Conjunction With Partner Reports Of Social Skills example essay topic

Differences in One's Own and One's Partner's Perceptions of Social Skills as a Function of Attachment Style Researchers / Experimenters: Laura K. Guerrero and Susanne M. Jones Goal or Purpose of the Study: To extend research and theory on the relations between attachment style and social skill To gain a clearer picture of how the intersection of models of self and others associates with different social skills by testing for attachment-style differences across Bartholomew's four-category conceptualization of attachment Guide Questions: Are there differences in attachment style that relate to how people recognize their own social skills, specifically in emotional expressivity, emotional control, emotional sensitivity, social expressivity, social control, and social sensitivity? Do people recognize their partners's ocial skills (emotional expressivity, emotional control, emotional sensitivity, social expressivity, social control, and social sensitivity) differently as a function of their partners's elf-reported attachment styles? Theories or Models: ATTACHMENT THEORY Attachment theory provides a useful framework for studying differences in social skills. This theory states that people develop different attachment styles as a result of interactions with significant others, beginning with their interactions with a primary giver which was said to be the parents of a certain child (Bowl by, 1969). Attachment styles are modes of social interaction that reflect how people view themselves and others (Bartholomew, 1990). Bartholomew's (1990, 1993) conceptualization of attachment style entails crossing two theoretically-derived dimensions: a mental mode of self (based on whether a person has an internalized sense of self-worth) and a mental model of others (based on whether a person sees involvement with others to be rewarding).

When these dimensions are crossed, four unique attachment styles emerge: secure (positive models of both self and others), dismissive (positive model of self, negative of others), fearful (negative models of both self and others), and preoccupied (negative model of self, positive model of others). Secure individuals are confident that others will like and accept them. They are also comfortable with closeness and experience relatively few interpersonal problems. Dismissive individuals are confident and self-sufficient, but to the point that they often reject interaction with others, and see relationships as both unrewarding and unnecessary.

These individuals usually place a premium on activities related to work or self-fulfillment rather than on close relationships with others. In contrast, fearful individuals would like to have close relationships with others, but they worry that they will be rejected or hurt. These individuals generally have low self-esteem and experience considerable social anxiety when interacting with others. Finally, preoccupied individuals have particularly pronounced needs for external validation; they want others to like them but often think that partners do not reciprocate their feelings sufficiently. Thus, these individuals worry a lot about the well-being of their relationships (Bartholomew, 1990, 1993; Feeney, No ller, & Hanrahan, 1994; Guerrero, 1996).

SOCIAL SKILLS Based on how models of self and others combine, it is likely that people with different attachment styles see themselves as possessing various levels and types of social skills. Riggio (1086, 1993) developed one of the most comprehensive measures of social skill to date. His inventory focuses on the nonverbal and verbal manifestations of three general skills related to expressivity, control, and sensitivity. All these three have two classifications, namely emotional and social.

Emotional expressivity is the ability to express emotion spontaneously and accurately, primarily through the use of nonverbal communication while social expressivity is the skill in verbal speaking and engaging others in social interaction. Emotional control is the nonverbal skill of regulating affect by appearing to be indifferent, by covering up a felt emotion with a different (perhaps more appropriate) emotion, or by de-intensifying emotion. Social control, in contrast, is the regulation of verbal performance, including the ability to manage impressions, assume different social roles, and take on leadership positions (Riggio, 1986, 1993). Emotional sensitivity refers to skill in recognizing and responding to the emotional states of others. Social sensitivity, on the other hand, is the ability to decode and interpret verbal messages regarding what others are thinking and feeling (Riggio, 1986, 1993). It also reflects the degree to which a person is motivated to avoid criticism from others.

Too much of this "skill" may actually reflect a strong need for external validation (Guerrero & Reiter, 1998). HYPOTHESIS Perceptions of social skills differ as a function of attachment style and the intersection of models of self and others defines the four styles. SHORT SUMMARY OF THE STUDY This study is composed of two studies contrasting the four attachment styles on the six social skills in Riggio's (1986, 1993) inventory. Study 1 involved using self-reports while Study 2 examined whether people's perceptions of partners's ocial skills differ as a function of the partner's self-reported attachment style. Under Study 1, the respondents were undergraduate students (female n = 148; male n = 88) enrolled in introductory psychology courses. The students were asked to: "report some of your general attitudes toward yourself and other people, as well as your attitudes toward communicating with others".

About half of these participants were currently in serious dating relationships. They completed a 32-item attachment dimension scale that was a revised version of Guerrero's (1996, 1998) measure. Data from two of the sub scales from this measure - avoidance and anxiety (lack of confidence) - served to validate the ope rationalization of attachment-style categories used in this study. They used 7-point scales with Riggio's (1986) Social Skill Inventory (SSI). They were asked to reflect upon their style of interacting with others. Emotional expressiveness was measured with items such as: "I am able to liven up a dull party" and "People tell me I am a very expressive person".

