Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Use of Animals In Psychological Research - Coggle Diagram
Use of Animals In Psychological Research
Arguements for use of animals
Rats are heavily used in psychological research due to speed of offspring production; rat’s gestation/pregnancy period is typically 22 days and therefore large sample can be bred in short time frames. When investigating a characteristic across generations like aggression, researcher doesn’t have to wait long for results to appear.
Lab experiments have degree of internal validity as animal ppts unaware of what’s happening, behaviour unlikely to change due to demand characteristics which are present in humans
Experimentation offers higher control, can cage animals in a way that humans cannot be caged, and can isolate variables in animals easier than you would for humans.
Pain and distress is permitted, which isn’t the case for humans. Skinner gave electric shocks to animals in Skinner Box; however, animal research is heavily regulated and controlled by legislation to ensure correct housing and treatment is provided. Laboratories undergo regular inspections to ensure welfare of animals being studied.
Animal research has provided significant insight into vital areas of medical research including Drug treatment, transplants, surgical techniques, and cloning. Animal research has made a highly significant contribution to what we know about brain and nervous system and conditioning techniques have been used successfully in therapeutic settings.
From evolutionary perspective, humans share common ancestry with other animals, particularly primates and therefore animal research gives valid information about human processes. We share basic nervous system structures and functions that means we’re able to generalise from animals to humans to some extent.
From ethical perspective, utilitarian argument (Utilitarianism is often associated with two psychological features. First, acceptance of instrumental harm for the greater good. The utilitarian is famously willing to kill one to save five in the trolley problem) would suggest that suffering of small number of animals is justified because it helps significant number of people, moreover some would argue that we have a moral obligation to own species to advance knowledge and reduce suffering. Gray (1991) would argue that animal research is justified as it furthers this cause
Arguments against use of animals
Most people would argue that animal research is not credible and lacks ecological validity, lab-based animal research produces behaviour that is different from animal’s natural behaviour, for example drug addiction studies. Moreover, there are too many differences between animals and humans. Extrapolation (the process of estimating) may reduce validity of research. Generalisations between animals and humans are guilty of anthropomorphism ( Where animals are mistakenly attributed with human characteristics).
Humans and animals are very different. There are differences in human and animal evolution and our genetic make-up. We act differently both cognitively and emotionally. Our behaviour and thought processes are subject to many more variables like cultural context and social norms and language. Physiologically, our brains differ from animals, humans have much larger cortex than other animals. Generalising from animals to humans has questionable value.’
A researcher should avoid pain and discomfort for animals unless findings have significant benefit for humans. Benefit isn’t known until after the study so it’s possible that research has limited effect. This raises wider ethical issues. Others point to inconsistency in continuity argument: If animals are so similar to humans, why aren’t they given same ethical considerations as us?
From moral perspective, utilitarian argument suggests that the research gives human suffering priority over animal suffering. Singer (1975) viewed this as form of discrimination (Speciesism) and could be argued that animals have same rights as humans and we have moral obligation to protect them. No amount of regulation can justify animal research.
Ethics for Use of animals in research
From ethical perspective, utilitarian argument (Utilitarianism is often associated with two psychological features. First, acceptance of instrumental harm for the greater good.
The utilitarian is famously willing to kill one to save five in the trolley problem) would suggest that suffering of small number of animals is justified because it helps significant number of people, moreover some would argue that we have a moral obligation to own species to advance knowledge and reduce suffering..
Gray (1991) would argue that animal research is justified as it furthers this cause. From moral perspective, utilitarian argument suggests that the research gives human suffering priority over animal suffering.
Singer (1975) viewed this as form of discrimination (Speciesism) and could be argued that animals have same rights as humans and we have moral obligation to protect them. No amount of regulation can justify animal research
Animals cannot give informed consent or withdraw
Can be deceived to some extent, i.e. eating a fake food pellet thinking that it was edible or safe to eat
Cannot debrief animals
Can protect animals from harm by not using them or not causing them pain. Physical Pain is easier to control as there’s arguments about an animal’s emotional capacity which may make it difficult to protect them from psychological harm
Doesn’t need to protect confidentiality for an animal as they have no data which needs to be kept confidential
Scientific Procedures Act 1986
Legal Requirements: Research must not break the law regarding endangered and protected species. This particularly restricts research involving great apes (chimpanzees, gorillas, orang-utans).
Replacement: Where possible, live animals should be replaced with research alternatives, like videos and computer simulations. Animals should only be used as a last resort.
Choice of Species: Species bred in captivity are ethically preferable to creatures taken from the wild; research should be minimised if it involves highly sentient (thinking, feeling) animals, like the great apes
Reduction: The number of animals used should be minimised as much as possible; this involves carefully designed experiments and good use of statistics to get the maximum amount of data from the smallest number of animals
Animal Care: When not being studied, animals must be housed, fed and watered in a suitable way as well as being given space and companionship appropriate to their species
Disposal: When the research is over, animals should be disposed of humanely; ideally they should be kept alive for breeding or as pets
Procedures: Animals must be treated humanely during research. The BPS gives special consideration to these three areas:
Deprivation: Some food deprivation is allowable (and may be normal and healthy for animals) but distress should be minimised
Pain: Anaesthetics should be used to minimise pain; animals should be given medical treatment after research; humane killing must be considered if suffering cannot be reduced
Caging: Distress should be minimised during caging; social species need companionship and animals unused to other animals may be distressed if caged with them