Table 1.

Predictions for habituation of reinforcer effectiveness made by the 10 behavioral characteristics of habituation¹ as described by Rankin et al. (2009).

#	Habituation characteristic	Habituation of reinforcing effectiveness
1	Repeated application of a stimulus results in a progressive decrease in some parameter of a response to an asymptotic level.	Predicts that repeated presentation of a reinforcer will cause a within-session decline in response rate.
2	If the stimulus is withheld after response decrement, the response recovers at least partially over the observation time (“spontaneous recovery”).	Predicts that a subject responding for a reinforcer in 2 consecutive testing sessions with a long break between sessions will show greater responding during the start of the second session than at the end of the first.
3	After multiple series of stimulus repetitions and spontaneous recoveries, the response decrement becomes successively more rapid and/or more pronounced (this phenomenon can be called potentiation of habituation).	Predicts that a subject responding for a reinforcer in once per day sessions for five consecutive days will show a faster within-session decline in response rate on the 5th day than on the 1st day of testing.
4	More frequent stimulation results in more rapid and/or more pronounced response decrement and more rapid spontaneous recovery.	Predicts that a subject responding for a reinforcer according to a Fixed Interval (FI) 10 s schedule will show a greater within-session decrease in responding than a subject responding for a reinforcer on a FI 100 s schedule.
5	Within a stimulus modality, the less intense the stimulus, the more rapid and/or more pronounced the behavioral response decrement. Very intense stimuli may yield no significant observable response decrement.	Predicts that a subject responding for a large magnitude reinforcer will show less within-session decline in responding than a subject responding for a smaller magnitude reinforcer.
6	The effects of repeated stimulation may continue to accumulate even after the response has reached an asymptotic level. This effect of stimulation beyond asymptotic levels can alter subsequent behavior, for example, by delaying the onset of spontaneous recovery.	Predicts that a subject that responds for a reinforcer until an asymptotic baseline (operant) level of responding is reached will show greater initial responding upon retest than a subject that is left in the test situation for additional testing after asymptotic responding is reached.
7	Within the same stimulus modality, the response decrement shows some stimulus specificity.	Predicts that changing the stimulus properties of the reinforcer after responding has declined (habituated) will increase responding.
8	Presentation of a different stimulus results in an increase of the decremented response to the original stimulus. This phenomenon is termed “dishabituation.”	Predicts that after responding for a reinforcer has declined (habituated), the introduction of a separate non-contingent novel stimulus will increase responding for the reinforcer.
9	Upon repeated application of the dishabituating stimulus, the amount of dishabituation produced decreases.	Predicts that repeated dishabituation by a non-contingent stimulus (see prediction #8) will have diminished effects on responding with each successive use.
10	Some stimulus repetition protocols may result in properties of the response decrement that last hours, days, or weeks. This persistence of aspects of habituation is termed long-term habituation.	Predicts that, with repeated testing, total responding during daily test sessions will decrease and that this decrease in responding will be long lasting.

¹The descriptions of the characteristics of habituation described in this table are abbreviated in order to save space. If clarification is needed please refer to the original descriptions provided by Rankin etal. (2009).