
they load on latent variables (factors) as predicted by the
Items
researcher’s model. This can provide a more detailed CATSO40 .722
insight into the measurement model than can the use of CATSO42 .649
CATSO38 .613
single-coefficient goodness-of-fit measures used in the CATSO91 .566
SEM approach. An OBLIMIN rotation was performed CATSO87 .550
CATSO25 .544
because it allows for some degree of factor correlation CATSO70 .501
(Preacher & MacCallum, 2003). CATSO31 .451
Consistent with the method performed by Wnuk and CATSO72 .374
CATSO65 .370
colleagues (2006), we compared the number of factors CATSO92 .717
identified by a visual scree plot to those with eigenvalues CATSO37 .611
CATSO82 .560
greater than one. Next, we conducted a parallel analysis and CATSO33 .529
the corresponding results indicated four factors which CATSO90 .481
CATSO43 .480
accounted for 44.4% of the variance and had communalities CATSO83 –.401
greater than .35 (see Table 1). Each of the factors was CATSO23 .716
CATSO9 –.661
named based upon examination of the items and the col- CATSO96 .613
lective agreement of the authors. The factors were labeled CATSO10 –.567
as follows: Social Isolation (10 items); Capacity to CATSO66 –.496
CATSO44 .432
Change (seven items); Severity/Dangerousness (seven CATSO86 .596
items); and Deviancy (six items). CATSO56 .595
CATSO34 .474
CATSO50 .447
CATSO26 .444
Phase II—Confirmatory Factor Analysis CATSO17 .432

Phase II participants. The participants for Phase II con-
sisted of a comparable sample of undergraduate students who
were also enrolled in Introduction to Psychology classes at the
same university and who were awarded research credit for
their participation in a study on “attitudes relating to victims,
offenders, and the law.” A total of 344 participants completed
this phase of the study; however, 28 participants were removed
from the analyses due to high scores on a measure of impres-
sion management (the Balanced Inventory of Desirable
Responding; for further explanation of exclusion criteria, see
Paulhus, 1998), resulting in a total of 316 participants.
Consistent with the Phase I sample, the majority of partici-
pants were female (74.7%) and Caucasian (81.0%), with an
average age of 18.9 years (age range: 17 to 47 years). The
remaining participants racially identified themselves as
African American (13.3%), Latino/Hispanic (2.2%), biracial
(1.3%), or other ethnicities (2.2%).
Phase II procedure. All data were collected online
through an encrypted server. In addition to a demographic
questionnaire and the 30-item version of the CATSO devel-
oped in Phase I, participants were administered the Balanced
Inventory of Desirable Responding, Version 6 (BIDR;
Paulhus, 1988). The BIDR is a 40-item scale that measures
social desirability on two dimensions: self-deception and
impression management. Ratings are made using a 7-point
Likert Scale ranging from not true to very true.
NOTE: Item numbers reflect the preliminary version (97 items) of the
CATSO.
Phase II results. The initial Confirmatory Factor
Analysis (CFA) between the two samples indicated a
poor model fit with the 30-item CATSO. To further
refine the CATSO, three additional CFAs were per-
formed using LISERL 8.51. The Goodness-of-Fix Index
(GFI) and Adjusted GFI (AGFI), as well as the
Standardized Root Mean Square Residual (SRMR)
were used to examine the model fit (Bentler & Bonett,
1980). According to Bentler and Bonett (1980), accept-
able model fit levels for GFI and AGFI are greater than
or equal to .90. Acceptable model fit levels for SRMR
are less than or equal to .08 (Bentler & Bonett, 1980).
Upon examination of the 30-item model, we identi-
fied three items in the Deviancy factor that performed
poorly, each having a standardized lambda coefficient
lower than the desired .40. With these items removed
because of factor loadings < .40, a 27-item model was
analyzed. This model exhibited some improvement, but
the fit indices were still not acceptable (See Table 1).
A second model was run with five additional items removed
based upon standardized lambdas lower than .40 and with
no other modifications to the model. This resulted in some
improvement to the model; however, this 22-item model
still did not have acceptable model fit levels (See Table 2).

