Accelerat ing t he world's research.

Effects of baseline reinforcement rate

on operant ABA and ABC renewal
Amy Odum

Cite this paper Downloaded from Academia.edu 

Get the citation in MLA, APA, or Chicago styles

Related papers Download a PDF Pack of t he best relat ed papers 

Effect s of t he t ype of reinforcer on renewal of operant responding

Kennet h Madrigal

Reinforcer magnit ude and resist ance t o disrupt ion of forget t ing funct ions and response rat es
Amy Odum

Different ial Reinforcement of Alt ernat ive Behavior Increases Resist ance t o Ext inct ion: Clinical Demo…
Jennifer McComas
 Behavioural Processes 108 (2014) 87–93

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Behavioural Processes
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/behavproc

Effects of baseline reinforcement rate on operant ABA

and ABC renewal
Meredith S. Berry ∗ , Mary M. Sweeney 1 , Amy L. Odum
Department of Psychology, Utah State University, 2810 Old Main Hill, Logan, UT 84322, United States

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Renewal is a relapse phenomenon that occurs when the contextual stimuli present during extinction
Received 9 May 2014 change, and consequently, an extinguished response increases in rate. Two experiments assessed extinc-
Received in revised form 29 August 2014 tion and renewal of key-pecking in pigeons in a two-component multiple schedule wherein baseline
Accepted 7 September 2014
reinforcer rates were delivered at relatively rich or lean rates. In Experiment 1, an ABA design was used
Available online 20 September 2014
in which baseline stimuli were steady key lights (Context A). Food was then removed during extinc-
tion, and simultaneously, the context was changed by flashing the key lights (Context B). Following
Keywords:
extinction, steady key lights were reintroduced, but food remained unavailable. Key-pecking was more
ABA renewal
ABC renewal
resistant to extinction and recovered to a greater degree in the rich relative to the lean component. In
Behavioral momentum theory Experiment 2, we introduced novel stimuli following extinction (ABC renewal) rather than reintroducing
Extinction baseline stimuli. Similar to Experiment 1, in Experiment 2 resistance to change and renewal remained
Persistence greater in the component associated with higher reinforcer rates during baseline. These findings provide
Relapse additional support for the context-specificity of operant extinction, and support the prediction of behav-
ioral momentum theory that stimuli associated with higher rates of reinforcement engender greater
persistence and relapse than those associated with lower rates of reinforcement.
© 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Although the persistence of some behaviors (e.g., academic
endeavors, foraging) despite disruption is beneficial, the persis-
tence of other behaviors (e.g., drug use, anxiety) is detrimental.
One source of disruption is extinction,2 which can be defined in
operant conditioning as the removal of a reinforcer (e.g., food) for a
previously reinforced response. Extinction can result in a decrease
and eventual cessation of the response (Ferster and Skinner, 1957).
Response reduction as a result of extinction exposure and subse-
quent relapse in animal models has been used as an analogue to
reduction and reoccurrence of problematic behaviors in applied
settings (e.g., relapse of drug use following treatment), and has
particular clinical relevance (see Bouton, 2002 for review; Bouton
et al., 2011). For example, 40–60% of drug and alcohol users relapse
∗ Corresponding author. Present address: Department of Society and Conserva-
tion, University of Montana, 32 Campus Drive, Missoula, MT 59812, United States.
Tel.: +1 407 595 1560.
E-mail address: meredith.berry@umontana.edu (M.S. Berry).
1
Present address: Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Johns Hop-
kins University School of Medicine, 5510 Nathan Shock Drive, Baltimore, MD, 21224,
United States.
2
Note that the terms extinction as well as renewal are used to describe both
behavioral effects and procedural manipulations (e.g., conditions).
following treatment (e.g., Moos and Moos, 2006). Learning during
extinction is context-specific, and renewal is a form of relapse of
extinguished behavior that occurs by simply changing the extinc-
tion context (Bouton, 2002). Context has been defined as the
“constellation of cues that are in the background whenever learn-
ing occurs” (Bouton, 2002, p. 977). Research that identifies variables
that influence persistence (e.g., Zarcone et al., 1997) and renewal
of operant behavior across contexts may help to inform treatments
for a range of maladaptive behaviors.
Behavioral momentum theory is one framework that proposes
important variables for response persistence and renewal of
operant (i.e., voluntary) behavior (see Craig et al., 2014). According
to behavioral momentum theory, there are two separable aspects
of operant behavior, response rate and resistance to change
(see Nevin and Grace, 2000). Response rate is governed by the
response–reinforcer relation, whereas resistance to change (i.e.,
persistence) of behavior is governed by the stimulus–reinforcer
relation (see Nevin and Grace, 2000 for a review; Nevin et al.,
1990, 2009; Shahan and Sweeney, 2011). In other words, stimuli
associated with higher reinforcer rates result in greater persistence
during disruption (e.g., extinction) than stimuli associated with
lower reinforcer rates. The predictions of behavioral momentum
theory have been useful in illuminating the influence of previous
reinforcement history on behavioral persistence including drug
use (Quick and Shahan, 2009) and memory (Berry and Odum, 2014;

