Resurgence of Temporal Patterns of Responding

Cançado, Carlos R. X.; Lattal, Kennon A.

doi:10.1901/jeab.2011.95-271

Cited by 34 publications

(34 citation statements)

References 31 publications

(75 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Reed and Morgan (2006) found that when three distinct response sequences were trained in succession, the pattern of behavior that resurged when reinforcement was discontinued for the third and final sequence was most consistent with the first learned sequence. Similarly, Cançado and Lattal (2011) found that the typical scalloping pattern of responding that emerged during initial training on a fixed interval (FI) 5-s schedule itself resurged when alternative reinforcement for a second response was discontinued (Experiment 2). The results of Winterbauer et al (2013), Reed and Morgan (2006), and Cançado and Lattal (2011) all suggest that the behavior that resurges mimics the original response in rate, topography, and temporal characteristics.…”

Section: Basic Features Of Resurgencementioning

confidence: 86%

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: Basic Features Of Resurgencementioning

confidence: 86%

Context Change Explains Resurgence After the Extinction of Operant Behavior

Trask

Schepers

Bouton

2015

RMAC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To our knowledge, no experiment on resurgence has included a spontaneous recovery control that receives another session of the Phase 2 treatment during testing (see Bouton & Schepers, 2014; Cançado & Lattal, 2011; Kincaid, Lattal, & Spence, 2015; Lieving & Lattal, 2003; Schepers & Bouton, 2015; Sweeney & Shahan, 2013a; Winterbauer & Bouton, 2010, 2011, 2012). Our analyses of the results of both experiments indicated that while R1 responding did increase as a function of time between the last two sessions of Phase 2, the crucial differences between the groups that were present during resurgence testing were not present then.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Role of the discriminative properties of the reinforcer in resurgence

Bouton

Trask

2015

Learn Behav

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Three experiments with rat subjects examined the effects of the discriminative effects of reinforcers that were presented during or after operant extinction. Experiments 1 and 2 examined resurgence, in which an extinguished operant response (R1) recovers when a second behavior (R2) that has been reinforced to replace it is also placed on extinction. The results of Experiment 1 suggest that the amount of R1’s resurgence is a decreasing linear function of the interreinforcement interval used during the reinforcement of R2. In Experiment 2, R1 was reinforced with one outcome (O1) and R2 was then reinforced with a second outcome (O2) while R1 was extinguished. In resurgence tests, response-independent (noncontingent) presentations of O2 prevented resurgence of R1, which otherwise occurred when testing was conducted with either no reinforcers or noncontingent presentations of O1. Experiment 3 then examined the effects of noncontingent O1 and O2 presentations after simple extinction in either the presence or absence of noncontingent presentations of O2. Overall, the results are consistent with a role for the discriminative properties of the reinforcer in controlling operant behavior. In resurgence, the reinforcer used during response elimination provides a distinct context that controls inhibition of R1. The results are less consistent with an alternative view emphasizing the disrupting effects of alternative reinforcement.

show abstract

“…Previously reinforced sequences resurged when extinguishing a later-reinforced sequence. Additionally, Cançado and Lattal (2011) demonstrated resurgence of a temporally defined operant. In their experiment, pigeons were trained to emit a positively accelerated pattern of responding, before responses were eliminated with a differential reinforcement of other behavior (DRO) schedule.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Quantitative analysis of local-level resurgence

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Resurgence is the recurrence of a previously reinforced and then extinguished behavior induced by the extinction of another more recently reinforced behavior. Resurgence provides insight into behavioral processes relevant to treatment relapse of a range of problem behaviors. Resurgence is typically studied across three phases: (1) reinforcement of a target response, (2) extinction of the target and concurrent reinforcement of an alternative response, and (3) extinction of the alternative response, resulting in the recurrence of target responding. Because each phase typically occurs successively and spans multiple sessions, extended time frames separate the training and resurgence of target responding. This study assessed resurgence more dynamically and throughout ongoing training in 6 pigeons. Baseline entailed 50-s trials of a freeoperant psychophysical procedure, resembling Phases 1 and 2 of typical resurgence procedures. During the first 25 s, we reinforced target (left-key) responding but not alternative (right-key) responding; contingencies reversed during the second 25 s. Target and alternative responding followed the baseline reinforcement contingencies, with alternative responding replacing target responding across the 50 s. We observed resurgence of target responding during signaled and unsignaled probes that extended trial durations an additional 100 s in extinction. Furthermore, resurgence was greater and/or sooner when probes were signaled, suggesting an important role of discriminating transitions to extinction in resurgence. The data were well described by an extension of a stimulus-control model of discrimination that assumes resurgence is the result of generalization of obtained reinforcers across space and time. Therefore, the present findings introduce novel methods and quantitative analyses for assessing behavioral processes underlying resurgence.

show abstract

Resurgence of Temporal Patterns of Responding

Cited by 34 publications

References 31 publications

Context Change Explains Resurgence After the Extinction of Operant Behavior

Context Change Explains Resurgence After the Extinction of Operant Behavior

Role of the discriminative properties of the reinforcer in resurgence

Quantitative analysis of local-level resurgence

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About