, since they describe what these skills are used for rather than what they are.

It is
rather like defining a bicycle as something that gets you from one place to another. As
illustrated in the next section, attempts to provide a more forensic definition of social
skill are manifold.

DEFINITIONS OF INTERPERSONAL SKILL

In an early review of this field, Phillips (1978) concluded that individuals are socially
skilled according to the extent to which they can interact with others in such a way as to
fulfil their own rights and needs while protecting the equal rights or needs of others.
This definition emphasised the macro elements of social encounters, in terms of
reciprocation between participants, and focused upon the outcome of behaviour rather
than the skills per se (although Phillips also noted that knowing how to behave in a range
of situations was part of social skill). A similar approach was adopted by Combs and
Slaby (1977), who defined social skill as the ability to interact with others in a socially
acceptable manner that was beneficial both to oneself and the interlocutor. Both of these
perspectives view social skill as an ability, which the person may possess to a greater or
lesser extent.
Ability was linked to goal-related performance by Kelly, Fincham, and Beach (2003, p. 724) when
they pointed out that ‘Communication skills refer to the ability to realize commu