# Monkeys
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/monkeys/550308
**Category:** Factual Questions
**Created:** [August 15, 2010, 5:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/monkeys/550308 "2010-08-15T05:22:49Z")
**Posts on this page:** 20
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@Drum\_God](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Drum_God)
#### Post date: [August 15, 2010, 5:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/monkeys/550308/1 "2010-08-15T05:22:49Z")
I received the following in an email this afternoon:
> [@](#):
>
> Start with a cage containing five monkeys. Inside the cage, hang a banana on a string and place a set of stairs under it. Before long, a monkey will go to the stairs and start to climb towards the banana.
>
> As soon as he touches the stairs, spray all the other monkeys with cold water. After a while another monkey makes the attempt with same result, all the other monkeys are sprayed with cold water. Pretty soon when another monkey tries to climb the stairs, the other monkeys will try to prevent it.
>
> Now, put the cold water away. Remove one monkey from the cage and replace it with a new one. The new monkey sees the banana and wants to climb the stairs.
>
> To his shock, all of the other monkeys attack him. After another attempt and attack, he knows that if he tries to climb the stairs he will be assaulted.
>
> Next, remove another of the original five monkeys and replace it with a new one.
>
> The newcomer goes to the stairs and is attacked. The previous newcomer takes part in the punishment with enthusiasm.
>
> Likewise, replace a third original monkey with a new one, then a fourth, then the fifth. Every time the newest monkey takes to the stairs he is attacked.
>
> Most of the monkeys that are beating him up have no idea why they were not permitted to climb the stairs or why they are participating in the beating of the newest monkey. After replacing all of the original monkeys, none of the remaining monkeys have ever been sprayed with cold water. Nevertheless, no monkey ever again approaches the stairs to try for the banana.
> Why not?
>
> Because as far as they know, that is the way it has always been done around here.
The story ends with a political comment that has no bearing on my question.
Put simply, would monkeys (or any other animal really act this way? I understand how a monkey could be conditioned through direct action. Reach for the banana and get doused with cold water. However, in this scenario, the four other monkeys get the negative reinforcement based on the action of a monkey that gets positive reinforcement (he gets the banana). Each monkey decides to prevent one of their number from reaching for the banana so that they do not get doused. To me, that is a pretty huge leap for a monkey to make. He has to understand that when someone _else_ does “X”, then something bad happens to _him_. Can a monkey really make such an indirect connection? I’m not sure that even humans would easily make that connection. My thought is that if everyone except the monkey going for the banana gets doused, then I want to be the one getting the banana. That guy gets the banana and stays dry. Win-win.
I think that this experiment assumes that the monkeys are not starving and that the banana does not represent a desperation move that will be made no matter what the cost.
---
### Author:  [@qazwart](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/qazwart)
#### Post date: [August 15, 2010, 2:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/monkeys/550308/2 "2010-08-15T14:54:58Z")
What type of monkeys are we talking about? Different monkeys have different social structures and hierarchy. For example, a group of monkeys with a very strong social hierarchy, the alpha male might simply take the banana and not care what happens to the others.
It sounds like a made up experiment to make a political point.
---
### Author:  [@jasg](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jasg)
#### Post date: [August 15, 2010, 3:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/monkeys/550308/3 "2010-08-15T15:05:37Z")
[Wiki](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hundredth_monkey_effect) to the rescue.
---
### Author:  [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)
#### Post date: [August 15, 2010, 3:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/monkeys/550308/4 "2010-08-15T15:23:21Z")
> [@jasg](#):
>
> [Wiki](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hundredth_monkey_effect) to the rescue.
The OP’s story isn’t about the hundredth monkey effect. It’s about monkeys learning to regulate behavior that will have negative consequences even though none of those monkeys themselves have experienced the negative consequences.
---
### Author:  [@GHO57](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GHO57)
#### Post date: [August 15, 2010, 3:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/monkeys/550308/5 "2010-08-15T15:39:52Z")
Link dump.
I was looking into something and had these bookmarked,So…
[http://www.s-cool.co.uk/alevel/psychology/determinants-of-animal-behaviour/social-learning-in-non-human-animals.html](http://www.s-cool.co.uk/alevel/psychology/determinants-of-animal-behaviour/social-learning-in-non-human-animals.html)
> **[Monkeys Show Sophisticated Learning Abilities](https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2003/01/030123073355.htm)**
>
> Psychologists have found evidence that monkeys have sophisticated abilities to acquire and apply knowledge using some of the same strategies as do humans. Specifically, the researchers have discovered that rhesus monkeys can learn the correct order...
