The Effectiveness of Time-Out in Reducing Maladaptive Behavior of Autistic and Retarded Children

Husted, John; Hall, Patricia; Agin, Bill

doi:10.1080/00223980.1971.9921310

Cited by 9 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Numerous other studies have questioned the routine use of time-out as a training procedure with autistic and/or retarded children. Generally, they have demonstrated that it is of extremely limited training value with this population and is a poor use of valuable training time (Husted, Hall, and Agin 1971;Martin 1975;Plummer, Baer, and LeBlanc 1977).…”

Section: Special Behavioral/educationalmentioning

confidence: 99%

Infantile Autism Reviewed: A Decade of Research

DeMyer¹,

Hingtgen²,

Jackson³

1981

Schizophrenia Bulletin

315

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Progress in the study of infantile autism over the past 10 years was reviewed in terms of classification and diagnosis, relation to other disorders, demographics, parental characteristics, genetics, intelligence, language, perceptual processes, behavioral characteristics, neurobiological, biochemical and pharmacological aspects, behavioral/educational treatment methodologies, prognosis, and theoretical considerations. This decade's research led to the now generally accepted position that infantile autism is a type of developmental disorder accompanied by severe and, to a large extent, permanent intellectual/behavioral deficits. However, its relationship to other forms of developmental disorders and to mental retardation remains to be delineated. Perceptual/cognitive/language defects appear central to the autistic syndrome, but the specific underlying mechanisms are unknown. Most studies indicate that autistic children have more signs of brain dysfunction than do normal children and about the same number as mentally retarded children. The overwhelming evidence suggests that te treatment of choice for maximal benefit to autistic children is a systematic, intrusive behavioral/educational approach. Yet, in spite of significant gains in almost all children treated, the typical prognostic picture is poor in terms of achieving self-supportive adulthood. The parents of autistic children have been found to be essentially similar to parents of children with organic brain disorders, and manifest no psychopathology which conceivably could induce the disorder. The vast majority of theoretical articles appearing in the 1970s proposed some from of neurobiological defect as the causative factor in autism. One of the major goals for future research is to undertake more extensive comparative studies on nonautistic brain dysfunctional children and autistic children that could yield cleared differential behavioral profiles and testable neurobiological hypotheses.

show abstract

Section: Special Behavioral/educationalmentioning

confidence: 99%

Infantile Autism Reviewed: A Decade of Research

DeMyer¹,

Hingtgen²,

Jackson³

1981

Schizophrenia Bulletin

315

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Finally, timeout may be ineffective where it allows escape from a stressful or demanding learning situation (Foxx, 1976a, b). Building on the work and suggestions of other investigators such as Glavin (1974), Husted, Hall, and Agin (1971), LeBlanc, Busby, and Thomson (1974), Porterfield, Herbert-Jackson, and Risley (1976), and Spitalnik and Drabman (1976), the present research sought to develop a nonexclusionary timeout procedure that would be effective, humane, and acceptable for use in most applied programs, thereby overcoming the above concerns. The procedure was applied in a special-education classroom.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

THE TIMEOUT RIBBON: A NONEXCLUSIONARY TIMEOUT PROCEDURE¹

Foxx

Shapiro

1978

J of App Behav Analysis

112

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recently, the use of timeout rooms has been questioned by various agencies, and some have adopted policies that prohibit or greatly restrict exclusionary timeout. The present study developed a timeout procedure that did not require removal of the misbehaver from the learning environment. The procedure was applied to the disruptive behaviors of five severely retarded children in an institutional special-education classroom. An observer prompted all teacher behaviors related to the procedures to assure their precise implementation. After baseline, a reinforcement-only condition was implemented. Each child was given a different colored ribbon to wear as a tie and received edibles and praise every few minutes for good behavior and for wearing the ribbon. When timeout was added, a child's ribbon was removed for any instance of misbehavior and teacher attention and participation in activities ceased for three minutes or until the misbehavior stopped. Reinforcement continued at other times for appropriate behavior. An ABCBC reversal design was used to demonstrate control of the behavior by the conditions applied. On average, the children misbehaved 42% and 32% of the time during the baseline and reinforcement conditions respectively but only 6% of the time during the timeout conditions. A followup probe during the new school year revealed that the teacher was able to conduct the procedure independently and that the children's disruptive behaviors were maintained at low levels. The practicality and acceptability of the procedure were supported further by the successful implementation of the procedure by a teacher in another state and by responses to a questionnaire given to 40 mental health professionals. The ribbon procedure appears to be a viable form of timeout, provided that disruptive behaviors during timeout can be tolerated within the setting, or a backup procedure such as exclusionary timeout is available when needed.

