Resurgence of instrumental behavior after an abstinence contingency

In resurgence, an extinguished instrumental behavior (R1) recovers when a behavior that has replaced it (R2) is also extinguished. The phenomenon may be relevant to understanding relapse that can occur after the termination of “contingency management” treatments, in which an unwanted behavior (e.g., substance abuse) is reduced by reinforcing an alternative behavior. When reinforcement is discontinued, the unwanted behavior might resurge. However, unlike most resurgence experiments, contingency management treatments also introduce a negative contingency, in which reinforcers are not delivered unless the client has abstained from the unwanted behavior. In two experiments with rats, we therefore examined the effects of adding a negative “abstinence” contingency to the resurgence design. During response elimination, R2 was not reinforced unless R1 had not been emitted for a minimum period of time (45, 90, or 135 s). In both experiments, adding such a contingency to simple R1 extinction reduced, but did not eliminate, resurgence. In Experiment 2, we found the same effect in a yoked group that could earn reinforcers for R2 at the same points in time as the negative-contingency group, but without the requirement to abstain from R1. Thus, the negative contingency per se did not contribute to the reduction in resurgence. These results suggest that the contingency reduced resurgence by making reinforcers more difficult to earn and more widely spaced in time. This could have allowed the animal to learn that R1 was extinguished in the “context” of infrequent reinforcement—a context more like that of resurgence testing. The results are thus consistent with a contextual (renewal) account of resurgence. The method might provide a better model of relapse after termination of a contingency management treatment.