Second-order avoidance behavior in monkeys.

Scientists worked with monkeys on a three-part schedule. Each part had its own colored light.

In the first part, monkeys could press a lever to avoid mild shock. In the second part, they could choose to work or rest. The third part gave either food or more avoidance trials.

The team asked: will the monkeys use the middle "choice" part to dodge upcoming work or shock, even though that middle part never delivers shock itself?

Monkeys treated the middle light like a warning. They pressed more when it signaled upcoming shock trials and less when it signaled food.

Shocks stayed rare, so the animals were not simply escaping pain. They were escaping the chance of having to work later.

KELLEHER et al. (1963) showed that monkeys keep pressing even when shocks are unavoidable. D et al. add the twist: monkeys also work to avoid the stimuli that predict upcoming work.

Herrnstein et al. (1979) later chained two avoidance links and found that shocks in the second link controlled early responding. The 1966 study is the seed of that idea—stimuli two steps away from shock still steer behavior.

Wilkie et al. (1981) showed that safety tones can reinforce food patterns. D et al. flip the coin: cues that predict more work can become aversive and drive avoidance.

Your client may try to escape therapy tasks that signal harder work later, even if the task itself is easy. Watch for avoidance of the room, staff, or materials that predict tough trials. Insert neutral or preferred activities between hard ones to keep the cues from becoming "little shocks."