School Psychology International (1991), Vol. 12ReferencesDay, S . (1989) 'Some Children Die - How Does Jersey Care?', unpublished

seminar report, Acorns Children's Hospice Trust, Birmingham .Fullen, M . (1982) The Meaning ofEducational Change . New York : Teachers'

College Press .Georgiades, N.J . and Phillimore, L . (1975) 'The Myth of the Hero-Innovator

and Alternative Strategies for Organizational Change', in C.C . Kiernanand F.P . Woodford (eds) Behaviour Modircation with the Severely Retarded .New York : Associated Scientific Publishers .

Grady, J . (1986)'Special Educational Needs in the 11-16 Schools', unpublishedpaper, States ofJersey Education Committee .

Katz, D . and Kahn, R.L . (1966) The Social Psychology of Organisations . NewYork: Wiley .

Robson, C . et al . (1988) In-service Training and Special Educational Needs:Running Short, School Focused Courses . Manchester: Manchester Univer-sity Press .

Waterman, R.H., Peters, T.J . and Phillips, J .R . (1980) 'Structure is notOrganisation', Business Horizons 3 .

Social Skills Assessment and Intervention withChildren and Adolescents

Guidelines for Assessment and Training Procedures

STEPHEN N . ELLIOTT and R.T . BUSSEUniversity of Wisconsin-Madison, USA

ABSTRACT

Children who persistently exhibit social skills deficitsexperience both short- and long-term negative consequences, andthese negative consequences may often be precursors of more severeproblems later in life . If untreated, researchers have indicated thatsocial skills deficits in early childhood are relatively stable over time,related to poor academic performance and may be predictive of socialadjustment problems and serious psychopathology in adolescence .Procedures for linking assessment and classification of social skillsproblems to treatments are briefly reviewed. A number of procedureshave been identified as effective methods for treating social skillsdeficits . The myriad of procedures can be classified into three catego-ries : (1) operant conditioning, (2) social learning, and (3) cognitive-behavioral procedures . In practice, behavioral rehearsal is oftenincorporated into treatments and most of the effective social skillsinterventions are combined procedures rather than a single tech-nique . Guidelines for implementing major treatment components arediscussed and an overall implementation plan is presented .

Behaviors such as sharing, helping, initiating relationships, request-ing -help from others, giving compliments and saying 'please' and'thank you' are socially desirable behaviors that almost everyone

This article represents the content of an invited three-hour workshop pre-sented at the 13th International School Psychology Colloquium held inNewport, Rhode Island in July 1990 . Portions of this workshop containedmaterials from the Social Skills Rating System Technical Manual (Greshamand Elliott, 1990) and from a chapter entitled 'Best Practices in PreschoolSocial Skills Training' by Elliott and Ershler (1990) . Please address allcorrespondence regarding this manuscript to Stephen N . Elliott, Departmentof Educational Psychology, 1025 W. Johnson St, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI 53706, USA .

School Psychology International (SAGE, London, Newbury Park and NewDelhi), Vol . 12 (1991), 63-83 .

c0

School Psychology International (1991), Vol. 12 Elliott andBusse: Social Skills Trainingwould agree are examples of social skills . In general, social skills maybe defined as socially acceptable learned behaviors that enable a ar

a)person to interact with others in ways that elicit positive responses and a ~v d'

LO o u CO G d eassist in avoiding negative responses (Gresham and Elliott, 1984) . The a C y v

o [C N

y

_Cl _ ~, Uof d a u.b

�- 0O O 00 WW _

CJ a) X O O. )o, a't7 ` C. Udevelopment of social skills is a) a)one of the most important outcomes of b WO.

bw EEmEa~

°o ., o."0o y y

'bw EEid" .:,v�=tCN'ic6 n°'.°ecM..ao

O.yC00 . ° ..the schooling process . Children with social skills deficit are at risk for .: W .y

C C w i6 .~ ..a .~ N .w cd � r. .-, Cr ~ t0

social-emotional difficulties and Cpoor academic performances (Parker d d ti w ro U ,a.~ O tu"u d y G ~D G ii

and Asher, 1987). z~0 COa o. (;n

C's

m 3 .a x o a a 'n. fo °.-°vw0 � ~~n o A a u -0 CO

The acronym of CARES has been offered by Gresham and Elliott c(1990) to facilitate memory for, and the identification of, five major _a c

enE v E

clusters of social skills . The clusters are cooperation, assertion, respon- Cq -0sibility, empathy and self-control . Briefly, these clusters of social H 0 oCV v a.~ b Obehaviors can be characterized as follows: O)

b1 . Cooperation - behaviors such as helping others, sharing materi- Uy u vw

als with CD Ca peer and complying with rules. N C UC r- 4 - 02 . Assertion - initiating behaviors such as asking others for .n J0

Na yiro. ~ Y:3 + N V

information and behaviors that are responses to others' actions such as v ood E °C n.y ' u ~4,o.

v'E 0 C.. � mc

Lresponding to peer pressure . C0 a)

u V) 8 4.00 a7 O

o

d'~

t. >,c Z

OCL-2

3 . Responsibilityy

- behaviors that demonstrate the ability to C t.cdA

A L-11 O

communicate with adults and concern about one's property . o) fs. t% O H oU .0

H m 00 CLoo. -04 . Empathy - behaviors that show concern for a peer's or signifi- d

cant adult's feelings . UO5. Self-control y- behaviors that emerge in conflict situations such mc vas responding appropriately to teasing or to corrective feedback from 0

Uan adult. Mh M 0. wOThe term social competence has often been considered synonymous M 'O Cd

with social skills . Social competence, however, is a summary term v yC

Ewhich reflects social judgment about the general quality of an individ-

psycho-

d o C m rnvba,'o

> w

=~Coual's performance in a given situation . The concept of social skills, 'v = c yaZ cs0 C* 0. 0. Q. r

U

from a behavioral perspective, is premised on the assumption that .ti 3N..d LN. 0 0 D. D. to a) 0-0 >

