PERSISTENT BEHAVIOR MAINTAINED BY UNAVOIDABLE SHOCKS.
Unavoidable shocks can keep useless behavior going if a cue always comes first.
01Research in Context
What this study did
KELLEHER et al. (1963) worked with squirrel monkeys on a two-part schedule. A red light came on for three minutes. Shocks arrived every 30 seconds no matter what the monkey did. The light stayed on after each shock. The rest of the day was shock-free and dark.
The key point: the monkeys could press a lever, but pressing did not stop or change the shocks. The team simply watched how much pressing happened during the red light.
What they found
Monkeys pressed the lever most when the red light was on, even though pressing had no effect. The shocks were unavoidable, yet the animals kept responding. The behavior persisted day after day.
In short, a cue that always comes before unavoidable shocks can keep useless behavior alive.
How this fits with other research
WALLETHOMAS et al. (1963) ran almost the same setup the same year and got the same result. Both labs show that unavoidable shocks can maintain high response rates, proving the effect is real.
Henton (1972) later showed the schedule matters. When shocks came only after a set number of responses (FR-1), pressing dropped. When shocks arrived after varied times (VI), pressing stayed high. Same shocks, different rule, opposite outcome.
Hearst et al. (1970) seems to disagree. They gave monkeys a one-minute tone before each shock and saw pressing stop. The difference: their monkeys first learned that pressing could avoid shocks. Once the tone arrived, the monkeys gave up. T et al. never gave the monkeys a chance to avoid shocks, so the cue kept pressing alive instead of killing it.
Why it matters
Watch for superstitious persistence in your clients. If a child keeps rocking, yelling, or checking a device right before a non-avoidable loud alarm, the cue itself may be feeding the behavior. Try removing the cue or adding a true escape route. When the behavior no longer pays off, it should drop just like the FR-1 shocks did for W’s monkeys.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Track if problem behavior spikes right before a fixed annoyance (bell, alarm, buzzer) and test removing or varying that cue.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
Squirrel monkeys were trained on a multiple schedule in which 10-min periods on a continuous shock avoidance schedule, indicated by a yellow light, alternated with 10-min periods on a 1.5-min variable interval schedule of food reinforcement (VI 1.5). A white light indicated that VI 1.5 was in effect, except for the middle 2 min of the period on VI 1.5, in which a blue light appeared and terminated with the delivery of a 0.5-sec unavoidable shock. Stable response rates developed in the avoidance and VI 1.5 components. However, the highest response rates occurred in the blue, preshock stimulus. A series of experiments showed that responding in the blue stimulus persisted even when responding had been extinguished on both the VI schedule of food reinforcement and the shock avoidance schedule. Responding in the blue stimulus ceased when the blue stimulus terminated without shock or when it terminated with a response-contingent shock. Each time responding ceased, it was restored by terminating the blue stimulus with an unavoidable shock. When the blue stimulus was on throughout each session and unavoidable shocks were delivered at regular 10-min intervals, responding was well maintained. These results show that in monkeys that have been trained on a continuous avoidance schedule, unavoidable shocks can maintain responding even under conditions where responses have no programmed consequences.
Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior, 1963 · doi:10.1901/jeab.1963.6-507