Home » Oxford House Measures

Oxford House Measures

Social Network Instrument

Six items focused on relationship, resources, and access which are scored on five point scales. The lower the score, the stronger the relationship. Currently, item 2 must be reversed scored. Each resident answers these questions about every other member of the house.

  1. How friendly are you with this person?
  2. If this person asked to borrow money from you, how much would you be willing to lend them?
  3. If this person needed help for a day, how likely would you be to help?
  4. How often do you have a personal conversation with this person?
  5. How often do you go to this person for advice on your recovery and other important life issues?
  6. Overall, how strong would you rate your relationship with this person?

The Social Network Instrument measures residents’ theoretically significant relationships within the house, comprising the house social structure. We focused on types of relationships, mentoring, and trust. Each is rated on a 5-point (0-4) scale.  Several of our studies have used the following three indices. Types of Relationships, which taps non-judgmental social support, was determined by asking, “How friendly are you with this person?” (a friend was counted if a person selected close friend or a friend, and was not selected if the person selected acquaintance, stranger, and adversary). To assess Trust, residents were asked, “If this person asked to borrow money from you, how much would you be willing to lend them?” (If a person indicated $100 or $500 they were counted as being trusted, but not if they said $0, $10, or $50). Mentoring, which involves being a confidant, was assessed by the question, “How often do you go to this person for advice on your recovery and other important life issues?” (If residents mentioned very often or quite often, they were counted as being a confidant, but were not counted for the following responses: regularly, rarely or never).

In our work with this instrument, the Cronbach’s alpha was .85 and all items contributed positively. We also performed multi-level CFA on the social network instrument and found excellent fit and per-item loading contribution. This social network instrument was sensitive to length of stay in a recovery home and quality of life, and neither age nor sex were significantly corrected with this instrument (Jason & Stevens, 2017).

Jason, L.A., & Stevens, E. (2017). The reliability and reciprocity of a social network measure. Alcoholism Treatment Quarterly, 35, 317–327. doi: 10.1080/07347324.2017.1355220

If you are using this as a whole network, then each person in the house or setting would fill out the questions below:

Member 1

Member First & Last Initial
1. How friendly are you with this person?

Close Friend       Friend       Acquaintance       Stranger      Adversary

2. If this person asked to borrow money from you, how much would you be willing to lend them?

$0       $10       $50       $100       $500

3. If this person needed help for a day, how likely would you be to help?

Very Likely       Likely       Maybe       Probably Not       Wouldn’t

4. How often do you have a personal conversation with this person?

Daily       Almost Daily       Every Few Days       Weekly       Almost Never

5. How often do you go to this person for advice on your recovery and other important life issues?

Very Often       Quite Often       Regularly       Rarely       Never

6. Overall, how strong would you relate your relationship with this person?

Very Strong        Strong        Weak        None     Negative



Psychological Sense of Community Scale

Jason, L.A., Stevens, E., & Ram, D. (2015). Development of a three-factor psychological sense of community scale. Journal of Community Psychology, 43, 973-985.

Using this measure, first replace the letter “E” with the Entity and the letter “M” with the Membership that the sample will refer to. Respondents answer whether they Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Slightly Disagree,   Slightly Agree, Agree, or Strongly Agree with the questions below.

1     I think this E was a good E

22   I did not leave this E because I wanted to

23   For me, this E was a good fit

10   M could depend on each other in this E

12   M could get help from other M if they needed it

13   M were secure in sharing opinions or asking for advice

18   This E was important to me 20   I made friends in this E

21   I felt good helping the E and the M

 

The questions above are in the past tense, so if an investigator decides to use this scale for a person’s current sense of community, we suggest using the slight variation of wording below that puts things in the present tense.

1     I think this E is a good E

22   I am not planning on leaving this E

23   For me, this E is a good fit

10   M can depend on each other in this E

12   M can get help from other M if they need it

13   M are secure in sharing opinions or asking for advice

18   This E is important to me

20   I have friends in this E

21   I feel good helping the E and the M

Advertisements