|
| Extinction-Induced Resurgence: Some New Findings |
| Tuesday, June 1, 2010 |
| 10:30 AM–11:50 AM |
| Bonham C (Grand Hyatt) |
| Area: EAB; Domain: Experimental Analysis |
| Chair: Adam H. Doughty (College of Charleston) |
| Abstract: The concept of resurgence refers to the recovery of previously extinguished responding when a recently reinforced response is extinguished. The concept provide behavior analysts with a more descriptive means of understanding findings sometimes attributed to Freud’s concept of regression. It has been argued that resurgence deserves empirical and theoretical interest by both basic and applied behavior analysts because of its relevance to a variety of topics including behavioral history, drug relapse, severe problem behavior, communication disorders, and problem solving. In this symposium, the importance of investigating resurgence is demonstrated by considering several issues. Holloway, Kastner, and Doughty first describe some challenges and successes of studying resurgence in the human operant laboratory. Next, da Silva will discuss how the impact of procedural factors can contribute in significant ways to our understanding of the necessary and sufficient variables controlling resurgence. Lieving next will present results from a series of experiments with rats that bear on an understanding of discriminative stimulus control over resurgence, a topic he relates to applied behavior analytic work. Finally, Quick, Pyszczynski, Colston, and Shahan will discuss their recent investigations involving how resurgence relates to drug relapse, specifically to the recovery of responses that previously produced cocaine delivery. |
| |
| Examination of Resurgence in College Students |
| CHRISEY HOLLOWAY (College of Charleston), Rebecca M Kastner (College of Charleston), Adam H. Doughty (College of Charleston) |
| Abstract: In the animal operant laboratory over the past few years, there has been an increased interest in extinction-induced resurgence. There also have been, along with these animal studies, conceptual extrapolations to human behavior outside the laboratory. Despite this aforementioned work, there have been minimal empirical investigations of resurgence involving human participants. Consequently, our recent work in the human operant laboratory involving extinction-induced resurgence is described here. Our goal has been not only to search for procedures to produce resurgence reliably in human participants but to study the variables that produce differential resurgence. We first report results involving the resurgence of derived relations. We also report results showing differential resurgence as a function of training history. We conclude by noting our future research directions. |
| |
| Concurrent Resurgence of Nose Poking in Rats |
| STEPHANIE P. DA SILVA (Columbus State University) |
| Abstract: Two experiments were conducted to replicate prior reports that the relative resurgence rates of concurrent operants is proportionate to the relative response rates produced by prior reinforcement contingencies for those operants (da Silva, Maxwell, and Lattal, 2008). In both experiments of the present study, rats first were exposed to concurrent VI VI schedules for nose poking. Then, in the second condition, nose poking was extinguished while lever pressing was reinforced. After lever pressing was established, it too was placed on extinction and the resurgence of nose poking was measured. The two experiments differed in the location of the lever within the chamber, which was altered because of a failure to obtain any resurgence during the first experiment. The role and impact of experimental procedures in/on our examination and understanding of resurgence will be discussed. |
| |
| Antecedent Stimulus Control of Resurgence |
| GREGORY A. LIEVING (West Virginia University Institute of Technology) |
| Abstract: The contribution of antecedent stimulus control over the extinction-induced recovery (i.e. resurgence) of lever pressing was examined with six rats. Lever pressing first was established with food reinforcement in a two-lever operant chamber. In a second condition, responding on the previously-unused lever was reinforced with food reinforcement and the previous response was extinguished concurrently. Extinction then was implemented with (Experiment 1), without (Experiment 2), or with a variation of (Experiment 3) the discriminative stimuli present during reinforcement conditions. The results indicated that the resurgence effect is modulated by the discriminative control exerted over the operant that was reinforced historically. The results are discussed in relation to previous research in behavioral history, and their implications for applied behavior analysis. |
| |
| Resurgence of Cocaine Seeking by Removal of a Non-Drug Alternative Reinforcer |
| STACEY QUICK (Utah State University), Adam Pyszczynski (Utah State University), Kelli A. Colston (Utah State University), Timothy A. Shahan (Utah State University) |
| Abstract: Previous research using the resurgence model of drug relapse has demonstrated that removal of a non-drug reinforcer for an alternative response produces increased alcohol seeking. The present experiment assessed the extent to which cocaine seeking increased as a result of removing food deliveries for an alternative response. Rats were first trained to press a lever for intravenous infusions of cocaine. Following a stable baseline of cocaine self-administration, cocaine deliveries were omitted and food pellets were provided for an alternative nose-poke response. Once lever pressing had decreased to less than 10% of baseline, food pellets for the alternative response were also omitted. Cocaine seeking increased when the non-drug alternative reinforcer was omitted despite continued extinction of previously reinforced cocaine-maintained behavior. These results provide further evidence that removal of an alternative source of reinforcement may induce a resurgence of drug seeking. Subsequent research will address pharmacological treatments that may reduce the resurgence of cocaine seeking by omission of a non-drug alternative reinforcer. |
|
| |