Children's Perceptions of Time Out and Other Maternal Disciplinary Strategies: The Effects of Clinic Status and Exposure to Behavioural Treatment

Author:

Dadds Mark R.,Adlington Fiona M.,Christensen Alison P.

Abstract

Behaviour therapy is now beginning to assess the social validity, along with efficacy, of its treatments. Literature dealing with the social validity of parent-training programs is reviewed. The aim of this investigation was to obtain acceptability ratings of the “time out” procedure from the perspective of behaviour problem and non-problem children. The study looked at acceptability ratings of five maternal behaviours/disciplinary techniques (permissiveness, physical punishment, directed discussion, quiet time, time out) across four different situations (non-compliance with an initiating instruction, aggression toward others, non-compliance with a terminating instruction, non-compliance with known rule) by samples of clinical (problem behaviour) children and control children. Both groups were alike in rating permissiveness as less acceptable than any of the other behaviours across most situations and rating it as unacceptable in absolute terms. Time out was rated equally acceptable with physical punishment, directed discussion and quiet time. The results support previous findings that young children prefer interventionist to permissive parents, including the use of exclusionary time out. In a second study, ratings were taken from two clinical groups, treatment and waitlist, both at pre- and post-treatment. Despite large individual differences in the treatment group, no change in acceptability ratings was found at post-treatment. Thus, experiencing time out did not change the children's evaluation of this procedure. Possible reasons for these findings and their practical implications are discussed.

Publisher

Cambridge University Press (CUP)

Subject

Clinical Psychology,Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

Cited by 10 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3