Delivering alternative reinforcement in a distinct context reduces its counter‐therapeutic effects on relapse

Delivery of alternative reinforcers in the presence of stimuli previously associated with reinforcement for target behavior increases the susceptibility of target behavior to relapse. To explore contingencies that might mitigate this counter‐therapeutic effect, we trained pigeons on a procedure that entailed extinction of previously reinforced target‐key pecking, access to a distinct stimulus context contingently on refraining from target behavior (differential‐reinforcement‐of‐other‐behavior; DRO), and reinforcement of alternative‐key pecks (differential‐reinforcement of alternative behavior; DRA) in that context. This DRO‐DRA treatment was compared with standard DRA in successive conditions, counterbalanced across pigeons. Target behavior extinguished more rapidly in the Standard‐DRA condition. When alternative reinforcement was discontinued, however, there was less resurgence after DRO‐DRA than after Standard DRA. In a third condition, the DRO contingency was suspended so that the former DRA stimuli were not presented (DRO‐NAC), and resurgence was greater than in the Standard‐DRA and DRO‐DRA conditions. Reinstatement produced by response‐independent reinforcers was small and similar across conditions. Subsequent reacquisition of target‐key pecking under baseline reinforcement conditions was faster following DRO‐NAC than Standard‐DRA or DRO‐DRA. These findings suggest that DRO‐DRA might serve as a useful method in clinical settings for reducing problem behavior while minimizing the threat of posttreatment relapse.     

Signaled alternative reinforcement and the persistence of operant behavior

Differential reinforcement of alternative behavior (DRA) is a treatment designed to eliminate problem behavior by reinforcing an alternative behavior at a higher rate. Availability of alternative reinforcement may be signaled, as with Functional Communication Training, or unsignaled. Whether or not alternative reinforcement is signaled could influence both the rate and persistence of problem behavior. The present study investigated whether signaling the availability of alternative reinforcement affects the rate and persistence of a concurrently available target response with pigeons. Three components of a multiple concurrent schedule arranged equal reinforcement rates for target responding. Two of the components also arranged equal reinforcement rates for an alternative response. In one DRA component, a discrete stimulus signaled the availability of response‐contingent alternative reinforcement by changing the keylight color upon reinforcement availability. In the other DRA component, availability of alternative reinforcement was not signaled. Target responding was most persistent in the unsignaled DRA component when disrupted by satiation, free food presented between components, and extinction, relative to the signaled DRA and control components. These findings suggest the discrete stimulus functionally separated the availability of alternative reinforcement from the discriminative stimuli governing target responding. These findings provide a novel avenue to explore in translational research assessing whether signaling the availability of alternative reinforcement with DRA treatments reduces the persistence of problem behavior.     

Stimulus–reinforcer relations established during training determine resistance to extinction and relapse via reinstatement

The baseline rate of a reinforced target response decreases with the availability of response‐independent sources of alternative reinforcement; however, resistance to disruption and relapse increases. Because many behavioral treatments for problem behavior include response‐dependent reinforcement of alternative behavior, the present study assessed whether response‐dependent alternative reinforcement also decreases baseline response rates but increases resistance to extinction and relapse. We reinforced target responding at equal rates across two components of a multiple schedule with pigeons. We compared resistance to extinction and relapse via reinstatement of (1) a target response trained concurrently with a reinforced alternative response in one component with (2) a target response trained either concurrently or in separate components from the alternative response across conditions. Target response rates trained alone in baseline were higher but resistance to extinction and relapse via reinstatement tests were greater after training concurrently with the alternative response. In another assessment, training target and alternative responding together, but separating them during extinction and reinstatement tests, produced equal resistance to extinction and relapse. Together, these findings are consistent with behavioral momentum theory—operant response–reinforcer relations determined baseline response rates but Pavlovian stimulus–reinforcer relations established during training determined resistance to extinction and relapse. These findings imply that reinforcing alternative behavior to treat problem behavior could initially reduce rates but increase persistence.     

