Interview Schedule for Social Interaction (sample)

Abstract

The Interview Schedule for Social Interaction (ISSI) is a seminal instrument developed by Henderson and colleagues in 1980 to systematically measure an individual’s perceived and actual social relationships. It moves beyond simple counts of friends to assess the quality and functional aspects of social support and integration. The scale is noted for its focus on four distinct dimensions: the availability and adequacy of attachment figures (confidants) and the availability and adequacy of broader social integration networks. It has historically been utilized in psychiatric and epidemiological research, particularly for exploring the link between social bonds and conditions like neurosis and general psychological distress.

Keywords

social interaction, social support, attachment, integration, psychological measurement, ISSI, neurosis, epidemiology, social bonds, confidant

Authors

Henderson, S., Byrne, D.G., Duncan-Jones, P., Scott, R., et al. (1980)

Purpose

The primary purpose of the ISSI is to provide a structured, in-depth assessment of an individual’s social environment and the quality of their social bonds. Unlike simpler measures that might only count network size, the ISSI seeks to determine both the quantitative presence (availability) and the qualitative satisfaction (adequacy) of key social functions, such as having a confidant and being part of a larger social group.

The instrument was designed specifically for use in epidemiological studies linking deficient social relationships to the onset or maintenance of mental health issues, notably depression and anxiety disorders. It allows researchers to differentiate between various types of social deficit, which is crucial for targeted clinical or community interventions.

Construct

The Interview Schedule for Social Interaction operationalizes the construct of social bonds across four primary dimensions, which are derived from two fundamental aspects of human relationship needs: attachment and social integration. These dimensions are measured through 53 distinct items, leading to four main subscales.

• Availability of Attachment (AVAT): Measures the existence and accessibility of intimate relationships, typically focusing on a primary confidant or close partner (8 items).
• Adequacy of Attachment (ADAT): Assesses the subjective satisfaction and perceived quality of these intimate relationships, reflecting whether the individual feels their needs for confiding are met (12 items).
• Availability of Social Integration (AVSI): Measures the presence and size of a broader social network, including friends, colleagues, and community ties (16 items).
• Adequacy of Social Integration (ADSI): Evaluates the subjective satisfaction derived from the wider social network, reflecting the sense of belonging and community involvement (17 items).

Validity

The validity of the ISSI has been established primarily through its strong association with measures of psychological distress, demonstrating significant criterion validity. Studies, including those by Henderson and colleagues, showed that low scores on the adequacy subscales (ADAT and ADSI) are robust predictors of elevated neurotic symptoms and general psychiatric morbidity. This suggests the scale successfully measures the functional deficits in social relationships that contribute to poor mental health outcomes.

Furthermore, the four-factor structure provides evidence of construct validity, distinguishing clearly between the quantitative aspects (availability) and the qualitative aspects (adequacy) of both intimate attachment and broader social integration. The scale’s differentiation of these components supports theoretical models of social provision.

Reliability

The ISSI generally exhibits good internal consistency, particularly for the four main subscales. Initial research indicated acceptable to high Cronbach’s alpha coefficients, confirming that the items within each subscale reliably measure their intended construct. The structured nature of the interview format also aids in achieving high inter-rater reliability when administered by trained personnel.

Test-retest reliability has been investigated in longitudinal studies, showing stability in scores over short periods, reflecting the relatively stable nature of core social support networks in the general population.

Factor Analysis

The development of the ISSI was strongly guided by factor analytic techniques intended to establish the independence of the four hypothesized dimensions. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses consistently supported the distinction between attachment and social integration, as well as the crucial separation between the objective presence (availability) and the subjective perception (adequacy) of social resources.

This four-factor structure is fundamental to the scale’s utility, allowing researchers to pinpoint whether an individual lacks social resources entirely (availability deficit) or possesses resources but finds them unsatisfying (adequacy deficit), providing precise diagnostic information for psychosocial intervention.

Instrument

Test Type: Structured Clinical Interview and Self-Report Component

Format: Interviewer-administered; responses are coded immediately based on scripted questions and follow-up probes.

Language Available: Primarily English; translated versions exist for use in international epidemiological studies.

Population Group: Clinical and General Population

Age Group: Adults (typically 18+)

Population Details: Used extensively in community surveys and psychiatric samples to measure psychosocial risk factors and the impact of social deficits.

Test Methodology: The interview format allows for detailed probing and clarification, ensuring accurate assessment of complex social relationships. Scoring involves summing item responses within the four subscales, providing continuous measures of social provision.

Keywords

availability, adequacy, social bonds, psychological measurement, social network, epidemiology, attachment theory, social support, mental health

Authors

Author ORCID Identifier: Not specified in source materials.

Affiliation Email addresses: Correspondence typically directed to the lead institution at the time of publication, such as the Australian National University.

Correspondence Address: Refer to original publications (Henderson, S., et al., 1980) for institutional addresses.

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The initial development and publication year for the Interview Schedule for Social Interaction was 1980. The scale is widely used in academic research. For commercial use or specific clinical applications, researchers should consult the original authors or copyright holders regarding permissions and any associated fees.

The complete instrument and related documentation are often made available for academic purposes. The original PDF describing the instrument can be reviewed here: www.a4ebm.org/sites/default/files/Measuring Health.pdf

Reference’s

• Henderson, S. (1980). A development of social psychiatry: the systematic study of social bonds. J Nerv Ment Dis, 168(2):63–69.

• Henderson, S., Byrne, D.G., Duncan-Jones, P. (1981). Neurosis and the social environment. Sydney, Australia: Academic Press.

• Henderson, A.S., Brown, G.W. (1988). Social support: the hypothesis and the evidence. In: Henderson AS, Burrows GD, eds. Handbook of social psychiatry. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 73–85.

• Henderson, S., Duncan-Jones, P., Byrne, D.G., Scott,R. (1980). et al. Measuring social relationships: the Interview Schedule for Social Interaction. Psychological Medicine, 10:723–734.

• McDowell, Ian. (2006). Measuring Health: A Guide to Rating Scales and Questionnaires, Third Edition. OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS.

Items of the Interview Schedule for Social Interaction (sample)

IMPORTANT: The following scale items must be preserved in their original language and must not be changed in any way.

33. At present, do you have someone you can share your most private feelings with (confide in) or not?

No one (Go to Q. 33D) 0

Yes 1

A. Who is this mainly? (Fill in only one on Attachment Table)

B. Do you wish you could share more with _______________ or is it about right?

About right 1

Depends on the situation 2

More 3

Not applicable 9

C. Would you like to have someone else like this as well, would you prefer not to use a confidant, or is it just about right for you the way it is?

Prefers no confidant 1

About right 2

Depends on the situation 3

Like someone else as well 4

Not applicable 9

(Go to Q. 34)

(If no one)

D. Would you like to have someone like this or would you prefer to keep your feelings to yourself?

Keep things to self1

Like someone 2

Not applicable