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.beproc.2014.09.009
0376-6357/© 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
88 M.S. Berry et al. / Behavioural Processes 108 (2014) 87–93
Odum et al., 2005) and are robust and consistent across different
populations (Dube and McIlvane, 2001; Grimes and Shull, 2001;
Igaki and Sakagami, 2004; Nevin, 1974; see Nevin and Shahan,
2011, for review), and reinforcers (Grimes and Shull, 2001; Quick
and Shahan, 2009; Shahan and Burke, 2004; Sweeney and Shahan,
2013).
Behavioral momentum theory and empirical tests suggest that
response rates (governed by the response–reinforcer relation) and
response persistence (governed by stimulus–reinforcer relation)
are separable aspects of behavior—and response rates during base-
line should not dictate persistence. All else being equal, however,
lower response rates may be more resistant to change than higher
response rates (e.g., Nevin et al., 2001). For example, Nevin et al.
(2001) examined the effects of response rates on resistance to
disruption. Nevin et al. trained pigeons on multiple random-ratio
random-interval schedules with equated reinforcer rates, and then
disrupted performance with intercomponent food, extinction, and
prefeeding. Results challenged the independence of response rates
in baseline and resistance to disruption by showing a correla-
tion between the two. Specifically, when reinforcer rates were
equated in two-component multiple schedules, lower response
rates were more persistent upon disruption. As described below,
extending the predictions of behavioral momentum theory to the
phenomenon of renewal requires additional tests that address the
separable aspects of response rates and response persistence.
In a recent extension of behavioral momentum theory to
renewal, Podlesnik and Shahan (2009) arranged a multiple sched-
ule with a rich and a lean component during baseline to investigate
the effects of different reinforcer rates on subsequent resistance to
extinction and renewal. Each component was associated with dif-
ferent stimuli. They found that resistance to extinction and renewal
were greater in the rich component relative to the lean compo-
nent. Podlesnik and Shahan, however, arranged a baseline schedule
that occasioned lower response rates in the rich component rela-
tive to the lean by adding response-independent food delivery to
the rich component, thereby strengthening the stimulus–reinforcer
relation in the rich component (e.g., Nevin et al., 1990; Shahan
and Burke, 2004). Greater relapse in the rich component during
renewal in the Podlesnik and Shahan (2009) experiment could be
due, therefore, to the lower response rates in baseline.
If lower response rates in baseline dictated higher levels of per-
sistence and relapse in the rich component relative to the lean
component in the work of Podlesnik and Shahan (2009), we would
expect that arranging a lean component which occasioned lower
response rates would also result in higher levels of persistence and
relapse. We hypothesized that resistance to extinction and renewal
are driven by the stimulus–reinforcer relation, and would conse-
quently be greater in a component arranging higher reinforcer rates
(i.e., the rich component), rather than lower response rates (i.e., the
lean component)—as predicted by behavioral momentum theory.
We therefore designed the present study to extend the work of
Podlesnik and Shahan (2009) in three ways.
First, the response independent food added to the baseline
preparation of Podlesnik and Shahan resulted in lower response
rates in the rich component relative to the lean. Because lower
response rates can be more persistent than higher response rates
upon disruption, one critical aspect to further extend behavioral
momentum theory to relapse is a baseline preparation as in the
present experiment that occasions greater response rates in the
rich component relative to the lean (e.g., Nevin et al., 2001). Sec-
ond, many unhealthy reinforcers in naturalistic settings are entirely
response-dependent rather than independent. For this reason we
used only response-dependent food delivery.
Finally, we extended the work of Podlesnik and Shahan (2009)
to ABC renewal. Renewal can occur not only when the origi-
nal baseline context is implemented (i.e., ABA renewal), but also
when a novel context is introduced (ABC renewal). Both renewal
phenomena may be the result of similar processes of excitation
and less generalization of inhibition (Bouton et al., 2011; Bouton
and Todd, 2014; Neumann and Kitlertsirivatana, 2010). This result
has important practical implications in that individuals who have
reduced or eliminated problematic behaviors through extinction
might be likely to relapse following treatment by simply leaving
the rehabilitation context. At present, operant ABC renewal has not
been investigated using a behavioral momentum theory approach
to examine the effects of varied reinforcement history associated
with different stimuli on ABC renewal. Therefore, Experiment 2
tested the generality of the effect of relative reinforcer rates on
renewed responding with the introduction of a novel context fol-
lowing extinction (ABC renewal).
2. Experiment 1
To further extend behavioral momentum theory to renewal, we
arranged a baseline preparation that occasioned greater response
rates in the rich component relative to the lean using only
response-dependent food delivery. In the present experiments,
we expected the stimulus–reinforcer relation to influence per-
sistence and renewal of response rates. As a result, greater
persistence and renewal of response rates in the rich component
were predicted, despite a different method of food delivery (i.e.,
response-dependent) and relative response rates during baseline
than those arranged previously (Podlesnik and Shahan, 2009).
2.1. Method
2.1.1. Subjects
Eight adult unsexed homing pigeons with prior experience
with extinction and variable interval (VI) schedules of food deliv-
ery similar to those arranged here were used. The subjects were
maintained at approximately 80% of free-feeding weight (±15 g)
by post-session supplemental Purina Pigeon Chow as necessary.
Subjects were housed in a temperature- and humidity-controlled
colony room with a 12:12 h light–dark cycle. Water was provided
ad libitum in their home cages.
2.1.2. Apparatus and context manipulations
Four standard 29 cm × 24 cm × 30 cm clear polycarbonate and
aluminum operant chambers housed inside sound attenuating
chambers were used. Chambers were equipped with two 2.5 cm
diameter response keys that required a force of 0.1 N to operate.
The keys were centered on the left and right sides of the intelligence
panel, 20 cm above the floor. The keys could be transilluminated
red, green, or white from behind via a 28 V-DC bulb. Chambers
were also equipped with a 28 V-DC shielded houselight, centered
on the intelligence panel, 26 cm from the floor of the chamber. A
6 cm × 6 cm aperture directly below the houselight and 7 cm from
the chamber floor allowed access to pigeon chow from a raised,
solenoid-operated hopper. During reinforcer delivery, the house-
light and keylights were extinguished and the hopper aperture was
