Resurgence of Previously Reinforced Responding: Research and Application

Abstract

Previously learned responses recur under a variety of conditions. Whether such recurrence is good news or bad news depends on the circumstances of the recurrence. Recurrence of a previously eliminated problem behavior is bad news, but the recurrence of a previously established strategy that facilitates constructive problem solving receives a warmer reception. One label attached to some recurrent responding is resurgence. The term is used to describe a procedure, to describe the behavioral effect of the procedure, and to describe a behavioral process (cf. Mazur, 2006). These three uses of the term often are concurrent. Laboratory studies with nonhuman and human animals have isolated some of the variables that contribute to resurgence. In this review, we consider these variables and their implications for facilitating or reducing the likelihood of past behavior recurring in applied research and practice (hereafter, application). Resurgence is said to occur when a previously learned response recurs following a hiatus from that response, during which time some other response first is reinforced and thereafter extinguished. It is during the final condition that the previously learned response resurges. The process of resurgence thus involves three phases. In the first, or reinforcement, phase, a response, A, is reinforced. In the second, or alternative reinforcement, phase, a second response, B, is reinforced while Response A is extinguished. In the third, or resurgence, phase, Response B is extinguished while extinction remains in effect for Response A. The recurrence of Response A is labeled as resurgence. Resurgence may be distinguished from several other circumstances wherein previously learned responses recur. Spontaneous recovery similarly occurs following extinction of such responses, and after an absence of exposure to the extinction situation. It differs from resurgence in that other responses are not (systematically) reinforced during extinction of the response that later spontaneously recovers (but see Cleland, Guerin, Foster, and Temple [2001] for a discussion of circumstances in which resurgence may be considered an instance of spontaneous recovery). Reinstatement occurs when a previously learned response recurs during a period of response-independent delivery of the reinforcer previously used to maintain the response, but after that response first is extinguished. In reinstatement, the response recurs as a result of the evocative, discriminative stimulus effects of the now response-independent presentations of the previously established reinforcer (cf. Franks & Lattal, 1976). Response induction or response generalization may be considered instances of response recurrence in which topographies develop that are similar to the reinforced one. The distinguishing features of these phenomena are important for application because they may result in the re-emergence of responding under different conditions or in different forms. Although all four types of response recurrence have implications for application, the present analysis is restricted to resurgence. Examples of Resurgence The first systematic experimental analysis of resurgence appears to have been that of Carey (1951; [see also Carey, 1953]). Two groups of rats were trained to lever press. With one group, a sequence of two lever-press responses that occurred within 0.25 s of one another, which were described as "doubles," first was reinforced. With the other group, only single responses were reinforced. Subsequently, the conditions were reversed for the two groups such that the "doubles" group received reinforcers following single responses and the "singles" group received reinforcers following double responses. In a final phase, lever pressing was extinguished for both groups. During extinction, as the number of instances of the last-reinforced response sequence (singles or doubles) decreased, the frequency of the other, first reinforced, pattern increased. …