Social Competence. Interventions for Children and Adults

347 Pages·1980·5.602 MB·English

by  Diana Pickett Rathjen and John P. Foreyt (Eds.)

Pergamon Titles of Related Interest
Cartledge & Milburn TEACHING SOCIAL SKILLS TO
CHILDREN: INNOVATIVE
APPROACHES
Goldstein/Sprafkin/Gershaw SKILL TRAINING FOR COMMUNITY
LIVING: APPLYING STRUCTURED
LEARNING THERAPY
Kanfer & Goldstein HELPING PEOPLE CHANGE: A
TEXTBOOK OF METHODS, 2nd
Edition
Monjan & Gassner CRITICAL ISSUES IN COMPETENCY-
BASED EDUCATION
Rachman & Wilson THE EFFECTS OF PSYCHO-
THERAPY, 2nd Edition
Tamir COMMUNICATION AND THE AGING
PROCESS: INTERACTION
THROUGHOUT THE LIFE
PROCESS
Related Journals *
BEHAVIORAL ASSESSMENT
CHILD ABUSE AND NEGLECT, the International Journal
CHILDREN AND YOUTH SERVICES REVIEW
COMPUTERS AND EDUCATION
EVALUATION AND PROGRAM PLANNING, an International
Journal
JOURNAL OF CHILD PSYCHOLOGY & PSYCHIATRY AND ALLIED
DISCIPLINES
PERSONALITY AND INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES
SYSTEM, the International Journal of Educational Technology and
Language Learning Systems
EVALUATION IN EDUCATION
STUDIES IN EDUCATIONAL EVALUATION
ANALYSIS AND INTERVENTION IN DEVELOPMENTAL
DISABILITIES
APPLIED RESEARCH IN MENTAL RETARDATION: A
MULTIDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL
LANGUAGE & COMMUNICATION
* Free specimen copies available upon request.
Social
Competence
Interventions
Children
and
Adults
Edited by
Diana Pickett Rathjen
Rice University
John P. Foreyt
Baylor College of Medicine
Published in Cooperation with the
Houston Behavior Therapy Association
Pergamon Press
New York • Oxford • Toronto • Sydney • Frankfurt • Paris
Pergamon Press Offices:
U.S.A. Pergamon Press Inc., Maxwell House. Fairview Park,
Elmsford, New York 10523. U.S.A.
U.K. Pergamon Press Ltd.. Headlngton Hill Hall.
Oxford 0X3 OBW, England
CANADA Pergamon of Canada, Ltd., Suite 104. 150 Consumers Road,
Willowdale. Ontario M2J 1P9, Canada
AUSTRALIA Pergamon Press (Aust.) Pty. Ltd., P.O. Box 544.
Potts Point, NSW 2011, Australia
FRANCE Pergamon Press SARL, 24 rue des Ecoles,
75240 Paris, Cedex 05, France
FEDERAL REPUBLIC Pergamon Press GmbH, Hammerweg 6, Postfach 1305,
OF GERMANY 6242 Kronberg/Taunus, Federal Republic of Germany
Copyright ©1980 Pergamon Press Inc.
Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data
Main entry under title:
Social competence.
(Pergamon general psychology series)
Bibliography: p.
Includes index.
1. Interpersonal relations. 2. Social adjustment.
I. Rathjen, Diana P. II. Foreyt, John Paul.
HM131.S583 1980 302 80-118
ISBN 0-08-025965-0
All Rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced,
stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means:
electronic, electrostatic, magnetic tape, mechanical, photocopying,
recording or otherwise, without permission in writing from the
publishers.
Printed in the United States of America
Preface
The relationship between peoples' social abilities and interpersonal skills
and their satisfaction and productivity has long been recognized by profes-
sionals and the general public. For example, teachers have often noted the
correlation between children's poor academic performance and their ag-
gressive or withdrawn social behavior in the classroom, and managers have
reported cases of otherwise bright employees who cannot relate well to peo-
ple and thus fail to advance in their careers. Despite the crucial role that
social abilities play in the coping processes, these skills are rarely taught in a
systematic fashion. Although parents convey certain norms and rules gov-
erning appropriate social behavior and teachers tend to reinforce quiet and
obedient classroom behavior, children are rarely given specific instruction
in the methodology of coping with interpersonal activities such as making
friends, handling disagreements, and dealing with stress. Instead, most peo-
ple are expected to "pick up" these skills vicariously from cultural models,
and those who feel they are less skilled than their peers can enroll in charm
school, Toastmasters' clubs, and Dale Carnegie workshops. The persistent
popularity of such courses, despite their sometimes high fees and the lack of
evidence supporting their effectiveness, suggests that many people feel the
need for more education in these areas.