lit by a 28 V-DC bulb. Contingencies were programmed and data
were collected via Med Associates interfacing.
The context was made up by the stimuli within the chamber, as
well as the chamber itself—the context change in this case involved
changing the key lights. During baseline the key lights were steadily
lit. During extinction, the key lights were programmed to flash (0.1-
s on, and 0.1-s off). During the renewal, the keys were again steadily
lit. As vision is an acutely developed sense in pigeons (Ator, 1991),
we selected contextual changes that would be visually percepti-
ble. The contextual changes employed in the present experiment
are similar to those used in previous experiments (e.g., houselight
 M.S. Berry et al. / Behavioural Processes 108 (2014) 87–93
100
Responses Per Minute
80
60
40
20
0 1
Rich Lean
Fig. 1. Average response rates in Experiment 1 for the last 10 sessions of baseline.
Error bars represent the standard error of the mean. Filled and open bars represent
data from the rich and lean components, respectively.
alterations; Podlesnik and Shahan, 2009; Thrailkill and Shahan,
2012).
2.1.3. Procedure
Baseline conditions consisted of a two-component multiple VI
30-s (rich), VI 120-s (lean) schedule (Fleshler and Hoffman, 1962)
in which key-pecking resulted in 2-s hopper presentations. Sched-
ules were comprised of eight intervals and were selected randomly
without replacement until all intervals were used. Each schedule
was associated with a different key color (red or green), which
was counterbalanced across subjects. A 20-s period in which the
houselight was lit and the keys were dark began each session and
separated each component. The first component of the multiple
schedule was selected randomly, after which the two compo-
nents alternated for the remainder of the session. Rich and lean
components were presented five times throughout each session.
Components switched after 3 min and sessions lasted 35 min total
(the session timer did not run during reinforcer delivery).
All subjects experienced 25 daily sessions of baseline. A fixed-
time stability criterion (e.g., Berry et al., 2012; Perone, 1991;
Sidman, 1960), which has been used extensively in previous work
on behavioral momentum (e.g., Podlesnik et al., 2012; Shahan and
Burke, 2004), was employed for baseline and extinction sessions.
Following baseline, extinction was introduced for the duration of
the experiment. During extinction, food was no longer available
and the context was changed (see detailed context manipula-
tion description above). Extinction lasted seven sessions. Following
extinction in the new context, the baseline context was again
introduced, and reinforcers remained unavailable for one session,
which was designated to test for renewal effects (e.g., Bouton et al.,
2011).
2.2. Results
Fig. 1 displays the average response rates of the last ten sessions
of baseline. Table 1 presents individual subject data for response
rates during baseline, as well as the proportion of baseline response
rates during extinction and renewal sessions for Experiments 1 and
2. The difference in response rates across rich and lean components
approached statistical significance (t (7) = 2.09, p = 0.08; 6 of 8 sub-
jects exhibited higher response rates in the rich relative to the lean
component—see Table 1). The difference in response rates across
rich and lean components was in the range of what is expected
using these schedules (VI 30 s VI 120 s; see Catania and Reynolds,
1968), and importantly, is in the opposite direction to that observed
in Podlesnik and Shahan (2009).
Fig. 2 displays the average proportion of baseline response rates
across extinction and renewal sessions (see Table 1 for individual
subject data). Proportion baseline is used to assess response rates
89
1.2
Proportion Baseline
Rich
0.9
Lean
0.6
0.3
0.0
2 3 4 5 6 7 1
Extinction Renewal
Fig. 2. Mean proportion of baseline response rates in Experiment 1 across extinction
and renewal sessions. Error bars represent the standard error of the mean. Filled and
open circles represent data from the rich and lean components, respectively.
relative to baseline rates and across rich and lean schedules (e.g.,
Nevin, 1974). For each subject, proportion of baseline response
rates was calculated using mean response rates during the final
10 sessions of baseline. The majority of subjects showed a higher
proportion of baseline response rates in the first three sessions of
extinction (8/8, 7/8 and 7/8, in sessions 1, 2 and 3 of extinction),
after which the proportion of baseline response rates in both com-
ponents decreased to near zero. Seven of eight subjects showed a
higher proportion of baseline response rates in the rich relative to
the lean component during renewal (Table 1).
Average proportion of baseline response rates decreased with
increased extinction exposure and was greater in the rich compo-
nent, especially in the first 2 sessions of extinction. We conducted
a repeated measures ANOVA with two within subjects factors,
session (each day following baseline, including the return to Con-
text A, was coded as a different session) and component (each
proportion of baseline response rate occurred either in the rich
or the lean component). Proportion of baseline response rates
during extinction and renewal were greater in the rich compo-
nent relative to the lean component, revealed by a main effect
of component3 [F(1,7) = 25.71, p < .005]. Proportion of baseline
response rates decreased with the removal of food as revealed by a
main effect of session [F(7,49) = 25.36, p < .0005], and the decrease
was more rapid in the lean relative to the rich component, shown
by the component by session interaction [F(7,49) = 5.03, p < .0005].
Follow-up simple effects contrasts comparing proportion of base-
line response rates during the return to Context A relative to the
last day of extinction in Context B confirm significant renewal
[F(1,7) = 74.53, p < .0005]. This renewal was greater in the rich rela-
tive to the lean component as shown by a simple effects component
by renewal [i.e., session 7 vs. session 8] interaction [F(1,7) = 7.72,
p < .025]. The same analyses applied to absolute response rates,
rather than proportion baseline response rates, yielded the same
conclusions (data not shown).
2.3. Discussion
Higher proportion of baseline response rates during extinction
and greater renewal were observed in the rich component rel-
ative to the lean component. When considered with Podlesnik
and Shahan (2009), these results show that regardless of relative
3
Statistical comparisons were made between proportion of baseline rates in the
rich and lean components using a one-tailed t-test (˛ criterion of .05). This crite-
rion was used because there is a clear directional prediction of greater persistence
of response rates during extinction and greater relapse in the rich relative to lean
component given previous findings (Podlesnik and Shahan, 2009; Pyszczynski and
Shahan, 2011). One-tailed tests have been used previously in behavioral momen-
tum research (Nevin et al., 2009). We report p less than the closest threshold for
additional detail.
90 M.S. Berry et al. / Behavioural Processes 108 (2014) 87–93