. .4 U 11 t,specific, identifiable skills form the basis for socially competent behav- 0 t ..., U

O4.o .CU CW o C ~. C!1 t .v .~ c

a) w '6 0 -1!y= cCd

;as°'- u 4' y Ea) ds

ior (Hops, 1983) . To assess social competence, a wider range of O Ca 0C

.W u Cd -- 0 .a .L W a ._r U, , .= d 'o m 0v cv

E0

oo E0daE~dEbehaviors and abilities, such as communication skills, physical abili- 4i ~wO C0 ~"0O C MH a = o.~awoo uc. Cd a a) CL. m cwE40 Or- wU

ties and physical appearance need to be considered . From a treatment yw

perspective, social skills may be the most malleable of the components Q.v wTof social competence . d Q o xor M

w

Assessment of social skills and identification of children in aneed of social skills training l2 0,0 c W 00a .M 0 E,0)0000A number of methods, including rating scales, checklists and sociomet- n > � Uu 0, d c^

ric nomination techniques, have been designed to identify children at ca a)risk for behavior problems . Specific assessment procedures are not c a °. g :MOreviewed here, however Table 1 documents the normative and H

_a W .0 aoc ~? w

dvCvC

School Psychology International (1991), Vol. 12

0 _R

mq

-C

o d.c

0

oS

-db

.Fco 0-

Ei

cd .12O .00 .a

E

O.00YA

.u

0.C O

0

w cd C ay V .C p

t. C a+w ~ dC>

C db C ~ d .F 0 FOnrid CCd

vy~"~.

CC E C

U.b

U .!U

0.

>

C Cb 5 ro >,

ou W -r ,w'O

.0

.0 M 0

.0 -0yy

A 'C ~ a7 C v

w v 'D

0.°0. y

dy 0. G cd E; U

co

°0. 0

O.a 3 .e

c

C .>+

lr E

~:a 7CW

CT'd

Elliott and Busse: Social Skills Training

metric characteristics of three frequently used rating scales : SocialBehavior Assessment, Walker-McConnell Scale of Social Competenceand School Adjustment, and Social Skills Rating System . Detailedreviews of social skills assessment methods have been published byGresham and Elliott (1984, 1989) and Strain et al . (1986) .

In general, the purposes of social skills assessment concern eitheridentification/classification or intervention/program planning . From abehavioral perspective, the critical characteristic that differentiatesassessment methods is the extent to which a method allows for afunctional analysis of behavior (i .e . the extent to which an assessmentprocedure provides data on the antecedent, sequential and consequentconditions surrounding a molecular behavior) .A standard battery of tests or methods for assessing social skills

does not exist . Rather, hypotheses dictate the direction of assessment,the questions to be answered and the methods to be used . Assessmentshould proceed from global to specific to allow appropriate planning ofinterventions . In contrast, evaluation of intervention success typically

Table 2

Assessment sequence for social skills

1 . Teacher ratings of social skillsa . Estimation of frequency of behaviorsb . Estimation of behavior's importance to teacherc . Tentative estimation of skill and performance deficitsd . Guideline for teacher interview and direct observations

2 . Parent ratings of social skillsa . Estimation ofcross-setting generality of deficitsb . Parent's perceived importance of social behaviorsc. Guideline for parent interview

3 . Teacher interviewa . Further delineation of target behaviorsb . Functional analysis ofbehavior in specific situationsc . Selection of target behaviors based upon importance ratings and

teacher's ratingsd . Guideline for development of observation case

4. Parent interview(same as above)

5 . Direct observations of classroom behaviora . Functional analysis of behaviorb . Direct measurement of behavior in applied settingc. Observation of peer reactions to target child's behavior

6 . Sociometrics using liked most and liked least nominationsa. Measurement of social preference and social impactb . Classification of sociometric status (rejected, neglected, controversial)

7 . Self-report of social skills - obtain child's perception of social behavior8 . Child interview

Note: From Elliott et al ., (1989) Copyright 1989 by Pergamon Press . Adaptedby permission .

H wb

70.

a .-~ GO U

a'3Zd~b

X

QC ~-SG . G

O V

C C w~3

C i..C.d.~'D ~,~z.C C ate... .~

0 CO.~.=

>, 'O

b E d y n. O. b O d aT+.C

d cdaiU N U

dy o y.r ~

C 3 c. N F'~as ~ ~ .l N.3a~

n. yo y- v .u-C O C as

3.O^ V

C 4. U Na >N y N

..G.. y ~ G d aUa

No

Vl

~C>°~,U J y s. u C yO

ao">FmEO O G7 m .C a ° ~,

daA

o L .~

c-° .r>Fv'0' .5yC d yO CO d .m d

UG.-0

,y 0o w

Exy, E_roo~Utd y O r.W °U °w t/) 't7 Ls. L. U V (n

C am- . O

U V ~ 0. W ..

0U

l ?,V v

Cz, sue. v d 'o LT, sC. ^O N. o ' wval 0 U N O. "F .~' d V

N U ~ N'b

U U:s CJd : d G

00 0C

.Eu dw

d.o F -EFnz cn yH va

w .

ti L0O)

M .~ C-3 ~ CJ C. aUais M 0.M y N I W I Q

0.o m

v

w wavoa . d

0

00

,0 u atM

Er i00 Go C ao m

7

;v

^!

o.o .o

V~wru,G 'C 'd

w0 0 0

~ cc

E ~ -

0V

v N cV O 'O

N Vi y ~d

O m:p unC

0 1.