show abstract

“…Contingent removal of reinforcement is regarded as a preferred punishment procedure by many clinicians because a physically painful stimulus is not required (Johnston, 1972) and the techniques are readily taught to paraprofessionals (Davison, 1964(Davison, , 1965Laws, Brown, Epstein, & Hocking, 1971) and parents (Barrett, 1969;Nordquist & Wahler, 1973;Wahler, 1969). As a result of its ease of administration and low aversiveness, contingent removal of reinforcement alone or in combination with DRO has been applied to a wide range of problem behaviors including self-stimulation (Greene, Hoats, & Hornick, 1970;Fendergrass, 1972), SIB (Adams, Klinge, & Keiser, 1973;Anderson, Herrman, Alpert, & Dancis, 1975;Brawley et al, 1969, Hamilton, Stephens, & Allen, 1967Harmatz & Rasmussen, 1969;Husted, Hall, & Agin, 1971; J. J. Myers & Deibert, 1971;Wolf, Risley," Johnston, Harris, & Allen, 1967), and aggressive behaviors (Bostow & Bailey, 1969;Drabman & Spitalnik, 1973;Hawkins, Peterson, Schweid, & Bijou, 1966;Husted et al, 1971;Sachs, 1973;Vukelich & Hake, 1971).…”

Section: Contingent Removal Of Reinforcementmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As a result of its ease of administration and low aversiveness, contingent removal of reinforcement alone or in combination with DRO has been applied to a wide range of problem behaviors including self-stimulation (Greene, Hoats, & Hornick, 1970;Fendergrass, 1972), SIB (Adams, Klinge, & Keiser, 1973;Anderson, Herrman, Alpert, & Dancis, 1975;Brawley et al, 1969, Hamilton, Stephens, & Allen, 1967Harmatz & Rasmussen, 1969;Husted, Hall, & Agin, 1971; J. J. Myers & Deibert, 1971;Wolf, Risley," Johnston, Harris, & Allen, 1967), and aggressive behaviors (Bostow & Bailey, 1969;Drabman & Spitalnik, 1973;Hawkins, Peterson, Schweid, & Bijou, 1966;Husted et al, 1971;Sachs, 1973;Vukelich & Hake, 1971). In general, contingent removal of reinforcement has proved moderately effective in treating self-stimulation and aggression but has been of more limited value in dealing with severe SIB.…”

Section: Contingent Removal Of Reinforcementmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Contingent removal of reinforcement has also been used effectively with retarded or autistic patients to reduce inapprorpiate eating (Barton, Guess, Garcia, & Baer, 1970;Edwards & Lilly, 1966;, tantrums, sleeping and eating problems (Wolf, Risley, & Mees, 1964), escape from living quarters (Husted et al, 1971), out-of-seat behavior on a bus (Ritschl, Mongrella, & Presbie, 1972), verbal jargon (McReynolds, 1969, obscene speech (Lahey, McNees, & McNees, 1973), crying (Stark, Meisel, & Wright, 1969;Zimmerman & Zimmerman, 1962), bowel control (Barrett, 1969), and inappropriate attention seeking (Wiesen & Watson, 1967).…”

Section: Contingent Removal Of Reinforcementmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Behavioral suppression of seriously disruptive behavior in psychotic and retarded patients: A review of punishment and its alternatives.

Harris

Ersner-Hershfield²

1978

Psychological Bulletin

100

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The use of punishment procedures to suppress seriously disruptive behavior has generated considerable controversy. Differential reinforcement of behaviors incompatible with disruptive behavior is attractive to many because it does not involve aversive procedures. Unfortunately, differential reinforcement has shown mixed results and may be effective only when combined with other procedures. Contingent removal of reinforcement (time-out) has been found moderately effective for dealing with self-stimulation and aggression but is of more limited value in treating severe self-injury. Overcorrection also has a beneficial effect on a variety of serious management problems. Electric shock, the most controversial procedure reviewed here, has been the focus of considerable debate but may have value under certain conditions. Research on generalization, maintenance, and side effects attached to these various procedures is reviewed, and ethical issues are examined.

show abstract

The Effectiveness of Time-Out in Reducing Maladaptive Behavior of Autistic and Retarded Children

Cited by 9 publications

References 6 publications

Infantile Autism Reviewed: A Decade of Research

Infantile Autism Reviewed: A Decade of Research

THE TIMEOUT RIBBON: A NONEXCLUSIONARY TIMEOUT PROCEDURE¹

Behavioral suppression of seriously disruptive behavior in psychotic and retarded patients: A review of punishment and its alternatives.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

The Effectiveness of Time-Out in Reducing Maladaptive Behavior of Autistic and Retarded Children

Cited by 9 publications

References 6 publications

Infantile Autism Reviewed: A Decade of Research

Infantile Autism Reviewed: A Decade of Research

THE TIMEOUT RIBBON: A NONEXCLUSIONARY TIMEOUT PROCEDURE1

Behavioral suppression of seriously disruptive behavior in psychotic and retarded patients: A review of punishment and its alternatives.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

THE TIMEOUT RIBBON: A NONEXCLUSIONARY TIMEOUT PROCEDURE¹