THE INFLUENCE OF BEHAVIOR PRECEDING A REINFORCED RESPONSE ON BEHAVIOR CHANGE IN THE CLASSROOM1

The influence of behavior that immediately precedes a reinforced target response on the effectiveness of a reinforcement contingency was examined in two experiments with mentally retarded children in a special-education classroom. Two reinforcement schedules were examined in each experiment. For each schedule, a prespecified period of attentive behavior served as the target response. The schedules differed in whether inattentive or attentive behavior was required immediately to precede the target response. These schedules were examined with one child in a simultaneous treatment design using praise as the reinforcer (Experiment I), and with two children in separate reversal designs using tokens as the reinforcer (Experiment II). While attentive behavior increased under each schedule, the increase was greater when attentive rather than inattentive behavior preceded the reinforced response. The results indicated that the effect of a contingency may be determined not only by the specific response reinforced but also by the behavior that immediately precedes that response.     

Social influence in pigeons (Columba livia): the role of differential reinforcement

Socially-influenced learning was studied in observer pigeons that observed a demonstrator in an adjacent chamber performing a target response comprising standing on a box and pecking a key 10 times. In Experiment 1 there was no evidence for social learning in the absence of reinforcement of the observer's behavior. When the target response was already established in the observer's repertoire, but was not differentially reinforced in relation to the demonstrator's behavior, rates of extinction were not influenced by the demonstrator's behavior (Experiment 2). Reinforcement of the observer's target response in the presence of the modeled target response, and not in its absence, resulted in control of the observer's responding by the behavior of the demonstrator (Experiments 3 and 4). This control was extended in Experiment 5 to deferred responses that occurred following a delay since the demonstrator's target responses. The acquisition of social influence depended on differential reinforcement of the observer's target response, with the demonstrator's target behavior serving as the explicit discriminative stimulus.     

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

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.     

Resurgence is greater following a return to the training context than remaining in the extinction context

The present study examined whether resurgence of a previously reinforced target response upon removing alternative reinforcement would be greater when (1) returning to the original training context (ABA context changes) versus (2) remaining in the analogue treatment context in which the alternative response was differentially reinforced (ABB context changes). Experiment 1 arranged reinforcement of button pressing with points exchangeable for money in university students. Experiment 2 arranged reinforcement of lever pressing with food for rats. Experiment 3 arranged reinforcement of responses to a touchscreen with small bites of food with children diagnosed with ASD. Overall, resurgence of target responding tended to be greater when returning to the original training context (A) than when remaining in the analogue treatment context (B). These findings suggest context changes with differential reinforcement treatments could exacerbate the recurrence of problem behavior resulting from reductions in treatment integrity through failure to reinforce appropriate behavior.     

Differential reinforcement of alternative behavior increases resistance to extinction: clinical demonstration, animal modeling, and clinical test of one solution

Basic research with pigeons on behavioral momentum suggests that differential reinforcement of alternative behavior (DRA) can increase the resistance of target behavior to change. This finding suggests that clinical applications of DRA may inadvertently increase the persistence of target behavior even as it decreases its frequency. We conducted three coordinated experiments to test whether DRA has persistence-strengthening effects on clinically significant target behavior and then tested the effectiveness of a possible solution to this problem in both a nonhuman and clinical study. Experiment 1 compared resistance to extinction following baseline rates of reinforcement versus higher DRA rates of reinforcement in a clinical study. Resistance to extinction was substantially greater following DRA. Experiment 2 tested a rat model of a possible solution to this problem. Training an alternative response in a context without reinforcement of the target response circumvented the persistence-strengthening effects of DRA. Experiment 3 translated the rat model into a novel clinical application of DRA. Training an alternative response with DRA in a separate context resulted in lower resistance to extinction than employing DRA in the context correlated with reinforcement of target behavior. The value of coordinated bidirectional translational research is discussed.     

Punishment of an alternative behavior generates resurgence of a previously extinguished target behavior

Resurgence is often defined as the recurrence of an extinguished behavior when a more recently reinforced alternative behavior is also extinguished. Resurgence has also been observed when the alternative behavior is devalued by other means (e.g., reinforcement rate or magnitude reductions). The present study investigated whether punishment of an alternative behavior would generate resurgence. A target response was reinforced during Phase 1 and then extinguished in Phase 2 while an alternative response was reinforced. During Phase 3, response‐dependent foot shocks were superimposed on the schedule of reinforcement for the alternative response and shock intensity was escalated gradually across sessions. Resurgence of the target response was reliably observed, mostly at higher intensities. The effect was replicated in two subsequent exposures to the sequence of conditions, with resurgence tending to occur at the lowest foot shock intensity. These results suggest that devaluation of an alternative behavior via punishment can generate resurgence. Although it is difficult to reconcile the overall pattern of results with Bouton's context account, these findings are consistent with the suggestion that resurgence results from a “worsening of conditions” for the alternative behavior and with the formalization of that suggestion in terms of a choice‐based matching‐law account (i.e., Resurgence as Choice).     

