Magnitude Of Resurgence Research Articles

Examination of clinical variables affecting resurgence: A reanalysis of 46 applications.

Despite the efficacy of behavioral interventions, resurgence of challenging behavior (e.g., aggression, self-injury) following successful treatment can still occur. Applied work has focused on identifying treatment-related variables thought to affect the occurrence and magnitude of resurgence. The current study describes the relation between several variables (i.e., phase duration, response rates in baseline and treatment, obtained rates of reinforcement, downshift in reinforcement step size) and resurgence in a retrospective consecutive controlled case series of 46 treatment applications for challenging behavior conducted in an inpatient setting. Only the downshift in reinforcement (e.g., schedule-thinning) step size was correlated with the magnitude of resurgence. These results are consistent with recent findings suggesting that treatment duration and other factors have inconsistent effects on resurgence of challenging behavior.

Resurgence of destructive behavior following decreases in alternative reinforcement: A prospective analysis.

Basic and retrospective translational research has shown that the magnitude of resurgence is determined by the size of the decrease in alternative reinforcement, with larger decreases producing more resurgence. However, this finding has not been evaluated prospectively with a clinical population. In Experiment 1, five participants experienced a fixed progression of reinforcement schedule-thinning steps during treatment of their destructive behavior. Resurgence occurred infrequently across steps and participants, and when resurgence did occur, its clinical meaningfulness was often minimal. In Experiment 2, five new participants experienced these same schedule-thinning steps but in a counterbalanced order. Resurgence occurred most often and was generally largest with larger decreases in alternative reinforcement programmed earlier in the evaluation. Large decreases in alternative reinforcement may be more problematic clinically when they occur earlier in treatment. Whether larger transitions can be recommended in the clinic following the success of smaller ones will require additional research.

Response effort and resurgence.

This study provides an initial translational examination of response effort and resurgence. Eleven typically developing adults and five adolescents with autism served as participants across two experiments. Participants received points for touching moving stimuli on a computer screen. The resurgence evaluation consisted of three phases: establishment wherein R1 was reinforced, elimination wherein R1 was placed on extinction while R2 was reinforced, and extinction wherein R1 and R2 no longer resulted in reinforcement. Rate of R1 during extinction was compared across three conditions: intermediate, easy, and difficult. Disparity in effort was created by manipulations of the size and speed of objects that moved about on a computer screen. In Experiment 2, control stimuli were added to the experimental arrangement. Across the two experiments, the magnitude of resurgence was greater when R1 was easy. In Experiment 2, both R1 and control responding were greater in the extinction phase than in the elimination phase in all conditions with all participants. The present study supports the hypothesis that response effort affects resurgence and that less effortful responses are likely to recur with greater magnitude under conditions that produce resurgence than are their more effortful counterparts.

Examining resurgence and repetition with the evolutionary theory of behavior dynamics

Recently, Redner et al. (2022) examined the nature of resurgence across repeated iterations of the traditional three-phase resurgence procedure with four pigeons. Although extant research findings in this area are mixed, Redner et al. found that resurgence generally increased in magnitude with repetition. These findings provide a baseline against which future research examining resurgence using this three-phase procedure can be compared and contrasted. The purpose of the present investigation was to examine resurgence via concurrent schedule arrangements similar to those described by Redner et al. with 30 artificial organisms (AOs) animated by the Evolutionary Theory of Behavior Dynamics (McDowell, 2004). We quantified the prevalence of resurgence across iterations and found that resurgence occurred in 86.7 % (156 of 180) iterations across all 30 AOs. This is strikingly similar to the resurgence prevalence estimates of 87.5 % reported by both Redner et al. (2022). However, we also found that the magnitude of target responding generally did not change significantly with repetition. This finding is inconsistent with Redner et al. but is consistent with the predictions of prominent quantitative models of behavioral persistence and a number of relevant studies (Volkert et al., 2009; Gratz et al., 2019). We also conducted exploratory analyses to examine how several variables (e.g., sensitivity to reinforcement, reinforcer magnitude, number of sessions of exposure to various phases) affect the prevalence and magnitude of resurgence among AOs.

Assessing the repeatability of resurgence in humans: Implications for the use of within-subject designs.

Resurgence refers to the recurrence of a previously reinforced response following the worsening of reinforcement conditions (e.g., extinction) for an alternative response. Because of the implications for treatment relapse, researchers have become particularly interested in mitigating resurgence of human behavior. Some studies have employed reversal designs and varied parameters across replications (e.g., ABCADC) to compare effects of second-phase variables. Although resurgence is generally repeatable within and between subjects, the extent to which similar levels of resurgence occur across replications is less clear. To assess the repeatability of resurgence, we conducted a secondary analysis of 62 human-operant data sets using ABCABC reversal designs from two laboratories in the United States. We found significant reductions in the magnitude of resurgence during the second exposure to extinction relative to the first exposure when all other phase variables were held constant. These results suggest that researchers should exercise caution when using within-subject, across-phase replications to compare resurgence between variable manipulations with human participants.

REINFORCEMENT RATE AND RESURGENCE: A PARAMETRIC ANALYSIS

The effects of reinforcement rates of alternative responding on resurgence were studied in two experiments with rats. In both experiments, left-and right-lever pressing were reinforced according to a multiple schedule in the Training and Alternative Reinforcement phase, respectively. In the Test phase, reinforcers were discontinued. In Experiment 1, reinforcement rates were similar between components in the Training phase, and different between components in the Alternative Reinforcement phase. This latter difference was manipulated parametrically across conditions. Resurgence occurred more frequently (i.e., in more sessions) and was of greater magnitude (i.e., response rates were relatively higher) in the rich (i.e., higher reinforcement rate) than in the lean (i.e., lower reinforcement rate) component. Additionally, for two of the four rats, the magnitude of resurgence in both components was positively related to reinforcement rates in the Alternative-Reinforcement phase. In Experiment 2, reinforcement rates were different between components in the Training phase, and similar between components in the Alternative Reinforcement phase.