Downloaded from http://rsw.sagepub.com at UNIV ALABAMA LIBRARY/SERIALS on August 1, 2008

© 2008 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution.
256 RESEARCH ON SOCIAL WORK PRACTICE

TABLE 2: 27-Item and 22-Item Goodness-of-Fit Statistics TABLE 3: Goodness-of-Fit Statistics

RMSEA RMSEA χ2 difference/

Model GFI AGFI SRMR (90% CI) χ2/df Model GFI AGFI SRMR (90% CI) χ df
2
df difference

27 items .81 .76 .11 .089 (.083–.094) 30 items .80 .75 .13 .086 1395 379
1171/302 (p < .001) (.081–.091)
22 items .88 .83 .09 .073 (.063–.081) 18 items .92 .90 .08 .065 280 108
530/186 (p < .001) (.055–.075) 1115/271 (p < .001)

NOTE: GFI = Goodness-of-Fit Index; AGFI = Adjusted GFI; SRMR = NOTE: GFI = Goodness-of-Fit Index; AGFI = Adjusted GFI; SRMR =
Standardized Root Mean Square Residual; RMSEA = Root Mean Standardized Root Mean Square Residual; RMSEA = Root Mean
Square Error of Approximation; CI = confidence interval. Square Error of Approximation; CI = confidence interval.

TABLE 4: Results of Confirmatory Analysis on Sample 2 (n = 316)

Alternative Model

CATSO Item Number Item λ SMC

Factor 1 social isolation

8 Sex offenders have difficulty making friends .82 .67
even if they try real hard.
7 Most sex offenders do not have close friends. .65 .42
16 Most sex offenders keep to themselves. .76 .58
6 Sex offenders prefer to stay home alone rather than .66 .44
be around lots of people.
14 Most sex offenders are unmarried men. .64 .41
Factor 2 capacity to change
18 Convicted sex offenders should never .42 .18
be released from prison.
12 Sex offenders should wear tracking devices so .43 .18
their location can be pinpointed at any time.
2 People who commit sex offenses should lose .67 .45
their civil rights (e.g., voting and privacy).
11 Trying to rehabilitate a sex offender is a waste of time. .71 .50
1* With support and therapy, someone who committed .72 .52
a sexual offense can learn to change their behavior.
Factor 3 severity/dangerousness
17 A sex offense committed against someone the .74 .55
perpetrator knows is less serious than a sex
offense committed against A stranger.
13* Only a few sex offenders are dangerous. .63 .40
15 Someone who uses emotional control when .57 .32
committing a sex offense is not as bad as someone
who uses physical control when committing a sex offense.
9* The prison sentences sex offenders receive are much .75 .56
too long when compared to the sentence
lengths for other crimes.
4 Male sex offenders should be punished more .45 .20
severely than female sex offenders.
Factor 4 deviancy
5 Sexual fondling (inappropriate unwarranted touch) .95 .90
is not as bad as rape.
10 Sex offenders have high rates of sexual activity. .73 .53
3 People who commit sex offenses want to have .86 .74
sex more often than the average person.

NOTE: SMC = squared multiple correlation.

*Indicates reverse scored item.

Based on item cross-loads and lambda levels lower than indices yielded a model chi-square of χ2 (108) = 280, p =
.40, the number of CATSO items was again decreased and .175 which indicates a good model fit. The chi-square dif-
a third and final CFA was performed on the remaining 18 ference statistic was used to test the difference between the
items. This alternative model exhibited adequate fit indices final 18-item model and the initial 30-item model which
and had an acceptable fit according to guidelines deter- indicates that the final model is a statistically better fit than
mined by Schumacker and Lomax (2004). The final model the initial 30-item model (See Table 3).
Downloaded from http://rsw.sagepub.com at UNIV ALABAMA LIBRARY/SERIALS on August 1, 2008
© 2008 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution.
 Church II et al. / THE COMMUNITY ATTITUDES TOWARD SEX OFFENDERS SCALE 257

TABLE 5: Factor Correlation Matrix

CATSO Social Capacity Severity/ CATSO7

Total Isolation to Change Dangerousness Deviancy
CATSO8
CATSO 1.00 .737** .622** .552** .633**
Total CATSO6
Social 1.00 .116* .245** .449** Social
Isolation CATSO16 Isolation
Capacity 1.00 .143* .077
to Change CATSO14
Severity/ 1.00 .338**
Dangerousness CATSO11
Deviancy 1.00

