We examined trial spacing during extinction following a human contingency learning task. Specifically, we assessed if an expanding retrieval practice schedule (Bjork & Bjork, 1992, 2006), in which the spacing between extinction trials was progressively increased, would result in faster immediate extinction and less recovery from extinction than uniformly spaced extinction trials. We used an ABB vs. ABA renewal design and observed that, whereas the expanding group extinguished faster during extinction treatment, the expanding and constant groups showed the same level of extinction with an immediate test in the extinction context (ABB) and the two groups showed equivalent ABA renewal at test in the training context. We conclude that the faster extinction observed in the expanding groups could be misleading in clinical treatment, if the therapist used the absence of fear during extinction as the basis for terminating treatment.