Effect of effort on resistance to extinction of the bar-pressing response

This study was designed to obtain more information on the relation between effort and resistance to extinction when all subjects receive equal acquisition experience on each effort level at which the response is subsequently to be extinguished. Twenty-four subjects were given 120 reinforcements on each of three weighted bars of 5, 40 and 70 gm. They were then ordered into three groups, each extinguished on one effort level. Analysis of the number of responses emitted in six daily 20-min. extinction sessions showed that resistance to extinction was not related to the amount of effort expended in extinction.     

Effect of effort and latent extinction on resistance to extinction

Sixty-four male Wistar rats were given acquisition training in an enclosed straight-alley runway which could be adjusted for angles of inclination. The 2×2×2 design involved two angles of inclination in acquisition (0° and 40°) and two angles of inclination in extinction (0° and 40°). Between acquisition and extinction, half the subjects were exposed to a latent extinction procedure and half served as controls. Number of responses in a 30-min extinction session was an inverse function of effort required in extinction. Additionally, latent extinction procedures resulted in reduced resistance to extinction, but only when the effort conditions of acquisition and extinction were constant. When the effort conditions of acquisition and extinction were dissimilar, latent extinction procedures resulted in increased resistance to extinction. The results raise questions about the nature of the learning which occurs during latent extinction training.     

The effects of single-component extinction of a three-component serial CS on resistance to extinction of the conditioned avoidance response

Central to a fear interpretation of how avoidance responses are maintained in the absence of further CS-UCS pairings is the underlying assumption of an existing gradient of fear across the CS-UCS interval. Extrapolations based on this gradient lead to a number of differential predictions concerning the topography of avoidance responding during extinction. The present research was concerned with the differential effects of extinguishing separate components of the CS complex upon responding to the complete CS complex during extinction. In Phase 1 of the study, rats were classically conditioned to a three-component serial CS (S₁/S₂/S₃) followed by shock. Each subject was then given avoidance training in a one-way apparatus to a criterion of one successful avoidance. In Phase 2, subjects were divided into four groups, with three of the groups receiving nonreinforced exposure for 25 trials to one of the components of the serial CS (S₁, S₂, or S₃). The fourth group (S₀) was exposed for the same period of time to the apparatus cues. In Phase 3, the total stimulus complex was reintroduced in its original order, and animals were tested until extinction of the instrumental response was reached. The results are consistent with the hypothesis that a fear gradient exists in extinction and decreases in magnitude as the distance from the point of UCS onset increases.     

Behavioral momentum and resistance to extinction across repeated extinction tests

The present experiments assessed whether resistance to extinction of pigeons' key pecking decreased across repeated extinction tests. An additional impetus for this research was to determine how the quantitative framework provided by behavioral momentum theory might be used to describe any such changes across tests. Pigeons pecked keys in two‐component multiple schedules (one component associated with a higher reinforcer rate and the other with a lower rate) in which baseline and extinction conditions alternated. In Experiment 1, baseline and extinction conditions alternated every session, and, in Experiment 2, these conditions lasted for 10 and 7 sessions, respectively. Resistance to extinction decreased across successive extinction conditions in both experiments. Fits of the behavioral‐momentum based model of extinction to the data returned uncertain results in Experiment 1 but implicated both generalization decrement and response–reinforcer contingency termination as the possible mechanisms responsible for behavior change in Experiment 2. Thus, these data suggest that experimental manipulations that affect discrimination of changes in reinforcement contingencies may influence resistance to extinction by modulating the disruptive impacts of removing reinforcers from the experimental context and of suspending response–reinforcer contingencies.     

Magnitude of negative reinforcement and resistance to extinction

In the first experiment rats experienced large or small magnitude of negative reinforcement (shock reduction) in a straight alley. Half of the subjects in each magnitude group received continuous reinforcement, and the other half received a 50% partial reinforcement schedule (nonreinforcement consisting of no shock reduction in the goal box). In extinction the groups were ordered: large partial > small-partial > small-continuous > large-continuous. In the second experiment rats received large, small and nonreinforcement in various sequences using the runway-negative reinforcement procedure and were ordered: SNL>LNL>SNL>LNS in resistance to extinction (letters represent the magnitudes in the sequence experienced in acquisition). The results of these experiments indicate a commality between positive and negative reinforcement with respect to behavioral phenomena and theoretical accounts of those phenomena.     

Induction, contrast, and resistance to extinction

The resistance of responding to extinction after variable-interval reinforcement in one of two components of a multiple schedule of reinforcement was (1) greater, when responding in the second component was reinforced on a variable-interval schedule than when responding there was extinguished, (2) not reduced, by a more rapid decrease in the rate of responding than occurs in ordinary extinction in the second component, and, (3) increased, by the occurrence of positive behavioral contrast before the beginning of extinction.     

Assessing the role of alternative response rates and reinforcer rates in resistance to extinction of target responding when combining stimuli

Studies of behavioral momentum reveal that reinforcing an alternative response in the presence of a target response reduces the rate of target responding but increases its persistence, relative to training the target response on its own. Because of the parallels between these studies and differential‐reinforcement techniques to reduce problem behavior in clinical settings, alternative techniques to reduce problem behavior without enhancing its persistence are being explored. One potential solution is to train an alternative response in a separate stimulus context from problem behavior before combining the alternative stimulus with the target stimulus. The present study assessed how differences in reinforcement contingencies and rate for alternative responding influenced resistance to extinction of target responding when combining alternative and target stimuli in pigeons. Across three experiments, alternative stimuli signaling a response–reinforcer dependency and greater reinforcer rates more effectively decreased the persistence of target responding when combining alternative and target stimuli within the same extinction tests, but not when compared across separate extinction tests. Overall, these findings reveal that differences in competition between alternative and target responding produced by contingencies of alternative reinforcement could influence the effectiveness of treating problem behavior through combining stimulus contexts.