Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41741938›Full record

ArticleLearning & behavior2026

Additivity of resurgence and spontaneous recovery.

Rodolfo Bernal-Gamboa, A Matías Gámez, Christopher A Podlesnik

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Rodolfo Bernal-GamboaUniversidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Mexico, Mexico. rbernalg@unam.mx.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4096-8425
A Matías GámezDepartamento de Psicología, Universidad de Córdoba, Córdoba, Spain.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9844-4261
Christopher A PodlesnikDepartment of Psychology, University of Florida, 945 Center Dr., Gainesville, FL, 32611-2026, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8614-8158

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

Conditioning, OperantExtinction, PsychologicalReinforcement, PsychologyFemaleHumansMaleReinforcement ScheduleVideo GamesYoung AdultAdditivityExtinctionHumansResurgenceSpontaneous recovery

Identifiers

PMID41741938
PMCPMC13538178

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.