Enforcing chair timeouts with room timeouts.
Escaping the timeout chair can be stopped just as well with a brief room timeout as with spanking, while keeping the classroom quieter.
01Research in Context
What this study did
The team worked with preschoolers who had different diagnoses. All kids tried to leave the timeout chair.
Each child was randomly assigned to one of two groups. When a child got off the chair, adults either gave a quick spank or walked the child to a small room for a short room timeout.
The study measured how often kids stayed seated and how much they disrupted the class.
What they found
Both tactics stopped chair escapes. Kids sat longer and followed directions better.
Room timeout worked just as well as spanking, but it caused less crying and yelling. The class stayed calmer.
How this fits with other research
Lord et al. (1986) also used rewards and consequences at home. They showed parents can boost exercise with simple contracts. Malott (1988) moves the same idea into school and swaps prizes for timeout.
Miller et al. (2018) used group contests and raffle tickets to lift recess exercise. Their study and Malott (1988) both prove that clear, quick consequences keep kids on task, whether the goal is movement or compliance.
Stichter et al. (2009) screened preschoolers for language issues in the same age range. Their work reminds us to check why a child misbehaves before we pick a timeout plan.
Why it matters
You can stop timeout escapes without spanking. When a child slips off the chair, quietly guide them to a boring room for one or two minutes. Return them to the chair right after. This keeps the lesson moving and keeps your class calm.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Next time a child leaves the timeout chair, walk them to an empty room for 60 seconds, then return them to the chair—no spanking needed.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
Eighteen defiant preschool children were taught to obey maternal chorelike instructions in a clinic analog. Standard Forehand compliance-training procedures (i.e., precise instruction giving, praise, warnings, and chair timeouts) were used. Subjects were assigned to one of two chair-timeout enforcement procedures: spanking (SP) or room timeout (RTO). Children in the SP condition were spanked for refusal to remain on the timeout chair; RTO subjects spent one minute in a barrier-enforced timeout room following escape from the timeout chair. Following SP or RTO enforcement procedures, children were replaced on the timeout chair. Both procedures successfully inhibited escape efforts from the timeout chair. Both procedures were associated with compliance acquisition. Less timeout disruption was associated with the RTO procedure. Behavioral, ethical, practical, and safety issues appear to favor the enforcement of chair timeouts with room timeouts over both traditional room timeouts and chair timeouts enforced by physical punishment.
Behavior modification, 1988 · doi:10.1177/01454455880123003