Assessment of children's social problem-solving skills in hypothetical and actual conflict situations.

This study compared the social problem-solving skills of 57 maladjusted and 57 well adjusted first and second graders in a series of hypothetical and actual provocations. All children were asked how they would react to four video-taped provocations involving same-age peers. They were also exposed to three provocations simulated by a peer-confederate; their verbal and nonverbal behaviors were videotaped. Multivariate analyses of variance indicated that, overall, maladjusted subjects displayed less assertiveness and more verbal and nonverbal aggressive responses to the actual provocations. Conversely, hypothetical situations yielded few between-group differences with respect to verbal strategies. The validity of hypothetical situations is questioned; the importance of actual situations for assessment and intervention purposes is stressed.