Resurgence and alternative‐reinforcer magnitude
Shrinking the size of alternative reinforcers too quickly can rebound problem behavior as hard as stopping them cold.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Craig et al. (2017) tested how the size of alternative reinforcers changes resurgence.
They used a three-phase lab design. First, participants earned big rewards for pressing one button. Next, that button stopped paying off, but a new button paid. Last, both buttons stopped paying.
The team varied how large the new reward was across trials.
What they found
Bigger alternative rewards knocked out the old button pressing faster.
When both buttons later stopped paying, the old pressing came back stronger if the alternative reward had been large.
Cutting the big reward down to one pellet caused the same rebound as removing it completely.
How this fits with other research
Arroyo Antúnez et al. (2026) repeated the study in mice and saw the same pattern. Larger pellets meant faster suppression and bigger resurgence.
Ritchey et al. (2023) extended the work to human adults. They confirmed that shrinking reward size step-by-step drives resurgence, and the RaC2 model tracks the curve.
Greer et al. (2024) moved the lab rule into a clinic. Children with destructive behavior showed the least resurgence when alternative reinforcement was thinned slowly. Big early drops sparked the biggest return of problem behavior.
Shahan et al. (2020) had earlier shown the same exponential link with rate instead of size. Larger cuts in how often reinforcement was delivered produced exponentially more resurgence. Craig’s team showed the rule also holds for how big each reward is.
Why it matters
When you fade token boards, edibles, or iPad time, think in small steps. A sudden drop from ten tokens to one can bring back problem behavior as if you removed all tokens. Plan gradual magnitude reductions and watch for resurgence after each cut. If the behavior returns, hold the current level steady before thinning again.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Cut your token or edible size by no more than one-third this week and probe for resurgence before the next cut.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
Resurgence is defined as an increase in the frequency of a previously reinforced target response when an alternative source of reinforcement is suspended. Despite an extensive body of research examining factors that affect resurgence, the effects of alternative-reinforcer magnitude have not been examined. Thus, the present experiments aimed to fill this gap in the literature. In Experiment 1, rats pressed levers for single-pellet reinforcers during Phase 1. In Phase 2, target-lever pressing was extinguished, and alternative-lever pressing produced either five-pellet, one-pellet, or no alternative reinforcement. In Phase 3, alternative reinforcement was suspended to test for resurgence. Five-pellet alternative reinforcement produced faster elimination and greater resurgence of target-lever pressing than one-pellet alternative reinforcement. In Experiment 2, effects of decreasing alternative-reinforcer magnitude on resurgence were examined. Rats pressed levers and pulled chains for six-pellet reinforcers during Phases 1 and 2, respectively. In Phase 3, alternative reinforcement was decreased to three pellets for one group, one pellet for a second group, and suspended altogether for a third group. Shifting from six-pellet to one-pellet alternative reinforcement produced as much resurgence as suspending alternative reinforcement altogether, while shifting from six pellets to three pellets did not produce resurgence. These results suggest that alternative-reinforcer magnitude has effects on elimination and resurgence of target behavior that are similar to those of alternative-reinforcer rate. Thus, both suppression of target behavior during alternative reinforcement and resurgence when conditions of alternative reinforcement are altered may be related to variables that affect the value of the alternative-reinforcement source.
Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 2017 · doi:10.1002/jeab.245