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

这项研究将探索英语的社会包容性衡量标准是否可以被翻译成等同的中文包容性衡量标准，可以用来评估弱势群体的包容性，如移民群体和有心理健康问题的人。我们将在几个样本中将中文版的一些新结果与英国最初的研究结果进行比较：香港(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；突出重要的相似和差异；以及促进机构和跨文化交流和理解。目前的建议着眼于与英国和香港的社会包容概念有关的这些事项。虽然我们承认社会包容的概念是一个有争议的概念，但就目前的提议而言，我们接受世界银行的定义。社会包容指的是促进机会的平等获得，使每个人都能为社会和经济计划做出贡献，并分享其回报。自世纪之交以来，人们对跨文化衡量问题的兴趣迅速增长。尽管心理学家在测量问题上起到了带头作用，但社会工作研究人员已经认识到发展跨文化测量对该职业的重要性，特别是对与少数族裔和移民群体合作的测量。大多数作者都同意新调查表应在哪些基本方面与原来的调查表等同。这些问题包括概念本身，用来评估它的问题，这些问题的准确措辞，以及不同语言中使用的词语的含义。从技术上讲，在两种文化中，每一项(或变量)彼此之间以及与基本概念之间的关系应该是相同的，才能证明完全对等。多年来，已经出现了一些跨文化翻译指南，为适应其他文化的措施提供指导。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，该研究所建议我们按如下方式进行。首先，我们需要与香港的一些人交谈，看看他们对这一概念的性质的看法在多大程度上与英国的相似或不同。为了做到这一点，我们使用了一种称为“概念映射”的方法。然后，我们让专家检查英国的衡量标准在多大程度上体现了这些想法。在这一点上，可能需要向新版本添加其他项目。然后我们将英国版本翻译成中文，然后再翻译回来，并协调和澄清任何差异。然后在华人社区试行新版本，解决所有困难。一旦我们获得了可以接受的措施版本，在试行之后，我们将对不同的样本应用该措施。其中一个将是香港的出院精神病患者，这些患者将与英国的类似患者进行比较，看看他们的性质和纳入程度是否相似。另一项调查是中国移民到英国，看看他们的融入程度与英国人口还是香港居民和移民更相似。最后，我们会评估新措施是否与广泛使用的标准化措施和复苏措施相比较。这项措施和这些结果将为香港、内地中国和世界其他地区的华裔移民社区提供进一步的社区研究基础。可以在这些背景下评估社会包容政策的影响，社会干预可以展示它们如何帮助人们更多地融入社会。

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.