Unfortunately, the people whose interpersonal coping skills are the most
deficient may be the least likely to seek help at an early stage because our
culture tends to view social abilities as a function of "personality," an
amorphous, general, mystically acquired quality that allows people to be di-
chotomized as either competent (read extrovert, a leader, charismatic,
popular, effective, confident) or incompetent (read introvert, follower, un-
popular, insecure). Any effort to seek help is a tacit admission that one
belongs in the latter category, since society views failure on specific tasks,
such as "making friends," as evidence of major personality deficits and
labels a person as unfriendly, antisocial, or unpopular rather than unskilled.
Although many therapeutic programs would involve a skills approach to
such problems, the point to be made is that, from the client's viewpoint,
social difficulties are often indicative of major personality aberrations
rather than skill deficits.
In order to emphasize the prevalence of the therapeutic rather than
educational model of social competence, we have chosen skill in forming
vii
viii Preface
peer relationships as a prototypical social ability. However, our discussion
is not limited to the origins of popularity; similar thinking prevails with
respect to many other social abilities as well.
A common belief is that either through heredity, upbringing, or social
class, certain persons are imbued with magnetic, dynamic, effective person-
alities that lead to social success. The amorphous qualities which set these
people apart are stated in general terms which defy specification and would
seem to preclude the possibility of being learned by others not as favorably
equipped. Social abilities often conceptualized in this manner include prob-
lem solving, decision making, conflict resolution, leadership, social influ-
ence, stress management, sexual prowess, and parenting. The lack of
systematic educational efforts directed at the teaching of interpersonal skills
is particularly ironic in light of the tremendous amount of basic research in
such areas as friendship, social influence, and attitude change. Unfor-
tunately, the interface between basic research and applied problems
necessary for curriculum development was hindered for many years by the
*'trait" viewpoint of social competence.
However, in the 1960s, an alternative to the elusive concept of trait was
presented by Albert Bandura's social-learning theory, which views human
interaction as a series of overt behaviors that can be reliably measured. The
critical characteristic of his model is the assumption that both normal and
abnormal behavior can be explained by the same laws and that the most im-
portant laws governing human behavior are those derived from learning.
In the original formulation of social-learning theory, it was assumed that
all behavior, whether socially competent or incompetent, is developed and
maintained through three regulatory systems that create a reciprocal inter-
action between the person and his environment. The three systems are:
(1) classical conditioning processes that lead to patterns of behavior largely
determined by external events; (2) the process of external reinforcement;
and (3) the person's cognitive mediational processes that determine which
aspects of the environment are attended to, how they are perceived, and
how they will influence future behavior.
Social-learning theory provided the missing link between basic research
on social processes and the development of clinical interventions. Charac-
teristics of the socially competent individuals described earlier were recon-
ceptualized as specific behaviors demonstrated by competent people rather
than personality traits of such individuals. Once social competence was
operationally defined as a collection of specific behaviors, it became theo-
retically possible to use the principles of learning to develop programs to
teach people more effective behaviors. It would appear that a social com-
petence curriculum could be developed by combining the information on
socially successful behaviors identified in the social research literature
with the techniques for effective learning from the work of Bandura and his
Preface ix
colleagues. However, the idea of one set of socially competent behaviors ap-
plicable in all settings is as erroneous and misleading as the former notion of
ideal personality traits. The social effectiveness of behavior is a function of
both the individual's characteristics and of the environment in which the
behavior is performed.
Thus, after the initial presentation of Bandura's theory, two major
challenges to the development of a systematic social competence curriculum
remained: (1) identification of behaviors which would actually be effective in
a particular situation, and (2) development of the most effective way to
teach those behaviors to specific individuals. These are still major questions
in the area of social competence, and much-further work remains to be
done. The present book is an effort to provide a state-of-the-art review of
efforts to answer these questions by presenting research and interventions
on social competence organized according to stages in the life cycle.
The answer to the first question regarding assessment is provided by a
situational definition of social competence in which parameters of effective
behavior are determined for a specific context. The idea that behavior is a
function of both person and environment was first presented in Lewin's
early writings on field theory (B = P + E) and Barker and Wright's emphasis
on behavior settings. This notion was given further empirical support by
Mischel's review of personality research, in which he concluded that
behaviors were more consistent across similar situations than across similar
individuals. The idea was again emphasized in Bandura's notion of
reciprocity between person and environment. However, it was only in later
research that the general concept of reciprocity was applied to the assess-
ment of social competence. Only recently have researchers attempted to
assess competence in a situational fashion. At this point in time, it is par-
ticularly exciting to present the work of authors, who have attempted to use
the situational approach for a series of important life situations ranging
from childhood to retirement.