H a mcQ m39 .V

00 X v~ a

C

n ~' ,22.� oar u. s

.v. -50U o m 8b ^ y

Q) C*d

C CC ti . W

o. .L ro u, a

I u. S"' C td .-rwC yC.. F 0

x

C ~.°. N U as C 00 ,x ...+° °.~ 0x

°~ .~ .cv o

caL

r

00

m°a~~>'u

vh07F-. n °

00 Z;

3 ~Y0 0d¢3 °cRr ~?w a a ~ .. v

C d .r'b

Ci O b .5 w y .-0,X CN

y"U~ ~ y O. CL3 10,(n Cv 3oF.ro

° c0.d Cc0 o

vu

`o

.G duU ~' ~ ~n a

School Psychology International (1991), Vol. 12

proceeds in the opposite direction, moving from behavior-specific

outcomes to more global analyses of important social outcomes .

To increase the likelihood of accurate identification/classification

decisions, we recommend the use of direct observations of the target

child and non-target peers in multiple settings; behavioral interviews

with the referral source andpossibly the target child; rating scale data,

preferably norm-referenced, from both a social skills scale and a

problem behavior scale completed by the referral source ; and sociomet-

ric data from the target child's classmates . Regarding intervention

decisions, data contributing to a functional analysis of important socialbehaviors are imperative . These types of data usually result from

multiple direct observations across settings ; behavioral role plays with

the target child; and teacher and parent ratings of socially valid

molecular behaviors. Behavioral interviews with the treatment

agent(s) also will be important to assess the treatment setting, the

acceptability of the final treatment plan and the integrity with which

the plan is implemented . Table 2 (from Elliott et al ., 1989) provides a

summary of an heuristic sequence for the assessment of social skills .

Basic assumptions and procedures for promoting social skills

Social skills interventions focus on positive behaviors and use non-

aversive methods (e .g . modeling, coaching and reinforcement) to

improve children's behavior . These also are the characteristics that

teachers and parents report they like in interventions (Elliott, 1988).

Therefore, utilization of these methods may enhance treatment integ-

rity . In addition, these programs can be built into the existing

structure of a classroom or home environment, thus minimizing the

Table 3

Common social skills training tactics and selection factors

1 . Therapist directeda . Modeling (positive and negative ; live and symbolic)b. Coachingc. Operant (manipulation of antecedents and consequences)d. Problem solving exercises (role play)e. Self-system (self-talk, self-monitoring, self-evaluation)

2. Therapist and peer directeda. Group therapy (includes modeling, problem-solving, guided practice)

3. Peer directeda. Peer-mediated initiation and reinforcement

Treatment selection factors1 . Type of problem and accompanying interfering behaviors2. Resources available3. Setting and situations4. Treatment effectiveness and acceptability findings

Elliott andBusse: Social Skills Trainingtime required for successful implementation and maximizing treat-ment generalization . Finally, social skills interventions can be usedwith individuals or groups of students, and because they primarilyconcern increasing prosocial behaviors, all students can participateand benefit from the interventions.

Teaching children social skills involves many of the same methodsas teaching academic concepts . Effective teachers ofboth academic andsocial skills model correct behavior, elicit an imitative response,provide corrective feedback and arrange for opportunities to practicethe new skill (Cartledge and Milburn, 1986). A large number ofintervention procedures have been identified as effective for trainingsocial skills in children . Table 3 illustrates common social skillstraining tactics that are (1) therapist directed, (2) therapist and peerdirected or (3) peer directed . These procedures can be further classifiedinto three theoretical approaches" that highlight common treatmentfeatures and assumptions about how social behavior is learned. Theseapproaches are operant, social learning and cognitive-behavioral .Table 4 provides a comparison of these three approaches along severalcommon dimensions .

In practice, many researchers and practitioners have used proce-dures that represent combinations of two or more of these basicapproaches. However, we will use the three groups of interventions todescribe the basic procedures and to organize a review of theireffectiveness. First, however, we believe it is instructive to review fiveassumptions proposed by Michelson et al . (1983: 3) which are funda-mental to the conceptualization of social skills assessment and inter-vention plans.Assumption 1 : Social skills are primarily acquired through learn-

ing which involves observation, modeling, rehearsal and feedback .Assumption 2: Social skills comprise specific and discrete verbal

and non-verbal behaviors.Assumption 3: Social skills entail both effective and appropriate

initiations and responses.Assumption 4 : Social skills are interactive by nature and entail

effective and appropriate responsiveness .Assumption 5: Social skill performance is influenced by the charac-

teristics of an environment.Collectively, these pragmatic assumptions provide direction to both

assessment and intervention activities by stressing the multidimen-sional (verbal-non-verbal and initiating-responding), interactive,situation-specific nature of social skills . Thus, regardless of interven-tion approach, effective interventions will need to address targetbehaviors which involve both verbal and non-verbal communicationsused to initiate or respond to others . With this in mind, we now

School Psychology International (1991), Vol. 12

LO

Elliott and Busse: Social Skills Training

examine the procedures that are germane to the operant, sociallearning and cognitive-behavioral approaches to social skills interven-tions.

Operant intervention proceduresOperant conditioning procedures focus on overt, observable behaviorand the antecedent and consequent events that surround the behavior .Control of a behavior is most often achieved through the application ofreinforcement or punishment contingent on the observance of thebehavior . However, many social behaviors can also be modifiedthrough the control of antecedent conditions, such as a friend appear-ing at your door or a teacher prompting students to observe aplayground conduct rule before leaving for recess. Thus, the manipula-tion of both antecedents and consequences are valuable procedures forinterventions in a wide variety of settings and with almost anyperformance deficit.Some children experience difficulties in interpersonal relationships

because the social environment is not structured to facilitate positivesocial exchanges. Antecedent control of social behavior can set theoccasion for positive social interactions and has the advantage ofrequiring less teacher time and monitoring than other procedures (e .g .reinforcement-based procedures) . Antecedent control procedures, how-ever, implicitly assume that the child possesses the requisite socialskills but is not performing them at acceptable levels . Strain and hiscolleagues (Strain, 1977 ; Strain et al ., 1977 ; Strain and Timm, 1974)used an antecedent control procedure termed peer social initiations toincrease social interaction rates of socially withdrawn children . Thegeneral procedure involved having a trained peer confederate initiatepositive social interactions with a withdrawn child in a free-playenvironment. Peer confederates were coached, prior to the interven-tion, to appropriately initiate and maintain social interactions . Thisprocedure effectively increased rates of social interactions of with-drawn children . Strain and Fox (1981) provide a comprehensive reviewof these procedures for pre-schoolers and for older children .

