Effects of Length of Time-Out from Positive Reinforcement and Schedule of Application in Suppression of Aggressive Behavior

Pendergrass, Virginia E.

doi:10.1007/bf03393992

Cited by 47 publications

(37 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Timeout periods, for example, have been used to suppress stuttering (Haroldson, Martin, and Starr, 1968) and aggressive behavior (Allison and Allison, 1971;Bostow and Bailey, 1969;Pendergrass, 1971) in human subjects and to suppress responding maintained by variable-interval (McMillan, 1967;Thomas, 1968), fixed-ratio (Kaufman and Baron, 1968), and differential-reinforcementof-low-rate (Kramer and Rilling, 1969) schedules of food reinforcement in animal subjects. These results support Leitenberg's (1965) conclusion that timeout from positive reinforcement is aversive and suppresses the behavior that produces it.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

EFFECTS OF LICK‐CONTINGENT TIMEOUT ON SCHEDULE‐INDUCED POLYDIPSIA¹

Flory

Lickfett

1974

J Exper Analysis Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rats bar pressing on a 1-min fixed-interval schedule for 45-mg food pellets became polydipsic when water was concurrently available. They were then exposed to conditions in which each lick on the drinking tube produced a timeout period during which the foodschedule lever was retracted and the fixed-interval timer either did or did not continue to operate. Licks occurring within a timeout period extended its duration. As the duration of the lick-initiated timeout period was increased logarithmically through four values from 10 sec to 80 sec, lick rates as well as water intake rates generally decreased for all three subjects. As timeout duration was progressively increased, the rate of licks occurring in the absense of, but producing, timeouts decreased for all three rats, whereas the rate of licks occurring in the presence of timeout periods remained essentially constant. Waterintake rates and, with one exception, lick rates were suppressed more by timeout periods during which the fixed-interval timer did not continue to operate. These results indicate that lick-contingent timeout froni positive reinforcement reduces schedule-induced drinking, and this suppressive effect is greater when the timeout period necessarily increases the interreinforcement interval beyond its minimum duration than when it does not. Schedule-induced polydipsia was first reported by Falk (1961). He found that fooddeprived rats, bar pressing for 45-mg food pellets on a variable-interval 1-min schedule, drank after each pellet to the point of consuming in a 3.2-hr session three to four times their normal 24-hr intake. Schedule-induced polydipsia, which has been observed in mice (Palfai, Kutscher, and Symons, 1971), in monkeys (Schuster and Woods, 1966), in the pigeon (Shanab and Peterson, 1969) as well as in rats, is characterized by a period of drinking that occurs shortly after the ingestion of a food pellet. This typical drinking pattern is observed with fixed or variable schedules whether or not food deliveries are contingent upon the emission of a specific operant response (Falk, 1969(Falk, , 1971 Although it appears to be physiologically maladaptive (Falk, 1971), schedule-induced polydipsia is a relatively strong behavioral phenomenon. Falk (1966a) observed that polydipsia occurred adjunctive to a 60-sec variable-interval food schedule even when water was concurrently available in 0. l-ml portions contingent on responding under a fixed-ratio schedule requiring as many as 50 responses. These results indicate that schedule-induced drinking is not simply a mediating or collateral behavior, but rather is an activity that is sufficiently reinforcing to sustain scheduled behavior. Further indication of the strength of adjunctive drinking behavior was provided by Flory and O'Boyle (1972), who reported that rats, bar pressing for food pellets on a 60-sec fixed-interval schedule, became polydipsic when 0.l-ml portions of water were concurrently available via a second lever on a fixed-ratio 1 basis. The session water intakes of each rat remain...

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

EFFECTS OF LICK‐CONTINGENT TIMEOUT ON SCHEDULE‐INDUCED POLYDIPSIA¹

Flory

Lickfett

1974

J Exper Analysis Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…One possibility is that the ratio of time intervals compared might act on an independent variable. Pendergrass [1971] utilized a 1:4 (5 versus 20 minutes) ratio and found no effect. Similarly, White et a1 [1972] found no effect with a 1:2 ratio (15 versus 30 minutes).…”

Section: Summary and Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Thus far, only three studies [Burchard and Barrera, 1972;Pendergrass, 1971;White et al, 19721 have addressed this area. The use of case study and the ABAB, or some variant, experimental design (baseline, treatment 1, reversal, treatment 2) has dominated contemporary investigations.…”

Section: Benjamin Mamrins and Kupfersmidmentioning

confidence: 99%

The effect of time-out (to) duration on assaultiveness in psychiatrically hospitalized children

1983

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The effect of differential time‐out (TO) durations (15, 30, 45, 60, and 90 minutes) on assaultive behavior for 13 psychiatrically hospitalized children and adolescents was analyzed. For the total sample, no statistically significant difference in assault frequencies was evident. Also evident was the effect of time‐out duration on time taken to become settled: the longer the time‐out given, the longer the time needed to become calm.

show abstract

“…There is no evidence that longer periods of time out are any more effective than shorter periods (Benjamin et al 1983;Freeman et al 1976;Hobbs et al 1978;McGuffin 1991;Pendergrass 1971), and short periods of time out are generally recommended. There is no specific research providing recommendations relation to the time out stimulus or the schedule.…”

Section: How Is Time Out Used Effectively?mentioning

confidence: 96%

Parental Use of Time Out Revisited: A Useful or Harmful Parenting Strategy?

Morawska

Sanders

2010

J Child Fam Stud

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Time out has been widely advocated as an effective parental discipline practice to reduce disruptive and oppositional child behaviour in young children. Despite evidence showing that the procedure is effective when used as part of a comprehensive positive parenting strategy it has not been uniformly accepted and critics have questioned its effectiveness and potentially adverse effects on the parent-child relationship. This paper examines the controversy surrounding the use of time out, discusses the criticisms levelled against it, and concludes that its judicious use in parent training programs is justified and is of benefit to many children with conduct problems. Factors that influence the effectiveness of time out and some contraindications are also discussed.

show abstract

Effects of Length of Time-Out from Positive Reinforcement and Schedule of Application in Suppression of Aggressive Behavior

Cited by 47 publications

References 6 publications

EFFECTS OF LICK‐CONTINGENT TIMEOUT ON SCHEDULE‐INDUCED POLYDIPSIA¹

EFFECTS OF LICK‐CONTINGENT TIMEOUT ON SCHEDULE‐INDUCED POLYDIPSIA¹

The effect of time-out (to) duration on assaultiveness in psychiatrically hospitalized children

Parental Use of Time Out Revisited: A Useful or Harmful Parenting Strategy?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Effects of Length of Time-Out from Positive Reinforcement and Schedule of Application in Suppression of Aggressive Behavior

Cited by 47 publications

References 6 publications

EFFECTS OF LICK‐CONTINGENT TIMEOUT ON SCHEDULE‐INDUCED POLYDIPSIA1

EFFECTS OF LICK‐CONTINGENT TIMEOUT ON SCHEDULE‐INDUCED POLYDIPSIA1

The effect of time-out (to) duration on assaultiveness in psychiatrically hospitalized children

Parental Use of Time Out Revisited: A Useful or Harmful Parenting Strategy?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

EFFECTS OF LICK‐CONTINGENT TIMEOUT ON SCHEDULE‐INDUCED POLYDIPSIA¹

EFFECTS OF LICK‐CONTINGENT TIMEOUT ON SCHEDULE‐INDUCED POLYDIPSIA¹