Table 1
Responses per minute during baseline (10 session mean) and proportion of baseline response rates for each extinction and renewal session for each subject (see text).

Experiment 1

Subject 373 121 220 39 223 381 55 11

Rich Lean Rich Lean Rich Lean Rich Lean Rich Lean Rich Lean Rich Lean Rich Lean

Responses per minute (mean) 108.79 74.02 49.23 36.49 71.85 62.93 46.99 42.90 44.79 48.12 64.80 75.80 104.34 84.83 96.59 52.45

Proportion baseline
Ext 1 0.18 0.04 0.11 0.08 0.53 0.19 0.26 0.14 0.83 0.44 0.17 0.13 1.08 0.54 0.63 0.37
Ext 2 0.01 0.00 0.06 0.01 0.18 0.07 0.07 0.05 0.16 0.08 0.04 0.15 0.50 0.04 0.27 0.07
Ext 3 0.10 0.00 0.33 0.39 0.05 0.05 0.07 0.14 0.28 0.07 0.02 0.15 0.89 0.78 0.45 0.50
Ext 4 0.00 0.01 0.18 0.19 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.14 0.01 0.00 0.07 0.29 0.32 0.19 0.27
Ext 5 0.04 0.00 0.03 0.10 0.02 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.13 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.12 0.25 0.09
Ext 6 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.06 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.15 0.17 0.17 0.00
Ext 7 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.11 0.04 0.03 0.00

ABA renewal 0.49 0.24 1.39 0.78 0.78 0.49 1.19 0.78 0.80 0.61 1.22 1.01 0.62 0.74 0.98 0.87

Experiment 2

Subject 373 121 220 39 223 381 55 11

Rich Lean Rich Lean Rich Lean Rich Lean Rich Lean Rich Lean Rich Lean Rich Lean

Responses per minute (mean) 91.79 72.43 92.34 51.39 75.10 65.20 Deceased 51.63 42.75 71.03 84.29 111.93 82.40 96.99 50.93

Proportion baseline
Ext 1 0.33 0.66 0.14 0.17 0.91 0.72 0.61 0.17 0.20 0.12 0.99 0.98 0.59 0.87
Ext 2 0.24 0.41 0.00 0.05 0.89 0.40 0.27 0.09 0.94 0.46 0.48 0.22 0.44 0.43
Ext 3 0.13 0.26 0.02 0.06 0.69 0.16 0.55 0.03 0.25 0.00 0.31 0.31 0.42 0.23
Ext 4 0.02 0.09 0.01 0.07 0.42 0.04 0.30 0.00 0.15 0.00 0.03 0.07 0.20 0.29
Ext 5 0.06 0.07 0.00 0.12 0.31 0.04 0.18 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.32 0.21 0.19 0.15
Ext 6 0.06 0.10 0.02 0.22 0.08 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.19 0.01 0.13 0.00

ABC renewal 0.65 0.17 0.39 0.49 0.39 0.34 0.23 0.11 0.82 0.47 0.20 0.18 0.49 0.07

response rates during baseline, greater levels of renewal occur in
the presence of stimuli previously associated with higher rather
than lower reinforcer rates. In other words, the strength of the
stimulus–reinforcer relation dictates persistence and renewal.
These results extend the generality of the effect of relative rein-
forcement rates on persistence and renewal, as we obtained similar
results to Podlesnik and Shahan (2009) despite using different
schedules of reinforcement, response–reinforcer contingencies,
and contextual stimuli (flashing or steady key lights used in
the present experiment; flashing or steady houselight used in
Podlesnik and Shahan).
baseline in Context A in Chamber 1 with a white houselight and
barred flooring, extinction in Context B in Chamber 1 with an orange
houselight and barred flooring, and renewal in Context C in Cham-
ber 3 with a purple houselight and grated flooring. As previously
noted, mainly visual alterations were used to change the context as
in previous experiments using pigeons as subjects (e.g., Podlesnik
and Shahan, 2009; Thrailkill and Shahan, 2012), in addition to the
altered chamber and floor type in Context C.
3.2. Procedure

Experiment 2 began approximately four months after the con-

3. Experiment 2
clusion of Experiment 1. Between Experiments 1 and 2, another
renewal (ABC) procedure was completed. During baseline, a
Renewal can occur not only when the original baseline con-
solid houselight was presented. During extinction, the houselight
text is implemented (i.e., ABA renewal), but also can occur when
flashed, and during renewal the houselight was solid and the color
a novel context that is different from the baseline and extinction
was changed. These manipulations had little effect on behavior,
contexts is introduced (i.e., ABC renewal). Although operant ABC
and so the results are not shown. For Experiment 2, the baseline
renewal has recently been explored using single schedules (e.g.,
multiple schedule of food delivery was the same as described in
Bouton et al., 2011, Neumann and Kitlertsirivatana, 2010), relative
Experiment 1 (VI 120-s and VI 30-s). All subjects experienced 20
persistence and relapse of behavior across stimuli associated with
daily sessions of baseline, six daily sessions of extinction, and one
more or less reinforcement has not. Therefore, Experiment 2 tested
session designated to test for renewal effects (fixed-time stability
the generality of the effect of relative reinforcer rates on response
criterion; Perone, 1991; Sidman, 1960). Following baseline, extinc-
rates with the introduction of a novel context following extinction
tion was introduced and remained in effect for the duration of the
(ABC renewal).
experiment (see above for contextual changes across extinction in
Context B, and renewal in Context C).
3.1. Subjects, apparatus, and context manipulations

