Effects of incorrect or partial implementation (poor treatment integrity) on response cost are largely unknown. We evaluated reduced treatment integrity during response cost on rates of 2 concurrently available responses. College students earned points by clicking on either a black circle or a red circle on a computer screen. Experiment 1 compared 2 types of treatment-integrity failures (omission and commission errors) across 2 levels of integrity (20% and 50%). Compared to 100% integrity conditions, omission errors did not suppress responding to the same extent, and commission errors reduced target responding but also decreased rates of alternative behavior. Experiment 2 compared the effects of 20% and 50% omission errors within subjects. Implementation at 50% integrity adequately suppressed responding, but treatment effects were lost at 20% integrity. There may be a critical level at which response cost must be implemented to suppress responding, which has important implications for application.

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.

No abstract

No abstract

Evaluating Treatment Integrity Failures during Timeout from Play Apral P. Foreman Timeout is an effective behavior-reduction strategy with considerable generality. There are several recommendations about how to implement timeout. However, little research has investigated how timeout is implemented under natural conditions, or how timeoutimplementation errors impact its effectiveness. Thus, our study attempted to address two aims. The first aim was to observe how teachers implemented timeout with their students. To address this aim (Experiment 1), we completed naturalistic observations of teachers who were implementing timeout during play. We collected data on how frequently the teachers implemented timeout following problem behavior (omission integrity), and how frequently teachers implemented timeout following responses not targeted for timeout (commission integrity). Experiment 1 data showed that teachers rarely implemented timeout; when the teachers did implement timeout, they often did not follow the timeout parameters specified initially. The second aim was to evaluate what effects inconsistent timeout implementation has on student behavior. To address this aim (Experiment 2), we evaluated the effects of inconsistent timeout on rates of problem behavior. Specifically, we used a reversal design to compare implementation of timeout at 0%, 100%, and reduced integrity (e.g., 11% integrity). The specific level of integrity implemented during the reduced-integrity phases was based upon the omission integrity observed for each student during Experiment 1. The data from Experiment 2 showed that timeout implemented with high integrity decreased problem behavior for two of four students. For one student, reduced-integrity implementation also decreased problem behavior. Due to low rates of problem behavior and participant attrition, three of four participants did not complete Experiment 2. Although our conclusions are limited, these data allowed us to make clinical recommendations about how the teachers should implement timeout with their students. Our results also have important implications for the application of timeout in schools and for future research.