Search

Serial reversal-learning procedures are simple preparations that allow for a better understanding of how animals learn about environmental changes, including flexibly shifting responding to adapt to changing reinforcement contingencies. The present study examined serial reversal learning with humans by arranging both midsession and variable contingency reversals across two experiments. We also examined the effects of extinction by adding nonreinforced trials at the end of later sessions and provided the first evaluation of effects of win-stay/lose-shift versus counting strategies on accuracy and response latency of humans' reversal-learning performance. In each experiment, responding tracked contingency reversals, primarily with participants using either win-stay/lose-shift or counting strategies. Introducing variable reversal points in the second experiment resulted in near-exclusive win-stay/lose-shift responding among participants and eliminated counting of trials. Each experiment also revealed an immediate shift from S2 to S1 after experiencing extinction during the initial test trial, indicating resurgence of the initial response through a win-stay/lose-shift response pattern. Therefore, the present study replicates and extends prior findings of a win-stay/lose shift response pattern in situations of greater uncertainty. These findings suggest that differences in environmental certainty induce qualitatively different decision-making strategies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Resurgence occurs when a previously reinforced and then extinguished target response increases due to a worsening of reinforcement conditions for an alternative response. We conducted four crowdsourcing experiments to evaluate effects of alternative-reinforcer rate and magnitude on resurgence with humans. Contingent on an alternative response, we manipulated across groups either the rate of point delivery (Experiment 1) or number of points delivered per reinforcer (Experiments 2–3). Experiment 4 arranged combinations of high- or low-rate and high- or low-magnitude alternative reinforcement across four groups. When extinguishing alternative responding across experiments, we observed resurgence of target responding with relatively high rates of alternative reinforcement but differences in reinforcer magnitude did not influence resurgence. A quantitative model based on the concatenated matching law, Resurgence as Choice in Context (RaC2), provided a poor fit to the data, generally underpredicted target responding, and could not account for data from control groups experiencing extinction of target responding in the absence of alternative reinforcement. We then fit a modified version of RaC2 borrowing an assumption from theories of choice that suggest some proportion of reinforcers are misallocated between responses – this modified version of RaC2 provided a better account of these findings. • Examined effects of reinforcer rate and magnitude on resurgence through crowdsourcing. • In four experiments, greater reinforcer rates but not magnitudes increased resurgence. • We fit a quantitative model based on matching, Resurgence as Choice in Context (RaC2). • RaC2 fits improved when assuming reinforcers are misallocated between responses. • Misallocation also allowed RaC2 to be fit for the first time to simple extinction data. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Resurgence occurs when a worsening of conditions for an alternative response (e.g., extinction) increases a previously reinforced and subsequently extinguished target response. In contrast, renewal is an increase in a response previously eliminated by extinction following a contextual change. Moreover, arranging contextual changes during resurgence tests has enhanced relapse compared with the absence of contextual changes. Several laboratory studies evaluating resurgence in humans have included interruptions of operant tasks by presenting instructions or "blackouts" immediately prior to phase changes in which reinforcement contingencies change. Such interruptions could enhance relapse during testing similarly to changes in contextual stimuli. We tested this possibility in the present study with human participants recruited via Amazon Mechanical Turk by interrupting the task across groups with 1-s blackouts every 12 s, 60 s, between phases, or by arranging no blackouts in a control group. We found that blackouts prior to phase changes increased resurgence effects relative to no blackouts, suggesting that blackouts between phases are a type of contextual manipulation serving to increase the salience of contingency changes. • Evaluated whether blackouts serve as contextual stimuli to enhance resurgence. • Brief blackouts between phase changes increased resurgence compared to no blackouts. • Between-phase blackouts could increase salience of contingency changes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Laboratory models of relapse provide methods for evaluating challenges to behavioral treatments with differential reinforcement of an alternative response (DRA). Resurgence occurs with the worsening of conditions of reinforcement for appropriate behavior and renewal occurs when transitioning out of a treatment context. Across five experiments, participants recruited via online crowdsourcing pressed onscreen buttons to earn points exchangeable for money and contexts sometimes changed through changes in the background image. Returning to the training context (ABA, Experiment 1) and transitioning to a novel context (ABC, Experiment 2) produced greater resurgence when removing alternative reinforcement in comparison with remaining in the treatment context (ABB). In contrast, we observed little difference in resurgence among AAA, ABB, and AAC context manipulations (Experiment 3) and ABA, ABC, and AAC context manipulations (Experiment 4). In Experiment 5, we evaluated relative contributions of the presence versus absence of context changes (ABA vs. ABB) in combination with or without the removal of alternative reinforcement. Both changing context and removing alternative reinforcement increased responding in isolation and the combination produced greater-than-additive effects. Overall, the present findings demonstrate a consistent effect of removing alternative reinforcement on relapse that, under certain conditions, can be enhanced by context change. • We evaluated effects of context changes on resurgence of a button press with humans. • ABA and ABC context changes enhanced resurgence relative to ABB context changes. • Similar levels of resurgence occurred with AAA, ABB, and AAC context changes. • Similar levels of resurgence occurred with ABA, ABC, and AAC context changes. • Context changes and extinction produced greater-than-additive response increases. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]