The second question, concerning the most efficient way to teach socially
competent behaviors, has been hotly debated within psychology. The
original emphasis of the behaviorists on overt and easily measured behavior
as the target of intervention was quickly challenged by others in the field
who felt that human behavior could not be adequately explained without
reference to thoughts and feelings. Both behavioral and cognitive perspec-
tives have been employed in the study of social competence. Early studies
emphasized the easily measured overt components of social behavior, such
as verbal content, eye contact, and latency. With the increasing trend
towards "going cognitive," more attention has been paid to emotional reac-
tion, including anxiety and anger, and to cognitive components such as ex-
pectations, self-statements, and rules or strategies. Although all three com-
ponents of social competence, behavior, affect, and thought, were included
x Preface
in Bandura's original formulation, research has tended to focus on one or
another of the components at different points in time. The programs pre-
sented in this volume represent an effort to integrate all three components in
terms of both assessment and treatment. The relative importance of the
three components of behavior continues to be an unresolved issue in the
field. Current research suggests that cognitive factors do play a critical role
in behavior change, but that behavioral performance may be the best way to
induce such change. Thus, it is clear that the cognitive perspective, par-
ticularly as espoused by Bandura's recent articles on the development of
self-efficacy, is assuming a more crucial role in the development of interven-
tion programs, but that a strong behavioral emphasis is also apparent in
those programs that have proved successful. This volume presents an over-
view of validated and innovative interventions designed to enhance social
competence in a variety of target populations throughout the life cycle.
These programs represent many different solutions to the basic challenge of
enhancing individuals' cognitive, affective, and behavioral repertoire to en-
able them to cope effectively with interpersonal relationship throughout life.
At this point in time, the diversity and creativity in the types of interven-
tion programs that have been developed make the presentation of the most
promising and best-validated research efforts a truly exciting task. In addi-
tion to recognition of the need for interventions specifically tailored for the
particular individual in a given situation, the chapters in the current volume
reflect the current focus on prevention and education, as well as the more
tertiary aspect of treatment. The timing of this volume is appropriate, not
only because of the exciting rapprochement between the cognitive and
behavioral perspectives it represents from a theoretical view, but also in
terms of the new perspectives which are represented from an applied view.
The emphasis on an educational as well as a remedial perspective on social
competence suggests that it is no longer necessary to be born a Dale
Carnegie to enjoy successful relationships.
The idea for this book originated at the Seventh Annual Symposium of
the Houston Behavior Therapy Association (HBTA). We are deeply in-
debted to the authors for their outstanding contributions. For their con-
tinued support, we are also grateful to the co-sponsors of the symposium:
Baylor College of Medicine, Rice University, University of Houston, Harris
County Department of Education, South Texas Dietetic Association, and
Spring Branch Academy. Our symposium is successful each year only
because of the hard work of many HBTA members, including Phyllis
Massie, Robert Mitchell, Pat Doyle, Ed Keuej, Ben Williams, Lynne Scott,
Francisco Barrios, and Eric Rathjen. Thanks also to Wanda Mollins,
Steven D. Keener, Terry A. Needham, Lewis Dratt, Doris Murray, and Susi
LeBaron for their help with the manuscript.
Diana Pickett Rathjen
John P. Foreyt
1
An Overview of
Social Competence
Diana Pickett Rathjen
The purpose of this chapter is to review areas of psychological research
relevant to the development of interventions that enhance or develop social
competence. The importance of social ability has long been recognized, but
only recently has it become the focus of educational and therapeutic
programs. For many years, social abilities were assumed to be intrinsic
characteristics that determined a person's success or failure in social
situations, and the characteristics were not considered amenable to change.
Two important developments in psychological theory led to a new concep-
tualization of social abilities that allowed them to be incorporated in an
educational model. The first development was social learning theory by
Albert Bandura in the 1960s.
In his theory, social abilities, along with other aspects of human func-
tioning, were considered to be behaviors that were developed and main-
tained according to principles of learning and, unlike traits, were amenable
to change through processes of relearning. The shift in focus from traits to
behaviors suggested by his theory allowed social abilities to be defined in
terms of behaviors that could be easily and reliably measured. Once the
components of social abilities could be measured and changed, it was
logical to consider them as skills similar to physical and intellectual abilities
for which systematic curricula could be developed.
However, the choice of which behaviors should be included in the reper-
toire of a socially competent person is not clear; basic research on social
processes indicates that behavior judged to be interpersonally effective in
one situation may not be perceived as effective in another. In fact, the search
for a list of behaviors that characterize the socially competent person
may be just as fruitless as the former search for the traits that characterize
the socially successful individual.
