Resurgence following differential reinforcement of alternative behavior implemented with and without extinction
DRA without extinction keeps behavior higher during treatment yet still produces the same resurgence later, so plan for relapse either way.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Brown and colleagues compared two ways to run DRA. One group got DRA plus extinction. The other got DRA without extinction.
They watched how much target behavior dropped during treatment. Then they stopped all reinforcement to see if the old behavior came back.
What they found
DRA with extinction cut the target response faster and lower during treatment. DRA without extinction left the behavior higher.
When reinforcement ended, both groups showed the same amount of resurgence. Skipping extinction did not protect against relapse later.
How this fits with other research
Greer et al. (2020) ran a near-copy of this design and also saw equal resurgence after short or long extinction. The 2020 and 2023 Greer studies together say duration does not matter — extinction length won’t tame relapse.
Briggs et al. (2019) looks like a contradiction: they got good behavior reduction with DRA-without-extinction by boosting reinforcer size and quality. Brown et al. (2020) did not use those big reinforcers, so their no-extinction group stayed higher during treatment. The studies agree that without extinction you need extra reinforcement power to see drops.
Saini et al. (2017) tested NCR with and without extinction and found the same twist: leaving extinction out sped early gains but later resurgence still hit. The pattern crosses procedures — DRA or NCR, the relapse risk stays.
Why it matters
If parents or teachers block extinction, do not expect a free pass on resurgence. Plan for relapse no matter which DRA style you use. You can still pick DRA-without-extinction when side effects are a concern, just know you’ll need richer reinforcement during treatment and the same after-care plan when reinforcement stops.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Add a resurgence-prevention step to your behavior plan even when the team says ‘no extinction’ — schedule thinning and intermittent reinforcement before you fade supports.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
In the clinic, differential reinforcement of alternative behavior (DRA) often involves programming extinction for destructive behavior while reinforcing an alternative form of communication (e.g., a functional communication response); however, implementing extinction can be unsafe or impractical under some circumstances. Quantitative theories of resurgence (i.e., Behavioral Momentum Theory and Resurgence as Choice) predict differences in the efficacy of treatments that do and do not involve extinction of target responding when reinforcement conditions maintaining alternative responding worsen. We tested these predictions by examining resurgence following two DRA conditions in which we equated rates of reinforcement. In DRA without extinction, target and alternative behavior produced reinforcement. In DRA with extinction plus noncontingent reinforcement, only alternative behavior produced reinforcement. We conducted this study in a reverse-translation sequence, first with participants who engaged in destructive behavior (Experiment 1) and then in a laboratory setting with rats (Experiment 2). Across both experiments, we observed proportionally lower levels of target responding during and following the DRA condition that arranged extinction for the target response. However, levels of resurgence were similar following both arrangements.
Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 2020 · doi:10.1002/jeab.588