Development of a Chinese Language version of the Social & Community Opportunities Profile (SCOPE) for NGO services in Hong Kong

本研究将探讨是否可以将英语的社会包容衡量标准翻译成汉语的包容衡量标准，以评估移民群体和有心理健康问题的人等弱势群体的包容程度。我们将在几个样本中比较中国版本的一些新结果与英国原始研究的结果：香港居民和移民人口中有精神健康问题的人，以及在英国的中国移民。据报道，跨文化比较的优势在于测试知识的边界和扩展方法参数；突出重要的异同；促进机构间和跨文化交流与理解。本建议将这些事项与英国和香港的社会共融概念联系起来。虽然我们认识到社会包容的概念是一个有争议的概念，但为了当前提案的目的，我们接受世界银行的定义。社会包容（SI）是指促进平等的机会，使每个人都能为社会和经济项目做出贡献，并分享其回报。自世纪之交以来，对跨文化测量问题的兴趣迅速增长。尽管心理学家在测量问题上处于领先地位，社会工作研究人员已经认识到发展跨文化测量对职业的重要性，特别是对少数民族和移民群体的工作。大多数作者都同意新问卷应该与原问卷相同的基本领域。这些包括概念本身，用来评估它的问题，这些问题的精确措辞，以及不同语言中使用的单词的含义。从技术上讲，每个项目（或变量）相互关联的方式以及与潜在概念的关系在两种文化中应该是相同的，以证明完全等价。多年来出现了许多跨文化翻译指南，为适应其他文化提供了指导措施。考虑到各种可用的指南，为了本研究的目的，我们采用了法国一家领先研究机构的指南，该机构建议我们进行如下操作。首先，我们需要与香港的一些人交谈，看看他们对这个概念的本质的看法与英国人有什么相似或不同。为此，我们使用一种称为“概念映射”的方法。然后，我们让专家检查英国标准中的项目在多大程度上体现了这些观点。此时，可能有必要在新版本中添加额外的项目。然后我们将英国版本翻译成中文，再翻译回来，并调和和澄清任何差异。新版本随后会在中国社区试用，任何困难都会被消除。一旦我们获得了测量的可接受版本，接下来我们将把测量应用到不同的样本中。其中一组是香港的出院精神病患者，并将这些患者与英国的类似患者进行比较，看看他们的性质和纳入水平是否相似。另一个将是中国移民到英国，看看他们的包容性水平是否与英国人口或香港居民和移民更相似。最后，我们将评估新措施是否与广泛使用的标准化措施和复苏措施进行了应有的比较。可以在这些背景下评估社会包容政策的影响，社会干预措施可以证明它们如何帮助人们更好地融入社会。

This study is going to explore whether an English language measure of social inclusion can be translated into an equivalentChinese measure of inclusion that can be used to assess inclusion in disadvantaged groups such as immigrant groups andpeople with mental health problems. We will compare some new results for the Chinese version with results from theoriginal research in the UK in several samples: people with mental health problems in the Hong Kong (HK) resident andimmigrant populations, and Chinese immigrants in the UK.The advantages of cross-cultural comparison have been reported as testing the boundaries of knowledge and stretchingmethodological parameters; highlighting important similarities and differences; and the promotion of institutional andintercultural exchange and understanding. The present proposal looks at these matters in relation to the concept of socialinclusion in the UK and HK. While we recognise that the concept of social inclusion is a contested one, for the purposes ofthe current proposal we accept the World Bank definition. Social Inclusion (SI) refers to promoting equal access toopportunities, enabling everyone to contribute to social and economic program and share in its rewards.Interest in cross-cultural measurement issues has grown rapidly since the turn of the century. Although psychologists havetaken the lead on measurement issues social work researchers have recognised the importance of developingcrosscultural measurement for the profession, especially for work with minority and immigrant groups. Most authors agreeon the fundamental areas in which the new questionnaire should be shown to be equivalent to the original one. Theseinclude the concept itself, the questions used to assess it, the precise wording of these questions, and the meaning of thewords used in the different languages. Technically, the way each of the items (or variables) relate to each other and to theunderlying concepts should be the same in both cultures, for full equivalence to be demonstrated.A number of cross-cultural translation guides have become available over the years which provide guidance about adaptingmeasures for other cultures. Taking into consideration the various available guides, for the purposes of this research weare adopting the guidance from a leading French research institute, which suggests that we proceed as follows. First weneed to speak to groups of people in HK to see to what extent their views about the nature of the concept are similar ordissimilar to those in the UK. To do this we use a method known as 'concept mapping'. We then have experts examine theextent to which the items in the UK measure capture these ideas. At this point it may be necessary to add additional itemsto the new version. We then translate the UK version into Chinese, and back again, and reconcile and clarify anydifference. The new version is then piloted in the Chinese communities, and any difficulties ironed out.Once we have obtained an acceptable version of the measure, following piloting we will then apply the measure to differentsamples. One will be of discharged mental patients in HK and these will be compared to similar patients in the UK to see iftheir nature and levels of inclusion are similar or not. Another will be of Chinese immigrants to the UK to see if their levelsof inclusion are more similar to UK population or HK residents and immigrants. Finally, we will assess whether the newmeasure compares in the way it should with a widely used standardised measure, and a measure of recovery.The measure and these findings will provide the basis for further community research in Hong Kong, mainland China and inChinese immigrant communities in other parts of the world. Social inclusion policy impact could be evaluated in thesecontexts and social interventions could demonstrate how they have helped people to become more included in society.