Cooperative learningCooperative learning is another method which focuses upon manipu-lating antecedent conditions to set the occasion for positive socialinteractions (Madden and Slavin, 1983). Basically, cooperative learn-ing requires students to work together in completing an academic task .The group, rather than the individual, receives a grade on thecompleted academic product. This procedure requires that studentscooperate, share and assist each other in completing the task and, as

N

0U

np NO it

O`"- . U ,0-C~b

LO. ~

cl . .,0

,o.~U

ya.

0on

0 C' 'v4 Oa

a . 5doa

c°~a °'f do a

0 d

sC c

o

0 n0

4~ t-0b cd r en

a '5

0 a.O O ccd W G; .[ W U

CON

f0-icnG»O

aVr. r.

dO

a.V

a. U 7OU d r.

oGa

r.O+'

0ac.,

>d

a is a-> O0

V

U

HU O

YU

-0c7Cd

bDq'j

a.O

Wo.a

°" my

VCd

U

0

dO

nN >C u m'.

d O

O

y;n ca

OOX-O

'>

O .p

�'

Cdro ~y °" b a

:[ a.d 0

.n . .~. a

yO

Cd 4;U ch

b 0Sb

;;.C.

X a.

Up caaU G.

Vb

ao

a

(Uw '0p

cad .o ^O ~O

O m'5 yCd

H

.Tcd

y C

OCd

~

y 0

~ -C cx,

.ty NN

~

y

oCL

a "cZO"

yaU

O V°'

L.q, O Cd

^ UC

,d Cd q ,b o cd

ao

School Psychology International (1991), Vol. 12

such, represents an effective technique for increasing the likelihood of

positive social behaviors .A number of operant-learning procedures (i .e ., manipulation of

antecedents and consequences) have been used to increase the fre-quency of positive social behaviors and decrease the frequency ofnegative social behaviors . All of these procedures are based on theassumption that low rates of positive social interaction and high rates

of negative social interaction result from reinforcement contingencies(positive or negative) occurring subsequent to behavior . The implicitassumption when using these procedures is that the child knows howto perform the social behavior in question but is not doing so because ofthe lack of reinforcement for appropriate social behavior .

Contingent social reinforcementContingent social reinforcement involves having a teacher, parent or

other significant person to a child publicly reinforce appropriate socialbehaviors . For example, Allen et al . (1964) had a teacher sociallyreinforce a four-year-old socially isolated girl whenever she interactedwith other children . This procedure led to a six-fold increase in social

interaction rates over baseline levels . Variations of this basic proce-

dure have been successful with elective mute and severely andprofoundly mentally retarded populations (Mayhew et al ., 1978).Althpugh contingent social reinforcement increases rates of positivesocial interaction, it requires a great deal of teacher/parent involve-ment on a consistent basis to be effective . Therefore, it is perhaps bestused to maintain social interaction rates once they have been estab-lished through other social skills intervention procedures.

Differential reinforcementDifferential reinforcement of other behavior (DRO) and differentialreinforcement of low rate of responding (DRL) have also been used tomodify social skills . DRO involves presenting reinforcement after anybehavior except the target behavior . Thus, the individual is reinforcedonly when he or she does not perform the target behavior after acertain amount of time has elapsed . For example, to decrease aggres-sive behavior and increase positive social interactions, any behaviorthat is exhibited by a child except aggressive behavior, is reinforced .This procedure would have the effect of increasing all other responsesand extinguishing aggressive behavior . Pinkston et al . (1973) used aDRO procedure to decrease the aggressive behavior of a boy andcontingent social reinforcement to increase his positive social interac-tion . DRL involves reinforcing reductions in the performance of atarget behavior . Reinforcers may be delivered for reduction in theoverall frequency of a response within a particular time period, or for

Elliott and Busse: Social Skills Trainingincreased elapsed time between responses (interresponse time) . Forexample, to decrease the frequency of talking-out behavior in aclassroom, a reinforcement contingency could be specified such thatreinforcement would only occur if the frequency of behavior was at orbelow a given criterion level . Dietz and Repp (1973) used a DRLschedule to reduce the inappropriate talking of an entire EMR class-room . During the DRL contingency, students could earn reinforcementif the entire class made five or fewer 'talk-outs' in a fifty-minuteperiod .The studies just reviewed illustrate that DRO and DRL are effective

in decreasing the frequency of negative social behaviors . These proce-dures, however, are perhaps best used as adjuncts in social skillsinterventions as a means of decreasing negative social behaviorswhile, at the same time, teaching positive social behaviors.

Social learning intervention proceduresSocial learning procedures have their roots in the social learningtheory of Bandura and Walters (1963) and Bandura (1977), whosuggest that social behavior is acquired through two types of learning :observational learning and reinforced learning. Social learning theo-rists differentiate between the learning of a response and the perfor-mance of that learning . This enables social learning theorists todevelop the role of modeling influences apart from their use in theacquisition of new behavior . Modeling also affects the performance ofpreviously learned responses through its disinhibitory or cueingeffects . Therefore, socially acceptable behavior can be elicited throughthe presence of a person modeling a particular behavior . For example,if one student volunteers to help the teacher, he or she will often elicitsimilar volunteering behaviors in other students in the class . Theconsequences for a modeled behavior are hypothesized to influence thefuture occurrence of the same behavior . Observers tend to inhibitresponses which they see punished in others, whereas they are likelyto perform the behavior if it is reinforced . This process of observing theconsequence for a modeled behavior is referred to as vicarious punish-ment or vicarious reinforcement, depending on the effect of theconsequence .

