The Social Skills Inventory (SSI): Measuring Nonverbal and Social Skills Ronald E. Riggio Claremont McKenna College INTRODUCTION The measurement of individual differences in nonverbal and social skills is, in many ways, rooted in research on intelligence, particularly the early work by Thorndike (1920) and others (Moss, Hunt, Omwake, & Ronning, 1927) in mea- suring social intelligence (ic., the ability to understand and manage people and to act wisely in human relations). Researchers of social intelligence (e.g,, Chapin, 1942; O'Sullivan, 1983; O'Sullivan & Guilford, 1975) realized that the ability to read or decode the feelings and intentions of others, and to decode and understand social interactions and social settings, were critical components of social intelli- gence. Guilford (1967), in his structure of intellect model and in the development of measures of multiple intelligences, included several nonverbal tests of social intel- ligence (O'Sullivan & Guilford, 1976). Whereas the “intelligence” line of research represents attempts to define and measure individual differences in social interaction skills, it was the pioneering research of Robert Roscnthal and his colleagues in measuring nonverbal decoding skills (see Rosenthal, 1979) that led to the first performance-based measures of nonverbal ability. One such measure, the Profile of Nonverbal Sensitivity (PONS; Rosenthal, Hall, DiMatteo, Rogers, & Archer, 1979), was used widely in research on individual differences in nonverbal skill. Another measure of both verbal and nonverbal decoding skill—one that is closely linked to notions of social intelli- ‘gence—is Archer and Akert’s (1977) work with the Social Interpretations Task (SIT), a performance-based measure of ability to decode and interpret social situ- ations. The SIT evolved into the updated Interpersonal Perception Task (IPT; Costanzo & Archer, 1993). 2526 RIGGIO ‘This chapter, however, presents The Social Skills Inventory (SSI; Riggio, 1986, 1989; Riggio & Carney, 2003). The $S1 is a 90-item, self-report instrument that measures basic skill in nonverbal/emotional communication as well as verbal/so- ial skills that are related to social competence. The inventory was derived from multidisciplinary research focusing on the development of nonverbal, emotional, and interpersonal skills. This research included groundbreaking work for measur- ing nonverbal encoding and decoding skills (Archer & Akert, 1977; Friedman, 1979; Rosenthal et al., 1979; Zuckerman & Larrance, 1979), Snyder's (1974, 1987) re- search on assessing skill in impression management/self-monitoring, and Guilford’s and O’Sullivan’s (O'Sullivan, 1983; O'Sullivan & Guilford, 1975) schol- arship for measuring social intelligence. THE SOCIAL SKILLS INVENTORY Drawing on a basic communication model, the SSI framework breaks down basic communication skills into three types: skill in encoding, or expressivity, skill in de- coding, or sensitivity; and skill in regulation, or control, over communication. These three basic communication skills operate in two domains: the nonverbal, or emo- tional, and the verbal, or social. Table 1 provides an illustration of the SSI model and brief description of each of the six SSI subscales along with sample items from the SSI. Information on obtaining the SSI is provided at the end of the chapter. The three SSI emotional skill subscales are tied to nonverbal communication skill most directly. Emotional Expressivity (EE) is a measure of emotional expres- siveness, related closely to other self-report measures of the same construct (see Riggio & Riggio, this volume). The Emotional Sensitivity (ES) scale is a self-report measure of nonverbal decoding skill. The $8] Emotional Control (EC) scale isan as- sessment of ability to monitor and control one’s own emotional expressions. It is also linked theoretically to posed nonverbal/emotional encoding, because emo- tionally controlled individuals need to regulate their facial expressions in order to. mask felt emotions, either by appearing stoic, or by using a conflicting emotional stateasa mask (e.g,, putting ona happy face to cover felt sadness or anger). Research suggests, however, that