"He called it a 'time out.' Exhaustive experiments conducted by Dr. Staats (rhymes with 'spots') and his collaborators found that removing a child from the scene of improper behavior, and whatever had provoked it, ingrained an emotional connection with self-control and was preferable to punishment. As a bonus, it gave frustrated parents a short break. Dr. Staats emphasized that children needed to be warned of the consequences of their behavior in advance, and that the 'time out' tactic had to be applied consistently and within the context of a positive relationship between parent and child....."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
6 comments:
Amadeus 48 writes: "Is Staats being given credit for the standard punishment of “Go stand in the corner”? My parents did that to us from 1948 forward. Not much achievement here, I’d say."
I think the idea is that it was one of the "more or less random" punishments and he tested it and elevated it above the other choices — scolding and spanking, etc. — and he gave it a memorable name, which helped sell it.
I think a big part of the idea, which is an achievement if it worked, was selling it to people who were relying on yelling at their kids or hitting them. Notice that "His experiments, he wrote, demonstrated... that a child’s IQ can be improved." I think he was trying to break the chain of poor cognition found in families with a tradition of controlling children with physical and verbal abuse.
Probably, your family had a different tradition and was already doing pretty well. They could figure things out for themselves and didn't need that catchy phrase "time out."
Let me add that the phrase "time out" always bothered me, I guess because I didn't like that everyone was suddenly using a vogue phrase to say something that had existed without that label before. I associated it with sports, and in sports you call a time out for yourself when you think it's to your advantage to break up the play. It's not a punishment.
But now I see that the one who's calling the time out really does want and need the break. It's the parent who needs a break in the play so that he or she does not make things worse by abusing the child physically or verbally. The break should also help the child get some composure, but the term "time out" conveys the idea that the parent can and should call for a break so that she or he can be a better parent.
Scott writes:
I see "time out" as a short-term "social isolation" that can be more damaging to the child's psychology than a quick swat on the butt (significant physical abuse is a different matter). What is worse for a child, to think that if he misbehaves, he will get a short physical punishment, or to think that if he misbehaves, he will be cut off from contact with his parents and other family members.
Look back at your post on "the silent treatment." https://althouse.blogspot.com/2021/03/kipling-williams-has-studied-effects-of.html
Also, looking around at the increasing mental health problems of young people, I'd posit that then entire post-WWII field of child psychology was a incalcuably damaging mistake.
Jim writes:
"On the "time out" post - we used it quite successfully when one of our kids was experiencing a grand mal tantrum in a store (usually the grocery). Only took a couple of times and the behavior ceased. The shock on the faces of our babies that we would do something like that was priceless."
Bart writes:
Raising a couple of delightfully strong-willed boys, now nearly 50, in Canada, I had never heard of "time out" but we all knew about the hockey penalty box. When things got out of hand they'd have to go sit in a chair at the far end of my L-shaped office. I kept it playful by calling the most similar hockey equivalent on them.
They got spanked when little and pre-rational, but only as a slightly painful reminder: After about 8 yo, never, but by then they followed hockey. After about 10 yo the penalty box gradually disappeared and we simply discussed matters, first as guidance, but increasingly as adults.
My point is that there's a rather narrow age-span for which "time-out" makes any real sense. A 3 yo cannot understand, and (s)he cannot make any sort of rational connection. If you have to give a 13 yo a "time out" ... there are more serious parental problems than whatever was the triggering incident.
Tim writes:
I think Dr. Staats made a common mistake. He mistook the best method of punishment for his child for the best method of punishment for all children. What works for one child will not work the same way for a different child. Some children respond better to other forms of punishment, including in some cases corporal punishment. Raising a child (I and my wife, mostly my wife, have raised two) and what worked well for the oldest didn't work well for the youngest, and vice versa. And different kinds and levels of punishment were necessary for different misbehaviors. Children are not some monolithic organism, they are distinct individuals starting right from the beginning.
Post a Comment