*p < .05. **p < .01. CATSO18

Based on Byrne’s (1989) concern that model respec-
ification be based upon theory, as well as the modifica-
tion indices, the authors compared the 18- and 30-item
models and determined that the former shares the same
theoretical concept as the latter. Additionally, each item
makes a distinctive contribution to the latent construct
on which it is loaded. All factor loadings on the latent
constructs were statically significant, and each stan-
dardized loading coefficient was over .40, which indi-
cates an acceptable level of validity. Table 4 presents the
final four factors with corresponding lambda levels.
Within the final 18 items, three items were reverse-scored
in order to make the direction of the items consistent
throughout the CATSO (i.e., higher scores represent more
negative attitudes). Factor intercorrelations are presented in
Table 5. Each factor was strongly and positively correlated
with the total score of the CATSO. Additionally, each
factor was significantly correlated with the other factors,
with the exception of the Deviancy and Capacity to Change
factors (r = .077, p = .01). Figure 1 represents a graphic
illustration of the final 18-item model.
Cronbach’s alpha was used to determine the internal con-
sistency for the CATSO and each of its factors (Nunnally &
Bernstein, 1994; Tabachnick & Fidell, 2001). The alpha
estimates are as follows: Social Isolation (0.80); Capacity to
Change (0.80); Severity/Dangerousness (0.70); Deviancy
(0.43); and Total CATSO (.74). Based upon these estimates,
the CATSO appears to have adequate internal consistency.
DISCUSSION AND APPLICATIONS
TO SOCIAL WORK RESEARCH
The primary goal of this study was to develop a mea-
sure that explores public attitudes regarding sex offend-
ers. Although we began with 15 different a prioiri
conceptual clusters and more than 300 items, 18 items
were found to form four factors. The items demonstrated
good internal consistency both within factors (with the
exception of factor 4) and as a total scale. Higher scores
Downloaded from http://rsw.sagepub.com at UNIV ALABAMA LIBRARY/SERIALS on August 1, 2008
© 2008 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution.
Capacity
CATSO2 to
Change
CATSO12
CATSO1
CATSO17
Severity/
CATSO13 Dangerousness
CATSO4
CATSO15
CATSO9
CATSO2
Deviancy
CATSO10
CATSO3
Figure 1: Confirmatory Factor Analysis of 18-Item CATSO
NOTE: CATSO = Community Attitudes Toward Sex Offenders.
on the individual factors represent beliefs in which sex
offenders are considered to be persons who are loners, are
unlikely to change, are especially dangerous and commit
overly serious crimes, and are sexually preoccupied.
Although there were substantial correlations among
the factors and between each factor and the total scale
score, the Capacity to Change and Deviancy factors were
not correlated. This is surprising because one would
expect the view that sex offenders cannot be rehabilitated
to be related to the perception of sexual preoccupation by
sex offenders. Consistent with Brown’s (1999) findings,
this suggests that although the public may support sex
offender treatment, this support is not to the exclusion of
punishment, and overall attitudes regarding this popula-
tion continue to be negative. However, this lack of corre-
lation warrants further investigation.
The CATSO is promising for use in numerous settings,
such as correctional and mental health facilities; however,
it will be particularly useful in gathering information
258 RESEARCH ON SOCIAL WORK PRACTICE
about the attitudes of the general public, for instance
through community organizations. In contrast to other
measures, such as Hogue’s (1993) ATS, the CATSO was
designed specifically to address perceptions and stereo-
types of sex offenders. The CATSO can also be adminis-
tered in conjunction with other measures, such as the
ATTSO, which together would enable researchers to study
general and treatment-specific views of sex offenders.
Second, this instrument could be used within the field of
social work as part of an in-service training package for
professionals who may come into contact with sex
offenders (e.g., treatment providers, correctional offi-
cers, public defenders, police officers). Given the level
of stigma experienced by sex offenders, it would be
important to determine the degree and type of negativity
embraced by potential providers so as to create tailored
training programs. Furthermore, considering the number
of pessimistic misconceptions about the ineffectiveness of
treatment (Griffin & West, 2006), we should examine
these attitudes among current and future professionals
charged with treatment, counseling, or case manage-
ment in order to improve services. Although test-retest
reliability has yet to be established, the CATSO has the
