Practitioners' Use and Acceptability of Time-Out.

IF 2.2 3区 医学 Q2 PSYCHIATRY Child Psychiatry & Human Development Pub Date : 2024-12-09 DOI:10.1007/s10578-024-01798-9
Samantha Jugovac, David J Hawes, Lucy A Tully, Dave S Pasalich
{"title":"Practitioners' Use and Acceptability of Time-Out.","authors":"Samantha Jugovac, David J Hawes, Lucy A Tully, Dave S Pasalich","doi":"10.1007/s10578-024-01798-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Time-out is an empirically supported component of parenting interventions for child conduct problems; however, it is receiving increasing criticism among parents and some practitioners. This study aimed to investigate practitioners' use and acceptability of time-out for child conduct problems; examine whether perceived effectiveness and knowledge of evidence-based parameters of time-out implementation influence use and acceptability of time-out; and explore practitioners' perceptions about alternatives to time-out. One hundred and ten Australian and New Zealand practitioners who have worked with children and families completed an online survey investigating their use and acceptability of time-out for children with conduct problems. Results showed that 55.5% of the sample have used timeout, with 38.0% considered current TO users. Acceptability of the strategy varied, with some practitioners critical of time-out. Increased knowledge of evidence-based parameters of time-out implementation was associated with increased frequency of time-out use and acceptability, while perceived effectiveness was associated with increased acceptability only. Practitioners perceived a number of other parenting strategies as effective alternatives to time-out. These findings have important implications for improving practitioners' implementation of time-out with parents of children with conduct problems.</p>","PeriodicalId":10024,"journal":{"name":"Child Psychiatry & Human Development","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Child Psychiatry & Human Development","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10578-024-01798-9","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Time-out is an empirically supported component of parenting interventions for child conduct problems; however, it is receiving increasing criticism among parents and some practitioners. This study aimed to investigate practitioners' use and acceptability of time-out for child conduct problems; examine whether perceived effectiveness and knowledge of evidence-based parameters of time-out implementation influence use and acceptability of time-out; and explore practitioners' perceptions about alternatives to time-out. One hundred and ten Australian and New Zealand practitioners who have worked with children and families completed an online survey investigating their use and acceptability of time-out for children with conduct problems. Results showed that 55.5% of the sample have used timeout, with 38.0% considered current TO users. Acceptability of the strategy varied, with some practitioners critical of time-out. Increased knowledge of evidence-based parameters of time-out implementation was associated with increased frequency of time-out use and acceptability, while perceived effectiveness was associated with increased acceptability only. Practitioners perceived a number of other parenting strategies as effective alternatives to time-out. These findings have important implications for improving practitioners' implementation of time-out with parents of children with conduct problems.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
从业人员对暂停的使用和可接受性。
暂停是针对儿童行为问题的父母干预措施的经验支持组成部分;然而,这种做法在家长和一些从业者中受到越来越多的批评。本研究旨在探讨从业人员对儿童行为问题暂停的使用和可接受性;检查超时执行的感知有效性和对循证参数的了解是否影响超时的使用和可接受性;并探讨从业者对暂停替代方案的看法。110名澳大利亚和新西兰的从业人员与儿童和家庭一起工作,他们完成了一项在线调查,调查他们对有行为问题的儿童使用暂停的情况和可接受性。结果显示55.5%的样本使用过timeout,其中38.0%认为是当前的TO用户。该策略的可接受性各不相同,一些从业者对暂停持批评态度。对超时实施的循证参数了解的增加与超时使用频率和可接受性的增加有关,而感知有效性仅与可接受性的增加有关。从业人员认为,许多其他的育儿策略是有效的替代暂停。这些发现对于提高从业人员对有行为问题儿童的父母实施暂停具有重要意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
3.40%
发文量
174
期刊介绍: Child Psychiatry & Human Development is an interdisciplinary international journal serving the groups represented by child and adolescent psychiatry, clinical child/pediatric/family psychology, pediatrics, social science, and human development. The journal publishes research on diagnosis, assessment, treatment, epidemiology, development, advocacy, training, cultural factors, ethics, policy, and professional issues as related to clinical disorders in children, adolescents, and families. The journal publishes peer-reviewed original empirical research in addition to substantive and theoretical reviews.
期刊最新文献
Generalized Anxiety Disorder Symptoms in Adolescents: The Relative Contribution of Intolerance of Uncertainty and Metacognitive Beliefs. Application of the Minimal Clinically Important Difference to Adolescent Mental Health Interventions: A Case Study for Hopelessness. Self-Control and Perceived Parental Psychological Control? Their Links with Depression and Problematic Mobile Phone Use in Primary School Students. The Accuracy of Temperament Ratings in Late Childhood and Early Adolescence and their Relation to Behavior Problems: An Analysis of Parent, Child, and Teacher Agreement. Youth Irritability as Consequence and Predictor of Family Conflict From Late Childhood to Early Adolescence.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1