The inertia of conditioned craving. Does context modulate the effect of counterconditioning?

Previous research (Van Gucht, Baeyens, Vansteenwegen, Hermans, & Beckers, 2010) showed that a cue, initially paired with chocolate consumption, did not cease to elicit craving for chocolate after extinction, but did so after counterconditioning (CC). CC moreover was more effective than extinction in changing evaluations, in disrupting reported cue-elicited expectancy to get to eat chocolate, and in reducing actual consumption. The present research aimed to investigate whether the advantage of CC over extinction in changing acquired craving and liking would survive a change in context after CC. One group of participants received acquisition, CC and a final test all in the same context A (AAA-COUNTER-group). A second group received CC in a different context B (ABA-COUNTER-group). To compare the degree of any renewal after CC to renewal after extinction, a third group received extinction rather than CC in context B (ABA-EXT-group). Data indicate that a context switch after CC/extinction (ABA-groups) results in a return of cue-elicited approach tendencies and US-expectancies that were reduced or reversed after CC/extinction (renewal). As before, acquired liking is reduced only through CC, not by an extinction procedure. After CC in a different context, a return to the original acquisition context did not renew liking.