The effect of mindfulness on extinction and behavioral resurgence

Abstract

In the present experiments, we investigated the effects of mindfulness on behavioral extinction and resurgence. Participants received instrumental training; either they received FI training (Experiment 1), or they were trained to emit high rates and low rates of response via exposure to a multiple VR yoked-VI schedule prior to exposure to a multiple FI FI schedule in order to alter their rates of responding learned during Experiment 2. Participants were then exposed to either a focused-(mindfulness) or an unfocused-attention induction task. All participants were finally exposed to an extinction schedule in order to determine whether a mindfulness induction task presented immediately prior to extinction training affected extinction (Experiment 1) and behavioral resurgence (Experiment 2). During the extinction phase, the rates of responding were higher in the control group than in the mindfulness group, indicating that the mindfulness group was more sensitive to the contingencies and, thus, their prior performance extinguished more readily (Experiment 1). Moreover, rates of response in the extinction components less precisely reflected previous training in the mindfulness group, suggesting less resurgence of past behaviors after the mindfulness induction (Experiment 2).Keywords Operant conditioning . Schedule of reinforcement . Human learning Human behavior maintained by schedules of reinforcement has sometimes been found to be insensitive to the contingencies that are in operation, and this finding is sometimes related to behavior being under the control of previously established verbal rules, rather than the currently operating reinforcement contingencies themselves (e.g

Mindfulness Training Disrupts Pavlovian Conditioning

“…Mindfulness training may be one method of increasing volitional control over habitual, automatized responding. Our results, in conjunction with strong theoretical support (Deikman, 1966;Garland et al, 2015;Hölzel et al, 2011) and associated empirical evidence (Kirk & Montague, 2015;McHugh et al, 2012;Stillman et al, 2014;Whitmarsh et al, 2013), indicate that mindfulness meditation training disrupts conditioned behavior. Results from the present study further justify the use of mindfulness as a clinical intervention and may have far-reaching implications.…”

Resurgence of target responding does not exceed increases in inactive responding in a forced-choice alternative reinforcement procedure in humans

“…Dixon and Hayes (1998) instructed participants that there were two possible responses, repeating a pattern of movements of a circle, or moving the circle in different patterns. Similarly, McHugh et al (2012, p. 407), participants were told, “You must press either quickly or slowly in order to earn points.” The dichotomy of responses in Dixon and Hayes and McHugh et al without a control response does not allow for interpretation of resurgence as something above extinction-induced variability. If participants were operating under the rule, “This response is not working, it must be some other response that is working,” then the reason we did not observe resurgence comparable to Dixon and Hayes and McHugh et al is that we included a response that was not associated with a history of reinforcement.…”

“…Some laboratory studies with adult humans have used arbitrary responses to control the history of reinforcement, but have had only two measurable behaviors (i.e., Dixon & Hayes, 1998; McHugh, Procter, Herzog, Schock, & Reed, 2012). The presence of only two measurable behaviors makes it difficult to establish that resurgence occurring in these preparations is a result of the history of reinforcement for the target behavior above and beyond extinction-induced variability (e.g., Antonitis, 1951, Morgan & Lee, 1996; Neuringer, Kornell, & Olufs, 2001).…”

“…This is a function of examining resurgence of conditional discriminations, derived stimulus relations, or revealed operant behavior, which require more extensive accuracy training on the prerequisite discriminations than the relatively more simple discriminations described above (Dixon & Hayes, 1998; McHugh et al, 2012). Determining subject characteristics that predict response to alternative reinforcement treatments may necessitate larger sample sizes.…”

Effects of differential rates of alternative reinforcement on resurgence of human behavior

“…To date, researchers using human operant preparations have primarily investigated the effects of baseline variables, such as length or schedule of baseline reinforcement, on resurgence (Bruzek, Thompson, & Peters, , Experiment 2; Doughty, Cash, Finch, Holloway, & Wallington, ; Kuroda, Cancado, & Podlesnik, ; Sweeney & Shahan, ). Additionally, some studies have investigated resurgence of various behavioral topographies, including caregiving responses (Bruzek et al, ), derived stimulus relations (Doughty, Kastner, & Bismark, ; Wilson & Hayes, ), and rule‐following (Dixon & Hayes, ), as well as the effects of serial positioning and intervention (King & Hayes, ; McHugh, Procter, Herzog, Schock, & Reed, ). Most of these studies have employed positive reinforcement of both the target and alternative behaviors, but some have investigated resurgence using negative reinforcement (Alessandri, Lattal, & Cancado, , Experiment 1; Bruzek et al, ) and punishment (Wilson & Hayes, ).…”