Effects of delayed time‐out on problem behavior of preschool children

Abstract

Time‐out is a common negative punishment procedure in home and school settings. Although prior studies have shown time‐out is effective, more research is needed on its effects when implementation is imperfect. We evaluated delays to time‐out with 4 preschool children who engaged in some combination of aggression, property destruction, and rule breaking. Target behavior decreased for all subjects exposed to delayed time‐out, with 3 of 4 subjects displaying low levels of target behavior even when time‐out was delayed by 90‐120 s. These data suggest delayed time‐out might be effective in situations in which a caregiver or teacher cannot implement time‐out immediately.

Knowledge, Practice and Challenges of Special Education Teachers in Managing the Behaviour of Students with Learning Disabilities

“…However, negative reinforcement in the form of time-outs and extinction is also practised by the respondents in order to cultivate desired behaviour and discourage unwanted behaviour. This matches the research of Slocum, Vollmer and Donaldson (2019), which found that behavioural problems can be diminished using negative reinforcement in the form of time-outs. Negative reinforcement can also be used to shift students' behaviour from negative to positive.…”

“…Moreover, the findings of the study found that negative reinforcement practices such as time-out and elimination are also used by special education teachers in managing the behaviour of students with learning disabilities. The findings of this study also have similarities with the findings of a study conducted by Slocum et al (2019) that unwanted student behaviour can be reduced when time-out is applied to students who exhibit unwanted behaviour.…”

Aggression and crying as side effects of time-out.

“…We defined crying as any instance of visible tears, furrowing of the brow, or whining vocalizations. These are the definitions from the published studies as well as in the below (Donaldson & Vollmer, 2011; Donaldson & Vollmer, 2012; Slocum et al, 2019). Time-out began when the participant was being escorted to the time-out area, so aggression that happened before reaching the designated area was considered “during time-out.” Aggression was scored the same in time-in and in time-out.…”

“…Studies evaluating time-out procedures have shown the intervention can successfully reduce challenging behavior (e.g., Burchard & Barrera, 1972; Donaldson & Vollmer, 2011, 2012; Slocum et al, 2019; Wolf et al, 1964). These studies included a broad range of challenging behavior, such as screaming, throwing items, aggression, and breaking toys.…”

“…Likely because of its prevalence, acceptability, and effectiveness, time-out has been examined in the early years of applied behavior analysis (Burchard & Barrera, 1972; Wolf et al, 1964) as well as more recently (Donaldson & Vollmer, 2011, 2012; Donaldson et al, 2013; Slocum et al, 2019). More current literature on time-out has evaluated imperfect implementation of time-out, including schedule thinning (Donaldson & Vollmer, 2012) and delayed time-out (Slocum et al, 2019), because it may not always be feasible for interventionists to use time-out with a high degree of treatment integrity. Across most evaluations of time-out, its effectiveness is evaluated by comparing the level of behavior in time-in from baseline to time-out phases (e.g., Donaldson & Vollmer, 2011).…”