> **[Monkeys Learn In The Same Way As Humans, Psychologists Report](https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/08/070801161511.htm)**
>
> Monkeys seem to learn the same way as humans psychologists report in the journal Psychological Science. Like humans, monkeys benefit enormously from being actively involved in learning, instead of having information presented to them passively.
> **[Monkeys' Ability To Reflect On Their Thoughts May Have Implications For...](https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/04/070420133813.htm)**
>
> A new study shows that monkeys have the ability to reflect about their thoughts and to assess their performance. In the future, the nonverbal tests used in this and other experiments on animal cognition can be adapted to study cognitive abilities of...
[http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/monkey-200801.html?c=y&page=1](http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/monkey-200801.html?c=y&page=1)
> **[Concept of mind in non-human primates](https://academic.oup.com/biohorizons/article/3/1/96/229091)**
>
> Abstract. Research concerning animal cognition explores the abilities and capacity of animals to perceive, think and conceive. As an extension of this, research
[http://www.emory.edu/LIVING\_LINKS/articles.html](http://www.emory.edu/LIVING_LINKS/articles.html)
[http://jasss.soc.surrey.ac.uk/13/3/4.html](http://jasss.soc.surrey.ac.uk/13/3/4.html)
… to the rescue?
To sum it up… They are to some extend capable of empathy, and exhibit a form of theory of mind… the basic learning strategy is similar to humans, the methods of social control are effective… apes have pretty well formed understanding of altruistic punishment. The answer is “possibly”; apes, sure thing at least for a while. Some monkeys… perhaps (macaques are a top contender there). They’ll also bound to stop doing it sooner or later if there’s no reinforcement, first monkey to forget the rule when others aren’t paying attention will break the system down. Or the first hungry one… or just the fastest…
_shrug_
---
### Author:  [@Oukile](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Oukile)
#### Post date: [August 15, 2010, 4:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/monkeys/550308/6 "2010-08-15T16:30:19Z")
I’m working directly with macaques, so I can answer this question in macaques species.
> [@Drum\_God](#):
>
> He has to understand that when someone _else_ does “X”, then something bad happens to _him_. Can a monkey really make such an indirect connection?
Absolutely. For bad things or for good things just as well. If a caretaker walk towards the banana storage next to the monkey cage, you can be sure that the monkeys know what’s coming (and get quite excited). Macaques have a lot of social interactions: if some peanut is thrown in the cage and the alpha monkey (i.e. the dominant one) is in the vicinity and looks interested, the beta and gamma won’t dare touch it. Well, the beta may go for it and then ruuuuuun before getting kicked.
> [@Drum\_God](#):
>
> I’m not sure that even humans would easily make that connection.
Suppose that I put you in a cage with a banana or bottle of beer or whatever you find attractive, and then every time you try to go for it I touch a button and you get an electric shock. I assure you that you will get the point very quickly.
> [@Drum\_God](#):
>
> My thought is that if everyone except the monkey going for the banana gets doused, then I want to be the one getting the banana. That guy gets the banana and stays dry. Win-win.
Then you better be the super-super alpha guy, because even as a human, I can tell you that you don’t want to be in a cage together with four freaked-out water-doused macaques.
> [@GHO57](#):
>
> They are to some extend capable of empathy, and exhibit a form of theory of mind… the basic learning strategy is similar to humans, the methods of social control are effective… apes have pretty well formed understanding of altruistic punishment. The answer is “possibly”; apes, sure thing at least for a while. Some monkeys.. perhaps (macaques are a top contender there).
You are totally right to point out the difference between macaques and apes.
> [@GHO57](#):
>
> They’ll also bound to stop doing it sooner or later if there’s no reinforcement, first monkey to forget the rule when others aren’t paying attention will break the system down. Or the first hungry one… or just the fastest…
My bet (with macaques) is that some new strong and dominant monkey comes in the cage, takes the alpha position, goes for the banana and when the others protest he beats the crap out of them. The other monkeys who, indeed, have no real motivation for preventing the alpha form getting the banana, will quickly forget the rule “don’t touch the banana” and go back to the ancestral rule “don’t piss the boss when he wants the banana”.
Back to the email in the OP: I’m quite confident that this behavior can be taught, but only a reference to an actual scientific study could corroborate the notion that it can remain stable for a long time.
---
### Author:  [@Smeghead](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smeghead)
#### Post date: [August 15, 2010, 4:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/monkeys/550308/7 "2010-08-15T16:35:56Z")
> [@Oukile](#):
>
> Then you better be the super-super alpha guy, because even as a human, I can tell you that you don’t want to be in a cage together with four freaked-out water-doused macaques.