All Behavior is choice: Revisiting an evolutionary theory's account of behavior on single schedules

The axiomatic principle that all behavior is choice was incorporated into a revised implementation of an evolutionary theory's account of behavior on single schedules. According to this implementation, target responding occurs in the context of background responding and reinforcement. In Phase 1 of the research, the target responding of artificial organisms (AOs) animated by the revised theory was found to be well described by an exponentiated hyperbola, the parameters of which varied as a function of the background reinforcement rate. In Phase 2, the effect of reinforcer magnitude on the target behavior of the AOs was studied. As in Phase 1, the AOs' behavior was well described by an exponentiated hyperbola, the parameters of which varied with both the target reinforcer magnitude and the background reinforcement rate. Evidence from experiments with live organisms was found to be consistent with the Phase-1 predictions of the revised theory. The Phase-2 predictions have not been tested. The revised implementation of the theory can be used to study the effects of superimposing punishment on single-schedule responding, and it may lead to the discovery of a function that relates response rate to both the rate and magnitude of reinforcement on single schedules.     

Verbal self-reports of delayed matching to sample by humans

Undergraduates participated in two experiments to develop methods for the experimental analysis of self-reports about behavior. The target behavior was the choice response in a delayed-matching-to-sample task in which monetary reinforcement was contingent upon both speed and accuracy of the choice. In Experiment 1, the temporal portion of the contingency was manipulated within each session, and the presence and absence of feedback about reinforcement was manipulated across sessions. As the time limits became stricter, target response speeds increased, but accuracy and reinforcement rates decreased. When feedback was withheld, further reductions in speed and reinforcement occurred, but only at the strictest time limit. Thus, the procedures were successful in producing systematic variation in the speed, accuracy, and reinforcement of the target behavior. Experiment 2 was designed to assess the influence of these characteristics on self-reports. In self-report conditions, each target response was followed by a computer-generated query: “Did you earn points?” The subject reported by pressing “Yes” or “No” buttons, with the sole consequence of advancing the session. In some cases, feedback about reinforcement of the target response followed the reports; in other cases it was withheld. Self-reports were less accurate when the target responses occurred under greater time pressure. When feedback was withheld, the speed of the target response influenced reports, in that the probability of a “Yes” report increased directly with the speed of accurate target responses. In addition, imposing the self-report procedure disrupted target performance by reducing response speeds at the strictest time limit. These results allow investigation of issues in both behavioral and cognitive psychology. More important, the overall order in the data suggests promise for the experimental analysis of self-reports by human subjects.     

Designing interventions that include delayed reinforcement: implications of recent laboratory research

The search for robust and durable interventions in everyday situations typically involves the use of delayed reinforcers, sometimes delivered well after a target behavior occurs. Integrating the findings from laboratory research on delayed reinforcement can contribute to the design and analysis of those applied interventions. As illustrations, we examine articles from the Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior that analyzed delayed reinforcement with respect to response allocation (A. M. Williams & Lattal, 1999), stimulus chaining (B. A. Williams, 1999), and self-control (Jackson & Hackenberg, 1996). These studies help to clarify the conditions under which delayed reinforcement (a) exercises control of behavior, (b) entails conditioned reinforcement, and (c) displaces the effects of immediate reinforcement. The research has applied implications, including the development of positive social behavior and teaching people to make adaptive choices. DESCRIPTORS: delayed reinforcement, response allocation, stimulus chains, self-control, integration of basic and applied research     

Adventitious reinforcement during long-duration DRO exposure

Differential reinforcement of other behavior (DRO) is a procedure often used to decrease problem behavior, but the processes responsible for behavior reduction are not well understood. This study assessed whether adventitious reinforcement of other behavior contributes to DRO effectiveness when, relative to previous research, DRO exposure is prolonged. Two response options were presented on a computer and target responding was reinforced on a variable-ratio schedule. Response rates were then compared during DRO versus yoked variable-time or extinction probes. Across 2 experiments, DRO decreased target responding and increased other responding more than control conditions. However, increases in other responding did not usually maintain despite target responding remaining at low levels. DRO might adventitiously reinforce other responses transiently but the decreases in target behavior could not be entirely explained by adventitious reinforcement of the other response. Instead, reductions in target responding likely depend on the discriminability of the DRO contingency.     

