Non-human animals Flashcards
Why is it controversial?
The ethical considerations in psychological research with non-human animals involve balancing the potential harm to these animals with the wider benefits for society. We also concerned with the question of whether the study of non-human animals has any relevance to psychologists. There are 2 main points to keep in mind which your focus must be on psychological research instead of animal testing for cosmetics and use objective, evidence-based arguments instead of emotional criticism in your research, as these are crucial for a well-rounded understanding.
BPS Guidelines for psychologists working with animals
The British Psychological Society (BPS) publishes guidelines for research with animals. Psychologists are advised as follows:
- Conform to current legislation
- Heed the 3Rs
- Choose species that are suited to the research purpose
- Be aware of animals’ previous experience
- Responsibilities extend to animal care beyond study, including providing companionship for social animals.
- Be cautious of procedures that may cause pain and to thoroughly evaluate these procedures and explore potential alternatives.
- Consider food intake (e.g. conditioning experiments) so that normal food intake and metabolic requirements are met
BPS Guidelines for psychologists working with animals (continued)
The Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act (1986) requires that research with non-human animals is only permitted by licensed researchers on licensed projects. Licensed are only granted by the Home Office if:
- The knowledge to be gained from any investigation justifies harm or distress to animal participants
- The research cannot be done using non-animal methods
- Any discomfort or suffering is kept to a minimum by appropriate use of anesthetics or painkillers.
The Act relates only to vertebrate animals and only to those more than halfway through their gestation period. One invertebrates species (the octopus) was added in 1993. Primates, cats, dogs, and horses have additional protection.
Comparative psychology
The study of non-human animals, often with the intention of making comparisons with humans. For example, Harlow (1959), who placed infant rhesus monkeys in a cage with 2 wire mothers- one with a feeding bottle and one wrapped in soft cloth. The monkeys chose to spend most time with the cloth-covered mother, demonstrating the importance of contact comfort rather than feeding. The experiments led to monkeys becoming emotionally maladaptive adults, unable to socialize with others and rejecting their own infants despite their contact comfort. However, the research significantly influenced the understanding of infant emotional development, revealing that feeding alone doesn’t establish a strong bond between caregiver and infant, and suggests that some comparative research can potentially improve animal lives. For example Harlow’s research can be used to help improve the lives of monkeys in captivity or for breeding programmes for species in danger of extinction.
Ethological psychology
Ethologists aim to study animals without affecting their behaviour by observing them in their natural environment with minimal interference. For example, Lorenz (1935) arranged for some gosling eggs to hatch so he was the first moving thing they saw. These goslings then followed Lorenz everywhere as if he was their mother. This research, like Harlow’s had an important influence on understanding emotional development. Furthermore, Fossey (1983) observed gorillas in their natural habitat in order to reach a greater understanding of their social relationships. Her work was made famous through the film Gorillas in the Mist.
Use as a therapeutic device
The presence of pets has been shown to reduce stress. For example, Allen (2003) reported that the presence of pets reduced blood pressure in children reading aloud, buffered the elderly against life events stresses and reduced cardiovascular risk. A different kind of therapeutic approach aims to help individuals who are socially isolated or disturbed learn to trust and form relationships, such as attachments. Animal assisted therapy (AAT) may involve the use of dogs, cats, horses, dolphins or even fish and hamsters as ‘behavioural facilitators’. The client-animal bond is formed through physical interactions like grooming and feeding. Later followed by verbal interactions like commanding a dog to sit, marking the beginning of a social bond. The goal is to transfer social skills learned with animals to human relationships, allowing therapists to explore sensitive issues and discuss painful experiences through animal-client relationships.
Use as a therapeutic device: Evaluation
Some studies have provided very encouraging evidence for the use of AAT. For example, Friedmann and Son (2009) reviewed 28 studies using AAT and found that all the studies reported beneficial effects for emotional problems including schizophrenia, developmental disabilities and Down syndrome. However other researchers have criticised such studies. Anestis et al (2014) reviewed 14 studies of equine therapy and identified a number of serious methodological issues - the sample sizes were very small, there were no control groups and individuals were not randomly allocated to treatment groups. They suggested that the benefits may be due to therapist attention rather than animal interaction.
Speciesism
Singer (1975) argued that discrimination on the basis of membership of a species is no different from racial or gender discrimination and thus suggested that the use of animals is an example of ‘speciesism’, similar to racism or sexism. On the other hand, Gray (1991) suggested that we have a special duty of care to humans, and therefore speciesism is not equivalent to, for example, racism.
Animal rights
At the opposite end of the spectrum from Gray is Regan (1984), who believes that there are no circumstances under which animal research is acceptable. Singer’s view is a utilitarian one (produces the greater good for the greater number of people is ethically acceptable). This means that, if an animal research can alleviate pain and suffering, it is justifiable. Regan’s position is an absolutist one. He claims that animals have a right to be treated with respect and should never be used in research. The argument of ‘animal rights’ can be challenged by examining the concept of rights, which are dependent on societal responsibilities, such as citizenship. It can therefore be said that as animals do not have any responsibilities, they do not have any rights.
