Skip to main content
Log in

Responding Fails to Extinguish During Human-Laboratory Experiments of Resurgence

  • ORIGINAL ARTICLE
  • Published:
The Psychological Record Aims and scope Submit manuscript

A Correction to this article was published on 25 May 2021

This article has been updated

Abstract

Resurgence is observed when a previously extinguished behavior reemerges while a more recently reinforced behavior is extinguished. Resurgence is further defined as responding that is greater than an inactive control response that has never produced reinforcement. Recent studies of resurgence using neurotypical adults as participants in human-laboratory investigations have produced discrepant patterns of responding compared to nonhuman animal laboratory studies when comparing control response performance. Namely, human-laboratory investigations have produced no differences between target and control responding, and persistence of all response types across the resurgence-test phase. In the present study, we conducted two human-laboratory experiments to determine if these effects were a product of the history of reinforcement associated with the target response as well as the types of technology used in human-laboratory studies. For all participants, we found no differences in levels of resurgence and occurrence for the target and control response, respectively. Moreover, we observed persistence of all response types across the resurgence-test phase in a manner consistent with prior research. This finding was apparent even when the length of baseline (i.e., reinforcement for the target) was increased, when the length of extinction was increased, and when low-technology stimuli were used. We highlight the implications of this outcome in the context of recent human-laboratory studies that have used arbitrary responses to study resurgence, and discuss the possible role of verbal mediation in these investigations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Change history

References

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Valdeep Saini.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.

Informed Consent

All procedures performed involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments. This study was reviewed and received clearance from the SUNY Upstate Medical University Institutional Review Board [#960296-2 and #1641106-1]. Informed consent and publication of findings was provided in writing by participants. The authors have no conflict of interest to declare.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

The original online version of this article was revised: The last names of 2 co-authors are misspelled and should be corrected as follows:

"Kate Derrenback" should be "Kate Derrenbacker".

"Arohan Rima" should be "Arohan Rimal".

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Saini, V., Sullivan, W.E., Craig, A.R. et al. Responding Fails to Extinguish During Human-Laboratory Experiments of Resurgence. Psychol Rec 71, 325–336 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40732-021-00469-8

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40732-021-00469-8

Keywords

Navigation