A second major redirection in psychological theory bears directly on this
1
2 Social Competence
problem. Recent research in social psychology suggests that the most ac-
curate picture of social interaction may be a reciprocal one which takes into
account both the target person and the factors in his environment. It may be
more useful to conceptualize social competence as the product of an interac-
tion between the person and the situation. Use of the interactionist perspec-
tive has clarified several types of social behavior, such as helping behavior
and interpersonal attraction. Recent reviews by Ekehammar (1974), Bowers
(1973), and Endler and Magnusson (1976) conclude that person-situation in-
teraction is more important than either situational or individual differences
in explaining behavioral differences.
Recent studies in the social skills literature, particularly in the areas of
assertiveness and dating, also suggest that the effectiveness of certain
behaviors depends on the sex, status, and physical attractiveness of the in-
dividuals displaying them. Early attempts at interventions in these areas
tended to downplay individual differences. For example, assertiveness
training was often used as a remedy for social anxiety in diverse types of
clients. Recent studies have focused on the differential effectiveness that
assertive behavior may have for males and females.
Although the interactionist viewpoint is a relatively recent development,
it shows the most promise for integrating the diverse number of variables
that influence social behavior into one theoretical model. Much of the
research most relevant to applied problems, such as the development of a
social skills curriculum, is now being conducted within one of the various
versions of the interactionist perspective. However, there are also data to
support two other conceptualizations of social competence: the view that
focuses primarily on the individual, and the view that emphasizes the role of
environmental factors, both physical and social.
Each of the three perspectives provides a unique view of the criteria that
should be used to distinguish competence from incompetence. A prominent
researcher in this area, Edward Zigler, recently noted that he himself had
used the construct in four entirely different contexts in the past fifteen years
of research. However, building on the conceptual work of Kohlberg and
Mayer (1972) and of Anderson and Messick (1974), Zigler and Trickett
derive a twofold approach in which measures of social competence should
reflect one of two major criteria (Zigler and Trickett 1978). They suggest
that social competence must first reflect the success of the human being in
meeting social expectancies, and second, that the measures of social com-
petence should reflect something about the self-actualization or personal
development of the human being (p. 795). As Zigler and Trickett suggest,
any definition is arbitrary, and the issue is not accuracy but usefulness. The
purpose of this chapter is to integrate the data on competence in a way that
will be applicable to specific problems encountered by parents, teachers,
and therapists. For our purposes, the definition provided by Zigler and
An Overview of Social Competence 3
Trickett is a useful one if it is noted that each of their suggested criteria
could be judged by either society or by the individual involved, and that
each criterion could be measured either in the immediate situation or on a
long-term basis. These last considerations emphasize contradictions that are
inherent in a definition which uses multiple criteria for success. Examples of
coping judged to be competent on the basis of one criterion and not on
another come readily to mind. A child may induce his playmates into sub-
mission through aggression on the playground; such children often feel suc-
cessful in the short run, but complain later when they are rejected by their
peers. Such behavior, although initially successful, is considered unaccept-
able by society. It is clear that even an individual might consider the same
action as either competent or incompetent.
From an applied standpoint, it seems reasonable to deal with the diversity
of criteria by recognizing that there is not one competent solution to a given
dilemma, but many. As researchers, we can gather data on the different
competent solutions which appear in the laboratory or in field studies and
then, as practitioners, attempt to match one of the possible solutions with
the individual resources or goals of the person involved.
In addition to the problem of selecting criteria for successful coping,
there are three other frequently debated questions: (1) What factors make
up social competence? (2) How are these factors taught, developed or
elicited? (3) What factor, if any, provides continuity in the development of
social competence? This last question is one of the most intriguing and con-
troversial. Each of the perspectives above would suggest a different way of
asking the question and different variables to consider in providing an an-
swer. Those who take an individual perspective might ask the question in
terms of what leads to social adjustment or maturity, or how an individual
develops effectiveness or mastery. They would look for individual skills that
might increase with age and be appropriate across a wide variety of
situations. Those who take the environmental view would want to know
what leads to the generalization of behavior across settings, what factors in
the environment are necessary to elicit coping behavior, which social
arrangement or structure would facilitate social interaction. They would
look for the influence of different environments, both physical and
cultural, on social behavior, possibly using animal and cross-cultural data.
The adherents of the interactionist perspective are currently in disagreement
over the exact way to define and measure interaction (see Buss, 1977, for a
discussion), but would agree that behaviors that are competent for an in-
dividual in one situation might not be judged so in another setting, or if
displayed in the same setting by another person.
The next paragraphs review illustrative research conducted within each of
the frameworks discussed above. Our goal is to abstract from each area the
variables which have been empirically determined to be influential in