Modeling has broad empirical support for teaching new social skillsto children and youths (Gresham, 1985 ; Wandless and Prinz, 1982) . Insocial skills training, modeling can be divided into two types : (1) livemodeling, in which the target child observes the social behaviors ofmodels in naturalistic settings (e .g . the classroom) and (2) symbolicmodeling, in which a target child observes the social behaviors of amodel via film or videotape . Both types ofmodeling have been effectivein teaching social skills, although the majority of empirical studies

School Psychology International (1991), Vol. 12

have used symbolic modeling because of the experimental controlafforded by the consistent presentation format . Live modeling, how-ever, may be a more flexible technique for classroom settings becauseof the opportunity to modify the modeling sequences based uponbehavioral performance . Table 5 provides basic guidelines for usingmodeling .

Table 5

Guidelines for using modeling procedures

1 . Establish and explain the need ; set the stagea . Storiesb . TV or moviesc . Personal experiences of group membersd . Role models

2 . Identify skill componentsa . Task analysisb . Group participationc . Sequencing of skill componentsd . Evaluation ofcritical components and sequence

3 . Modeling a social skilla . Salience of modeled skill componentsb . Model/observer similarityc . Coping vs mastery modelsd . Situational relevance of modeled behavior

4. Behavioral rehearsala . Soliciting participantsb . Review of skill componentsc . Situational relevanced . Constructive feedbacke . Instant replay (if necessary)

5 . Program for generalizationa . Use sufficient stimulus exemplarsb . Use sufficient behavior exemplars

Gresham and Nagle (1980) conducted the only published study todate in which modeling has been compared to coaching (a cognitive-behavioral procedure discussed in detail in the next section) . Studentswere exposed to one of four conditions : (1) modeling, (2) coaching, (3)modeling and coaching, and (4) attention controls . The three treatmentconditions were equally effective in increasing sociometric status andincreasing the frequency of positive social interactions . Interestingly,the treatments containing a coaching component were more effectivethan modeling in decreasing rates of negative social interactions .

Cognitive-behavioral intervention proceduresThe cognitive-behavioral approach to intervention is a loosely definedgroup of procedures which place significant emphasis on an individu-al's internal regulation of his or her behavior . In particular, cognitive-behavioral approaches to social skills training emphasize a person's

Elliott and Busse: Social Shills Trainingability to problem solve and to self-regulate behavior . Two of the mostfrequently used cognitive-behavioral social skills procedures arecoaching and social problem solving .

Coaching is a direct verbal instruction technique that involves a'coach' (most often a teacher or psychologist, but occasionally a peer),knowledgeable as to how to enact a desired behavior, and the studentin need of acquiring the desired behavior . Most coaching interventionsrequire three steps . First, the child is presented with rules for orstandards of behavior . Second, the selected social skills are rehearsedwith the coach . Third, the coach provides specific feedback during thebehavior rehearsal and offers suggestions for future performance . Insome rehearsal situations modeling procedures may also become partof the coach's training, and if the coach praises the accurate perfor-mance of a behavior by the student, reinforcement will also beevidenced . Thus coaching, although conceptualized as a verbal instruc-tion procedure that requires cognitive skills of the student to translatethe instruction into desired behaviors, can be easily supplementedwith behavioral and/or social learning procedures . Table 6 providesbasic guidelines for enacting coaching procedures .

Table 6

Guidelines for using coaching procedures

1 . Present social concept based on skill to be learned2 . Ask for definitions of social skills3 . Provide clarification of definitions4 . Ask for specific behavioral examples of concept

a . 'What would someone have to do to show they were cooperating?'b . 'What things would you have to do to show you were helping others?'c . 'flow could you show that you disagree with someone without getting

into an argument or fight?'5 . Ask for specific behavioral negative examples of concept6 . Generate situations and settings where skill is appropriate and

inappropriate7 . Behavioral rehearsal8 . Constructive feedback and instant replay

Coaching has received empirical support as a social skills trainingprocedure . Oden and Asher (1977) used coaching to teach participa-tion, communication, cooperation and peer reinforcement to students .The coaching procedure involved the three steps of verbal instructions,opportunity for skill rehearsal and feedback on skill performance . Thisprocedure was also effective in increasing the sociometric status of thestudents who successfully acquired the new social skills . Ladd (1981)and Gottman et al . (1976) obtained similar results using coachingprocedures .

Several applied researchers have developed interventions that

School Psychology International (1991), Vol. 12

stress teaching children the process of solving social or interpersonalproblems. As Weissburg (1985) pointed out, some of these interventionprograms, which are largely classroom based, have been called socialproblem solving (SPS) whereas others have been called interpersonalcognitive problem solving (ICPS) programs . Although the ICPSapproach places more emphasis on the conditions that accompanysocial problem situations and employs a narrower training procedurethan does the SPS approach, both use a similar sequence of steps totrain students to identify and react to social problems . Briefly, thesteps can be characterized as : (1) identify and define the problem, (2)determine alternative ways of reacting to the problem, (3) predict theconsequences for each alternative reaction and (4) select the reactionthat is `best' or most adaptive . Social problem solving methods of socialskills training can be used with individual children or entire class-rooms and have become common parts of several classroom social skillscurriculums . It should be noted, however, that such an approach doesnot focus on discrete social skills training and that learning socialskills generally requires more skill focused, externally reinforcedprocedures than offered by this cognitively oriented approach . Table 7illustrates basic guidelines for using social problem solving strategiesto improve social functioning .

