Resurgence following differential reinforcement of alternative behavior implemented with and without extinction

Abstract

In the clinic, differential reinforcement of alternative behavior (DRA) often involves programming extinction for destructive behavior while reinforcing an alternative form of communication (e.g., a functional communication response); however, implementing extinction can be unsafe or impractical under some circumstances. Quantitative theories of resurgence (i.e., Behavioral Momentum Theory and Resurgence as Choice) predict differences in the efficacy of treatments that do and do not involve extinction of target responding when reinforcement conditions maintaining alternative responding worsen. We tested these predictions by examining resurgence following two DRA conditions in which we equated rates of reinforcement. In DRA without extinction, target and alternative behavior produced reinforcement. In DRA with extinction plus noncontingent reinforcement, only alternative behavior produced reinforcement. We conducted this study in a reverse‐translation sequence, first with participants who engaged in destructive behavior (Experiment 1) and then in a laboratory setting with rats (Experiment 2). Across both experiments, we observed proportionally lower levels of target responding during and following the DRA condition that arranged extinction for the target response. However, levels of resurgence were similar following both arrangements.

Using Chained or Tandem Schedules With Functional Communication Training: A Systematic Review

“…Our resurgence findings also have important implications for research. While other studies have mitigated resurgence in clinical settings using schedule-correlated stimuli (Fisher et al, 2020) and extinction (Brown et al, 2020), we did not find significant differences in resurgence between chained and tandem schedules or between the use of extinction and reinforcement for problem behavior. Relatively small sample sizes may have contributed to nonsignificant findings.…”

Resurgence following traditional and interdependent differential reinforcement of alternative behavior.

“…For example, if researchers focus primarily on demonstrating precise experimental control over every variable under sterile laboratory conditions, the results may fall short in regard to the ecological validity of the findings. On the other hand, if researchers focus primarily on ecological validity (e.g., by conducting observations in the natural environment but without methodological rigor), they may need well-controlled basic research to support their observational findings (e.g., Brown, et al, 2020). Thus, as translational work continues to increase, it is important for applied and basic researchers to continue to collaborate and coordinate bidirectional translational research.…”

Destructive behavior increases as a function of reductions in alternative reinforcement during schedule thinning: A retrospective quantitative analysis

“…Increased interest in the resurgence of destructive behavior has brought about a flurry of recent investigations on the prevalence, magnitude, and persistence of resurgence as it occurs in practice, as well as methods for mitigating such deleterious effects (Briggs et al, 2018;Brown et al, 2020;Fisher et al, 2018Fisher et al, , 2019Fisher et al, , 2020Fuhrman et al, 2016;Greer et al, 2020;Mitteer et al, in press;Muething et al, 2021). Studies on the prevalence of resurgence of destructive behavior during reinforcement schedule thinning have shown the phenomenon to be quite common.…”