The subjects and apparatus were the same as described in Exper-
iment 1. One subject (39) died before Experiment 2 was complete so
data from that subject are not included. During baseline, the color
of the houselight was white. During extinction in Context B, con-
textual change involved switching the color of the houselight. With
the introduction of the novel Context C, the houselight color was
again changed, and the chamber was switched as well as the floor
type (cf. Bouton et al., 2011). For example, Subject 373 experienced
3.3. Results
Fig. 3 displays the average of response rates during the last
ten sessions of baseline. Response rates in the rich component
were greater than rates during the lean component, and this dif-
ference was significant t (6) = 2.60, p < .05 (six of the seven subjects
showed higher response rates in the rich relative to the lean
component—Table 1).
 M.S. Berry et al. / Behavioural Processes 108 (2014) 87–93 91

100 context was reintroduced relative to Experiment 2 (Context C)

when a novel context was introduced. Two-tailed paired t-tests
Responses Per Minute 80 confirmed these visual impressions, showing a higher proportion
of baseline response rates in the rich component in Experiment
60 1 compared to the rich component in Experiment 2 (t (6) = 3.46,
p < 0.02), as well as in the lean component in Experiment 1
40 compared to the lean component in Experiment 2 (t (6) = 4.30,
p < 0.006).
20
3.4. Discussion
0
Rich Lean Similar to Experiment 1, results of Experiment 2 showed that
persistence and renewal were greater in the rich component
Fig. 3. Average response rates in Experiment 2 for the last 10 sessions of baseline.
Error bars represent the standard error of the mean. Filled and open bars represent relative to the lean component. This result occurred with the intro-
data from rich and lean components, respectively. duction of a novel context, rather than the reintroduction of the
training context as in Podlesnik and Shahan (2009). These data
provide additional support of the context-specificity of extinction,
Fig. 4 displays the proportion of baseline response rates across
and also assert that relative reinforcer rates are important predic-
extinction and renewal sessions. Proportion of baseline response
tors of both ABA and ABC renewal.
rates in the rich component was greater than proportion of baseline
Higher overall levels of renewal were observed in Experiment 1
response rates in the lean component both during extinction and
(ABA renewal) relative to Experiment 2 (ABC renewal). It should be
renewal. The majority of subjects showed a higher proportion of
noted, however, that the implementation of context manipulations
baseline response rates in the first three sessions of extinction (4/7,
across these experiments was different. The higher levels of relapse
5/7 and 5/7, in sessions 1, 2 and 3 of extinction) after which the pro-
observed during ABA as opposed to ABC renewal could be a result of
portion of baseline response rates in both components decreased
a decrease in levels of relapse with repeated extinction and renewal
to near zero. Six of seven subjects showed a higher proportion of
exposure. That is, repeated extinction and renewal exposures could
baseline response rates during renewal (see Table 1).
cause levels of relapse to decrease over time, even though we
As in Experiment 1, we conducted a repeated measures ANOVA
reestablished baseline reinforcement of responding between stud-
with two within subjects factors: session (each day following base-
ies. We are unaware of any within-subject experiments testing the
line, including the novel Context C, was a different session) and
effects of repeated extinction on renewal following the reestablish-
component (each proportion of baseline response rate was from
ment of baseline. Although ABA tends to be more robust than ABC
either the rich or the lean component). Proportion of baseline
renewal in between-subjects designs (e.g., Bouton et al., 2011; Todd
response rates during extinction and renewal was greater overall
et al., 2012). In a related preparation, the resurgence paradigm,
in the rich component relative to the lean component, revealed by
da Silva et al. (2008), found similar levels of relapse following
a main effect of component [F(1,6) = 3.83, p < .05]. Response rates
repeated extinction exposures. An experiment in which within-
decreased with the removal of food as revealed by a main effect
subject ABC and ABA renewal are presented in counterbalanced
of session [F(6,36) = 7.47, p < .0005], but no component by session
order, with counterbalanced contextual stimuli, would be impor-
interaction [F(6,36) = 1.38, p = .125], suggesting the size of the dif-
tant for addressing this issue.
ference between proportion of baseline response rates in the rich
and lean components did not significantly change across sessions.
4. General discussion
Follow-up simple effects contrasts comparing proportion of base-
line response rates during the introduction of Context C relative to
Several findings emerged from the present study, in which we
the last day of extinction in Context B confirm significant renewal
tested the effects of baseline reinforcer rate on the persistence and
[F(1,6) = 20.5, p < .005]. This renewal was greater in the rich relative
renewal of operant responding during extinction and renewal. First,
to the lean component as shown by a simple effects component
in both Experiments 1 and 2, proportion of baseline response rates
by renewal (i.e., session 6 vs. session 7) interaction [F(1,6) = 3.88,
in the rich component was higher during extinction than that in the
p < .05]. The same conclusions were found when the analyses were
lean component. Second, greater levels of renewal were observed
applied to absolute response rates (data not shown).
in the rich component relative to the lean with the reintroduction
Proportion of baseline response rates was higher during the
of the original baseline context (i.e., the ABA renewal test). Finally,
renewal test in Experiment 1 (Context A), when the baseline
in Experiment 2, greater levels of renewal also occurred in the rich
component relative to the lean with the introduction of a novel
1.2 context (i.e., the ABC renewal test).
The present results showed greater persistence of behavior
Proportion Baseline