Emotional control was comprised of such items as: "I am able to conceal my true feelings from just about anyone" and "I am very good at maintaining a calm exterior, even when I'm upset". Emotional sensitivity included such items as: "I always seem to know what people's true feelings are no matter how hard they try to conceal them" and "I am often told that I am a sensitive and understanding person". The eight items indexing social expressivity, among others, included: "At parties I enjoy talking to a lot of different people" and "I love to socialize". Items pertaining to social control included: "I am usually very good at leading group discussions" and "I find it very easy to play different "roles" at different times". Finally, the measure of social sensitivity included such items as: "I am generally concerned about the impression I am making on others" and "Sometimes I think that I take things that other people say to me too personally. It was revealed that secures and preoccupied's reported more skill in emotional and social expressiveness than di missives and fearful avoid ants.

Preoccupieds reported less emotional control and more social sensitivity than the other three groups. Fearful avo dants reported more social sensitivity than dismissive's. Under study 2, data were from a social-networking sample. Undergraduate students in a communication department administered pairs of questions to a dating or married couple they knew. The social-networking procedure resulted in a sample of 258 couples. Of these, 66 were married and the rest were in serious, exclusive relationships.

For the first section of the questionnaire (which contained items related to attachment and demographic variables), the respondents reported about their "own attitudes and feelings". For the second section (which contained items related to social skills), the respondents answered questions about their perceptions of their partner's behavior. Because data were collected from dyads, we have reported reliabilities separately for the female and male samples. They rated themselves on the same attachment-style dimensions as described for Study 1: Avoidance and anxiety. As was the case for Study 1, respondents also identified which of the four descriptions of attachment styles fit them best. To measure perceptions of the partner's social skills, the same abbreviated versions of the SSI sub scales reported for Study 1 were used.

Appropriate changes made it clear that the given situations were partner-reports. For example, items for emotional expressivity included "My partner is able to liven up a dull party". Emotional control included such items as: "My partner is able to conceal his or her true feelings from me". Emotional sensitivity was tapped by means of such items as: "My partner seems to know my true feelings no matter how hard I try to conceal them". The measure of social expressivity contained such items as "At parties my partner seems to enjoy talking to a lot of different people".

Social control was indexed with such items as "My partner is good at leading group discussions". Finally, social sensitivity included such items as "My partner seems concerned about making good impression on others". Because the second study contained dyadic data, the female and male samples were analyzed separately to avoid problems of non-independence. Self-reports of attachment styles were used in conjunction with partner-reports of social skills. In other words, the tests indicated whether Partner A's self-report of attachment affected Partner B's perceptions of Partner A's social skills. RESULT OF THE STUDY Overall, the results supported the hypothesis presented earlier.

Specifically, dismissive's had relatively low scores for both social sensitivity (presumably a reflection of their counter dependency) and sociability / expressiveness (presumably a reflection of their unwillingness to get too close to others). Fearful avoid ants had relatively high scores on social sensitivity and relatively low scores on sociability / expressiveness, which reflects the seemingly contradictory tension of needing social approval yet being afraid to develop close relationships. Preoccupieds were distinguishable from the other groups by virtue of high scores for both social sensitivity and sociability / expressiveness, which by virtue of high scores for both social sensitivity and sociability / expressiveness, which likely reflects their need for external validation through social relationships with others. Finally, although secures showed the least distinctive profile, their collective scores suggested relatively high sociability / expressivity and low social sensitivity.

This suggests that secures can approach relationships without being overly worried about what others think of them. The results for the partner-reported data were not as strong as those for the self-report data. Nonetheless, the partner-reported data suggested that the mental representations people have of themselves and others may lead to noticeable differences in social behavior. The differences in the findings for the two studies may be partially attributable to relational and perceptual factors. Whereas about half of the respondents in Study 1 were currently in serious dating relationships, all of the respondents in Study 2 were in long-term romantic relationships. Thus, participants in the second study may have had some added security based on their relationship status.

In terms of perception, people are obviously more aware of their true thoughts and feelings than their partners are. CONCLUSION The most consistent findings across the two studies were that: (a) preoccupied individuals were perceived by themselves and their partners to be more socially sensitive than those with other attachment styles, and (b) secure individuals possessed moderate to high levels of social skill across all of the measures except social sensitivity. Generally, however, self-reports revealed more theoretically consistent findings than did partner-reports. This may be because people are more critical of their own social shortcomings than their partners are, or it may be that the security of a long-term romantic relationship helps people gain social confidence and skill.

Reference: Communication Quarterly, Vol. 51, No. 3, Summer 2003, Pages 277-295.