Table 7

Guidelines for using social problem solving procedures

1 . Define and formulate problem2 . Generate alternate solutions3 . Specify consequences regarding alternatives4 . Select `best' alternative5 . Specify requirements/steps to implement solution6 . Verify outcomes of solution7 . Discuss and reinforce the problem solving process

Effectiveness of social skills interventions and suggestions forpracticeSeveral major reviews have been written concerning the effectivenessof social skills training procedures with children (see Cartledge andMilburn, 1986; Gresham, 1985; Ladd and Mize, 1983; Schneider andByrne, 1985). With regard to child characteristics, Schneider andByrne, who conducted a large meta analysis of social skills trainingstudies, indicated that social skills interventions were more effectivefor pre-schoolers and adolescents than elementary children . No genderdifferences in the effect sizes were noted (although few studies havetreated gender as an independent variable) . In addition, social skillstraining; was found to be more effective for withdrawn and learning

Elliott and Busse: Social Skills Training

disabled students than for aggressive students . Converse to what oftenis expected, the duration of interventions was related negatively to theoutcome . That is, interventions of fewer than five days were, on theaverage, more effective than interventions lasting more than fiftydays . This result was interpreted as consistent with the overall findingthat modeling and operant procedures were more effective thansocial-cognitive procedures, since the former procedures are usuallymuch briefer and are likely to involve a smaller number of students .

Based on reviews of research by Gresham (1981, 1985), Schneiderand Byrne (1985) and Mastropieri and Scruggs (1985-6), there appearsto be substantial support for the effectiveness of social skills trainingprocedures in general, and in particular for operant and modelingprocedures. Social-cognitive procedures were found to be less effective,especially with young children . The focus of most social-cognitiveprocedures on generalizable problem solving strategies as opposed tomore discrete, observable behavioral skills makes it difficult to mea-sure post-intervention improvements in social performance accurately.

Practical suggestions from the research literature for teachers,parents and other individuals interested in facilitating the develop-ment of social skills in children include the extensive use of operantmethods to reinforce existing social skills . The basic operant tacticsinclude (1) the manipulation of environmental conditions to createopportunities for social interactions which prompt/cue socially desiredbehavior in a target child and (2) the manipulation of consequences sothat socially appropriate behavior is reinforced and socially inappro-priate behavior, whenever possible, is ignored rather than punished .In addition, modeling of appropriate social behavior supplementedwith some coaching, feedback and reinforcement should be a primarytactic in developing new social behaviors in children .

Facilitating generalization of social skillsBerler et al . (1982) recommended that social skill interventions not beconsidered valid unless generalization to the natural environmentcould be demonstrated . Stokes and Baer (1977) and Michelson et al .(1983) identified several procedures, referred to as generalizationfacilitators, which enhance generalization beyond the specific aspectsof an intervention . Examples of generalization facilitators include : (1)teaching behaviors that are likely to be maintained by naturallyoccurring contingencies ; (2) training across stimuli (e.g . persons,setting) common to the natural environment ; (3) fading responsecontingencies to approximate naturally occurring consequences ; (4)reinforcing application of skills to new and appropriate situations ; and(5) including peers in training . By incorporating as many of thesefacilitators as possible into social skill interventions, and by offering

School Psychology International (1991), Vol. 12intervention `booster' sessions at regular intervals, maintenance andgeneralization of skills will be enhanced .

Classifying social skill difficulties and selecting interventionsMost authors agree that social incompetencies observed in childrencan result from difficulties in response acquisition or response perfor-mance (Bandura, 1977). Gresham and Elliott (1990) extended thistwo-way classification scheme to include areas of social skills prob-lems, social skills strengths and possible concurrent interfering prob-lem behaviors . As shown in Figure 1, this scheme of social skilldifficulties distinguishes between whether or not a child knows how toperform the target skill and the presence of interfering behaviors (e.g .anxiety, aggressiveness) . In addition, embedded in Figure 1 are lists oftreatments that often have been found effective for the variousproblem types. This classification scheme and its suggested treatmentsare part of Gresham and Elliott's (1990) Social Skills Rating System .The components of this classification scheme are as follows:

Social skills acquisition deficitsThis social skill problem characterizes children who have not acquiredthe necessary social skills to interact appropriately with others orthose who have failed to learn a critical step in the performance of theskill. Direct instruction, modeling, behavioral rehearsal and coachingare frequently used to remediate social skill acquisition deficits .

Social skills performance deficitsChildren with a social skills performance deficit have appropriatesocial skills in their behavior repertoires, but fail to perform them at

acceptable levels or at appropriate times. Typically, a social skills

performance deficit has been modified by manipulating antecedentsand consequences . Interventions have included peer initiations, con-tingent social reinforcement and group contingencies .

Social skills acquisition deficits with interfering problem behaviorsThis social skills problem describes a child for whom an emotional (e.g .anxiety, sadness) and/or behavioral (e.g . verbal aggression, excessivemovement) response(s) prevents skill acquisition . Anxiety is one suchemotional arousal response shown to prevent acquisition of appropri-ate coping behaviors, particularly with respect to fears and phobias(Bandura, 1977). Hence, a child may not learn to interact effectivelywith others because social anxiety inhibits social approach behavior.Impulsivity (a tendency toward short response latencies) is anotheremotional arousal response that can hinder social skill acquisition(Kendal) and Braswell, 1985) . Interventions designed to remediate

Elliott andBusse: Social Skills Traininganxiety that interferes with social skills primarily involve emotion-arousal reduction techniques, such as desensitization or flooding,paired with self-control strategies, such as self-talk, self-monitoringand self-reinforcement (Kendal) and Braswell, 1985 ; Meichenbaum,1977). Interventions that can help reduce overt behaviors such asphysical or verbal aggression, inattentiveness or excess movementsare often referred to as reductive procedures (Lentz, 1988). These

Figure 1 A scheme for classifying social behavior problems andsuggesting treatment techniques for such problems

No interfering Interferingproblem behaviors problem behaviors

Social skills Direct instruction Modelingacquisitiondeficits Modeling Coaching

Behavioral rehearsal DifferentialCoaching reinforcement of a low rate

of response (DRL)

Differential reinforcement ofother behavior (DRO)

Reductive procedures todecrease interfering problembehaviors

Social skills Operant methods to Operant methods toperformance manipulate antecedent or manipulate antecedent ordeficits consequent conditions to consequent conditions to

increase the rate of increase the rate ofexisting behaviors existing prosocial behaviors

