Examination of alternative-response discrimination training and resurgence in rats

Resurgence and Behavioral Contrast, Compared and Contrasted

This is a review of the relation between operant response resurgence and behavioral contrast. Both are defined by rate changes in a target response as a function of environmental changes spatially or temporally distal to the location of the target response. The typical procedures for investigating these two phenomena differ in that (1) resurgence is studied using concurrent schedules and behavioral contrast predominantly with multiple schedules and (2) resurgence is assessed against an extinction baseline of the target response and behavioral contrast has been assessed under a variety of reinforcement schedules. The distinctions between concurrent and multiple schedules, however, may be ones of degree rather than kind. Research into both phenomena reveals considerable overlap in the controlling variables of the two. With certain caveats, resurgence appears to be an instance of behavioral contrast measured against an extinction baseline. Because of Point 2 above, most instances of behavioral contrast do not meet the definition of resurgence. Investigating resurgence while maintaining target responding by a schedule of reinforcement might be useful, but such a procedure would not qualify as resurgence because it violates the definition of resurgence as the return of a previously reinforced but currently extinguished response. Several implications of the similarities and differences between the two are discussed.

A systematic review of enhanced resurgence paradigms

Following successful treatment in which problem behavior is reduced, it may reemerge as a function of changes in contextual stimuli or the worsening of reinforcement conditions for an alternative response. Although understudied, preliminary research suggests that simultaneous changes in contextual stimuli and reinforcement conditions may represent particularly exigent treatment challenges that create the condition for additive or superadditive relapse. The purpose of the present review was to systematically examine the relapse literature involving simultaneous changes in contextual stimuli and reinforcement conditions in relapse tests and experimental preparations arranged to evaluate their effect on response recovery. We identified 16 empirical articles spanning 27 experiments. Although all experiments included at least one condition that experienced a change in contextual stimuli and worsening of alternative reinforcement conditions, only two experiments included the comparison conditions needed to precisely evaluate additive and superadditive relapse. Our findings establish the preclinical generality of relapse effects associated with simultaneous changes to reinforcement conditions and contextual stimuli across a range of subjects, schedule arrangements, response topographies, reinforcers, and types of contextual changes. We make several recommendations for future research based on our findings from this nascent and clinically relevant subdomain of the relapse literature.

Relapse and its mitigation: Toward behavioral inoculation

Relapse following the successful treatment of problem behavior can increase the likelihood of injury and the need for more intensive care. Current research offers some predictions of how treatment procedures may contribute to relapse, and conversely, how the risk of relapse can be mitigated. This review describes relapse-mitigation procedures with varying levels of support, the quantitative models that have influenced the research on relapse mitigation, different experimental methods for measuring relapse mitigation, and directions for future research. We propose that by viewing the implementation of relapse-mitigation procedures as a means of producing behavioral inoculation, clinicians are placed in the proactive and intentional role of exposing their client's behavior to an array of reinforcement and stimulus conditions during treatment with the goal of decreasing the detrimental impact of future treatment challenges.

Conducting Translational Research in the Context of Patient Care

Although much has been written on the importance of translational research for bridging the continuum of basic science to clinical practice, few authors have described how such work can be carried out practically when working with patient populations in the context of ongoing clinical service delivery, where the priorities for patient care can sometimes conflict with the methods and goals of translational research. In this article, we explore some of the considerations for conducting this type of work while balancing clinical responsibilities that ensure high-quality patient care. We also discuss strategies we have found to jointly facilitate translational research and improve routine, clinical service delivery. A primary goal of this article is to encourage others working in applied settings to contribute to the increasingly important role that translational research plays in our science and practice by helping to better characterize and potentially lessen or remove barriers that may have impeded such investigations in the past.