I’ve only skimmed the thread and didn’t read your whole post, but I’m making this my new life motto.
---
### Author:  [@Wendell\_Wagner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wendell_Wagner)
#### Post date: [August 15, 2010, 4:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/monkeys/550308/8 "2010-08-15T16:41:30Z")
This link claims that the experiment described in the OP never happened exactly, although there are vaguely similar experiments:
> **[Did the monkey banana and water spray experiment ever take place? - Answers](https://qa.answers.com/Q/Did_the_monkey_banana_and_water_spray_experiment_ever_take_place)**
>
> The Monkey Banana and Water Spray Experiment
> The experiment is not real.
> A vaguely similar experiment by Stephenson (1966) is often
> quoted as if it supports the story, but it does not. The results of
> that real experiment do not in any way support the...
---
### Author:  [@Drum\_God](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Drum_God)
#### Post date: [August 15, 2010, 11:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/monkeys/550308/9 "2010-08-15T23:22:24Z")
> [@Oukile](#):
>
> I’m working directly with macaques, so I can answer this question in macaques species.
>
> > [@Drum\_God](#):
> >
> > He has to understand that when someone _else_ does “X”, then something bad happens to _him_. Can a monkey really make such an indirect connection?
>
> Suppose that I put you in a cage with a banana or bottle of beer or whatever you find attractive, and then every time you try to go for it I touch a button and you get an electric shock. I assure you that you will get the point very quickly.
I’m sure I would. But would a monkey get the point that, if he goes for the banana, someone _else_ gets the shock. Why would he care?
---
### Author:  [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)
#### Post date: [August 15, 2010, 11:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/monkeys/550308/10 "2010-08-15T23:38:22Z")
Because when the someone else gets the shock, they beat him up.
---
### Author:  [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)
#### Post date: [August 16, 2010, 2:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/monkeys/550308/11 "2010-08-16T02:09:47Z")
I can see the monkeys who are getting sprayed associating stair climbing with an unpleasant experience and beating up any monkey who tried it. And I can see monkeys who get beat up for attemting to climb the stairs learning not to try that.
So the criticial point is whether monkeys who were never sprayed would join in on beating up monkeys who are attempting to climb the stairs. These unsprayed monkeys have no reason to associate any unpleasant experience with another monkey climbing the stairs. The issue seems to be whether monkeys will beat up on another monkey just because the crowd is doing it or do they need a personal incentive for joining in.
---
### Author:  [@Wendell\_Wagner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wendell_Wagner)
#### Post date: [August 16, 2010, 7:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/monkeys/550308/12 "2010-08-16T07:18:03Z")
It seems reasonably clear that no such experiment ever happened, although it vaguely resembles some real ones. This story seems to be mostly told by managment consultants to prove some sort of point, and I don’t trust management consultants any further than I can throw them.
---
### Author:  [@GHO57](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GHO57)
#### Post date: [August 16, 2010, 7:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/monkeys/550308/13 "2010-08-16T07:24:46Z")
> [@Wendell\_Wagner](#):
>
> It seems reasonably clear that no such experiment ever happened, although it vaguely resembles some real ones. This story seems to be mostly told by managment consultants to prove some sort of point, and I don’t trust management consultants any further than I can throw them.
Just out of curiosity… how far could you throw a 207 pound management consultant?
---
### Author:  [@Wendell\_Wagner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wendell_Wagner)
#### Post date: [August 16, 2010, 7:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/monkeys/550308/14 "2010-08-16T07:48:57Z")
I can’t even pick one up.
---
### Author:  [@Oukile](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Oukile)
#### Post date: [August 16, 2010, 12:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/monkeys/550308/15 "2010-08-16T12:28:20Z")
> [@Drum\_God](#):
>
> > [@Oukile](#):
> >
> > I’m working directly with macaques, so I can answer this question in macaques species.
> >
> > Suppose that I put you in a cage with a banana or bottle of beer or whatever you find attractive, and then every time you try to go for it I touch a button and you get an electric shock. I assure you that you will get the point very quickly.
>
> I’m sure I would. But would a monkey get the point that, if he goes for the banana, someone _else_ gets the shock. Why would he care?
Ah, my banana/beer bottle example was out of the point indeed.
I’m pretty sure that the monkey would get the point that when someone else goes for the banana, he gets doused. See the caretaker heading for the banana storage example. A macaque can recognize someone else’s action (e.g. heading towards a specific item) an associate it with a short-term outcome.