Rich in the rich component relative to the lean during extinction

0.9
Lean across Experiments 1 and 2. These effects were obtained despite
higher response rates in the rich component during baseline.
0.6 These experiments replicate previous research (e.g., Nevin, 1974),
demonstrating that stimuli associated with more reinforcement
0.3 (i.e., an enhanced stimulus–reinforcer relation) tend to result
in behavior that is more persistent upon disruption. These data
0.0 suggest that maladaptive behavior (e.g., overeating) may be more
1 2 3 4 5 6 1 persistent in the face of disruption in settings that have previously
Extinction Renewal provided high rates of reinforcers.
Greater levels of renewal were observed in the rich compo-
Fig. 4. Mean proportion of baseline response rates in Experiment 2 across extinction
and renewal sessions. Error bars represent the standard error of the mean. Filled and nent relative to the lean with the reintroduction of the baseline
open circles represent data from rich and lean components, respectively. context (ABA) in Experiment 1. The present results, along with
92 M.S. Berry et al. / Behavioural Processes 108 (2014) 87–93
previous research (Podlesnik and Shahan, 2009, 2010), suggest that
persistence and renewal resulting from richer baseline reinforcer
schedules is a result of an enhanced Pavlovian stimulus–reinforcer
relation, supplementing the extension of behavioral momentum
theory to relapse, as suggested by Podlesnik and Shahan (2009).
Stimuli associated with more reinforcement produce greater
relapse regardless of the manner in which the additional reinforcers
are delivered (i.e., response-dependently, as in the present study,
or response-independently and dependently, as in Podlesnik and
Shahan).
Greater levels of renewal were also observed in the rich compo-
nent relative to the lean with the introduction of the novel context
(ABC) in Experiment 2. In general, these data highlight the context-
specificity of extinction, in that removal from the extinction context
is enough to cause relapse. Such relapse tends to be greater in the
presence of stimuli associated with a rich history of reinforcement.
These data, as well as the data from Experiment 1, suggest that
treatment in a separate context from where the unwanted behav-
iors occur may do little to prevent relapse (Bouton, 2002), even if
the novel context has not been explicitly paired with reinforcers for
responding. It is also valuable to note that in many problematic nat-
uralistic settings, reinforcers are response-dependent, highlighting
the importance of testing strictly response-dependent reinforcer
delivery with both ABA and ABC renewal, as in the present study.
Stimuli associated with more reinforcers produce greater relapse
regardless of the relative rate at which the behaviors occur during
baseline
Greater levels of relapse were observed in the ABA renewal
experiment relative to the ABC renewal experiment. This effect,
however, was confounded with the order of ABA and ABC renewal
exposure, as the ABA renewal experiment was conducted first.
This is a limitation of the present study, as it is possible that
with repeated extinction and renewal exposures levels of renewal
decrease, or that the stimuli we used to define context in the two
experiments may cause different levels of renewal. It is possible
that an experiment that counterbalances the order of ABA and ABC
renewal as well as contextual stimuli may reduce the differences
we observed in the magnitude of renewal. On the other hand, our
study is not the only experimental evidence to suggest renewal is
greater when the original training context is reintroduced (ABA),
rather than when a novel context is introduced (ABC; e.g., Bouton
et al., 2011; Effting and Kindt, 2007, see also Polack et al., 2013,
for discussion of the differences in levels of renewal that can be
produced by different renewal preparations).
The data that suggest ABC renewal is weaker than ABA renewal
are consistent with what behavioral momentum theory would
predict. Because behavioral momentum theory suggests that the
stimulus–reinforcer relation of the context determines persistence
and relapse, renewal in the baseline context (A) would have a
stronger stimulus–reinforcer relation than a context that has no
explicit history of reinforcement (C). If relapse is more heavily influ-
enced by the original rather than a novel context this would suggest
that returning individuals to previous contexts following treatment
may render them more susceptible to relapse than novel contexts.
Results of the present study are also consistent with alternative
explanations. Miller and Laborda (2011), for example, suggested
that at the time of the renewal test, behavior is determined by
retrieval of the association learned during the training phase (i.e.,
a cue and the presentation of an unconditioned stimulus) and the
extinction phase (i.e., a cue and no presentation of an uncondi-
tioned stimulus). The strength of retrieval representations will be
facilitated by the renewal context. In other words, if the context
in which renewal is tested is like the baseline context (i.e., ABA)
in which a cue and an unconditioned stimulus were originally
paired, the strength of the retrieved representation will be stronger
for a cue plus unconditioned stimulus and result in renewal of
responding. Cues associated with more reinforcement (i.e., in the
present experiment, the rich component) may lead to a strength-
ening of this association that is more likely to be retrieved at the
time of testing. Another widely cited account (Bouton, 1993), pro-
poses that the combination of contextual and temporal similarity of
the test context will determine which memory is expressed—either
memories formed during baseline training or extinction. These
alternative approaches are not necessarily at odds with the present
account offered by the theory of behavioral momentum.
Although extinction in the laboratory animal model and treat-