Differential reinforcement ofa low rate of response (DRL)

Differential reinforcement ofr

i

other behavior (DRO)

i Reductive procedures tof decrease interfering problemi behaviors

i Social skills Reinforcement procedures Reinforcement proceduresa strengths to maintain desired to maintain desiredit social behavior social behavior

i Use student as a model Reductive procedures tofor other students decrease interfering problem

i. behaviorsi

School Psychology International (1991), Vol . 12include the use of reinforcement techniques (e.g . DRO and DRL),groupcontingencies and mild aversive techniques (e .g . reprimands,time-out, response cost, overcorrection) . Thus, for social skills acquisi-tion deficits that are accompanied by significant interfering behaviors,the intervention objectives are to teach and increase the frequency ofaprosocial behavior and concurrently to decrease or eliminate theinterfering problem behavior .

Social skills performance deficits with interfering problem behaviorsChildren with a social skill performance deficit accompanied byinterfering problem behaviors have a given social skill in theirbehavior repertories, but performance of the skill is hindered by anemotional or overt problem behavior response and by problems inantecedent or consequent control . Self-control strategies to teachinhibition ofinappropriate behavior, stimulus control training to teachdiscrimination skills and contingent reinforcement to increase displayof appropriate social behavior are often used to ameliorate this socialskill problem . Occasionally, when the interfering behaviors persist,reductive methods may also be necessary .

An implementation framework for social skills assessment andinterventionA general framework for social skills training can be described by theacronym DATE (Define-Assess-Teach-Evaluate) . First, behaviors aredefined and stated in observable terms . In addition, the conditions(antecedent and consequent) surrounding the behavior are alsodefined . Second, behaviors are assessed, preferably via multiple meth-ods, including rating scales, direct observations of the child, interviewswith teachers and/or parents and occasionally a structured role play toconfirm deficits and to refine intervention plans. Third, teachingstrategies are prescribed to fit the student's needs as determined by theassessment results and the classification that best characterizes thesocial skills deficit(s) . Fourth, the effects of the teaching procedures areevaluated empirically with the assessment methods used to selectstudents and target behaviors . The DATE model is applied continu-ously to each deficient social behavior that the student exhibits.

The DATE model can be implemented by a teacher, psychologist orother specialist through five steps : (1) establishing the need forperforming the behavior, (2) identifying the specific behavioral compo-nents of the skill or task analysis, (3) modeling the behavior usingeither live or filmed procedures, (4) behavior rehearsal and responsefeedback and (5) generalization training . These five steps represent aneasilv implemented and generic approach to teaching social behavior

Elliott and Busse: Social Skills Trainingusing the intervention procedures which have consistently been foundto be most effective . The intervention options available for youngchildren with a social skills deficit are numerous, but the majority ofeffective interventions combine the manipulation of antecedents orconsequences with modeling/coaching procedures . When a child'ssocial difficulty results from a lack of knowledge ofa particular skill, itis generally necessary to use a direct intervention that involvesmodeling, coaching and role playing techniques . Conversely, when achild fails to perform a social behavior he/she is capable of, it is likelythat interventions involving the manipulation of antecedents and/orconsequences will be successful .

SummaryIn this article, we have outlined- how one's assessment of social skillscan be linked conceptually and practically to an intervention plan, andhave described and reviewed research on three approaches to socialskills intervention or training . These approaches were the behavioralapproach, the social learning approach and the cognitive-behavioralapproach . The behavioral and social learning based approaches havebeen shown to lead to the most effective interventions for developingskill building interaction behaviors. The article concluded with thepresentation of a model, the DATE (Define-Assess-Teach-Evaluate)model, for implementing social skills interventions .

ReferencesAchenbach, T.M ., McConaughy, S.H . and Howell, C.T. (1987) 'Child/

Adolescent Behavioral and Emotional Problems : Implications of Cross-informant Correlations for Situational Specificity', Psychological Bulletin101:213-32 .

Allen, K .E ., Hart, B.M., Buell, J.S ., Harris, F.R . and Wolf, M.M . (1964)'Effectsof Social Reinforcement on Isolate Behavior of a Nursery School Child',Child Development 35 : 7-9 .

Bandura, A . (1977) Social Learning Theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ : Prentice-Hall .Bandura, A. and Walters, R.H . (1963) Social Learning and Personality

Development . New York: Holt, Rhinehart and Winston .Berler, E.S ., Gross, A.M. and Drabman, R.S . (1982) 'Social Skills Trainingwith Children : Proceed with Caution', Journal ofApplied Behavior Analysis

15 : 41-53 .Cartledge, G . and Milburn, J .F . (1986) Teaching Social Skills to Children :Innovative Approaches, 2nd edn . New York : Pergamon Press .Dietz, S . and Repp, A . (1973) 'Decreasing Classroom Misbehavior through theUse of DRL Schedules of Reinforcement', Journal of Applied BehaviorAnalysis 6 : 457-63 .Elliott, S .N . (1988) 'Acceptability of Behavioral Treatments in Educational

School Psychology International (1991), Vol . 12

Settings', in J.C . Witt, S.N . Elliott and F.M . Gresham (eds) Handbook ofBehavior Therapy in Education, pp . 121-50 . New York: Plenum Press .

Elliott, S.N . and Ershler, J . (1990) 'Best Practices in Preschool Social SkillsTraining' in A . Thomas and J . Grimes (eds) Best Practices in SchoolPsychology, 2nd edn . pp . 591-606 . Washington, DC: NASP.

Elliott, S .N ., Sheridan, S.M . and Gresham, F.M . (1989) 'Assessing and Treat-ing Social Skills Deficits: A Case Study for the Scientist-practitioner',Journal of School Psychology 27 : 197-222 .

Gottman, J .M ., Gonso, J . and Schuler, P . (1976) 'Teaching Social Skills toIsolated Children', Journal ofAbnormal Child Psychology 4 : 179-97 .

