Association for Behavior Analysis International

Behavior is determined by interactions between current and past contingencies. As such, investigations on the potential effects of behavior history are essential to the understanding of human and nonhumans behavior. The present studies offer examples of history effects on self-control behavior, relapse and resistance to change with both humans and nonhumans (pigeons and rats). Moreira and Abreu-Rodrigues observed, with obese individuals, that a history with self-control training promoted adherence to prescriptions, but did not affect impulsivity as measured by delay discounting procedures. Calmon-Rodegheri and Abreu-Rodrigues isolated the effects of response and reinforcer rates upon the resistance of a target response to extinction and its recurrence with additional contingency changes. They found no covariation between resistance and three relapse phenomena (reinstatement, resurgence and renewal). Finally, Al�, Abreu-Rodrigues, Can�ado, Doughty, Louzada and Silva de Deus manipulated the variation requirement across components of a multiple schedule and observed a negatively accelerated relation between resistance to prefeeding and behavioral variation. Taken together, these studies can help both basic and applied researchers in the task of promoting desirable and weakening undesirable effects of historical variables.

Among the treatments for obesity, there are the dietetics prescriptions and physical activity, often combined with behavioral intervention aimed to increase the adherence to prescriptions. The adherence behavior can be understood as choosing a self-control alternative rather than choosing an impulsivity alternative. The goal of this study was to investigate the effects of a behavioral intervention (Self-Control Training) on adherence with three obese participants. Several measures were used to evaluate those effects: (1) behavioral measures of adherence (number of daily meals according to the diet, frequency of weekly physical activity, goal achievement); (2) anthropometric (weight, BMI, waist circumference) and laboratorial (blood glucose, cholesterol and triglycerides) measures; measures of (3) quality of life (SF-36) and (4) impulsivity (BIS-11 and delay discounting). The participants showed weight loss and an increase in the behavioral measures of adherence and perception of quality of life. There was also a reduction in anthropometric and lab measures, with the exception of glucose levels in the blood. Regarding impulsivity measures, there was a decrease in most of the BIS-11 sub scales, but not in delay discounting. Self-Control Training was effective in the treatment of obesity, producing beneficial behavioral changes, but without reducing delay discounting.

This study compared the effects of response and reinforcer rates upon the recurrence and resistance to change of a target response with three procedures: reinstatement, resurgence and renewal. In Training, a target response (R1) was reinforced according to a multiple FR DRL schedule. In Elimination, R1 was extinguished in all procedures, but in the resurgence procedure, another response (R2) was reinforced, and in the renewal procedure, another context replaced the previous one. In Testing, extinction remained in effect for R1, but in the reinstatement procedure, non-contingent reinforcers were delivered; in the resurgence procedure, R2 was also extinguished; and in the renewal procedure, the initial context returned. In Phase 1, response rates were similar and reinforcer rates differed across components in Training, and in Phase 2, the opposite was in place. With the three procedures, resistance to extinction (Elimination) was greater in the component with lower response rates and higher reinforcer rates. Recurrence of R1 (Testing) was greater in the FR than in the DRL component in the reinstatement procedure, but differed unsystematically across components in the other procedures, despite of response and reinforcer rates. It was concluded that relapse and resistance are not similarly controlled by response and reinforcer rates.

Resistance to prefeeding was evaluated as a function of the degree of behavioral variability required for reinforcement. Rats were exposed to a two-component multiple schedule in which a four-response sequence distributed in two levers would lead to reinforcement or timeout, depending on whether a variability requirement was met. This requirement changed across multiple-schedule components, but reinforcement rates were equated between schedule components. Across six to ten cycles of baseline and test conditions, variability was manipulated using different threshold requirements across components. Yoke and repeat components also were used to test the effects of the absence of a variability requirement and the requirement of no variability. There was a negatively accelerated relation between baseline U values and U-value changes from baseline, for all three rats. Thus, small increments in the variability requirement produced substantial increases in resistance to change, but these increases became smaller as the variability requirement became more stringent.