ment in applied human settings are different, they share key
elements that make comparisons useful. For example, no rein-
forcer access (e.g., cocaine) is provided during either extinction in
an animal model or treatment in the applied human setting. One
key difference between the animal model discussed here and the
human experience, however, is the continuation of extinction when
the experimental subjects are returned to the original context. It is
not unreasonable to assume that re-exposure in an applied setting
could be much more detrimental (i.e., result in greater relapse),
than within an animal model, as it is likely that individuals would
have access to the reinforcer (e.g., drug, high-fat foods) upon return
to their regular environment. Thus, any increase in responding
from extinction within an animal model, however slight, should
be viewed as potentially important as it could model recidivism of
former maladaptive behavior in an applied setting (Bouton et al.,
2011).
Fortunately, several methods increase the efficacy of extinction
(i.e., reduce/eliminate relapse). When thought of as two separate
contexts, a rehabilitation center versus home likely share few sim-
ilarities and therefore infusing elements of the extinction context
such as reminders or therapist interactions upon return to the orig-
inal context can reduce relapse (Brooks and Bouton, 1994; Collins
and Brandon, 2002). Including elements of the original context such
as family interactions during treatment (i.e., extinction) could also
result in less relapse as demonstrated in AAB renewal (e.g., Bouton
et al., 2011). Other methods of increasing the effectiveness of
extinction such as increased time in between extinction exposures
(Urcelay et al., 2009), greater extinction exposure (e.g., Bouton et al.,
2011), and extinction across multiple contexts (e.g., Gunther et al.,
1998) have been demonstrated. Langton and Richardson (2009)
discuss changing roles in NMDAr—receptors involved in mem-
ory function—with exposure to initial extinction and re-extinction
across multiple contexts, lending evidence to additional learn-
ing that may attenuate relapse with re-extinction exposures. A
combination of the above techniques may be most useful for contin-
ued cessation of problematic behaviors (Laborda and Miller, 2013;
Thomas et al., 2009).
In the present experiments, repeated exposure to extinction still
resulted in relapse with each new experiment, a result not unlike
human addiction or disorders in which individuals may receive
multiple treatments and still experience troublesome recurrences
(e.g., Zanarini et al., 2011). Previous reports combined with the
present data highlight the continued persistence of behavior
despite repeated extinction exposure, especially so in settings with
rich histories of reinforcement—extending the theory of behavioral
momentum to novel tests of ABA and ABC renewal. Further exper-
imental research is needed to better understand the influences of
context and underlying mechanisms of relapse.
Acknowledgments
We thank Daniel Hutchison, Robert Johnson, Brody Dixon and
Greg Stott for assistance in conducting these experiments as well as
Timothy Shahan, John A. “Tony” Nevin, and those in the Experimen-
tal and Applied Psychological Sciences Behavior Analysis seminar
at Utah State University for helpful discussion.
 M.S. Berry et al. / Behavioural Processes 108 (2014) 87–93
References
Ator, N.A., 1991. Subjects and instrumentation. In: Iversen, I.H., Lattal, K.A. (Eds.),
Experimental Analysis of Behavior, Part 1. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp. 1–62.
Berry, M.S., Kangas, B.D., Branch, M.N., 2012. Development of key-pecking, pause,
and ambulation during extended exposure to a fixed-interval schedule of rein-
forcement. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior 97, 333–346.
Berry, M.S., Odum, A.L., 2014. Reinforcer magnitude and resistance to disruption of
forgetting functions and response rates. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of
Behavior 101, 373–384.
Bouton, M.E., 1993. Context, time and memory retrieval in the interference paradigm
of Pavlovian learning. Psychological Bulletin 114, 80–99.
Bouton, M.E., 2002. Context, ambiguity and unlearning: sources of relapse after
behavioral extinction. Biological Psychiatry 52, 976–986.
Bouton, M.E., Todd, T.P., 2014. A fundamental role for context in instrumental learn-
ing and extinction. Behavioural Processes 104, 13–19.
Bouton, M.E., Todd, T.P., Vurbic, D., Winterbauer, N.E., 2011. Renewal after the extinc-
tion of free operant behavior. Learning & Behavior 39, 57–67.
Brooks, D.C., Bouton, M.E., 1994. A retrieval cue for extinction attenuates response
recovery (renewal) caused by a return to the conditioning context. Journal of
Experimental Psychology 20, 366–379.
Catania, C.A., Reynolds, G.S., 1968. A quantitative analysis of the responding main-
tained by interval schedules of reinforcement. Journal of the Experimental
Analysis of Behavior 11, 327–383.
Collins, B.N., Brandon, T.H., 2002. Effects of extinction context and retrieval cues on
alcohol cue reactivity among nonalcoholic drinkers. Journal of Consulting and
Clinical Psychology 70, 390–397.
Craig, A.R., Nevin, J.A., Odum, A.L., 2014. Behavioral momentum and resistance to
change. In: McSweeney, F.K., Murphey, E.S. (Eds.), The Wiley-Blackwell Hand-
book of Operant and Classical Conditioning. Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford, UK, pp.
249–274.
da Silva, S.P., Maxwell, M.E., Lattal, K.A., 2008. Concurrent resurgence and behavioral
history. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior 90, 313–331.
Dube, W.V., McIlvane, W.J., 2001. Behavioral momentum in computer-presented
discriminations in individuals with severe mental retardation. Journal of the
Experimental Analysis of Behavior 75, 15–25.
Effting, M., Kindt, M., 2007. Contextual control of human fear associations in a
renewal paradigm. Behavior Research and Therapy 45, 2001–2018.