it is a combination of Emotional Control and Emotional Expressivity that contributes to posed emotional sending/encodingability (Tucker & Riggio, 1988). ‘Summed, these three emotional skills can form an index of general emotional! nonverbal skill competence. Indeed, the recent surge of interest in the construct ‘of emotional intelligence has much in common with the SSI emotional skill framework. In fact, Mayer and Salovey’s (1997) ability model ofemotional intel- ligence includes abilities to identify/decode others’ emotions, expressfencode ‘one’s own emotions accurately, and monitor and regulate felt emotional states. ‘The Social Skills Inventory assesses these three core dimensions of emotional in- telligence. Moreover, in psychometric terms, the SSI compares favorably to some of the existing self-report measures of emotional intelligence (see Ciarrochi,“WORT [ejoos Aue moge 1snl Ur Bulag O3 nipe Ase WED = Tanda We [jf Woas Olan Wajes P BuraresUTeW We pod Aisa we [- “suorssnasip dnoz3 Surpeay ze poo8 Aisa Aqjensn wre [+ “Wau ayn pes pu aint auo Addy yoo} josur a9eus OF age Ayseo wre | - seus, Jewonoure Ue puryag suoRoW apy Surpry “suorssoxdeo euonouse uyjonuo> pur SunemBar wt [PIS ssoundope jppos ‘uoreiuasesd-yps repos pie Bu (08) rossuop pouoniouig ~Ayqeuosiod ‘00 au 03 Kes apdoad saxo Buren aye | eu UNA J SBUTIOUOG » -uosied Sumpueysiopun ‘aanysuas & we j 1eyp pfon uayo we [+ srowpo wo Sunjeur ur woissoxdua atp noge poui2ow09 dipesou98 ws]. “soqaous pes 8 29 soustiawios [. ‘suonents qe1p0s apooep or Apqy -sowetyag [wos neudosdde Buswi9408 ‘opedure Brag, sun10ujo Surpueisrapun pure 0: Asantsuag Surponap feqion uy [pfs _—_sSoN> [BUOTOW aAqns 02 aanuane Burag Buyporep peqIaAUOU Ur TPIS (9) Anamsuag jo1009 (sa) Aapasuag jouopowg ‘sao fuens 01 sjasdus aonponiut 0} aanieneen ayp 293 Aqfens T+ -sela aarssoadxa anny 12048 PIO} U32q 942g [+ -Aured jmp @ dn way ov 2yqe we [+ -ssome qurod a 28 dy 01 somas38 0.10] e290 4 -fouong Jeqioa (HM porepossy ‘uonDeTaIUr -sews paonows apj sada Apremnooe 01 Ana Surpoou fequaAuOU Ut AS e108 uy sioupo 9x89 07 Aang pure Buzpooue fequon Ur I (aS) Aeatssoadseg fo1208 (aa) Aaessaidieg youoroug (aouaByjariy po90s 02 parojas] [oouaBiponuy pouowoug 01 porwyes] (sneys 10905} ussuog popos/te4seA (sng tououowg) urowog jouonowz/oqs2AUON TSS ay) Way suas] a[dureg pure ‘suORMUTA apes SOMauTEsT (ISS) AIoa2AUT STIPIS [POS FUL 1 aTavL.28 RIGGIO Chan, Caputi, & Roberts, 2001), such as those developed by Bar-On (1997) and Schutte et al. (1998). Although there may appear to be little direct connection between research in nonverbal communication and the social skill subscales of the SSI, the skill of So ial Expressivity (SE) involves verbal speaking skill and the ability to engage oth- ers in social interaction. This is, in many ways, a complement to Emotional Expressivity and suggests skill in initiating interpersonal interactions. The SSI d mension of Social Sensitivity (SS), although primarily related to verbal decoding, skill i.e, listening), also involves ability to decode and interpret social situations, a skill that is very important in decoding tasks as represented in measures such as the Interpersonal Perception Task (IPT; Costanzo & Archer, 1993). In fact, the SSI-SS scale is significantly and positively correlated with scores on the IPT (Riggio & Carney, 2003). Theskill of Social Control (SC) is linked to ability to manage impressions—sim- ilar to the construct of self-monitoring—but more recently equated with the con- struct of savoir-faire: the ability to know how to act in social situations (Eaton, Funder, & Riggio, 2002). Taken together, these three social skill dimensions—SE, $8, and $C—can be considered an index of social intelligence (Riggio, Messamer, & ‘Throckmorton, 1991). Thus, researchers of nonverbal behavior and interpersonal processes may be interested not only in the nonverbal skill scales of the SSI but also in the entire scale. Psychometric Properties of the SSI Scale Reliability. ‘The $$] scales have shown good test-retest reliability, rang- ing from .81 to .96 fora 2-two week interval (N= 40). Cronbach’s alpha coefficients ranging from .65 to .88 were obtained from a sample of 549 