potential to examine the effects of time and measure
attitude development or change. In fact, if potential
treatment providers are found to have negative views,
the CATSO could be re-administered following an edu-
cational intervention to determine if and how these atti-
tudes have changed. However, the researchers would
caution that with an alpha of .74 the CATSO is appro-
priate for assessing the attitudes of large groups of
people, but should not be used as an individual or clini-
cal assessment tool.
Finally, the CATSO may be a useful tool in the area of
public policy, such as by promoting treatment-oriented sex
offender programs. Social workers have long argued for
examining and, when necessary, modifying public policies
that have negative influences on vulnerable populations.
Though members of the public may not be sympathetic
to their situation, convicted sex offenders are increas-
ingly vulnerable due to recent policies that have become
more restrictive and punitive. For instance, in several
municipalities the distance a sex offender can live in rela-
tion to a school or park has been increased such that some
offenders cannot live within the city limits. Consider, for
example, that several sex offenders in Florida recently
resorted to living under a bridge, as it was one of the few
places where they could live without violating their parole
(Sedensky, 2007). Also, in Georgia, a case has come to light
in which a 17-year-old boy, Genarlow Wilson, had oral sex
with a girl two years his junior. Based on current law he is
serving 10 years in prison, even though his behavior would
Downloaded from http://rsw.sagepub.com at UNIV ALABAMA LIBRARY/SERIALS on August 1, 2008
© 2008 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution.
have been a misdemeanor violation for an adult (ABC News,
2007). The CATSO may also be used in conjunction with
case studies and research findings to inform legislative offi-
cials about commonly held public attitudes (e.g., about the
perceived ineffectiveness of treatment) that stand in stark
contrast to research findings and, further, how these miscon-
ceptions may result in significant negative consequences.
A number of limitations of this study should be noted.
First, participants were recruited from a public southern uni-
versity. The student body primarily consists of individuals
who come from the “Bible Belt” and have strong conserva-
tive beliefs. In that respect, they may not be representative
of the university population in the United States. Nor do the
researchers infer that this sample is representative of the
general population. At present, the authors are seeking to
address this limitation through replication studies using
diverse community samples. Comparable findings will raise
the level of confidence in the reliability and validity of the
CATSO and improve its generalizability.
Second, the sensitive nature of sexual offending sug-
gests that future studies may benefit from the inclusion of
measures of impression management or social desirability,
particularly when sampling professional populations and
when addressing an emotionally charged topic, such as
sex offenses. This concern was partially addressed in
Phase II in which several participants were removed due
to response bias.
Finally, the predictive validity of the CATSO has not yet
been addressed. Future studies need to examine relations
between CATSO scores and other indicators of public
views about sex offenders (e.g., community policies and
legislation), attitudes toward other offenders and crime-
related issues (e.g., punishment, due process, etc.), and atti-
tudes towards crime victims (Clements, Brannen, Kirkley,
Gordon, & Church, 2006). It is important to incorporate
how attitudes toward sex offenders overlap or contrast
with broader justice-related attitudes. Steps to further
establish the reliability and validity of the CATSO
include additional replications evaluating its utility with
other populations and possibly testing the instrument’s
sensitivity to attitude change as a function of educational
interventions, dramatic community events (e.g., a sex
offender moving into a community), or personal experi-
ences with victimization (Church, Baldwin, Brannen, &
Clements, 2007).
REFERENCES
ABC News. (2007). Outrage after teen gets 10 years for oral sex with girl.
Retrieved June 25, 2007, from ABC News website: http://abcnews.go
.com/Primetime/LegalCenter/story?id=1693362&page=1
 Church II et al. / THE COMMUNITY ATTITUDES TOWARD SEX OFFENDERS SCALE 259
Becker, J. V., & Murphy, W. D. (1998). What we know and do not
know about assessing and treating sex offenders. Psychology,
Public Policy, and Law, 4, 116–137.
Bentler, P. M., & Bonett, D. G. (1980). Significance tests and good-