Ferster, C.R., Skinner, B.F., 1957. Schedules of Reinforcement. Appleton-Century-
Crofts, New York.
Fleshler, M., Hoffman, H.S., 1962. A progression for generating variable-interval
schedules. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior 5, 529–530.
Grimes, J.A., Shull, R.L., 2001. Response-independent milk delivery enhances per-
sistence of pellet-reinforced lever pressing by rats. Journal of the Experimental
Analysis of Behavior 76, 179–194.
Gunther, L.M., Denniston, J.C., Miller, R.R., 1998. Conducting exposure treatment
in multiple contexts can prevent relapse. Behaviour Research and Therapy 36,
75–91.
Igaki, T., Sakagami, T., 2004. Resistance to change in goldfish. Behavioural Processes
66, 139–152.
Laborda, M.A., Miller, R.R., 2013. Preventing return of fear in an animal model of anx-
iety: additive effects of massive extinction and extinction in multiple contexts.
Behavior Therapy 44, 249–261.
Langton, J.M., Richardson, R., 2009. The role of context in the re-extinction of learned
fear. Neurobiology of Learning and Memory 92, 496–503.
Miller, R.R., Laborda, M.A., 2011. Preventing recovery from extinction and relapse:
a product of current retrieval cues and strengths. Current Directions in Psycho-
logical Science 20, 325–329.
Moos, R.H., Moos, B.S., 2006. Rates and predictors of relapse after nat-
ural and treated remission from alcohol use disorders. Addiction 101,
212–222.
Neumann, D.L., Kitlertsirivatana, E., 2010. Exposure to a novel context after extinc-
tion causes a renewal of extinguished conditioned responses: implications for
treatment of fear. Behavior Research and Therapy 48, 565–570.
93
Nevin, J.A., 1974. Response strength in multiple schedules. Journal of the Experi-
mental Analysis of Behavior 21, 389–408.
Nevin, J.A., Grace, R., 2000. Behavioral momentum and the law of effect. Behavioral
and Brain Sciences 23, 73–130.
Nevin, J.A., Shahan, T.A., 2011. Behavioral momentum theory: equations and appli-
cations. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 44, 877–895.
Nevin, J.A., Grace, R.C., Holland, S., McLean, A.P., 2001. Variable-ratio versus variable-
interval schedules: response rate, resistance to change, and preference. Journal
of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior 76, 43–74.
Nevin, J.A., Tota, M.E., Torquato, R.D., Shull, R.L., 1990. Alternative reinforcement
increases resistance to change: Pavlovian or operant contingencies? Journal of
the Experimental Analysis of Behavior 53, 359–379.
Nevin, J.A., Ward, R.D., Jiminez-Gomez, C., Odum, A.L., Shahan, T.A., 2009. Differential
outcomes enhance accuracy of delayed matching to sample but not resistance
to change. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes 35,
74–91.
Odum, A.L., Shahan, T.A., Nevin, J.A., 2005. Resistance to change of forgetting func-
tions and response rates. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior 84,
65–75.
Perone, M., 1991. Experimental design in the analysis of free-operant behavior.
In: Iverson, I.H., Lattal, K.A. (Eds.), Experimental Analysis of Behavior. , Part I.
Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp. 135–172.
Podlesnik, C.A., Shahan, T.A., 2009. Behavioral momentum and relapse of extin-
guished operant responding. Learning & Behavior 37, 357–364.
Podlesnik, C.A., Shahan, T.A., 2010. Extinction, relapse, and behavioral momentum.
Behavioural Processes 84, 400–411.
Podlesnik, C.A., Thrailkill, E., Shahan, T.A., 2012. Differential reinforcement and resis-
tance to change of divided-attention performance. Learning & Behavior 40,
158–169.
Polack, C.W., Laborda, M.A., Miller, R.R., 2013. On the differences in degree of renewal
produced by the different renewal designs. Behavioural Processes 99, 112–120.
Pyszczynski, A.D., Shahan, T.A., 2011. Behavioral momentum and relapse of ethanol
seeking: non-drug reinforcement in a context increases relative reinstatement.
Behavioural Pharmacology 22, 81–86.
Quick, S.L., Shahan, T.A., 2009. Behavioral momentum of cocaine self-administration:
effects of frequency of reinforcement on resistance to extinction. Behavioural
Pharmacology 20, 337–345.
Shahan, T.A., Burke, K.A., 2004. Ethanol-maintained responding of rats is more resis-
tant to change in a context with added non-drug reinforcement. Behavioural
Pharmacology 15, 279–285.
Shahan, T.A., Sweeney, M.M., 2011. A model of resurgence based on behavioral
momentum theory. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior 95, 91–108.
Sidman, M., 1960. Tactics of Scientific Research. Basic Books, Inc, New York.
Sweeney, M.M., Shahan, T.A., 2013. Effects of high, low, and thinning rates of alter-
native reinforcement on response elimination and resurgence. Journal of the
Experimental Analysis of Behavior 100, 102–116.
Thomas, B.L., Vurbic, D., Novak, C., 2009. Extensive extinction in multiple contexts
eliminates the renewal of conditioned fear in rats. Learning and Motivation 40,
147–149.
Thrailkill, E.A., Shahan, T.A., 2012. Resistance to change and relapse of observing.
Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior 97, 281–304.
Todd, T.P., Winterbauer, N.E., Bouton, M.E., 2012. Effects of the amount of acquisition
and contextual generalization on the renewal of instrumental behavior after
extinction. Learning & Behavior 40, 145–157.
Urcelay, G.P., Wheeler, D.S., Miller, R.R., 2009. Spacing extinction trials alleviated
renewal and spontaneous recovery. Learning & Behavior 37, 60–73.
Zanarini, M.C., Frankenbur, F.R., Weingeroff, J.L., Reich, D.B., Fitzmaurice, G.M., Weiss,
R.D., 2011. The course of substance use disorders in patients with borderline
personality disorder and Axis II comparison subjects: a 10-year follow-up study.
Addiction 106, 342–348.
Zarcone, T.J., Branch, M.N., Hughes, C.E., Pennypacker, H.S., 1997. Key pecking during
extinction after intermittent or continuous reinforcement as a function of the
number of reinforcers delivered during training. Journal of the Experimental
Analysis of Behavior 67, 91–108.