Crowell Kathryn, Levi Benjamin H
Penn State Children's Hospital, USA.
Child Welfare. 2012;91(1):35-53.
This study examines how community-based mandated reporters understand and interpret reasonable suspicion, the standard threshold for mandated reporting of suspected child abuse. Respondents were asked to identify the probability necessary for "suspicion of child abuse" to constitute reasonable suspicion. Data were analyzed for internal consistency, evidence of a group standard, and associations with professional and educational demographics. There was a 90.4% response rate (1,233/1,364). On both ordinal probability and estimated probability scales, respondents demonstrated wide variability in the thresholds they identified for what constitutes reasonable suspicion. Comparing individual responses for the two scales, 83% were inconsistent. Responses on the estimated probability scale were correlated with frequency of reporting child abuse, professional background, and prior education on child abuse. Lack of consensus in how community professionals interpret reasonable suspicion raises the question of whether more specific training is needed for this threshold to be understood, interpreted, and applied in a consistent manner.
本研究考察了基于社区的强制报告人如何理解和解释合理怀疑，这是疑似虐待儿童强制报告的标准阈值。研究要求受访者确定“怀疑虐待儿童”构成合理怀疑所需的可能性。对数据进行了内部一致性分析、群体标准证据分析以及与专业和教育人口统计学的关联分析。回复率为90.4%（1233/1364）。在序数概率和估计概率量表上，受访者对构成合理怀疑的阈值的认定存在很大差异。比较两个量表的个体回答，83%不一致。估计概率量表上的回答与报告虐待儿童的频率、专业背景以及之前接受的虐待儿童相关教育有关。社区专业人员对合理怀疑的解释缺乏共识，这就引发了一个问题，即是否需要进行更具体的培训，以便以一致的方式理解、解释和应用这一阈值。
