Behavioral Momentum and Resistance to Change

Craig, Andrew R.; Nevin, John A.; Odum, Amy L.

doi:10.1002/9781118468135.ch11

Cited by 36 publications

(62 citation statements)

References 51 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Similar results have been produced using qualitatively different reinforcers to strengthen stimulus-reinforcer correlations in the stimulus (milk delivered freely during a stimulus that signaled lever pressing for food, Grimes & Shull, 2001; food delivered freely during a context that signaled lever pressing would be reinforced with ethanol, Shahan & Burke, 2004). The results thus suggest that persistence of behavior might be a function of how much overall reinforcement occurs in a certain stimulus or context (Craig, et al, 2014), regardless of the reinforcer type.…”

Section: Theories Of Resurgencementioning

confidence: 90%

“…Behavioral momentum theory suggests that response rate and resistance to change are two separable aspects of an operant behavior. While response rate is governed by the strength of the response–reinforcer correlation, resistance to change is theoretically determined by the strength of the stimulus–reinforcer correlation (Craig, Nevin, & Odum, 2014). Most research on behavioral momentum has studied responding in multiple schedules in which nonhuman animals are trained within the same session to make two responses (usually with different reinforcement rates) in the presence of two different discriminative stimuli (e.g., colored key lights).…”

Section: Theories Of Resurgencementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Context Change Explains Resurgence After the Extinction of Operant Behavior

Trask

Schepers

Bouton

2015

RMAC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Extinguished operant behavior can return or "resurge" when a response that has replaced it is also extinguished. Typically studied in nonhuman animals, the resurgence effect may provide insight into relapse that is seen when reinforcement is discontinued following human contingency management (CM) and functional communication training (FCT) treatments, which both involve reinforcing alternative behaviors to reduce behavioral excess. Although the variables that affect resurgence have been studied for some time, the mechanisms through which they promote relapse are still debated. We discuss three explanations of resurgence (response prevention, an extension of behavioral momentum theory, and an account emphasizing context change) as well as studies that evaluate them. Several new findings from our laboratory concerning the effects of different temporal distributions of the reinforcer during response elimination and the effects of manipulating qualitative features of the reinforcer pose a particular challenge to the momentumbased model. Overall, the results are consistent with a contextual account of resurgence, which emphasizes that reinforcers presented during response elimination have a discriminative role controlling behavioral inhibition. Changing the "reinforcer context" at the start of testing produces relapse if the organism has not learned to suppress its responding under conditions similar to the ones that prevail during testing.Operant behavior has been an important focus of laboratory research for many decades because it provides a model for studying the variables that control voluntary behavior. In a typical study of operant behavior, animals such as rats learn to perform a response (e.g., a lever press or chain pull) to receive an outcome (such as a food reinforcer). Although the animal is free to do whatever it "wants" during a session, it can be shown that the rate of its behavior is lawfully related to its consequences. Indeed, once the response has been acquired, it can be reduced through a process known as extinction, in which the reinforcer or outcome is no longer produced by that response. Extinction is a well-known and popular method for reducing behavioral excesses. However, behavior that has been reduced through extinction is prone to recovery and relapse (see , for one review). Therefore, the suppression of operant responding that occurs when reinforcers are omitted should not be taken as evidence that the original learning has been erased or unlearned.

show abstract

Section: Theories Of Resurgencementioning

confidence: 90%

Section: Theories Of Resurgencementioning

confidence: 99%

Context Change Explains Resurgence After the Extinction of Operant Behavior

Trask

Schepers

Bouton

2015

RMAC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Thus, although the Behavioral Momentum-Based theory of resurgence has been useful for generating research and for providing a broader theoretical context in which to frame resurgence, the problems with the core theoretical assumptions of the model, its empirical failings, and more general empirical problems for Behavioral Momentum Theory in general (see Craig et al, 2014 for review) suggest that an alternative approach may be more useful in generating a viable quantitative theory of resurgence. This conclusion is bolstered by the fact that the theory as developed thus far is only applicable to extinction-induced resurgence, and thus fails to provide insights into resurgence in the broader sense described in the Introduction section above.…”

Section: Behavioral Momentum Theory Of Resurgencementioning

confidence: 99%

Resurgence as Choice

Shahan

Craig

2017

Behavioural Processes

Self Cite

113

129

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Resurgence is typically defined as an increase in a previously extinguished target behavior when a more recently reinforced alternative behavior is later extinguished. Some treatments of the phenomenon have suggested that it might also extend to circumstances where either the historic or more recently reinforced behavior is reduced by other non-extinction related means (e.g., punishment, decreases in reinforcement rate, satiation, etc.). Here we present a theory of resurgence suggesting that the phenomenon results from the same basic processes governing choice. In its most general form, the theory suggests that resurgence results from changes in the allocation of target behavior driven by changes in the values of the target and alternative options across time. Specifically, resurgence occurs when there is an increase in the relative value of an historically effective target option as a result of a subsequent devaluation of a more recently effective alternative option. We develop a more specific quantitative model of how extinction of the target and alternative responses in a typical resurgence paradigm might produce such changes in relative value across time using a temporal weighting rule. The example model does a good job in accounting for the effects of reinforcement rate and related manipulations on resurgence in simple schedules where Behavioral Momentum Theory has failed. We also discuss how the general theory might be extended to other parameters of reinforcement (e.g., magnitude, quality), other means to suppress target or alternative behavior (e.g., satiation, punishment, differential reinforcement of other behavior), and other factors (e.g., non-contingent versus contingent alternative reinforcement, serial alternative reinforcement, and multiple schedules).

show abstract

“…In addition, similar results have been obtained with reinforcers that are the same as or different from those maintaining target behavior. For summaries and reviews see Craig, Nevin, & Odum (2014); Dube, Ahearn, Lionello-DeNolf & McIlvane (2009); Nevin & Wacker (2013).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Role of Contingencies and Stimuli in a Human Laboratory Model of Treatment of Problem Behavior

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Behavioral momentum theory posits a paradoxical implication for behavioral interventions in clinical situations using Differential Reinforcement of Alternative Behavior (DRA): When alternative reinforcers are presented within the same context as the problem behavior, the added reinforcers may decrease the frequency of the behavior but also increase its persistence when the intervention ends. Providing alternative reinforcers in a setting that is distinctively different from that in which the target behavior occurs may avoid or reduce this increase in persistence. The present experiment compared behavioral persistence following standard DRA versus DRA in a different context that was available after refraining from target behavior (Differential Reinforcement of Other Behavior, DRO). We arranged a human laboratory model of treatment intervention using computer games and token reinforcement. Participants were five individuals with intellectual disabilities. Experimental phases included (a) an initial multiple-schedule baseline with token reinforcement for target behaviors A and B, (b) an intervention phase with alternative reinforcement using a conventional DRA procedure for A and a DRO-DRA procedure for B, and (c) an extinction phase with no interventions and no tokens. Response rates as proportion of baseline in the initial extinction phase were greater for A than for B for three of five participants. Four participants whose response rates remained relatively high during the extinction phase then received a second extinction-plus-distraction test with leisure items available. Response rates were greater for A than for B in three of four participants. The results indicate that DRO-DRA contingencies may contribute to reduced post-intervention persistence of problem behavior.

show abstract

Behavioral Momentum and Resistance to Change

Cited by 36 publications

References 51 publications

Context Change Explains Resurgence After the Extinction of Operant Behavior

Context Change Explains Resurgence After the Extinction of Operant Behavior

Resurgence as Choice

The Role of Contingencies and Stimuli in a Human Laboratory Model of Treatment of Problem Behavior

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About