employed adults re- cruited froma number of work organizations across the United States. Alpha coeffi- cients from a group of 389 undergraduate students ranged from .64 to 89. These findings suggest that the various SSI scales have acceptable to good internal consis- tency (see Riggio & Carney, 2003). Scale intercorrelations and Sex Differences. The SSI subscales are posi- tively correlated, with some notable exceptions. For instance, Emotional Expres- sivity and Emotional Control are somewhat negatively correlated, as are Social Sensitivity and Social Control. The actual relationships among the various SSI di mensions are quite complex (see Riggio & Carney, 2003). Consistent with expectations, however, women tend to be more expressive and. sensitive than are men, with women obtaining typically higher scores on Emotional Expressivity, Social Expressivity, Emotional Sensitivity, and Social Sensitivity. Men tend to score significantly higher on Emotional Control, with no significant differ- ences on Social Control. These sex differences are consistent for both samples of adults and college students (Riggio & Carney, 2003).SOCIAL SKILLS INVENTORY 29 Factor Structure. Confirmatory factor analyses have supported the basic subscale structure of the SSI. The factor structure has held up both in tests of the SSI in English and in other cultures/languages, such as Italian (Galeazzi, Franceschina, & Holmes, 2002; Riggio, 1986). Convergent and Discriminant Validity. The SSI scales have demonstrated very good convergent validity with other self-report measures of nonverbal skill-related constructs, such as measures of emotional expressiveness, emo- tional reactivity, and emotional empathy. There is also evidence from a study using undergraduate students that $S1 Emotional Sensitivity correlates signifi- cantly with performance-based measures of emotional decoding skill (see Riggio & Carney, 2003) such as the Profile of Nonverbal Sensitivity (PONS; Rosenthal et al., 1979), the Diagnostic Analysis of Nonverbal Accuracy (DANVA; Nowicki & Duke, 1994; Duke & Nowicki, this volume), and an emo- tional decoding subscale of the Multifactor Emotional Intelligence Scale (MEIS-Pictures; Mayer, Salovey, & Caruso, 1997). A study of undergraduate students conducted by Tucker and Riggio (1988) ex- plored the relationships between the SSI scales and both posed and spontaneous emotional encoding, the latter using the Buck slide-viewing paradigm (see Buck’s chapter, this volume). As predicted, SSI-Emotional Expressivity was related to both posed and spontancous emotional encoding. Emotional Control, as one might sus- pect, was significantly negatively correlated with spontaneous emotional expres- sion while viewing emotion-eliciting slides, but was, contrary to prediction, unrelated to posed emotional encoding (although a combination of BE and BC was significantly positively correlated to posed sending). SSI-Social Control was, how- ever, significantly positively related to posed sending, further suggesting that SC is an important social acting skill. ‘An important concern to many researchers is the use of self-report measures to assess nonverbal skill, with critics suggesting that individuals do not have the insight or the unbiased perspective to make accurate assessments of thei verbal communication skills. However, validity evidence demonstrating signifi- cant relationships between self-report measures of nonverbal skill and performance-based assessments of skill suggest that the self-report methodo!- ogy is valuable, useful, and a cost-effective alternative to more time-consuming and costly performance measures (see Riggio & Riggio, 2001). In addition to ev- idence of convergent validity, there is good evidence demonstrating the dis- criminant validity of the SSI scales. For example, although Emotional and Social Expressivity are theoretically and empirically linked to personality constructs such as extraversion, evidence suggests that they are distinct constructs (see Friedman, 1983; Riggio & Riggio, 2002). Additionally, there has been little con- cern about socially desirable responding for the SSI scales (see Riggio, 1986; Riggio & Carney, 2003).30 RiGGIO