Cycling between the availability and unavailability of reinforcement for alternative responding has successfully reduced resurgence in basic laboratory evaluations, but this approach represents a marked departure from current standards of care when treating problem behavior, warranting careful translation before its use clinically. Therefore, with extinction arranged for target responding across groups in Phase 2, we evaluated the effects of cycling between the availability and unavailability of differential reinforcement of alternative behavior (DRA) using a computer-based task with adult humans recruited through Amazon MTurk. Two control groups experienced constant DRA in Phase 2, with one group experiencing a dense DRA schedule and another group experiencing a lean DRA schedule. The cycling DRA group tended to show greater reductions in target responding and improved discrimination in Phase 2 and less target responding across Phases 2 and 3 than the lean DRA and dense DRA groups. These preliminary findings suggest that on/off DRA cycling procedures may produce more desirable treatment outcomes than constant DRA without producing negative side effects; however, further research is needed to confirm these possibilities.

中文翻译：

---

开/关替代强化循环的转化评估

在替代反应的强化可用和不可用之间循环已成功地减少了基本实验室评估中的死灰复燃，但这种方法在治疗问题行为时明显偏离了当前的护理标准，需要在临床使用之前进行仔细翻译。因此，在第 2 阶段，针对跨群体的目标响应安排了灭绝，我们使用基于计算机的任务，对通过 Amazon MTurk 招募的成年人进行了评估，以评估替代行为差异强化 (DRA) 的可用性和不可用性之间循环的影响。两个对照组在第 2 阶段经历持续的 DRA，其中一组经历密集的 DRA 时间表，另一组经历精简的 DRA 时间表。与精益 DRA 组和密集 DRA 组相比，循环 DRA 组往往在第 2 阶段表现出更大的目标响应减少和改善的辨别力，并且在第 2 和第 3 阶段中表现出较少的目标响应。这些初步结果表明，开/关 DRA 循环程序可能比持续 DRA 产生更理想的治疗结果，且不会产生负面副作用；然而，还需要进一步的研究来证实这些可能性。