Bouton Mark E, Thrailkill Eric A, Bergeria Cecilia L, Davis Danielle R
University of Vermont, United States.
University of Vermont, United States.
Behav Processes. 2017 Aug;141(Pt 1):11-18. doi: 10.1016/j.beproc.2017.02.005. Epub 2017 Feb 7.
Two experiments with rats examined relapse of an operant behavior that occurred after the behavior was suppressed by reinforcing (incentivizing) an alternative behavior. In the first phase, a target response (R1) was reinforced. In a treatment phase, R1 was still reinforced, but a new response (R2) was introduced and associated with a larger reinforcer. As in human contingency management treatments, incentivizing R2 this way was effective at suppressing R1. However, when R2's reinforcement was discontinued, there was a robust and immediate relapse to R1. Experiment 1 found that the strength of R1 during relapse testing was not different from that seen in a no treatment control. Experiment 2 found that relapse could nevertheless be reduced by presenting reinforcers not contingent on responding during the test. Either the reinforcer for R1 or the reinforcer for R2 (which were qualitatively different types of food pellets) were effective. The experiments introduce a laboratory method for studying relapse and how to prevent it after contingency management treatments, and suggest at least one treatment that discourages relapse. The incentivized choice paradigm differs from other models of relapse of operant behavior (e.g., resurgence, renewal, reinstatement) in that it does not focus on the return of behaviors that are inhibited by extinction.
两项以大鼠为对象的实验研究了一种操作性行为的复发情况，该行为在通过强化（激励）另一种行为而被抑制后出现。在第一阶段，对目标反应（R1）进行强化。在治疗阶段，R1仍然得到强化，但引入了一种新反应（R2），并将其与更大的强化物相关联。与人类权变管理治疗一样，以这种方式激励R2有效地抑制了R1。然而，当R2的强化停止时，出现了强烈且立即向R1的复发。实验1发现，复发测试期间R1的强度与未治疗对照组中观察到的强度没有差异。实验2发现，通过在测试期间呈现与反应无关强化物，复发仍然可以减少。R1的强化物或R2的强化物（它们是质量上不同类型的食物颗粒）都是有效的。这些实验引入了一种研究复发以及在权变管理治疗后如何预防复发的实验室方法，并提出了至少一种抑制复发的治疗方法。激励选择范式与操作性行为复发的其他模型（例如，恢复、更新、复现）不同，因为它不关注被消退抑制的行为的恢复。