The SSI and Research in Nonverbal Communication ‘The SSI has been used widely in research on nonverbal behavior. One line of re- search examined the impact of emotional expressiveness and global nonverbal/so- ial skills on impressions made in initial encounters and in initial attractiveness, Consistent with past research (c.g,, Friedman, Riggio, & Casella, 1988; Riggio & Friedman, 1986; Riggio & Woll, 1984; Sabatelli & Rubin, 1986), emotionally and socially expressive persons (high scores on EE and SE), and persons with high over- all $S1 scores, were rated as more likable and attractive than persons scoring low on these $51 dimensions in initial encounters, even after controlling for static cues of physical attractiveness (Riggio, 1986; Riggio, Widaman, Tucker, & Salinas, 1991). ‘These studies included undergraduate students as well as adult members of @ videodating organization (Riggio & Woll, 1984) ‘Nonverbal social skills have also been investigated in the context of deception by undergraduate students. An important finding is that nonverbally skilled con nicators, as measured by the SSI, are more successful deceivers primarily because they have a more “honest” overall demeanor—emitting cues that are stereotypically associated with truthfulness-than are persons lacking these important nonverbal skills (Riggio, Tucker, & Throckmorton, 1987; Riggio, Tucker, & Widaman, 1987) Likewise, nonverbal social skills, as represented by the SSI framework, have been shown to be important in relationship formation and maintenance and in the abil ity to garner social support from these relationships to cope effectively with every day stress (Riggio, 1992; Riggio & Zimmerman, 1991). Moreover, the SSI has important implications for evaluating the quality of communication in marriages (both young adult marriages and marriages of more than 50 years) and interper- sonal relationships (see Riggio & Carney, 2003). ‘Most recently, the SSI has been used to study the nonverbal and social behavior of leaders in small groups and persons in managerial or business leadership posi tions. For instance, the SSI was found to correlate positively and significantly with observer ratings of participants’ communication skills in a managerial assessment center conducted for students in a university school of business (Riggio, Aguirre, Mayes, Belloli, & Kubiak, 1997). In addition, scores on the SSI predicted group members’ satisfaction with their leaders in simulated work groups, and wererelated tofollowers’ ratings of leader effectivenessin the fire service (Riggio, Riggio, Salinas, & Cole, 2003). An exciting line of research explores the role that nonverbal social skills play in contributing to a leader's charisma and extends some of the ideas pre- sented in Friedman et al. (1988) and Riggio (1987). In an additional study, the SSI predicted performance evaluations of hospice workers (Riggio & Taylor, 2000), and SSI scores correlated negatively with indices of loneliness, depression, and social maladjustment in student populations (Riggio, Watring, & Throckmorton, 1993; Segrin & Flora, 2000), ‘An important line of research investigates the role of nonverbal skills and non- verbal skill imbalances (c.g., wide variations such as high scores on Emotional ConSOCIAL SKILLS INVENTORY BL trol coupled with very low scores on Emotional Expressivity) in predicting psycho- pathology in outpatients from mental hospitals (Perez & Riggio, 2003; Perez, Riggio, & Kopelowicz, 2003). Although wide discrepancies in scores on the various ‘subscales of the Social Skills Inventory are hypothesized to be indicative of social skill “imbalances” that may suggest an overall social skill deficit, more work needs tobe done looking at how different combinations of high and low scoreson the SSI subscales relate to social performance and psychosocial adjustment. FUTURE DIRECTIONS Future research on the SSI can investigate the role of nonverbal behavior skills in Jeadership and in contributing to effective management in work organizations, as, well as additional research on how specific nonverbal and social skills impact rela- tionship formation and relationship quality. Besides its use as a