Generalization of the disruptive effects of alternative stimuli when combined with target stimuli in extinction
Keep alternative stimuli identical when combining reinforcement-based alternatives with extinction to avoid weakening the effect.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Researchers worked with rats in a lab. The rats pressed levers for food pellets.
They tested what happened when they added a second stimulus during extinction. This stimulus was a light that had signaled free food before.
Some rats got the same light every time. Other rats got a changed light. The team watched how fast lever pressing stopped.
What they found
Rats stopped pressing faster when the same light stayed with extinction.
When the light changed color or brightness, the rats kept pressing longer. The altered stimulus weakened extinction's power.
How this fits with other research
Corrigan et al. (1998) showed the same idea works with kids. Their FCT study paired each communication response with its own signal. Like Podlesnik's rats, children learned faster when the alternative cue stayed the same.
Plant et al. (2007) took this into schools. They kept goal statements and icons identical across training and generalization settings. Students with disabilities transferred skills better - extending Podlesnik's animal finding to human learning.
Cullinan et al. (2001) seems to disagree at first. They found extra milk made lever pressing more persistent. But they changed the reinforcer type, not the stimulus features. This shows consistency matters more than the reward itself.
Why it matters
Keep your therapy room, materials, and helper the same when mixing reinforcement alternatives with extinction. If you change the alternative stimulus - like switching therapists or rooms - you risk making problem behavior more persistent. Use consistent visual cues, sounds, and people throughout extinction sessions.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Use the same therapist, room layout, and visual cues every extinction session when pairing FCR with extinction
02At a glance
03Original abstract
Differential-reinforcement treatments reduce target problem behavior in the short term but at the expense of making it more persistent long term. Basic and translational research based on behavioral momentum theory suggests that combining features of stimuli governing an alternative response with the stimuli governing target responding could make target responding less persistent. However, changes to the alternative stimulus context when combining alternative and target stimuli could diminish the effectiveness of the alternative stimulus in reducing target responding. In an animal model with pigeons, the present study reinforced responding in the presence of target and alternative stimuli. When combining the alternative and target stimuli during extinction, we altered the alternative stimulus through changes in line orientation. We found that (1) combining alternative and target stimuli in extinction more effectively decreased target responding than presenting the target stimulus on its own; (2) combining these stimuli was more effective in decreasing target responding trained with lower reinforcement rates; and (3) changing the alternative stimulus reduced its effectiveness when it was combined with the target stimulus. Therefore, changing alternative stimuli (e.g., therapist, clinical setting) during behavioral treatments that combine alternative and target stimuli could reduce the effectiveness of those treatments in disrupting problem behavior.
Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 2017 · doi:10.1002/jeab.272