The use of timeout procedures by teachers of behaviorally disordered students has received widespread attention in the literature. Research has been conducted, and opinion papers written suggesting guidelines and appropriate use of this intervention. The actual “state of practice”, however, has not been as thoroughly assessed. This study used a questionnaire to ask teachers of behaviorally disordered students if they used timeout procedures, and if so, to describe some of the parameters of that usage. Results are discussed and suggestions offered for improving the current practice.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AlbertoP. A., & TroutmanA. C. (1982). Applied behavior analysis for teachers.Columbus, OH: Merrill.
2.
AxelrodS. (1983). Behavior modification for the classroom teacher.New York: McGraw Hill.
3.
BartonL. E., BrulleA. R., & ReppA. C. (1983). Aversive techniques and the doctrine of least restrictive alternative.Exceptional Education Quarterly, 3, 1–7.
4.
BrantnerJ. P., & DohertyM. A. (1983). A review of timeout: A conceptual and methodological analysis. In AxelrodS., & ApscheJ. (Eds.), The effects of punishment on human behavior (pp. 87–132). New York: Academic.
ElliottS. N., WittJ. C., GalvinG. A., & PetersonR. (1984). Acceptability of positive and reductive behavioral interventions: Factors that influence teachers' decisions.Journal of School Psychology, 22, 353–360.
7.
FoxxR. M., & ShapiroS. T. (1978). The timeout ribbon: A nonexclusionary timeout procedure.Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 11, 125–136.
8.
GastD. L., & NelsonC. M. (1977). Legal and ethical considerations for the use of timeout in special education settings.Journal of Special Education, 11, 457–467.
9.
HallR. V., & HallM. C. (1980). How to use timeout.Lawrence, KS: H & H Enterprises.
10.
HarrisK. (1982). Cognitive-behavior modification: Application with exceptional students.Focus on Exceptional Children, 15, 1–16.
11.
HarrisK. (1985). Definitional, parametric, and procedural considerations in timeout interventions and research.Exceptional Children, 51, 279–288.
12.
HarrisS. L., & Ersner-HershfieldR. (1978). Behavioral suppression of seriously disruptive behaviors in psychotic and retarded patients: A review of punishment and its alternatives.Psychological Bulletin, 85, 1352–1375.
13.
KazdinA. E. (1980). Acceptability of alternative treatments for deviant child behavior.Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 13, 259–273.
14.
McDowellR. L., AdamsonG. W., & WoodF. H. (1982). Teaching emotional disturbed children.Boston: Little, Brown.
15.
NelsonC. M., & RutherfordR. B. (1983). Timeout revisited: Guidelines for its use in special education.Exceptional Education Quarterly, 3, 56–67.
16.
RutherfordR. B., & NelsonC. M. (1982). Analysis of the response-contingent timeout literature with behaviorally disordered students in classroom settings. In RutherfordR. B. (Ed.), Severe behavior disorders of children and youth (Vol. 5, pp. 79–105). Reston, VA: Council for Children with Behavioral Disorders.
17.
WhiteG. D., NielsonG., & JohnsonS. M. (1972). Timeout duration and the suppression of deviant behavior in children.Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 5, 114–120.
18.
WoodF. H., & BraatenS. (1983). Developing guidelines for the use of punishing interventions in the schools.Exceptional Education Quarterly, 3, 68–75.
19.
WoodF. H., & LakinK. C. (Eds.). (1978). Punishment and aversive stimulation in special education.Reston, VA: Council for Exceptional Children.
20.
ZabelR. H. (in press). Preparation of teachers for behaviorally disordered students: A review of the literature. In WangM. C., ReynoldsM. C., & WalbergH. J. (Eds.), The handbook of special education: Research and practice (Vol. 2). Oxford, England: Pergamon.
