Behavioral momentum theory fails to account for the effects of reinforcement rate on resurgence

The behavioral‐momentum model of resurgence predicts reinforcer rates within a resurgence preparation should have three effects on target behavior. First, higher reinforcer rates in baseline (Phase 1) produce more persistent target behavior during extinction plus alternative reinforcement. Second, higher rate alternative reinforcement during Phase 2 generates greater disruption of target responding during extinction. Finally, higher rates of either reinforcement source should produce greater responding when alternative reinforcement is suspended in Phase 3. Recent empirical reports have produced mixed results in terms of these predictions. Thus, the present experiment further examined reinforcer‐rate effects on persistence and resurgence. Rats pressed target levers for high‐rate or low‐rate variable‐interval food during Phase 1. In Phase 2, target‐lever pressing was extinguished, an alternative nose‐poke became available, and nose‐poking produced either high‐rate variable‐interval, low‐rate variable‐interval, or no (an extinction control) alternative reinforcement. Alternative reinforcement was suspended in Phase 3. For groups that received no alternative reinforcement, target‐lever pressing was less persistent following high‐rate than low‐rate Phase‐1 reinforcement. Target behavior was more persistent with low‐rate alternative reinforcement than with high‐rate alternative reinforcement or extinction alone. Finally, no differences in Phase‐3 responding were observed for groups that received either high‐rate or low‐rate alternative reinforcement, and resurgence occurred only following high‐rate alternative reinforcement. These findings are inconsistent with the momentum‐based model of resurgence. We conclude this model mischaracterizes the effects of reinforcer rates on persistence and resurgence of operant 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.     

Effects of thinning the rate at which the alternative behavior is reinforced on resurgence of an extinguished instrumental response

Three experiments with rats examined the effects of thinning the rate of reinforcement for the alternative behavior in the resurgence paradigm. In all experiments, pressing one lever (L1) was first reinforced and then extinguished while pressing a second alternative lever (L2) was then reinforced. When L2 responding was then extinguished, L1 responses "resurged." Resurgence was always observed when L2 was reinforced on an unchanging reinforcement schedule during Phase 2. However, other rats received systematic decreases in the rate of L2 reinforcement before extinction of L2 began. Such a "thinning" procedure was predicted to reduce final resurgence by associating L1 extinction with longer and longer periods without a reinforcer. The procedure did reduce the resurgence effect observed when L2 was put on extinction (Experiment 3). However, in each experiment, thinned groups also returned to L1 responding, and continued to make L1 responses, while the reinforcement schedule for L2 was being thinned. Fine-grained analysis of behavior in time suggested that this early resurgence was not due to adventitious reinforcement of L1, occasion setting of L1 by reinforcer presentation, or the entrainment of L1 as a schedule-induced interim behavior. The results are overall consistent with the hypothesis that resurgence is a renewal effect in which extinguished L1 responding recovers when the context provided by the L2 reinforcement schedule is changed. Challenges for this view are also discussed.     

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.     

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.     

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).     

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.     

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.     

Examining effects of training duration on humans' resurgence and variability using a novel touchscreen procedure

Resurgence occurs when a previously reinforced and then extinguished target response increases due to reducing/eliminating an alternative source of reinforcement or punishing an alternative response. We evaluated whether duration of reinforcement history for a target response (1) affects the degree to which resurgence is observed in humans and (2) produces different gradients of response generalization around target responding during extinction testing. We arranged a novel touchscreen interface in which university students could swipe a 3D soccer ball to spin any direction. In Phase 1, the first direction swiped became the target and produced points exchangeable for money for 3 or 1 min across 2 groups. The first swipe was recorded but had no programmed consequence in a third group. In Phase 2, swipes 180-degrees from the target resulted in points for 3 min in all groups. Point deliveries ceased for 2 min to test for resurgence in Phase 3. Target responses resurged during testing to a relatively greater extent with longer Phase-1 training but gradients of response generalization did not differ among groups. These findings extend prior research on the role of training duration on resurgence. We discuss methodological and conceptual issues surrounding the assessment of response generalization in resurgence.     

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.     

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.     

Bouts of responding from variable-interval reinforcement of lever pressing by rats

Four rats obtained food pellets by lever pressing. A variable-interval reinforcement schedule assigned reinforcers on average every 2 min during one block of 20 sessions and on average every 8 min during another block. Also, at each variable-interval duration, a block of sessions was conducted with a schedule that imposed a variable-ratio 4 response requirement after each variable interval (i.e., a tandem variable-time variable-ratio 4 schedule). The total rate of lever pressing increased as a function of the rate of reinforcement and as a result of imposing the variable-ratio requirement. Analysis of log survivor plots of interresponse times indicated that lever pressing occurred in bouts that were separated by pauses. Increasing the rate of reinforcement increased total response rate by increasing the rate of initiating bouts and, less reliably, by lengthening bouts. Imposing the variable-ratio component increased response rate mainly by lengthening bouts. This pattern of results is similar to that reported previously with key poking as the response. Also, response rates within bouts were relatively insensitive to either variable.     