ness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological
Bulletin, 88, 588–606.
Brown, S. (1999). Public attitudes toward the treatment of sex
offenders. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 4, 239–252.
Byrne, B. M. (1989). A primer of LISREL: Basic applications and
programming for confirmatory factor analysis models. New
York: Springer-Verlag.
Church, W. T., Baldwin, J., Brannen, D. N., & Clements, C. B. (2007).
An exploratory study of social work student’s attitudes toward men-
tally ill offenders. Manuscript submitted for publication.
Clements, C. B., Brannen, D. N., Kirkley, S. M., Gordon, T., & Church,
W. T. (2006). The measurement of concern about victims: Empathy,
victim advocacy, and the Victim Concern Scale (VCS). Legal and
Criminological Psychology, 11, 283–295.
Costello, A. B., & Osborne, J. W. (2005). Best practices in
exploratory factor analysis: Four recommendations for getting
the most from your analysis. Practical Assessment, Research, &
Evaluation, 10, 1–9.
Fedoroff, J. P., & Moran, B. (1997). Myths and misconceptions about sex
offenders. The Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality, 6, 263–276.
Ferguson, K., & Ireland, C. A. (2006). Attitudes towards sex offend-
ers and the influence of offence type: A comparison of staff work-
ing in a forensic setting and students. The British Journal of
Forensic Practice, 8, 10–19.
Griffin, M. P., & West, D. A. (2006). The lowest of the low?
Addressing the disparity between community view, public policy,
and treatment effectiveness for sex offenders. Law & Psychology
Review, 30, 143–169.
Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (1998).
Multivariate data analysis (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ:
Prentice Hall.
Harnett, P. H. (1997). The attitudes of female and male residential
care-workers to the perpetrators of sexual and physical assault.
Child Abuse & Neglect, 9, 861–868.
Hogue, T. E. (1993). Attitudes towards prisoners and sexual offend-
ers. Issues in Criminal & Legal Psychology, 19, 23–32.
Lea, S., Auburn, T., & Kibblewhite, K. (1999). Working with sex
offenders: The perceptions and experiences of professionals and
Downloaded from http://rsw.sagepub.com at UNIV ALABAMA LIBRARY/SERIALS on August 1, 2008
© 2008 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution.
View publication stats
paraprofessionals. International Journal of Offender Therapy and
Comparative Criminology, 43, 103–119.
Melvin, K. B., Gramling, L. K., & Gardner, W. M. (1985). A scale to
measure attitudes toward prisoners. Criminal Justice and
Behavior, 12, 241–253.
Nelson, M., Herlihy, B., & Oescher, J. (2002). A survey of counselor atti-
tudes towards sex offenders. Journal of Mental Health Counseling,
24, 51–67.
Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. (1994). Psychometric Theory (3rd
Ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Paulhus, D. L. (1988). Assessing self deception and impression man-
agement in self-reports: The Balanced Inventory of Desirable
Responding. Manual available from the author at the Department
of Psychology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C.,
Canada V6T 1Y7.
Paulhus, D. L. (1998). The Paulhus Deception Scales: BIDR Version
7. Toronto/Buffalo: Multi-Health Systems.
Preacher, K. J., & MacCallum, R. C. (2003). Repairing Tom Swift’s elec-
tric factor analysis machine. Understanding Statistics, 2, 13–43.
Quinn, J. F., Forsyth, C. J., & Mullen-Quinn, C. (2004). Societal
reaction to sex offenders: A review of the origins and results of
the myths surrounding their crimes and treatment amenability.
Deviant Behavior, 25, 215–232.
Sedensky, M. (2007, June 28). Miami sex offenders living under a
bridge. Retrieved June 25, 2007, from USA Today website:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2007–04–06-miami-sex-
offenders_N.htm
Schumacker, R. E., & Lomax, R. G. (2004). A beginner’s guide to
structural equation modeling. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates, Inc.
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2001). Using multivariate statis-
tics (4th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Valliant, P. M., Furac, C. J., & Antonowicz, D. H. (1994). Attitudes
toward sex offenders by female undergraduate university students
enrolled in a psychology program. Social Behavior and
Personality, 22, 105–110.
Weekes, J. R., Pelletier, G., & Beaudette, D. (1995). Correctional offi-
cers: How do they perceive sex offenders? International Journal of
Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 39, 55–61.
Wnuk, D., Chapman, J. E., & Jeglic, E. L. (2006). Development and
refinement of a measure of attitudes toward sex offender treat-
ment. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 43, 35–47.