Transformation of avoidance response functions in accordance with same and opposite relational frames.

Dymond et al. (2007) taught adults to pick Same or Opposite relations between shapes.

Next, one shape was paired with mild shock. Participants could press a key to avoid the shock.

The team then tested new shapes that were only linked through the trained relations. No shocks were given to these new shapes.

People who learned Same/Opposite relations avoided the new shapes too, even though they were never shocked.

Control participants, who got no relational training, did not avoid the new shapes.

Avoidance can emerge from language relations alone, without direct bad experiences.

Dymond et al. (2018) review shows this lab result matches real-life anxiety. Clients may fear places or people simply because they are related to past trauma through words, not direct harm.

Paliliunas et al. (2022) took the idea further. They taught kids with autism hierarchical relations in a game of I Spy. Like Simon’s adults, the children showed new responses without extra training. The 2022 study extends relational training to a clinical population and to hierarchical frames.

Older animal studies such as Zeiler (1968) and Hineline et al. (1969) showed avoidance in rats and pigeons, but only through direct shock. Simon’s work reveals a purely human pathway: avoidance born from language, not pain.

If your client avoids school, apps, or people they have never met, ask what words link these stimuli to past aversive events. You can test and break those links with Same/Opposite or hierarchical relational training. Start by mapping the client’s equivalence network, then retrain key relations to reduce derived avoidance.