A model of resurgence based on behavioral momentum theory

Resurgence is the reappearance of an extinguished behavior when an alternative behavior reinforced during extinction is subsequently placed on extinction. Resurgence is of particular interest because it may be a source of relapse to problem behavior following treatments involving alternative reinforcement. In this article we develop a quantitative model of resurgence based on the augmented model of extinction provided by behavioral momentum theory. The model suggests that alternative reinforcement during extinction of a target response acts as both an additional source of disruption during extinction and as a source of reinforcement in the context that increases the future strength of the target response. The model does a good job accounting for existing data in the resurgence literature and makes novel and testable predictions. Thus, the model appears to provide a framework for understanding resurgence and serves to integrate the phenomenon into the existing theoretical account of persistence provided by behavioral momentum theory. In addition, we discuss some potential implications of the model for further development of behavioral momentum theory.     

Response-independent milk delivery enhances persistence of pellet-reinforced lever pressing by rats

If, during training, one stimulus is correlated with a higher rate of reinforcement than another, responding will be more resistant to extinction in the presence of that higher rate signal, even if many of the reinforcers have been presented independently of responding. For the present study we asked if the response-independent reinforcers must be the same as the response-dependent reinforcers to enhance the response's persistence. Twelve Long-Evans hooded rats obtained 45-mg food pellets by lever pressing (variable-interval 100-s schedules) in the presence of two discriminative stimuli (blinking vs. steady lights) that alternated every minute during daily sessions. Also, in the presence of one of the stimuli (counterbalanced across rats), the rats received additional response-independent deliveries of sweetened condensed milk (a variable-time schedule). Extinction sessions were exactly like training sessions except that neither pellets nor milk were presented. Lever pressing was more resistant to extinction in the presence of the milk-correlated stimulus when (a) the size of the milk deliveries during training (under a variable-time 30 s schedule) was 0.04 ml (vs. 0.01 ml) and (b) 120-s or 240-s blackouts separated components. Response-independent reinforcers do not have to be the same as the response-dependent reinforcers to enhance persistence.     

Repeated,within‐session resurgence

Resurgence is a reliable, transient effect that only occasionally is replicated more than once within a single experiment or subject. In the present experiments, within‐session resurgence was generated repeatedly by dividing individual sessions into three phases (Training, Alternative‐Reinforcement, and Resurgence‐Test). In Experiments 1 and 2, resurgence reliably occurred in most of the 22‐30 daily sessions when responding was reinforced on, respectively, fixed‐ and variable‐interval schedules. Resurgence magnitude and duration did decrease across replications for some subjects, but not for others. To examine the utility of the procedure in studying the effects of an independent variable on resurgence, in Experiment 3 the effects of rich and lean baseline and alternative reinforcement rates on resurgence were compared. The target response was eliminated more rapidly, resurgence occurred more often, and usually was greater following rich alternative reinforcement rates. Resurgence was of greater magnitude when the baseline reinforcement rate was relatively lean compared to the alternative reinforcement rate. These experiments provide a reliable method for generating resurgence within individual sessions, instead of across multiple‐session conditions, that can be repeated over many successive sessions.     

Compounding of discriminative stimuli correlated with chained and multiple schedules

In studies of stimulus compounding (1) the stimuli are presented randomly, (2) primary reinforcement is correlated with each stimulus, (3) a specific response is emitted during each stimulus, and (4) the response is necessary to produce the reinforcer. The present experiments assessed the importance of these procedures by (1) presenting light and tone stimuli in fixed order, (2) removing reinforcement (food) during one stimulus, (3) preventing the response (lever pressing) from being emitted, and (4) eliminating the contingency between lever pressing and food. These variables were presented in various combinations within the context of chained and multiple schedules. When the stimuli were combined in the schedule component correlated with each stimulus, the frequency of lever pressing increased in most instances (additive summation). This suggests that the effect of combining stimuli was not closely tied to the specific procedures used in previous experiments. However, presenting the stimuli in a fixed order did have an effect: the level of responding to the compound was generally greatest when the stimuli were combined in the component correlated with the higher frequency of lever pressing to the single stimulus. Additive summation failed to occur consistently when response-independent food was correlated with each stimulus, and when both lever pressing and food were eliminated during one stimulus.     

