Juvenile offenders' perceptions of probation officers as social workers in Hong Kong

Abstract

Summary There is virtually no information available on how juvenile offenders perceive the role of Hong Kong probation officers as social workers. This study explores 113 male juvenile probationers' perceptions of their probation officers and the probation service. Drawing from the existing literature, scales are developed to measure both domains. Findings These juvenile probationers generally perceived their probation officer as relatively authoritarian or punitive. Interestingly, juveniles supervised by females perceived officers to be more authoritarian or punitive than those supervised by males. Using exploratory factor analyses, two scales, Perceptions of the Assigned Probation Officer (PAPO) and Perceptions of the Job Nature of Probation Officers (PJNPO) are developed. An ordinary least squares (OLS) regression analysis shows that probation officers are perceived to be more authoritarian or punitive by older juveniles and those supervised by females. Applications These juvenile probationers’ perceptions are generally inconsistent with the operational objectives of the Hong Kong probation system, whereby probation officers are expected to be rehabilitative agents who facilitate community reintegration. Continuing civic education for young people, with an emphasis on providing accurate information about the probation system and the role of officers, would be desirable. Probation officers may also consider adopting the pro-social modeling approach that emphasizes pro-social values and behaviors in their interaction with probationers. Most importantly, a genuine working relationship between probation officers and probationers should be established. The supervision plan should be tailored to individuals' needs and capabilities, with a mutually-agreed outcome of crime desistance.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 10 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.