Effects of signaled and unsignaled alternative reinforcement on persistence and relapse in children and pigeons

Three experiments explored the impact of different reinforcer rates for alternative behavior (DRA) on the suppression and post‐DRA relapse of target behavior, and the persistence of alternative behavior. All experiments arranged baseline, intervention with extinction of target behavior concurrently with DRA, and post‐treatment tests of resurgence or reinstatement, in two‐ or three‐component multiple schedules. Experiment 1, with pigeons, arranged high or low baseline reinforcer rates; both rich and lean DRA schedules reduced target behavior to low levels. When DRA was discontinued, the magnitude of relapse depended on both baseline reinforcer rate and the rate of DRA. Experiment 2, with children exhibiting problem behaviors, arranged an intermediate baseline reinforcer rate and rich or lean signaled DRA. During treatment, both rich and lean DRA rapidly reduced problem behavior to low levels, but post‐treatment relapse was generally greater in the DRA‐rich than the DRA‐lean component. Experiment 3, with pigeons, repeated the low‐baseline condition of Experiment 1 with signaled DRA as in Experiment 2. Target behavior decreased to intermediate levels in both DRA‐rich and DRA‐lean components. Relapse, when it occurred, was directly related to DRA reinforcer rate as in Experiment 2. The post‐treatment persistence of alternative behavior was greater in the DRA‐rich component in Experiment 1, whereas it was the same or greater in the signaled‐DRA‐lean component in Experiments 2 and 3. Thus, infrequent signaled DRA may be optimal for effective clinical treatment.     

Examining stimuli paired with alternative reinforcement to mitigate resurgence in children diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder and pigeons

In two laboratory experiments, we examined whether stimuli paired with alternative reinforcers could mitigate resurgence of a previously reinforced target response with pigeons (Experiment 1) and children diagnosed with Autism Spectrum Disorder (Experiment 2). In Phase 1, we arranged food reinforcement according to a variable-ratio schedule for engaging in a target response. In Phase 2, we arranged extinction for target responding and differentially reinforced alternative responding according to a fixed-ratio schedule, with every alternative-reinforcer delivery paired with a change in keylight color (Experiment 1) or automated verbal (praise) statement (Experiment 2). In Phase 3, we assessed resurgence during extinction of target and alternative responding in the presence versus absence of continued presentation of the paired stimulus. Despite variation across sessions, resurgence on average was lower when continuing to present the paired stimuli in all pigeons and children while maintenance of alternative responding did not differ between assessments. These findings indicate that stimuli paired with alternative reinforcement can modestly decrease resurgence, but further examination of their efficacy and a better understanding of the underlying processes are necessary before they can be recommended for clinical use in reducing resurgence of clinically relevant problem behavior.     

Assessing the combined effects of resurgence and reinstatement in children diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder

Resurgence and reinstatement are laboratory models of relapse following treatments for problem behavior that arrange alternative sources of reinforcement, such as differential reinforcement of alternative behavior and noncontingent reinforcement. Resurgence models the elimination or reduction of reinforcers during treatment and reinstatement models the re‐presentation of reinforcers previously maintaining problem behavior. The present study examined individual and combined effects of resurgence and reinstatement in a translational model of treatment relapse with three children diagnosed with Autism Spectrum Disorder. We first reinforced and then extinguished an arbitrary response while providing access to a preferred toy to model a version of noncontingent reinforcement with extinction. In the following phases, we examined resurgence by removing the toy, reinstatement by presenting the training reinforcer response‐independently, and a combination of resurgence and reinstatement. Overall, relapse of target responding reliably exceeded functionally similar responses never reinforced in the experimental situation. Most importantly, relapse tended to be greater when combining resurgence and reinstatement than when assessing either alone. These findings support previous studies showing that combinations of operations can increase treatment relapse. This translational model arranging simulated problem behavior with arbitrary tasks provides a platform from which to thoroughly and systematically assess methods for understanding and improving behavioral treatments.     