Instructions and group versus individual reinforcement in modifying disruptive group behavior

Head Start children were matched into two groups on the basis of rates of disruptive behavior during rest periods. Attempts were made to modify their behavior using either individual or group token reinforcement procedures. While the reinforcement procedures reduced inappropriate behavior somewhat, the addition of instructions to the reinforcement reduced the inappropriate behavior to near zero for both groups. Instructions alone, however, were ineffective in controlling behavior. Type of reinforcement (group or individual) did not produce differential effects. While experimental control over the target behavior was demonstrated, there was little carryover from the experimental room to the regular classroom. Even when treatment was introduced into the regular class, follow-up results showed that with time the target behavior approximated pretreatment levels. The results suggest that (a) the combination of instructions and reinforcement is much more effective than either one of these alone, (b) behavior change is specific to the environmental contingencies, and (c) the group reinforcement technique, which is much more easily implemented, was at least as effective as individual reinforcement in the present study.     

RESISTANCE TO EXTINCTION AND RELAPSE IN COMBINED STIMULUS CONTEXTS

Reinforcing an alternative response in the same context as a target response reduces the rate of occurrence but increases the persistence of that target response. Applied researchers who use such techniques to decrease the rate of a target problem behavior risk inadvertently increasing the persistence of the same problem behavior. Behavioral momentum theory asserts that the increased persistence is a function of the alternative reinforcement enhancing the Pavlovian relation between the target stimulus context and reinforcement. A method showing promise for reducing the persistence‐enhancing effects of alternative reinforcement is to train the alternative response in a separate stimulus context before combining with the target stimulus in extinction. The present study replicated previous findings using pigeons by showing that combining an “alternative” richer VI schedule (96 reinforcers/ hr) with a “target” leaner VI schedule (24 reinforcers/hr) reduced resistance to extinction of target responding compared with concurrent training of the alternative and target responses (totaling 120 reinforcers/hr). We also found less relapse with a reinstatement procedure following extinction with separate‐context training, supporting previous findings that training conditions similarly influence both resistance to extinction and relapse. Finally, combining the alternative stimulus context was less disruptive to target responding previously trained in the concurrent schedule, relative to combining with the target response trained alone. Overall, the present findings suggest the technique of combining stimulus contexts associated with alternative responses with those associated with target responses disrupts target responding. Furthermore, the effectiveness of this disruption is a function of training context of reinforcement for target responding, consistent with assertions of behavioral momentum theory.     

Alternative response training, differential reinforcement of other behavior, and extinction in squirrel monkeys (Saimiri sciureus)

In Experiment I, (a) extinction, (b) extinction plus reinforcement of a discrete alternative response, and (c) differential reinforcement of other behavior were each correlated with a different stimulus in a three-component multiple schedule. The alternative-response procedure more rapidly and completely suppressed behavior than did differential reinforcement of other behavior. Differential reinforcement of other behavior was slightly more effective than extinction alone. In Experiment II, reinforcement of specific alternative behavior during extinction and differential reinforcement of other behavior were used in two components, while one component continued to provide reinforcement for the original response. Once again, the alternative-response procedure was most effective in reducing responding as long as it remained in effect. However, the responding partially recovered when reinforcement for competing behavior was discontinued. In general, responding was less readily reduced by differential reinforcement of other behavior than by the specific alternative-response procedure.     

Response acquisition under targeted percentile schedules: a continuing quandary for molar models of operant behavior.