Resurgence of time allocation

The resurgence of time allocation with pigeons was studied in three experiments. In Phase 1 of each experiment, response‐independent food occurred with different probabilities in the presence of two different keylights. Each peck on the key changed its color and the food probability in effect. In Phase 2, the food probabilities associated with each keylight were reversed and, in Phase 3, food was discontinued in the presence of either keylight. The food probabilities were .25 and .75, in Experiment 1, and 0.0 and 1.0 in Experiment 2. More time was allocated to the keylight correlated with more probable food in Phases 1 and 2, and in Phase 3 resurgence of time allocation occurred for two of three pigeons in Experiment 1, and for each of four pigeons in Experiment 2. Because time had to be allocated to either of the two alternatives in Experiments 1 and 2, however, it was difficult to characterize the time allocation patterns in Phase 3 as resurgence when changeover responding approached zero. In Experiment 3 this issue was addressed by providing a third alternative uncorrelated with food such that in each phase, after 30 s in the presence of either keylight correlated with food, the third alternative always was reinstated, requiring a response to access either of the two keylights correlated with food. In this experiment, the food probabilities were similar to those in Experiment 1. Resurgence of time allocation occurred for each of three pigeons under this procedure. The results of these experiments suggest that patterns of time allocation resurge similarly to discrete responses and to spatial and temporal patterns of responding.     

Resurgence and repeated within-session progressive-interval thinning of alternative reinforcement

Resurgence of a previously suppressed target behavior is common when reinforcement for a more recently reinforced alternative behavior is thinned. To better characterize such resurgence, these experiments examined repeated within-session alternative reinforcement thinning using a progressive-interval (PI) schedule with rats. In Experiment 1, a transition from a high rate of alternative reinforcement to a within-session PI schedule generated robust resurgence, but subsequent complete removal of alternative reinforcement produced no additional resurgence. Experiment 2 replicated these findings and showed similar effects with a fixed-interval (FI) schedule arranging similarly reduced session-wide rates of alternative reinforcement. Thus, the lack of additional resurgence following repeated exposure to the PI schedule was likely due to the low overall obtained rate of alternative reinforcement provided by the PI schedule, rather than to exposure to within-session reinforcement thinning per se. In both experiments, target responding increased at some point in the session during schedule thinning and continued across the rest of the session. Rats exposed to a PI schedule showed resurgence later in the session and after more cumulative alternative reinforcers than those exposed to an FI schedule. The results suggest the potential importance of further exploring how timing and change-detection mechanisms might be involved in resurgence.     

Factors that encourage generalization from extinction to test reduce resurgence of an extinguished operant response

Two experiments investigated methods that reduce the resurgence of an extinguished behavior (R1) that occurs when reinforcement for an alternative behavior (R2) is discontinued. In Experiment 1, R1 was first trained and then extinguished while R2 was reinforced during a 5‐ or 25‐session treatment phase. For half the rats, sessions in which R2 was reinforced alternated with sessions in which R2 was extinguished. Controls received the same number of treatment sessions, but R2 was never extinguished. When reinforcement for R2 was discontinued, R1 resurged in the controls. However, the alternating groups showed reduced resurgence, and the magnitude of the resurgences observed during their R2 extinction sessions decreased systematically over Phase 2. In Experiment 2, R1 was first reinforced with one outcome (O1). The rats then had two types of double‐alternating treatment sessions. In one type, R1 was extinguished and R2 produced O2. In the other, R1 was unavailable and R2 produced O3. R1 resurgence was weakened when O2, but not O3, was delivered freely during testing. Together, the results suggest that methods that encourage generalization between R1 extinction and resurgence testing weaken the resurgence effect. They are not consistent with an account of resurgence proposed by Shahan and Craig (2017).     

Within-session changes in key and lever pressing for water during several multiple variable-interval schedules

Rats pressed keys or levers for water reinforcers delivered by several multiple variable-interval schedules. The programmed rate of reinforcement varied from 15 to 240 reinforcers per hour in different conditions. Responding usually increased and then decreased within experimental sessions. As for food reinforcers, the within-session changes in both lever and key pressing were smaller, peaked later, and were more symmetrical around the middle of the session for lower than for higher rates of reinforcement. When schedules provided high rates of reinforcement, some quantitative differences appeared in the within-session changes for lever and key pressing and for food and water. These results imply that basically similar factors produce within-session changes in responding for lever and key pressing and for food and water. The nature of the reinforcer and the choice of response can also influence the quantitative properties of within-session changes at high rates of reinforcement. Finally, the results show that the application of Herrnstein's (1970) equation to rates of responding averaged over the session requires careful consideration.