Stimuli previously associated with reinforcement mitigate resurgence

Resurgence refers to the recurrence of an extinguished target behavior following subsequent suspension of alternative reinforcement. Delivery of reinforcers during extinction of alternative behavior has been shown to mitigate resurgence. The present experiment aimed to determine whether delivering stimuli associated with reinforcers during resurgence testing similarly mitigates resurgence. Three groups of rats pressed target levers for food according to variable‐interval 15‐s schedules during Phase 1. In Phase 2, lever pressing was extinguished, and an alternative nose‐poke response produced alternative reinforcement according to a variable‐interval 15‐s schedule. Food reinforcement was always associated with illumination of the food aperture and an audible click from the pellet dispenser during Phases 1 and 2. Phase 3 treatments differed between groups. For one group, nose poking continued to produce food and food‐correlated stimuli. Both of these consequences were suspended for a second group. Finally, nose poking produced food‐correlated stimuli but not food for a third group. Target‐lever pressing resurged in the group that received no consequences and in the group that received only food‐correlated stimuli for nose poking. Resurgence, however, was smaller for the group that received food‐correlated stimuli than for the group that received no consequences for nose poking. Target‐lever pressing did not increase between phases in the group that continued to receive food and associated stimuli. Thus, delivery of stimuli associated with food reinforcement after suspension of food reduced but did not eliminate resurgence of extinguished lever pressing. These findings contribute to potential methodologies for preventing relapse of extinguished problem behavior in clinical settings.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

The role of adventitious reinforcement during differential reinforcement of other behavior: A systematic replication

Differential reinforcement of other behavior (DRO) is commonly used to decrease problem behavior by presenting reinforcers contingent upon the absence of a target response. Although it is well demonstrated that DROs decrease response rates, the processes producing these decreases are not well understood. The present study systematically replicated previous research assessing whether adventitious reinforcement of alternative behavior contributes to the effectiveness of DRO. We presented university students with two options on a computer and reinforced target responding on a variable-ratio schedule. Next, we compared decreases in target-response rates and any increases in alternative responding during DRO schedules versus yoked variable-time schedules or extinction probes. DRO schedules resulted in the lowest target-response rate and highest alternative-response rate. These findings generally provide some support for the adventitious reinforcement of “other” behavior.     

Resurgence and alternative‐reinforcer magnitude

Resurgence is defined as an increase in the frequency of a previously reinforced target response when an alternative source of reinforcement is suspended. Despite an extensive body of research examining factors that affect resurgence, the effects of alternative‐reinforcer magnitude have not been examined. Thus, the present experiments aimed to fill this gap in the literature. In Experiment 1, rats pressed levers for single‐pellet reinforcers during Phase 1. In Phase 2, target‐lever pressing was extinguished, and alternative‐lever pressing produced either five‐pellet, one‐pellet, or no alternative reinforcement. In Phase 3, alternative reinforcement was suspended to test for resurgence. Five‐pellet alternative reinforcement produced faster elimination and greater resurgence of target‐lever pressing than one‐pellet alternative reinforcement. In Experiment 2, effects of decreasing alternative‐reinforcer magnitude on resurgence were examined. Rats pressed levers and pulled chains for six‐pellet reinforcers during Phases 1 and 2, respectively. In Phase 3, alternative reinforcement was decreased to three pellets for one group, one pellet for a second group, and suspended altogether for a third group. Shifting from six‐pellet to one‐pellet alternative reinforcement produced as much resurgence as suspending alternative reinforcement altogether, while shifting from six pellets to three pellets did not produce resurgence. These results suggest that alternative‐reinforcer magnitude has effects on elimination and resurgence of target behavior that are similar to those of alternative‐reinforcer rate. Thus, both suppression of target behavior during alternative reinforcement and resurgence when conditions of alternative reinforcement are altered may be related to variables that affect the value of the alternative‐reinforcement source.     

Recency, repeatability, and reinforcer retrenchment: an experimental analysis of resurgence

Four experiments were conducted with pigeons to assess the experimental conditions necessary for the occurrence of resurgence. The general procedure consisted of the following conditions: Condition 1--reinforcement of key pecking; Condition 2--reinforcement of treadle pressing and concurrent extinction of key pecking; and Condition 3--the resurgence condition wherein resurgence was defined as the recovery of key pecking. In Experiments 1 and 2, the resurgence condition was conventional extinction. The effect of recency on resurgence magnitude was examined in Experiment 1 by manipulating the number of sessions of Condition 2, above. Resurgence was not a function of recency with the parameters used. Repeating the three conditions revealed resurgence to be a repeatable effect in Experiment 2. In Experiment 3, a variable-time schedule was in effect for the resurgence condition. Resurgence was not produced by response-independent food delivery. In Experiment 4, the resurgence condition was a variable-interval schedule for treadle pressing that arranged a lower reinforcement rate than in Condition 2 (92% reduction in reinforcers per minute). Resurgence was lower in magnitude relative to conventional extinction, although resurgence was obtained with 2 out of 3 pigeons. The results are discussed in terms of the variables controlling resurgence and the relations between behavioral history, resurgence, and other forms of response recovery.     