---
### Author:  [@digs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/digs)
#### Post date: [August 16, 2010, 2:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/monkeys/550308/16 "2010-08-16T14:14:26Z")
For me, the real clue was contained in your first sentence:
> [@Drum\_God](#):
>
> I received the following in an email this afternoon:
I’m afraid that means that nothing that follows will be true. It may look logical, it may be full of names of scientists and dates of experiments, it may have quotes from prominent politicians or celebrities… but if you researched it, you would find that the entire thing had been twisted or just made up. All to make that “unrelated political point” you referenced.
I do apologize. I think you somehow got on my mom’s email list. Retired right-wing upper-class women, who are ready to believe anything that supports their very narrow viewpoints and can’t wait to pass it along to a hundred people that are merely related to an old high school friend should never have been given the power to forward emails.
---
### Author:  [@Drum\_God](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Drum_God)
#### Post date: [August 16, 2010, 4:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/monkeys/550308/17 "2010-08-16T16:17:34Z")
> [@digs](#):
>
> For me, the real clue was contained in your first sentence:
>
> > [@Drum\_God](#):
> >
> > I received the following in an email this afternoon:
>
> I’m afraid that means that nothing that follows will be true. It may look logical, it may be full of names of scientists and dates of experiments, it may have quotes from prominent politicians or celebrities… but if you researched it, you would find that the entire thing had been twisted or just made up. All to make that “unrelated political point” you referenced.
>
> I do apologize. I think you somehow got on my mom’s email list. Retired right-wing upper-class women, who are ready to believe anything that supports their very narrow viewpoints and can’t wait to pass it along to a hundred people that are merely related to an old high school friend should never have been given the power to forward emails.
I’m sure you’re right about that. I really didn’t think that the email was reporting a legitimate scientific experiment. The political point was that we should vote out all incumbent congress members. As such, I thought that the monkey story didn’t really apply all that well. I was just curious if monkeys could even make the leaps in reasoning that the story illustrates. It has seemed doubtful to me that monkeys behave that way, though some folks here with actual monkey experience say that it is possible.
---
### Author:  [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)
#### Post date: [August 16, 2010, 4:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/monkeys/550308/18 "2010-08-16T16:53:10Z")
> [@](#):
>
> The political point was that we should vote out all incumbent congress members.
Ah, thereby guaranteeing that none of them remember the cold water, and that all of them would just assume that “it’s always been done this way”, without knowing the reasons for anything. Makes perfect sense!
---
### Author:  [@Wendell\_Wagner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wendell_Wagner)
#### Post date: [August 17, 2010, 12:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/monkeys/550308/19 "2010-08-17T00:03:10Z")
I think that the story has different meanings depending on who tells it. When management consultants tell it in their expensive seminars, it means that they are going to introduce an idea that doesn’t make much obvious sense. By telling the monkey story, they imply that if there is widespread objection to the new idea in the company that they are giving the seminar to, that simply means that the employees are just like the monkeys. They have objections for no rational reason and discourage new ideas without thinking about them. Therefore the company should ignore the employees’ objections and impose the policy on the company that the consultant’s new idea must henceforth be used.
The problem with this attitude is not that every idea that management consultants come up with is wrong. Some are indeed good ideas, but there’s an awful lot of bad ones too. The problem is not that sometimes employees object to good ideas without thinking about them. That certainly happens. The problem is not that good ideas are sometimes counterintuitive. Some are, and they take a while to get used to. The problem is that by telling this story the management consultant is badgering the company and its employees. They are saying, “If you object to any of my ideas, you can’t be doing it for a rational reason. You must be doing it because you’re no smarter than the monkeys in this story. You have to accept my ideas without objections.”
---
### Author:  [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)
#### Post date: [August 17, 2010, 2:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/monkeys/550308/20 "2010-08-17T02:14:21Z")
> [@Wendell\_Wagner](#):
>
> The problem with this attitude is not that every idea that management consultants come up with is wrong. Some are indeed good ideas, but there’s an awful lot of bad ones too. The problem is not that sometimes employees object to good ideas without thinking about them. That certainly happens. The problem is not that good ideas are sometimes counterintuitive. Some are, and they take a while to get used to. The problem is that by telling this story the management consultant is badgering the company and its employees. They are saying, “If you object to any of my ideas, you can’t be doing it for a rational reason. You must be doing it because you’re no smarter than the monkeys in this story. You have to accept my ideas without objections.”
Exactly. That first group of monkeys had a sound reason for preventing any monkey from climbing the stairs.
It’s a good idea to periodically ask why something is being done and decide whether it still needs to be done. But it’s a bad idea to assume that if you don’t know the reason for doing something then it must not be important.
[Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/monkeys/550308.md?page=2)