ArticleLearning & behavior2026
Additivity of resurgence and spontaneous recovery.
Article in Learning & behavior, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Resurgence and spontaneous recovery are two extensively studied behavioral phenomena in which previously extinguished operant behavior increases or reemerges. These findings are relevant to understanding flexibility in behavior but also relapse. Resurgence is the re-return of an extinguished target response (R1) when reinforcement conditions worsen for a more recently reinforced alternative response (R2), such as with extinction. Spontaneous recovery is the return of an eliminated R1 following time off from experiencing extinction conditions, such as with a retention interval. The present experiment examined whether combining tests for resurgence (removing R2 reinforcement) and spontaneous recovery (retention interval) produced greater increases in R1 than either test in isolation. University students played a computer video game and learned to perform R1 during Phase 1. During Phase 2, R1 was placed on extinction while simultaneously performing R2 was reinforced (Ext + DRA). Finally, the four groups of participants were tested for (1) neither resurgence or spontaneous recovery, (2) only resurgence, (3) only spontaneous recovery, or (4) both resurgence and spontaneous recovery. Increases in R1 were additive, with combined testing producing significantly greater responding that either of the two tests in isolation. We discuss theoretical issues as well as the implications of our findings for the treatment and relapse of challenging behavior.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.