Reinforcement Rate and Resurgence: A Parametric Analysis

Cançado, Carlos R. X.; Abreu‐Rodrigues, Josele; Aló, Raquel M.

doi:10.5514/rmac.v41.i2.63739

Cited by 18 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Cançado & Lattal, ). Furthermore, the results of Experiment 3 replicated within and across individual sessions results related to the effects of different rates of reinforcement in the Training and Alternative‐Reinforcement phases found when such manipulations occur across successive blocks of sessions (Cançado et al, ; Craig & Shahan, ; Podlesnik & Shahan, 2013).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 58%

Repeated, within‐session resurgence

Cook

Lattal

2019

J Exper Analysis Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Resurgence is a reliable, transient effect that only occasionally is replicated more than once within a single experiment or subject. In the present experiments, within‐session resurgence was generated repeatedly by dividing individual sessions into three phases (Training, Alternative‐Reinforcement, and Resurgence‐Test). In Experiments 1 and 2, resurgence reliably occurred in most of the 22‐30 daily sessions when responding was reinforced on, respectively, fixed‐ and variable‐interval schedules. Resurgence magnitude and duration did decrease across replications for some subjects, but not for others. To examine the utility of the procedure in studying the effects of an independent variable on resurgence, in Experiment 3 the effects of rich and lean baseline and alternative reinforcement rates on resurgence were compared. The target response was eliminated more rapidly, resurgence occurred more often, and usually was greater following rich alternative reinforcement rates. Resurgence was of greater magnitude when the baseline reinforcement rate was relatively lean compared to the alternative reinforcement rate. These experiments provide a reliable method for generating resurgence within individual sessions, instead of across multiple‐session conditions, that can be repeated over many successive sessions.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 58%

Repeated, within‐session resurgence

Cook

Lattal

2019

J Exper Analysis Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Further, though target responding decreased at statistically comparable rates in the groups that experienced low‐rate alternative reinforcement and extinction alone, responding in the low‐rate group was visibly lower than responding in the extinction group early in Phase 2. Second, when alternative reinforcement was suspended, resurgence occurred for the high‐rate alternative‐reinforcement group while slight, but not statistically significant, increases in target responding occurred for the low‐rate group (for similar findings in rats and humans, see Bouton & Trask, ; Cançado, Abreu‐Rodrigues, & Aló, ; Pritchard, Hoerger, Mace, Penney, & Harris, ).…”

mentioning

confidence: 88%

Behavioral momentum theory fails to account for the effects of reinforcement rate on resurgence

Craig

Shahan

2016

J Exper Analysis Behavior

128

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The behavioral-momentum model of resurgence predicts reinforcer rates within a resurgence preparation should have three effects on target behavior. First, higher reinforcer rates in baseline (Phase 1) produce more persistent target behavior during extinction plus alternative reinforcement. Second, higher rate alternative reinforcement during Phase 2 generates greater disruption of target responding during extinction. Finally, higher rates of either reinforcement source should produce greater responding when alternative reinforcement is suspended in Phase 3. Recent empirical reports have produced mixed results in terms of these predictions. Thus, the present experiment further examined reinforcer-rate effects on persistence and resurgence. Rats pressed target levers for high-rate or low-rate variable-interval food during Phase 1. In Phase 2, target-lever pressing was extinguished, an alternative nose-poke became available, and nose-poking produced either high-rate variable-interval, low-rate variable-interval, or no (an extinction control) alternative reinforcement. Alternative reinforcement was suspended in Phase 3. For groups that received no alternative reinforcement, target-lever pressing was less persistent following high-rate than low-rate Phase-1 reinforcement. Target behavior was more persistent with low-rate alternative reinforcement than with high-rate alternative reinforcement or extinction alone. Finally, no differences in Phase-3 responding were observed for groups that received either high-rate or low-rate alternative reinforcement, and resurgence occurred only following high-rate alternative reinforcement. These findings are inconsistent with the momentum-based model of resurgence. We conclude this model mischaracterizes the effects of rein-forcer rates on persistence and resurgence of operant behavior.

show abstract

“…6 above). However, higher Phase-1 reinforcement rates generally appear to increase the persistence of Phase-2 target responding and to generate greater resurgence in Phase 3 when arranged within the component stimuli of multiple schedules of reinforcement (e.g Cançado, Abreu-Rodrigues, & Aló, 2015; Kuroda et al, 2016; Podlesnik and Shahan 2009a; Podlesnik and Shahan, 2010). Why should differential Phase-1 reinforcement rates have one effect in Phase 2 in simple schedules and a different effect in multiple schedules?…”

Section: Multiple Schedules and Momentum-like Effectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Resurgence as Choice

Shahan

Craig

2017

Behavioural Processes

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

Reinforcement Rate and Resurgence: A Parametric Analysis

Cited by 18 publications

References 22 publications

Repeated, within‐session resurgence

Repeated, within‐session resurgence

Behavioral momentum theory fails to account for the effects of reinforcement rate on resurgence

Resurgence as Choice

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About