Relapse after incentivized choice treatment in humans : A laboratory model for studying behavior change
Behavior change interventions that incentivize desired behavior are highly effective for improving personal health, but difficult to maintain long term. Relapse is common and examining the mechanisms that contribute to relapse in experimental settings can identify processes relevant to substance abuse treatment. We developed a laboratory task that parallels a recent operant model of relapse after incentivized choice reported in the rodent laboratory. In two experiments, undergraduate participants first learned to make an operant response (keyboard button; R1) to earn a reinforcer consisting of an image of a preferred snack food (O1). In a second phase (Phase 2), R1 was still reinforced, but a new response (R2) was introduced and reinforced with a different reinforcer (a coin; O2). In a test phase, contingent incentives for R2 were removed (extinction) and relapse of R1 was assessed. Experiment 1 found that the O2 contingency suppressed R1 during Phase 2, and R1 relapsed rapidly in the test. Neither effect was consistently related to O2 value. Experiment 2 examined whether noncontingent presentations of O1 or O2 during the test could weaken relapse. Here, we found that noncontingent reinforcers did little to reduce or slow the increase in R1 responding. The present experiments highlight a laboratory approach to studying variables that may influence relapse after incentivized treatment. We identify and discuss areas for development to address differences between the present results and prior observations from animal and clinical studies. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).
| Medienart: |
E-Artikel |
|---|
| Erscheinungsjahr: |
2022 |
|---|---|
| Erschienen: |
2022 |
| Enthalten in: |
Zur Gesamtaufnahme - volume:30 |
|---|---|
| Enthalten in: |
Experimental and clinical psychopharmacology - 30(2022), 2 vom: 11. Apr., Seite 220-234 |
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
|---|
| Beteiligte Personen: |
Thrailkill, Eric A [VerfasserIn] |
|---|
| Links: |
|---|
| Themen: |
|---|
| Anmerkungen: |
Date Completed 23.03.2022 Date Revised 02.04.2023 published: Print-Electronic Citation Status MEDLINE |
|---|
| doi: |
10.1037/pha0000443 |
|---|
| funding: |
|
|---|---|
| Förderinstitution / Projekttitel: |
|
| PPN (Katalog-ID): |
NLM320694119 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000naa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | NLM320694119 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20231225174125.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 231225s2022 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1037/pha0000443 |2 doi | |
| 028 | 5 | 2 | |a pubmed24n1068.xml |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)NLM320694119 | ||
| 035 | |a (NLM)33507769 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Thrailkill, Eric A |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Relapse after incentivized choice treatment in humans |b A laboratory model for studying behavior change |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2022 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a ƒaComputermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a ƒa Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 500 | |a Date Completed 23.03.2022 | ||
| 500 | |a Date Revised 02.04.2023 | ||
| 500 | |a published: Print-Electronic | ||
| 500 | |a Citation Status MEDLINE | ||
| 520 | |a Behavior change interventions that incentivize desired behavior are highly effective for improving personal health, but difficult to maintain long term. Relapse is common and examining the mechanisms that contribute to relapse in experimental settings can identify processes relevant to substance abuse treatment. We developed a laboratory task that parallels a recent operant model of relapse after incentivized choice reported in the rodent laboratory. In two experiments, undergraduate participants first learned to make an operant response (keyboard button; R1) to earn a reinforcer consisting of an image of a preferred snack food (O1). In a second phase (Phase 2), R1 was still reinforced, but a new response (R2) was introduced and reinforced with a different reinforcer (a coin; O2). In a test phase, contingent incentives for R2 were removed (extinction) and relapse of R1 was assessed. Experiment 1 found that the O2 contingency suppressed R1 during Phase 2, and R1 relapsed rapidly in the test. Neither effect was consistently related to O2 value. Experiment 2 examined whether noncontingent presentations of O1 or O2 during the test could weaken relapse. Here, we found that noncontingent reinforcers did little to reduce or slow the increase in R1 responding. The present experiments highlight a laboratory approach to studying variables that may influence relapse after incentivized treatment. We identify and discuss areas for development to address differences between the present results and prior observations from animal and clinical studies. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved) | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Journal Article | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Alcalá, José A |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Experimental and clinical psychopharmacology |d 1997 |g 30(2022), 2 vom: 11. Apr., Seite 220-234 |w (DE-627)NLM091883490 |x 1936-2293 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:30 |g year:2022 |g number:2 |g day:11 |g month:04 |g pages:220-234 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/pha0000443 |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_NLM | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 30 |j 2022 |e 2 |b 11 |c 04 |h 220-234 | ||