research tool for assessing nonverbal and social skills, the SSI can also be used to get baseline assess- ments of possession of communication skills or to measure the development of skills over time, This can be important for individual development or for larger scale nonverbal/social skill development and training programs. The Social Skills, Inventory is available to researchers for a nominal fee at www.mindgarden.com REFERENCES, Archer, B.,8 Akert, R.M, (1977). Words and everything else: Verbal and nonyerbsl cues in social inter pretation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35, 43-449. Bar-On, R. (1997}. Bar-On Emotional Quotient Inventory: Technical manual. Toronto, ON: Molt- Health Systems ‘Chapin, F.S. (1942). Preliminary standardization ofa social insight scle, American Sociological Review, 7,214-225, Ciatrochi, J, Chan, A., Capati, P., & Roberts, R. (2001). Measuring emotional intelligence. In J chi, J.P. Forgas, J.D. Mayer (Eds.), Emotional intelligence in everyday if: A scientificinguiry (pp. 25-45). Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press. (Costanzo, M.A. & Archer, D. (1993). Interpreting the expressive behavior of others: The interpersonal Perception Task (IPT). Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 13, 225-24. Eaton, G, Funder, D.C.&Riggio, RE (2003). Skil in social role paying: The essence of savior ‘Manuscript submitted for publication. Friedman, H.S.(1979). The concept ofskillin nonverbal communication: Implications for understand. ‘ing social interaction. In R. Rosenthal (Ed.), Skill in nonverbal communication (pp. 2-27). Cam: bridge, MA: Oclgeschlager, Guna, & Hain. Friedman H. S, (1983). On shutting one’s eyes to face validity. Pochological Bullein, 4, 185—187. Friedman, H.S._ Riggio, RE. 8 Casella D.F,(1988)- Nonverbal sil, personal charisna, and intial at traction, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 14, 203-211 Galearzi, A, Franceschina, E,, & Holmes, G. R. (2002). Factor analysis of Social Skills Inventory re- sponses of Italians and Americans. Psychological Reports, 90, 1115-1321 Guilford, J. P.(1967). The nature of human intelligence. New York: McGraw-Hill. Mayer, D.,& Salovey, P. (1997). What is emotional intelligence? In P.Salovey & J. D. Sluyter (Es. ‘Emotional developrient and emotional intelligence (pp. 3-34). New York: Basic Books. Mayer, J.D. Salovey, P.,& Caruso, 1. (1997), Multifactor Ensotional intelligence Test (MFIS). Needham, MA. ‘Moss, FA.,Hunt,T, Omwake,K.T.,& Ronning, M. M. (1927). Scial intelligence test. Washington, DC: George Washington University32 RIGGIO Nowicki,S. 8 Duke, M.P. (1994). Individual dfferencesin the nonverbal communication of affect: The Diagnostic Analysis of Nonverbal Accuracy Scale, Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 18, 9-35, O'Sullivan, M., & Guilford, |. P. (1976). Four factor tess of sacial intelligence (behavioral cognition) ‘Manual of structions ana inteypretations. Orange, CA: Sheridan Psychological Services, (O'Sullivan, M. (1983). Measuring individual differences. In J. M. Wiemann & K, P. Harrison (Eis. Nonverbal interaction (pp. 243.270). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. O'Sullivan, M., & Guilford, JP. (1975). Six factors of behavioral cognition: Understanding other peo ple. journal of Educational Measurement, 12, 255-271, Perez I. Fa & Riggio, RF, (2003). Nonverbal social skills and psychopathology. to P. Philippot,E. | Coats, & RS. Feldman (Eds.), Nonverbal behavior in clinical stings (pp. 7-44). New Yorks Oxford University Press Perez, JF. Riggio, R., & Kopelowiez, A. (2003). Socal sil mbalances asindicarorsof psychopathology ‘An exploratory investigation, Manuscript submitted for publication, Riggio, H.R, & Riggio, RF. (2002). Emotional expressiveness, extraversion, and neuraticistn: A ‘meta-analysis. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 26, Riggio, R. F. (1986), Assessment of basi social skills. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51 649-660. Riggio, RF. (1987) ‘The charisma quotient, New York: Dodd, Mead, Rigo, RE. (1988). Manual for the Social Skils Inventory: Research edition, Palo Alto, CA: Constiting Psychologists Press, Riggio, R.F. (1992). Social interaction skills and nonverbal behavior. in RS. Feldman (Ed), Appi ‘ations of nonverbal behavioral theoriesand research (pp.3~30). