Attitude Toward Violence Scale

Abstract

The Attitude Toward Violence Scale (ATVS) is a specialized self-report measure developed within psychological assessment to quantitatively gauge an individual’s subjective orientation and acceptance of violence. This instrument is specifically designed to assess cognitive beliefs concerning the justification and acceptability of aggression, with a primary focus on interpersonal conflicts and fighting among youth. The ATVS serves as a crucial research tool for identifying the cognitive precursors that support violent behavior, distinguishing itself from measures that quantify overt behavior alone.

Keywords

Attitude Toward Violence Scale, ATVS, Violence, Aggression, Delinquency, Antisocial Behavior, Youth Research, Conflict Resolution, Psychological Assessment, Psychometrics.

Authors

The original authors of the full 20-item scale are not explicitly detailed in the source documentation. However, specific and documented modifications, including the revision of Item 4 and the addition of Item 6, were implemented by Bosworth & Espelage in 1995.

Purpose

The primary purpose of the Attitude Toward Violence Scale is to establish a reliable, quantitative index of an individual’s internalized attitudes concerning physical aggression. It systematically assesses the degree to which a respondent views the use of violence as acceptable, justified, or necessary when confronted with perceived threats, insults, or conflicts.

In research settings, the ATVS is extensively employed to explore factors that contribute to the normalization of violence, particularly within adolescent populations. It helps researchers analyze how environmental and social variables—such as exposure to media, prevailing cultural norms, and personal experiences—influence a young person’s cognitive framework regarding the utility of violence in scenarios like self-defense, peer interactions, and conflict resolution strategies.

Construct

The core construct measured by the ATVS is the positive endorsement and cognitive justification of aggressive behavior. This measurement moves beyond simply reporting past actions to capture the deeper cognitive schema that either rationalizes or supports the initiation of violent acts.

The scale items are specifically formulated to measure beliefs about the social and personal outcomes of aggression. This includes evaluating the perceived social cost of nonviolence (e.g., fear of being labeled a “coward”) against the perceived effectiveness of using force to resolve conflict. Consequently, a high score on the ATVS signifies a deeply internalized positive attitude toward violent strategies and a corresponding reluctance to endorse or utilize nonviolent alternatives for conflict management.

Validity

The Attitude Toward Violence Scale is widely recognized in academic literature as a valid measure for accurately assessing attitudes related to violence, consistently measuring the intended construct across diverse research involving youth. Its utility is strongly supported by its established relationships with other psychological measures.

Evidence of strong concurrent or predictive validity exists through the scale’s consistent linkage to measures of related constructs, such as delinquency and overt aggressive behavior. This robust relationship highlights the ATVS’s practical value in identifying individuals whose cognitive orientation predisposes them toward future aggressive actions.

Reliability

The ATVS demonstrates established reliability, ensuring that it consistently measures attitudes toward violence with high stability and minimal measurement error, a finding verified across multiple empirical studies.

Crucially for intervention research, the scale has also proven to be sensitive to changes in attitudes over time. This responsiveness allows practitioners and researchers to effectively monitor shifts in the acceptance of violence following structured educational programs, therapeutic interventions, or prevention initiatives.

Factor Analysis

Although detailed results of the scale’s factor analysis are not provided in the source material, the composition of the 20 items suggests the instrument is designed to capture several latent sub-dimensions of attitudes toward violence. These likely include peer-related justification for fighting, reactive aggression, and the comparative perceived effectiveness of violent versus nonviolent responses.

Researchers intending to utilize the full scale should consult the primary validation articles, such as those published by Bosworth & Espelage (1995), to gain a comprehensive understanding of the specific underlying factors identified during the scale’s original construction and subsequent modification.

Instrument

Test Type: A self-report measure designed to capture subjective cognitive beliefs rather than observable behavior.

Format: The full scale comprises 20 items. Responses are collected using a five-point Likert scale.

Language Available: English.

Population Group: Youth.

Age Group: Middle school students, typically spanning grades 6 through 8.

Population Details: Primarily utilized in academic and prevention research settings for assessing attitudes linked to antisocial behavior and delinquency among young adolescents.

Test Methodology: Administration and Scoring: The instrument is self-administered. Scoring utilizes a 1 to 5 point scale, where the score of 5 represents the strongest endorsement of the statement (Strongly Agree). The scoring structure is:

• Strongly agree = 5
• Agree = 4
• Neither = 3
• Disagree = 2
• Strongly disagree = 1

Items 2 and 5 are reverse scored to mitigate potential response bias. For the 6 excerpted items provided in the source, a maximum total score of 30 is achievable by summing the points. Higher cumulative scores indicate a more positive attitude toward violent strategies and a diminished capacity for nonviolent conflict resolution.

Keywords

Psychological assessment, Attitude Toward Violence Scale, Youth Aggression, Conflict attitudes, Self-defense beliefs, Delinquency prevention, Middle school psychology, Psychometrics, Likert scaling.

Authors

Author ORCID Identifier: Not specified in source material.

Affiliation Email addresses: Not specified in source material.

Correspondence Address: Not specified in source material.

The authors responsible for documented modifications (Item 4 revised, Item 6 added) are Bosworth & Espelage (1995).

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

Permissions and Fees: No explicit fees or restrictions were noted in the source documentation. Given that the instrument is featured in a CDC compendium of assessment tools, it is generally inferred to be available for public academic use.

Test Year: The scale was actively utilized and featured in key modifications documented around 1995 by Bosworth & Espelage.

The instrument is documented on page 22 of the CDC publication, “Measuring Violence-Related Attitudes, Behaviors, and Influences Among Youths: A Compendium of Assessment Tools.” The original PDF can be downloaded here: http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/YV_Compendium.pdf.

An additional resource document is available here: http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED486261.pdf.

Reference’s

• Bosworth, K., & Espelage, D. L. (1995). Documentation of modifications and additions to the Attitude Toward Violence scale (Item 4 modified and Item 6 added).
• Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Measuring Violence-Related Attitudes, Behaviors, and Influences Among Youths: A Compendium of Assessment Tools. Available online: http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/YV_Compendium.pdf.
• ERIC Document ED486261. Available online: http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED486261.pdf.

Items of the Attitude Toward Violence Scale

IMPORTANT: The following scale items must be preserved in their original language and must not be changed in any way.

1. If I walk away from a fight‚ I’d be a coward (“chicken”).
2. I don’t need to fight because there are other ways to deal with being mad.
3. It’s okay to hit someone who hits you first.
4. If a kid teases me‚ I usually cannot get him/her to stop unless I hit him/her.
5. If I really want to‚ I can usually talk someone out of trying to fight with me.
6. If I refuse to fight‚ my friends will think I’m afraid.