Animal Research and the ethics of experimentation
Psychologists undertake research to gain more insight into behavior and consequently apply this knowledge to improve on human and animal welfare. Much of the research uses humans as subject although recently the use of animals has been on the rise. The study of human and animal behavior dates back to Charles Darwin’s evolution theory. More has been done, since then to understand the basic principals underlying the behavior of creatures both human and non human. More so, as psychologists seek to answer questions concerning the mind, intelligence and cognitive processes, animal research emerge as a strong contributor. This paper will discuss why psychologists are shifting into use of animals in their research as well as the ethical principles that guide them in their practice
According to Myers (2012, ch. 1, p.18), many psychologists study animals since they find them very fascinating. Their studies are aimed at understanding how the different species behave, learn, and think. Through the study of animals psychologists have also been able to learn about people since they share a common biology. Human share similar biological processes with animals and studies of animals have helped understand more on taste, hearing, vision, and pain perception. Myers (2012, ch. 1, p.18), notes that studies on the animal cognition have shed more light concerning the ecological and comparative processes of the mind. Research with animals is attributed to findings and the understanding of processes such as adaptation, development, and learning. Other important contributions of research with animals include the treatment of clinical problems such as self- injurious conditions in autistic children, as well as the understanding of physical dependence and drug abuse.
Although humans and animals share similar processes, the issue of using animals in research continues to raise heated debate. Just how just is it to defend scientific research with animals on basis of similarities and defend it morally on basis of difference? Animal protection movement is against the use of animals in biological, medical, and psychological research (Myers, 2012, ch. 1, p.19). The two emerging issues are if it is right to place the human wellbeing above that of animals and secondly, whether mice should get tumors so that humans do not. In order to answer this question, it is important to think of the best safeguards that can protect the wellbeing of animals in research (Myers, 2012, ch. 1, p.19),
According to Ferdowsian (2011 p.478), the study of certain behavior processes and behaviors require subjects that have certain characteristics, for instance, age, size or genetic make-up. Such experiments may also require certain restrictions of the subjects in terms of diet, environmental controls or specific behavioral histories. It would, certainly be impossible to achieve such with humans and thus the use of animals. Mostly, studies use animals in cases where the practical or ethical conditions involved cannot allow the use of human. For instance, psychopharmacology involves the study of the behavior effect and withdrawal of a drug that is chronically administered. Such a study required many days and most of these drugs are not yet approved for use by humans. Several studies also involve the examination of the brain after treatment and may also need the administration of the drug directly to certain tissues of the brain to create a more understanding of the mechanisms.
Gabriel et al (2012 p.384), point out that the use of animals in research is highly safeguarded by both the federal government and by scientific bodies such as the American Association for the Accreditation of Laboratory Animal Care (AAALAC) and the APA. Scientists have to obtain accreditation from this body before they can use animals in their research. They have to give assurance concerning proper care and conditions for the animals in their laboratories. Professional bodies that have members engaging in animal research have their own ethical standards and guidelines for their members.
Ferdowsian (2011 p.477), argues that animal research is guided by certain guidelines that must be adhered to by those involved in it. In performing the research it is ethically wrong to go on with it if it would cause more harm than the benefits it yields. In any research with animals there should be a clear purpose that the study is bound to yield knowledge that sheds an insight into the processes of evolution, alteration, control, development, maintenance or behavior. Secondly, the study should also increase the knowledge of the species being studied. Consequently the study should bring forth beneficial results to the welfare of humans or animals.
Myers (2012, ch 1, p.20), notes that when people are involved in research the American Psychological Association’s Ethics has devised a guideline that guides researchers. The researchers should first obtain an informed consent from the participant. The process must be conducted in such a way that participants are protected from harm and discomfort. Information about participants should be kept confidential at all times. Finally, the researcher is supposed to explain the research afterwards to the participant. In addition, most universities have also developed ethics committee that vets research proposals to ensure participants are safeguarded.
In conclusion, research is an integral part of psychology and the benefits are numerous. Psychologists are faced with the dilemma of which subjects to use unlike other scientists due to the nature of their study. The use of humans in research is challenging in some cases where certain conditions have to be adhered to. The use of animals in such cases is preferable but is not without conflict. Psychologists have no option but to adhere to strict guidelines that safeguard these animals.
References
Ferdowsian, h. (2011). Human and Animal Research Guidelines: Aligning Ethical Constructs with new Scientific Developments. Bioethics, 25(8), 472-478
Gabriel, K. I., Rutledge, B. H., & Barkley, C. L. (2012). Attitudes on Animal Research Predict Acceptance of Genetic Modification Technologies by University Undergraduates. Society & Animals, 20(4), 381-400.
Myers, D.G (2012) Psychology in Everyday Life. New York: Worth Publishers.
Use the order calculator below and get started! Contact our live support team for any assistance or inquiry.
[order_calculator]