The number of responses rats made in a "run" of consecutive left-lever presses, prior to a trial-ending right-lever press, was differentiated using a targeted percentile procedure. Under the nondifferential baseline, reinforcement was provided with a probability of .33 at the end of a trial, irrespective of the run on that trial. Most of the 30 subjects made short runs under these conditions, with the mean for the group around three. A targeted percentile schedule was next used to differentiate run length around the target value of 12. The current run was reinforced if it was nearer the target than 67% of those runs in the last 24 trials that were on the same side of the target as the current run. Programming reinforcement in this way held overall reinforcement probability per trial constant at .33 while providing reinforcement differentially with respect to runs more closely approximating the target of 12. The mean run for the group under this procedure increased to approximately 10. Runs approaching the target length were acquired even though differentiated responding produced the same probability of reinforcement per trial, decreased the probability of reinforcement per response, did not increase overall reinforcement rate, and generally substantially reduced it (i.e., in only a few instances did response rate increase sufficiently to compensate for the increase in the number of responses per trial). Models of behavior predicated solely on molar reinforcement contingencies all predict that runs should remain short throughout this experiment, because such runs promote both the most frequent reinforcement and the greatest reinforcement per press. To the contrary, 29 of 30 subjects emitted runs in the vicinity of the target, driving down reinforcement rate while greatly increasing the number of presses per pellet. These results illustrate the powerful effects of local reinforcement contingencies in changing behavior, and in doing so underscore a need for more dynamic quantitative formulations of operant behavior to supplement or supplant the currently prevalent static ones.     

Resurgence and downshifts in alternative reinforcement rate

Resurgence refers to an increase in a previously suppressed target behavior with a relative worsening of conditions for a more recently reinforced alternative behavior. This experiment examined the relation between resurgence and the magnitude of a reduction in the rate of reinforcement for the alternative behavior. Groups of both male and female rats initially pressed a target lever for food on a variable-interval (VI) 30-s schedule. In a second phase, responding to the target lever was extinguished for all groups and pressing an alternative lever was reinforced on a VI 10-s schedule. Next, the rate of reinforcement for alternative behavior was reduced differentially across groups by arranging extinction, VI 80-s, VI 40-s, VI 20-s, or continued VI 10-s reinforcement. Target responding increased as an exponential function of the magnitude of the reduction in alternative reinforcement rates. With the exception that males appeared to show higher rates of target responding in baseline and higher rates of alternative responding in other phases, the overall pattern of responding across phases was not meaningfully different between sexes. The pattern of both target and alternative response rates across sessions and phases was well described quantitatively by the Resurgence as Choice in Context model.     

Additional free reinforcers increase persistence of problem behavior in a clinical context: A partial replication of laboratory findings

Behavioral momentum theory is a quantitative framework used to characterize the persistence of behavior during response disruptors as a function of baseline stimulus–reinforcer relations. Results of several investigations have shown that alternative reinforcement can increase the resistance to change of a target response during extinction. In the present study, concomitant variable‐interval fixed‐time schedules of reinforcement for problem behavior were employed to simulate naturalistic situations involving the superimposition of response‐independent reinforcers on a baseline schedule of reinforcement for problem behavior, as in the common use of noncontingent reinforcement treatments. Resistance to change of problem behavior was assessed during postsession periods of extinction by comparing response rates in extinction following sessions with and without additional reinforcer deliveries arranged by fixed‐time schedules. For 2 out of 3 participants, problem behavior tended to be more resistant to extinction following periods in which additional fixed‐time reinforcers were delivered. These results are discussed in terms of potential effects of noncontingent reinforcement on problem behavior when the intervention is discontinued or implemented without good treatment integrity.     

THE EFFECTS OF FIXED-TIME REINFORCEMENT SCHEDULES ON FUNCTIONAL RESPONSE CLASSES: A TRANSLATIONAL STUDY

Research on functional response classes has applied significance because less severe forms of problem behavior have been found to co‐occur with more severe forms. In addition, the most severe forms of problem behavior are sometimes targeted for intervention without monitoring other less severe forms. In such cases, it is unknown whether and how untreated forms of problem behavior covary with the targeted behaviors. The present study employed a translational procedure (with button presses as the target behavior) to investigate response covariation under noncontingent reinforcement with typically developing preschoolers. The results indicated that noncontingent reinforcement was generally effective in decreasing all response class members when only one member was targeted.