Understanding resurgence and other emergent activity with the laws of allocation, induction, and covariance
Resurgence is a turf war among every available activity, so survey the whole field before you thin reinforcement.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Podlesnik et al. (2024) wrote a theory paper. They linked three old laws to the new resurgence-as-choice idea. The laws are allocation, induction, and covariance.
They say every behavior in the room competes. Not just the old problem and the new one. All of them.
What they found
The paper gives no new numbers. It gives a bigger map. The map shows why behavior comes back when reinforcement thins.
The key is competitive value. Any activity that pays off can pull the client away from the target response.
How this fits with other research
Shahan et al. (2021) tested the idea with real data. They saw more destructive behavior when alternative reinforcement dropped fast. Their numbers back the theory.
Gde Jonge et al. (2025) push the idea further. They say induction and reinforcement dance every second, not just during relapse. The 2025 paper extends the 2024 frame to moment-to-moment shifts.
Kimball et al. (2023) wrap the model into a review. They call relapse prevention a vaccine. The review shows the model is now part of standard relapse talk.
Why it matters
When you thin a schedule, look around the room. Toys, peers, even self-talk can act as B0 or BN. Give those activities value before you cut reinforcement. This keeps the client from sliding back to the old problem.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →List every activity the client can reach during thinning, then preload each with brief reinforcement so none outbid your target response.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
Resurgence is defined as an increase in a previously extinguished target response (B1) resulting from the worsening of conditions for a more recently reinforced alternative response (B2). Worsening includes extinction or reductions in rate, amount, and immediacy of delivery of food or some other phylogenetically important event (PIE). In the first part of the article, we apply the laws of allocation, induction, and covariance to understand not only resurgence of operant activity previously covarying with the PIE (B1) but also a constellation of ontogenetic and phylogenetic activities both related to the PIE (B0) and unrelated to the PIE (BN). In the second part, we discuss how induction might be incorporated into and provide alternative processes within an existing matching-based framework, resurgence as choice (RaC). We begin to identify how this range of activities could depend on changes in the relative competitive weight (V) of all available activities (B1, B2, B0, BN) in addition to only those receiving explicit training (B1, B2). Future empirical and theoretical research is needed within this framework to provide a more complete understanding of resurgence and behavior more generally.
Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 2024 · doi:10.1002/jeab.4212