Resurgence of temporal patterns of responding

The resurgence of temporal patterns of key pecking by pigeons was investigated in two experiments. In Experiment 1, positively accelerated and linear patterns of responding were established on one key under a discrete-trial multiple fixed-interval variable-interval schedule. Subsequently, only responses on a second key produced reinforcers according to a variable-interval schedule. When reinforcement on the second key was discontinued, positively accelerated and linear response patterns resurged on the first key, in the presence of the stimuli previously correlated with the fixed- and variable-interval schedules, respectively. In Experiment 2, resurgence was assessed after temporal patterns were directly reinforced. Initially, responding was reinforced if it approximated an algorithm-defined temporal pattern during trials. Subsequently, reinforcement depended on pausing during trials and, when it was discontinued, resurgence of previously reinforced patterns occurred for each pigeon and for 2 of 3 pigeons during a replication. The results of both experiments demonstrate the resurgence of temporally organized responding and replicate and extend previous findings on resurgence of discrete responses and spatial response sequences.     

Behavioral momentum theory: equations and applications

Behavioral momentum theory provides a quantitative account of how reinforcers experienced within a discriminative stimulus context govern the persistence of behavior that occurs in that context. The theory suggests that all reinforcers obtained in the presence of a discriminative stimulus increase resistance to change, regardless of whether those reinforcers are contingent on the target behavior, are noncontingent, or are even contingent on an alternative behavior. In this paper, we describe the equations that constitute the theory and address their application to issues of particular importance in applied settings. The theory provides a framework within which to consider the effects of interventions such as extinction, noncontingent reinforcement, differential reinforcement of alternative behavior, and other phenomena (e.g., resurgence). Finally, the theory predicts some counterintuitive and potentially counterproductive effects of alternative reinforcement, and can serve as an integrative guide for intervention when its terms are identified with the relevant conditions of applied settings.     

Effects of differences between stimuli, responses, and reinforcer rates on conditional discrimination performance

In a discrete-trial conditional discrimination procedure, 4 pigeons obtained food reinforcers by pecking a key with a short latency on trials signaled by one stimulus and by pecking the same key with a long latency on trials signaled by a second stimulus. The physical difference between the two stimuli and the temporal separation between the latency values required for reinforcement were varied factorially over four sets of conditions, and the ratio of reinforcer rates for short and long latencies was varied within each set of conditions. Stimulus discrimination varied directly with both stimulus and response differences and was unaffected by the reinforcer ratio. Sensitivity to reinforcement, estimated by generalized-matching-law fits to the data within each set of conditions, varied directly with the response difference but inversely with the stimulus difference arranged between sets of conditions. Because variations in stimulus differences, response differences, and reinforcer differences did not have equivalent effects, these findings question the functional equivalence of the three terms of the discriminated operant: antecedent stimuli, behavior, and consequences.     

ALTERNATIVE REINFORCEMENT INCREASES RESISTANCE TO CHANGE: PAVLOVIAN OR OPERANT CONTINGENCIES?

Two multiple-schedule experiments with pigeons examined the effect of adding food reinforcement from an alternative source on the resistance of the reinforced response (target response) to the decremental effects of satiation and extinction. In Experiment 1, key pecks were reinforced by food in two components according to variable-interval schedules and, in some conditions, food was delivered according to variable-time schedules in one of the components. The rate of key pecking in a component was negatively related to the proportion of reinforcers from the alternative (variable-time) source. Resistance to satiation and extinction, in contrast, was positively related to the overall rate of reinforcement in the component. Experiment 2 was conceptually similar except that the alternative reinforcers were contingent on a specific concurrent response. Again, the rate of the target response varied as a function of its relative reinforcement, but its resistance to satiation and extinction varied directly with the overall rate of reinforcement in the component stimulus regardless of its relative reinforcement. Together the results of the two experiments suggest that the relative reinforcement of a response (the operant contingency) determines its rate, whereas the stimulus-reinforcement contingency (a Pavlovian contingency) determines its resistance to change.     

