Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Timeout is an effective behavior-reduction strategy with considerable generality. However, little is known about how timeout is implemented under natural conditions, or how errors in implementation impact effectiveness. During Experiment 1, we observed teachers implementing timeout during play to evaluate how frequently the teachers implemented timeout following target behavior (omission errors) and other behaviors (commission errors) for four children. Teachers rarely implemented timeout; thus, omission errors were frequent, but commission errors rarely occurred. During Experiment 2, we used a reversal design to compare timeout implemented with 0% omission integrity, 100% integrity, and the level of omission integrity observed to occur during Experiment 1 for two of the participants. Timeout implemented with reduced-integrity decreased problem behavior relative to baseline, suggesting that infrequent teacher implementation of timeout may have been sufficient to reduce problem behavior.

Keywords

negative punishment omission errors school timeout treatment integrity

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Arkoosh

M. K.

Derby

K. M.

Wacker

D. P.

Berg

McLaughlin

T. F.

Barretto

(2007). A descriptive evaluation of long-term treatment integrity. Behavior Modification, 31(6), 880–895. https://doi.org/10.1177/0145445507302254

Barton

L. E.

Brulle

A. R.

Repp

A. C.

(1987). Effects of differential scheduling of timeout to reduce maladaptive responding. Exceptional Children, 53(4), 351–356. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440298705300410

Calhoun

K. S.

Matherne

(1975). The effects of varying schedules of time-out on aggressive behavior of a retarded girl. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 6(2), 139–143. https://doi.org/10.1016/0005-7916(75)90039-7

Carroll

R. A.

Kodak

Fisher

W. W.

(2013). An evaluation of programmed treatment-integrity errors during discrete-trial instruction. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 46(2), 379–394. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaba.49

Clark

H. B.

Rowbury

Baer

A. M.

Baer

D. M.

(1973). Timeout as a punishing stimulus in continuous and intermittent schedules. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 6(3), 443–455. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.1973.6-443

Colón

C. L.

Ahearn

W. H.

(2019). An analysis of treatment integrity of response interruption and redirection. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 52(2), 337–354. https://doi-org.www.libproxy.wvu.edu/10.1002/jaba.537

Cuenin

L. H.

Harris

K. R.

(1986). Planning, implementing, and evaluating timeout interventions with exceptional students. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 18(4), 272–276. https://doi.org/10.1177/004005998601800408

Donaldson

J. M.

Vollmer

T. R.

(2011). An evaluation and comparison of time-out procedures with and without release contingencies. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 44(4), 693–705. https://doi-org.www.libproxy.wvu.edu/10.1901/jaba.2011.44-693

Donaldson

J. M.

Vollmer

T. R.

(2012). A procedure for thinning the schedule of time-out. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 45(3), 625–630. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.2012.45-625

10.

Everett

G. E.

(2010). Time-out in special education settings: The parameters of previous implementation. North American Journal of Psychology, 12(1), 159–170.

11.

Fryling

M. J.

Wallace

M. D.

Yassine

J. N.

(2012). Impact of treatment integrity on intervention effectiveness. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 45(2), 449–453. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.2012.45-449

12.

Hobbs

S. A.

Forehand

(1977). Important parameters in the use of timeout with children: A re-examination. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 8(4), 365–370. https://doi.org/10.1016/0005-7916(77)90004-0

13.

Jackson

J. L.

Calhoun

K. S.

(1977). Effects of two variable-ratio schedules of timeout: Changes in target and non-target behaviors. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 8(2), 195–199. https://doi.org/10.1016/0005-7916(77)90047-7

14.

Maag

J. W.

(2001). Rewarded by punishment: Reflections on the disuse of positive reinforcement in schools. Exceptional Children, 67(2), 173–186. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440290106700203

15.

Northup

Fisher

Kahng

S. W.

Harrell

Kurtz

(1997). An assessment of the necessary strength of behavioral treatments for severe behavior problems. Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities, 9(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024984526008

16.

Pendergrass

V. E.

(1971). Effects of length of time-out from positive reinforcement and schedule of application in suppression of aggressive behavior. The Psychological Record, 21(1), 75–80. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03393992

17.

Peterson

Homer

A. L.

Wonderlich

S. A.

(1982). The integrity of independent variables in behavior analysis. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 15(4), 477–492. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.1982.15-477

18.

Rhymer

K. N.

Evans-Hampton

T. N.

McCurdy

Watson

T. S.

(2002). Effects of varying levels of treatment integrity on toddler aggressive behavior. Special Services in the Schools, 18(1–2), 75–82. https://doi.org/10.1300/J008v18n01_05

19.

St. Peter Pipkin

Vollmer

T. R.

Sloman

K. N

. (2010). Effects of treatment integrity failures during differential reinforcement of alternative behavior: A translational model. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 43(1), 47–70. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.2010.43-47

20.

Taylor

Miller

(1997). When timeout works some of the time: The importance of treatment integrity and functional assessment. School Psychology Quarterly, 12(1), 4–22. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0088943

21.

Vollmer

T. R.

Sloman

K. N.

St. Peter Pipkin

(2008). Practical implications of data reliability and treatment integrity monitoring. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 1(2), 4–11. http://doi.org/10.1007/BF03391722

22.

Warzak

W. J.

Floress

M. T.

Kellen

Kazmerski

J. S.

Chopko

(2012). Research forum-trends in time-out research: Are we focusing our efforts where our efforts are needed? The Behavior Therapist, 35(2), 30–33.

23.

Zimmerman

Baydan

N. T.

(1963). Punishment of sΔ responding of humans in conditional matching to sample by time-out. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 6(4), 589–597. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1963.6-589

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.16 MB

Treatment Integrity Failures during Timeout from Play

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References

Supplementary Material