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Lelbaun ‘Associates, Riggio, R.E., Aguirre, M., Mayes, BT, Bello, C8 K ‘methods for student outcome as Riggio, R. F. & Carey, D.R. (2003), ‘MindGarden, Riggio. RE. & Friedman, HLS, (1986). Impression formation: The role af expressive behavior fournal ‘of Personality and Socal Psychology, 50, 821-427 Riggio, RE, Messaimer, |. & Throckmorton, B.(1991)-Socialand academic intelligence: Conceptually dlistinet but overlapping consteuets. Personality and Idividual Differences, 12, 695-702 Riggio, R.E, & Riggio, H.R. (2001). Self-report measurement of interpersonal sensitivity nA. Hall Se FJ. Berniesi (Eds), Interpersonal sensitivity: Theory anid measurement (pp. 127-142). Malawal., N} Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Riggio, RE, Riggio, H.R, Salinas, C:, 8 Cole, EJ, (2003). The role of social and emotional communication sks eader emergence and effectiveness. Group Dynamics Theory, Research, and Practice, 783-103 Riggio, R. E, & Taylor, 8]. {2000}. Personality and communication skills a predictors of hospice nurse performance. Journal of Business and Psychology, 15, 347-355, Riggio, R.F., Tucker, & Throckmorton, B. (1987), Social skillsand deception shilty. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 13, 568-877, Riggio, RP, Tucker, |, &e Widamsan, K. F. (1987). Verbal and nonverbal cues as mediators af deception ability Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, |, 126-145. Riggio, RE, Warring, K., & Throckmorton, B, (1993). Social skills, social support, and psychosoci ‘adjustiment. Personality-and Individual Differences, 15, 275-280, Riggio, RE, Widaman, K.F., Tucker, IS. Salinas, (1991), Beauty it mote than skin deep: Compo- nents of atractiveness. Hac rad Applied Social Psychology, 12, 423-439, Riggio, R.E., & Woll,S.B. (1984), The role of nonverbal ewes nd physical attactiveness inthe selection, of dating partners, Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 1, 347-357. Riggio, RE, & Zimmerman.) A. (1991), Social skills and interpersonal relationships: Influences on so cial support and support secking. In W. If Jones & D. Perlman (Bas), Advances in personal relation ships (Vol. 2, pp. 133-155). London: Jessica Kingsley Pres, Rosenthal, R.(Ed,).(1979). Skill in nonverbal communication. Cambridge, MA: Oelgeschlaget, Gun & Hain, Rosenthal, R, Hal, J. A. DiMatteo, M. R., Rogers, Pay & Archer, D. (1979), Sesnsiivity to nonverbal communications: The PONS test Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press Sebateli, RM. & Rubin, M. (1986). Nonverbal expressiveness and physical attractiveness as mediators of interpersonal perceptions. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 10, 120-133, ak, C. (1992). The use of assecsme sinent. Journal of Social lehavior and Personality, 12, 273-288 ical hills ventory manual: Second edition, Redwood City, CASOCIAL SKILLS INVENTORY 3 Schutte, N.S, Malouf, ). M., Hall 1. F., Haggerty, Df. Cooper | Ts Golden, C. J & Dornbeim, 1 (1998), Development and validation ofa measure ofemotional intelligence. Personality and Individ sual Differences, 25, 167-177 Segrin, C., & Flora, J, (2000), Poor social skills are + vulnerability factor in the development of psychosocial problems. Human Communication Research, 26, 489-514 Snyder, M, (1974). The self-monitoring of expressive behavior. fours of Personality and Social Peychol ogy, 30, 526-53). Snyder, M. (1987). Public appe: WH. Freeman, ndike,E. |. (1920). Intelligence and its uses. Harper's Magazine, 140, 227-235. rancesprivate realities: The psychology of self-monitoring, New York ‘The “Tucker 1.8, 6 Riggio, R.6.(1988). The role of socal skillsin encoding posed and spontancous facial ex pressions. journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 12, 87-97. Zuckerman, M, Larranee,1). (1979), Individual differencesin perceived encoding and decoding abil ities. In R. Rosenthal (Ed), Skill in nonverbal communication (pp. 171-203). Cambridge, MA: Oelgeschlager, Gunn, & Iain.