The Efficacy and Misconceptions of the "Time-out"

Behavior Modification Series

How to cite: Barata, R. (2023). The Efficacy and Misconceptions of the "Time-out". Human-Animal Science.

The "Time-out" procedure, a behavioral intervention rooted in the principles of operant conditioning, is frequently misconstrued and unjustly criticized within the realm of dog training. This technique involves temporarily denying an individual access to positive reinforcers following the exhibition of undesirable behaviors. The primary objective of the time-out procedure is to decrease the frequency of these behaviors over time (Cooper et al., 1987).

There are two primary classifications of time-out strategies: Exclusionary and Nonexclusionary time-out.

• Exclusionary Time-out: This strategy necessitates the physical relocation of the individual from the environment where the undesirable behavior transpired to a separate setting, thereby isolating them from the reinforcing context. For instance, a dog that exhibits behaviors such as jumping on visitors or lunging at food can be addressed using this approach. Upon the manifestation of the unwanted behavior, the dog is relocated to a designated tranquil area for a brief duration, limiting its access to the reinforcing stimuli present in the original environment.

• Nonexclusionary Time-out: Contrarily, this approach maintains the individual's physical presence within the environment but restricts their access to positive reinforcers. This is typically executed by withholding the reinforcers that sustain the problematic behavior while keeping the individual in the same setting. For example, this strategy is employed if a cat engages in behaviors like scratching furniture or displaying agitation during feeding. The cat is guided towards a more suitable alternative, and access to the reinforcing behavior is momentarily curtailed. The cat remains in the same setting but is deterred from indulging in the problematic behavior.

Applying the time-out procedure results in a notable reduction in the frequency of undesirable behaviors. A supplementary strategy is differential reinforcement, which focuses on enhancing the frequency of alternative behaviors that can replace the problematic ones. Techniques such as differential reinforcement of alternative behavior (DRA) and other behavior (DRO) can be employed. While DRA provides positive reinforcement for the exhibition of desired behaviors, DRO offers reinforcement contingent upon the non-occurrence of the undesirable behavior. Concurrently, the undesirable behavior undergoes extinction.

Considering that the time-out procedure is predicated on eliminating access to positive reinforcers linked with specific behaviors, it is imperative to offset this by devising methods to access positive reinforcement through techniques like DRA, DRO, or Noncontingent Reinforcement (NCR). By establishing alternative channels for individuals to obtain reinforcement, the allure of the undesirable behavior is weakened.

Time-out is especially potent when addressing behaviors maintained by positive reinforcement, which could arise from social interactions or tangible reinforcers. Temporarily revoking access to these reinforcing stimuli reduces the likelihood of the problematic behavior manifesting. The efficacy of time-out is contingent on the contrasting characteristics of the time-in and time-out environments. The time-in environment should be replete with reinforcing activities or interactions for optimal results. Transitioning an individual from this environment constitutes a time-out from positive reinforcement only if the time-in environment is inherently reinforcing and the time-out environment is neutral or less appealing (Solnick et al., 1977). This highlights the significance of a meticulously curated environment for the success of the time-out procedure.

Conclusion

When applied judiciously in animal training, the time-out procedure is a powerful tool to modify unwanted behaviors. The distinction between Exclusionary and Nonexclusionary time-out strategies offers trainers flexibility, allowing them to tailor interventions based on the animal's specific needs. While the procedure has been subject to misconceptions and criticisms, empirical studies underscore its efficacy in behavior modification. As with all behavioral interventions, the key lies in understanding the nuances of the technique, ensuring the animal's welfare, and applying it consistently and informally. The referenced studies further emphasize the importance of continuous research and adaptation in animal training to achieve optimal outcomes.

References

Cooper, J. O., Heron, T. E., & Heward, W. L. (1987). Applied behavior analysis. Columbus, OH: Merrill. 

Solnick, J. V., Rincover, A., & Peterson, C. R. (1977). Some determinants of the reinforcing and punishing effects of time-out. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 10, 415–424.