Contingency tracking during unsignaled delayed reinforcement: Effects of delay duration and d‐amphetamine

In two experiments, the role of the response–reinforcer relation in maintaining low‐rate responding under unsignaled delay conditions was investigated. In both experiments pecking by pigeons on one response key, denoted the relevant key, was reinforced under an unsignaled delay‐of‐reinforcement procedure (defined as tandem variable‐interval (VI) differential‐reinforcement‐of‐other behavior [DRO] schedule). Responding on a second key, denoted the irrelevant key, had no programmed consequences. Between sessions, the location of the relevant key varied (after one, two, or three sessions) pseudorandomly. In Experiment 1, the delay (DRO) duration was manipulated parametrically. Overall, proportional relevant‐key response rates (relevant‐key response rates / [relevant‐key response rates + irrelevant key response rates]) increased across 3‐session sequences in which the relevant key remained in the same location and decreased as the DRO duration was changed systematically (2, 5, and 10 s). In Experiment 2, acute administration of d‐amphetamine increased proportional relevant‐key response rates during 1‐day sequences for only the DRO 5‐s duration, and results over 3‐day sequences, once a discrimination had already been established, were inconsistent. Results support that the response–reinforcer relation is the primary determinant of responding, and such discriminations are relatively resistant to disruption or potentiation by behaviorally active doses of d‐amphetamine.     

An evaluation of a punisher assessment for decreasing automatically reinforced problem behavior

We extended research on the identification and evaluation of potential punishers for decreasing automatically reinforced problem behavior in four individuals with autism spectrum disorder. A punisher selection interview was conducted with lead clinicians to identify socially acceptable punishers. During the treatment evaluation, treatment phases were introduced sequentially and included noncontingent reinforcement (NCR), NCR and differential reinforcement of alternative behavior (DRA), and NCR‐and‐DRA with punishment. During the NCR‐and‐DRA with punishment phase, four to five potential punishers were evaluated using a multielement design. Dependent measures included the target problem behavior, appropriate item engagement, and emotional responding. For all participants, NCR‐and‐DRA was not effective and punishment was necessary. However, the most effective punisher identified in the context of NCR‐and‐DRA differed across participants.     

Resurgence Following Higher or Lower Quality Alternative Reinforcement

Resurgence is a temporary increase in a previously suppressed target behavior following a worsening in reinforcement conditions. Previous studies have examined how higher rates or magnitudes of alternative reinforcement affect suppression of the target behavior and subsequent resurgence. However, there has been no investigation of the effects of higher versus lower qualities of alternative reinforcement on resurgence. Using a three-phase resurgence preparation with rats, the present experiments examined the effects of an alternative reinforcer that was of higher (Experiment 1) or lower (Experiment 2) quality than the reinforcer that had previously maintained the target behavior. The results of both experiments showed greater reductions in target behavior with a higher quality alternative reinforcer and larger increases in target responding when a higher quality alternative reinforcer was removed. Along with prior findings with higher rates and magnitudes of alternative reinforcement, these findings suggest that variations in reinforcer dimensions that increase the efficacy of alternative reinforcement also tend to increase resurgence when alternative reinforcement is removed. The results are discussed in terms of the resurgence as choice in context model and in terms of potential clinical implications.     

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

Despite the success of exposure‐based psychotherapies in anxiety treatment, relapse remains problematic. Resurgence, the return of previously eliminated behavior following the elimination of an alternative source of reinforcement, is a promising model of operant relapse. Nonhuman resurgence research has shown that higher rates of alternative reinforcement result in faster, more comprehensive suppression of target behavior, but also in greater resurgence when alternative reinforcement is eliminated. This study investigated rich and lean rates of alternative reinforcement on response suppression and resurgence in typically developing humans. In Phase 1, three groups (Rich, n = 18; Lean, n = 18; Control, n = 10) acquired the target response. In Phase 2, target responding was extinguished and alternative reinforcement delivered on RI 1 s, RI 3 s, and extinction schedules, respectively. Resurgence was assessed during Phase 3 under extinction conditions for all groups. Target responding was suppressed most thoroughly in Rich and partially in Lean. Target responding resurged in the Rich and Lean groups, but not in the Control group. Between groups, resurgence was more pronounced in the Rich group than the Lean and Control groups. Clinical implications of these findings, including care on the part of clinicians when identifying alternative sources of reinforcement, are discussed.     

THERAPIST‐ AND SELF‐MONITORED DRO CONTINGENCIES AS A TREATMENT FOR THE SELF‐INJURIOUS SKIN PICKING OF A YOUNG MAN WITH ASPERGER SYNDROME

The use of differential reinforcement of other behavior (DRO) has decreased, at least partially due to the development of less effortful alternative behavioral interventions (e.g., noncontingent reinforcement; Vollmer, Iwata, Zarcone, Smith, & Mazaleski, 1993). The effort associated with DRO contingencies may be lessened by incorporating self‐monitoring components in which clients are responsible for the delivery of reinforcers for their own behavior. The current study evaluates the effectiveness of DRO in the treatment of self‐injury when implemented first by the therapist and subsequently by the client.