skip navigation


Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.


NCJ Number: 201529 Find in a Library
Title: Prison Preference Inventory: An Examination of Substantive Validity in an Australian Prison Sample
Journal: Criminal Justice and Behavior: An International Journal  Volume:30  Issue:4  Dated:August 2003  Pages:459-482
Author(s): Roger Summers; Greg E. Dear
Date Published: August 2003
Page Count: 24
Type: Measurement/Evaluation Device
Format: Article
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: This study evaluated the substantive validity of the 56-item Prison Preference Inventory (PPI) with Australian prisoners.
Abstract: Developed by Toch (1977), the PPI was designed to measure inmates’ preferences with regard to eight psychosocial aspects of the prison environment. Previous evaluations of the validity of the PPI are limited and no studies have evaluated the substantive validity of the measure. To be substantively valid, each PPI statement must be reliably indicative of the intended environmental aspect, and only that aspect. Two studies were conducted for the current evaluation. In study 1, structured interviews were conducted with six prisoners in a maximum-security facility in western Australia and with four employees working in Health and Welfare positions within the correctional system. Participants completed the PPI and were asked to identify statements that required modification. In study 2, 11 non-Aboriginal prisoners familiar to the system (over 12 months in custody), 11 Aboriginal prisoners familiar to the system, and 11 non-Aboriginal prisoners new to the system (less than 3 months in custody) completed the PPI. Results indicated that 21 of the 56 items failed to demonstrate adequate validity. When the more stringent criterion of substantive validity was applied, only 8 of the 56 items were valid. Findings suggest the modified PPI requires substantial revision for use with Australian prison populations. The authors suggest that researchers in the United States try to replicate these findings using the original PPI scale. References
Main Term(s): Corrections; Evaluation measures
Index Term(s): Australia; Inmates; Needs assessment
To cite this abstract, use the following link:

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.