Skip to main content

ETHNOS_APP

Home • Search • Journals • List 0

Alternative‐reinforcer magnitude effects on resurgence across successive relapse tests in mice

Bibliographic Data

ID10244399
AuthorsBeatriz Arroyo (0000-0003-4286-3915, SUNY Upstate Medical University, corresponding author), Beatriz E Arroyo Antúnez (SUNY Upstate Medical University Syracuse NY USA), Sean W Smith (0000-0002-4219-8735, SUNY Upstate Medical University Syracuse NY USA), Charlene N Agnew (0000-0002-9241-0247, SUNY Upstate Medical University Syracuse NY USA), Kate E Derrenbacker (0009-0002-7633-9919, SUNY Upstate Medical University Syracuse NY USA), William E Sullivan (0000-0001-7790-3329, SUNY Upstate Medical University Syracuse NY USA), Henry S Roane (0000-0001-7201-8419, SUNY Upstate Medical University Syracuse NY USA), Andrew R Craig (0000-0002-2512-3205, SUNY Upstate Medical University Syracuse NY USA)
Year2026
Volume125
Issue1
Pagese70070-e70070
Publication date2026-01-01
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueJournal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0022-5002 • E-ISSN: 1938-3711
PublisherWiley (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1002/jeab.70070
PMID41370206
OpenAlexW4417201052
LanguageEN
References cited53

Alternative‐reinforcement‐based treatments are common strategies for reducing maladaptive behavior in humans. When conditions of alternative reinforcement are made worse in some way, however, behavior that was targeted for elimination may resurge. Previous research using rat subjects has demonstrated that high‐magnitude (relative to low‐magnitude) alternative reinforcement produces faster elimination of target behavior but more resurgence once removed. The purpose of the present experiment was to assess cross‐species generality of these effects to mice. During Phase 1, lever pressing produced single food pellet reinforcers. Next, during Phase 2, lever pressing was extinguished and groups of mice experienced either small‐magnitude (one pellet), large‐magnitude (three pellet), or no alternative reinforcement for nose poking. All food was suspended in Phase 3 to assess resurgence. As an additional goal of this study, changes in resurgence across successive determinations were assessed by cycling between periods during which alternative reinforcement was present or absent. Large‐magnitude alternative reinforcers produced faster suppression of target behavior but more resurgence when removed than did small‐magnitude alternative reinforcers. Moreover, this effect endured across repeated resurgence tests

Behavioral analysis · Conditioning · Generality · Lever · Operant conditioning · Reinforcement · Behavioral and Psychological Studies · Memory and Neural Mechanisms · Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior

  • Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1

    Open Access•Franz Faul, Edgar Erdfelder et al.•Behavior Research Methods•2009

  • Differences in Alcohol Preference among Inbred Strains of Mice

    Gerald E Mcclearn, David A Rodgers et al.•Quarterly Journal of Studies on…•1959

Highly citedNo

Tools

Open DOI
Ethnos_APP • Open Source Project • MIT License • Frontend v2.0.0 • Privacy and Cookies • API Documentation: api.ethnos.app/docs • API Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17049435 • Frontend Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17050053 • cruz.rio.br • Expectantes Misericordiae