Gresham, F.M . (1981) 'Social Skills Training with Handicapped Children : AReview', Review ofEducational Research 51 : 139-76 .

Gresham, F .M . (1985) 'Utility of Cognitive-behavioral Procedures for SocialSkills Training with Children : A Review', Journal of Abnormal ChildPsychology 13 : 411-23 .

Gresham, F.M . and Elliott, S.N . (1984) 'Assessment and Classification ofChildren's Social Skills : A Review of Methods and Issues', School Psychol-ogy Review 13 : 292-301 .

Gresham, F.M . and Elliott, S.N . (1989) 'Social Skills Deficits as a PrimaryLearning Disability?', Journal of Learning Disabilities 22 : 120-4 .

Gresham, F.M . and Elliott, S.N. (1990) Social Skills Rating System . CirclePines, MN: American Guidance Service .

Gresham, F.M . and Nagle, R.J . (1980) 'Social Skills Training with Children :Responsiveness to Modeling and Coaching as a Function of Peer Orienta-tion', Journal ofConsulting and Clinical Psychology 48 : 718-29 .

Hops, H. (1983) 'Children's Social Competence and Skill : Current ResearchPractices and Future Directions', Behavior Therapy 14 : 3-18 .

Kendall, P.C . and Braswell, L . (1985) Cognitive-behavioral Therapy for Impul-sive Children . New York : Guilford Press .

Ladd, G .W . (1981) 'Effectiveness of a Social Learning Method for EnhancingChildren's Social Interaction and Peer Acceptance', Child Development 52 :171-8 .

Ladd, G.W . and Mize, J . (1983) 'A Cognitive-social Learning Model of SocialSkill Training', Psychological Review 90 : 127-57 .

Lentz, F . (1988) 'Reductive Techniques', in J.C . Witt, S.N . Elliott and F.M .Gresham (eds) The Handbook of Behavior Therapy in Education, pp .439-68 . New York : Plenum Press .

Madden, N.M . and Slavin, R.E . (1983) 'Mainstreaming Students with MildHandicaps . Academic and Social Outcomes', Review of EducationalResearch 53 : 519-69 .

Mastropieri, M.A . and Scruggs, T.E . (1985-86)'Early Intervention for SociallyWithdrawn Children', Journal ofSpecial Education 19 : 429-41 .

Mayhew, G., Enyart, P . and Anderson, J . (1978) 'Social Reinforcement and theNaturally Occurring Social Responses of Severely and Profoundly RetardedAdolescents', American Journal ofMental Deficiency 83 : 164-70 .

Meichenbaum, D. (1977) Cognitive-behavior Modification : An IntegrativeApproach. New York : Plenum Press .

Michelson, L ., Sugai, D.P ., Wood, R.P . and Kazdin, A.E . (1983) Social SkillsAssessment and Training with Children : An Empirically Based Approach .New York : Plenum Press .

Oden, S.L . and Asher, S.R . (1977) 'Coaching Children in Social Skills forFriendship Making', Child Deuelopment 48 : 495-506 .

Elliott and Busse: Social Skills TrainingParker, J.G . and Asher, S.R. (1987) 'Peer Relations and Later Personal

Adjustment : Are Low-accepted Children at Risk?', Psychological Bulletin102:357-89 .

Pinkston, E .M ., Reese, N .M., Le Blanc, J.M. and Baer, D.M . (1973) 'Indepen-dent Control of a Preschool Child's Aggression and Peer Interaction byContingent Teacher Attention', Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 6 :223-4 .

Schneider, B .H . and Byrne, B.M . (1985) 'Children's Social Skills : A Meta-analysis', in B.H . Schneider, K.H . Rubin and J.E . Ledingham (eds) Chil-dren's Peer Relations : Issues in Assessment and Intervention, pp . 175-92 .New York: Springer-Verlag .

Stephens, T. (1978) Social Skills in the Classroom . Columbus, Oll : CedarsPress .

Stokes, T.F . and Baer, D.M . (1977)'An Implicit Technology of Generalization',Journal ofApplied Behavior Analysis 10 : 349-67 .

Strain, P.S . (1977)'An Experimental Analysis of Peer Social Initiations on theBehavior ofWithdrawn Preschool Children : Some Training and Generaliza-tion Effects', Journal ofAbnormal Child Psychology 5 : 445-55 .

Strain, P.S . and Fox, J . (1981) 'Peers as Behavior Change Agents for With-drawn Classmates', in B .B . Lahey and A.E . Kazdin (eds) Advances inClinical Child Psychology, vol . 4, pp . 167-98 . New York: Plenum Press .

Strain, P.S ., Guralnick, M.J . and Walker, H .M . (eds) (1986) Children's SocialBehavior: Development, Assessment and Modification . Orlando, FL : Aca-demic Press .

Strain, P . and Timm, M. (1974) 'An Experimental Analysis of Social Interac-tion between a Behaviorally Disordered Preschool Child and her ClassroomPeers', Journal ofApplied Behavior Analysis 7 : 583-90 .

Strain, P.S ., Shores, R.E . and Timm, M.A . (1977) 'Effects of Peer SocialInitiations on the Behavior of Withdrawn Preschool Children', Journal ofApplied Behavior Analysis 10:289-98 .

Walker, H.M . and McConnell, S . (1988) Walker-McConnell Scale of SocialCompetence and School Adjustment . Austin, TX : Pro-Ed .

Wandless, R.L. and Prinz, R.J . (1982) 'Methodological Issues in Conceptualiz-ing and Treating Childhood Social Isolation', Psychological Bulletin 92 :39-55.

Weissberg, R.P. (1985) 'Designing Effective Social Problem-solving Programsfor the Classroom', in B.H . Schneider, K.H . Rubin and J.E . Ledingham (eds)Children's Peer Relations : Issues in Assessment and Intervention, pp .225-42 . New York: Springer-Verlag .