Schepers Scott T, Bouton Mark E
Department of Psychological Science, University of Vermon.
J Exp Psychol Anim Learn Cogn. 2017 Jan;43(1):47. doi: 10.1037/xan0000121.
Reports an error in "Effects of reinforcer distribution during response elimination on resurgence of an instrumental behavior" by Scott T. Schepers and Mark E. Bouton (, 2015[Apr], Vol 41[2], 179-192). The mean R2 responding during the resurgence test in the alternating group in the lower right panel of Figure 4 was incorrect. A corrected figure is given in the correction. (The following abstract of the original article appeared in record 2015-12206-001.) Resurgence has commonly been viewed as the recovery of an extinguished instrumental behavior that occurs when an alternative behavior that has replaced it is also extinguished. Three experiments with rat subjects examined the effects on resurgence of the temporal distribution of reinforcement for the alternative behavior that is presented while the first response is being eliminated. Experiments 1 and 2 examined resurgence when rich rates of reinforcement at the onset of response elimination became leaner over sessions (i.e., forward thinning) and when lean rates became richer (i.e., reverse thinning). Both procedures weakened resurgence compared with that in a group that received the richest rate during all sessions. However, forward thinning was more effective than reverse thinning at reducing the resurgence effect. Experiment 3 found that final resurgence was eliminated when the alternative behavior was reinforced and extinguished in alternating response elimination sessions. The results are consistent with the hypothesis that reinforcer delivery during response elimination provides a contextual stimulus for the extinction of the original behavior; its removal during resurgence testing causes ABC renewal to occur. The results are less consistent with an alternative account that emphasizes the removal of response disruption caused by alternative reinforcement (Shahan & Sweeney, 2011). Other theoretical and applied implications are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record
报告斯科特·T·谢佩斯和马克·E·布顿所著《反应消除过程中强化物分布对工具性反应重现的影响》（《实验心理学杂志：动物学习与认知》，2015年[4月]，第41卷[2]，第179 - 192页）中的一处错误。图4右下角交替组在重现测试期间的平均R2反应数据有误。修正后的图表见勘误表。（原始文章的以下摘要出现在记录2015 - 12206 - 001中。）重现通常被视为一种已消退的工具性反应的恢复，当替代它的另一种行为也被消退时就会发生。三项以大鼠为实验对象的实验研究了在消除第一种反应时呈现的替代行为的强化时间分布对重现的影响。实验1和实验2研究了在反应消除开始时丰富的强化频率在各实验阶段变得稀疏（即正向渐变）以及稀疏频率变得丰富（即反向渐变）时的重现情况。与在所有实验阶段都接受最丰富强化频率的组相比，这两种程序都削弱了重现。然而，正向渐变在降低重现效应方面比反向渐变更有效。实验3发现，当替代行为在交替的反应消除实验阶段中得到强化和消退时，最终的重现被消除了。这些结果与以下假设一致：反应消除过程中的强化物传递为原始行为的消退提供了一种情境刺激；在重现测试期间去除该刺激会导致ABC更新的发生。这些结果与另一种强调去除替代强化引起的反应干扰的解释（沙汉和斯威尼，2011）不太一致。还讨论了其他理论和应用方面的影响。（《心理学文摘数据库记录》
