Effects of timeout on a discrimination between fixed-ratio schedules.
Timeout can erase the internal cues that tell learners where they are in a ratio sequence.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Pigeons pecked on two keys. Each key paid off after a fixed number of pecks.
The birds had to learn which key was on FR 50 and which was on FR 100.
After each wrong choice the lights went dark for a short timeout.
What they found
The timeout wiped out the birds' cue control. They dropped to chance accuracy.
The loss showed up mostly on the FR 50 key where cues had been strongest.
How this fits with other research
Bradshaw et al. (1978) found the opposite. In discrete trials, a bright light during timeout helped kids learn faster. The difference is task type. Discrete trials give one clear cue. Continuous ratio work gives many blended cues.
Morris (1987) extends the 1968 finding. Brief timeouts after every response made pigeons vary their pecking. Same tool, different goal: break old patterns instead of losing track of them.
Mintz et al. (1966) set the stage. They showed that visual cues inside a ratio keep errors low. Macphail (1968) shows that timeout can knock those cues out.
Why it matters
If you use timeout to cut problem behavior, watch what happens to the skills tied to that time. A child who loses track of where he is in a work cycle may start guessing. Build in extra cues—cards, counters, or teacher prompts—before and after the break so the learner can re-enter with accuracy.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Add a visual step counter during FR tasks; give timeout if needed, then point to the counter before resuming.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
A discrimination was established between two fixed-ratio schedules of reinforcement. In one, fixed ratio 25, the reinforcer was delivered on the twenty-fifth response; on the other, fixed ratio 50, the fiftieth response was reinforced. In the first component of a chain, either fixed ratio 25 or fixed ratio 50 was randomly programmed on the center key of a three-key pigeon box. Reinforcement of a single peck on the side key was contingent upon discriminating which schedule had just been completed on the center key. During test trials, a timeout was introduced after the first response on fixed ratio 25 and after either the first or twenty sixth response on fixed ratio 50. When the timeout followed the first response on fixed ratio 25 and fixed ratio 50, the accuracy of the discrimination was unaffected. When the timeout followed the first response on fixed ratio 25 and the twenty sixth response on fixed ratio 50, the accuracy of the discrimination decreased rapidly to chance as a function of the duration of the timeout. The loss of discrimination was primarily due to errors after fixed ratio 50 was completed. The timeout appears to weaken the control over the choice response by the response-produced stimuli which preceded the timeout. The results are consistent with the interpretation that the discrimination between fixed ratio 25 and fixed ratio 50 is maintained by chaining of response-produced stimuli within the ratio cycle.
Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior, 1968 · doi:10.1901/jeab.1968.11-129