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

Kestner, Kathryn M.; Diaz‐Salvat, Claudia C.; Peter, Claire C. St.; Peterson, Stephanie

doi:10.1002/jeab.477

Cited by 24 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Another limitation specific to Experiment 2 worth noting is that all participants had prior exposure to a resurgence procedure in Experiment 1. Other investigators have demonstrated previously that (a) resurgence is a repeatable phenomenon within subjects and (b) the magnitude of resurgence tends to decrease across successive assessments (e.g., Kestner, Diaz‐Salvat, St. Peter, & Peterson, ; Lieving & Lattal, ; Volkert et al, ). Thus, it remains uncertain whether, and if so, to what extent outcomes from this experiment may have been affected by the participants learning history with similar procedures.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 93%

Measurement of nontargeted problem behavior during investigations of resurgence

Sullivan

Saini

DeRosa

et al. 2019

J of App Behav Analysis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Resurgence occurs when a previously extinguished behavior reemerges once a more recently reinforced behavior is placed on extinction. Previous research has suggested that nontargeted responses within the same response class recur alongside target-response resurgence (e.g., da Silva, Maxwell, & Lattal, 2008;Lieving, Hagopian, Long, & O'Connor, 2004). The purpose of this two-experiment investigation was to examine target response resurgence while simultaneously measuring the occurrence of nontargeted responses. Three children diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder who displayed multiple topographies of problem behavior participated. In Experiment 1, a three-phase resurgence procedure was conducted and all three participants displayed target-response resurgence accompanied by the emergence of nontargeted forms of problem behavior. These findings were replicated in Experiment 2 using a 30-min assessment procedure. The implications of these findings as they pertain to the treatment of severe problem behavior and utility of a brief relapse assessment are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 93%

Measurement of nontargeted problem behavior during investigations of resurgence

Sullivan

Saini

DeRosa

et al. 2019

J of App Behav Analysis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In other studies, returning to Phase‐1 training has produced similar or greater resurgence with repeated testing (e.g., da Silva, Maxwell, & Lattal, 2008; Doughty, da Silva, & Lattal, ). In a study with university students, Kestner, Diaz‐Salvat, St. Peter, and Peterson () found a reduction in resurgence with the second exposure to the third of three phases of a resurgence procedure. As a whole, therefore, the existing literature to date is unclear whether repeated testing tends to mitigate return of target responding when there is a return to Phase‐1 training between tests.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Resurgence is greater following a return to the training context than remaining in the extinction context

Podlesnik

Kuroda

Jimenez‐Gomez

et al. 2019

J Exper Analysis Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present study examined whether resurgence of a previously reinforced target response upon removing alternative reinforcement would be greater when (1) returning to the original training context (ABA context changes) versus (2) remaining in the analogue treatment context in which the alternative response was differentially reinforced (ABB context changes). Experiment 1 arranged reinforcement of button pressing with points exchangeable for money in university students. Experiment 2 arranged reinforcement of lever pressing with food for rats. Experiment 3 arranged reinforcement of responses to a touchscreen with small bites of food with children diagnosed with ASD. Overall, resurgence of target responding tended to be greater when returning to the original training context (A) than when remaining in the analogue treatment context (B). These findings suggest context changes with differential reinforcement treatments could exacerbate the recurrence of problem behavior resulting from reductions in treatment integrity through failure to reinforce appropriate behavior.

show abstract

“…This approach minimized one potential source of variation present in other studies of resurgence that used within-subject methods. Specifically, repeatedly presenting the three phases comprising resurgence assessments can reduce resurgence during subsequent tests (e.g., Cleland et al, 2000;Kestner, Diaz-Salvat, St. Peter, & Peterson, 2018). In addition to avoiding any influence from repeated assessments, alternating sessions during testing also reduces the overall number of sessions required to assess both types of resurgence testing when compared to evaluating such tests sequentially across three-phase assessments.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Examining stimuli paired with alternative reinforcement to mitigate resurgence in children diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder and pigeons

Shvarts

Jimenez‐Gomez

Bai

et al. 2019

J Exper Analysis Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

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

Cited by 24 publications

References 21 publications

Measurement of nontargeted problem behavior during investigations of resurgence

Measurement of nontargeted problem behavior during investigations of resurgence

Resurgence is greater following a return to the training context than remaining in the extinction context

Examining stimuli paired with alternative reinforcement to mitigate resurgence in children diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder and pigeons

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About