Non-human Animals Controversy Flashcards
(9 cards)
What are the 4 points for the non-human animals controversy?
BPS guidelines for psychologists working with animals.
Comparative/ethological psychology.
Use as a therapeutic device.
Speciesism.
What is the intro to this debate?
Even though psych is primarily concerned with human behaviour, animals are often used in studies, for a variety of reasons.
Often, animals come to harm (physical/psychological).
It’s argued that animals can think/feel much in the same way as humans and that causing them to suffer does not justify the scientific findings such animal studies can give.
Is the cost of using animals in research justified for the benefits of what we learn about human behaviour.
BPS guidelines for psychologists working with animals:
Outline - BPS guidelines were published in 2012, for working with animals. Not legally binding but those who fail to meet the guidelines may be banned from conducting research.
Example - 1) conform to current legislation - must meet criteria - potential findings are important enough to justify animal harm, study cannot be done with non-human animal methods, minimum number of animals will be used, suffering kept to a minimum.
2) 3 Rs - replace with suitable alternatives, reduce number of animals used, refine minimal suffering.
3) choose species suited to research purpose.
Counter - Dunayer argues that animal legislation simply sets the standard for hurting/killing animals. Just because something is legal, doesn’t mean it’s right.
Link - no as they are not enforceable by law/strict enough so boundaries get pushed and animals get animals get treated poorly.
Comparative and ethological psychology.
Comparative psych - studies that aim to use animals in order to make generalisations about humans.
Harlow’s monkeys - attachment research in monkeys; importance of culture over feeding. Ps were baby monkeys (wire ‘mother’ with food, cloth ‘mother’ with no food. They only went to wire mother for food, cloth mother to spend time/when scared. Supports evolutionary theory of attachment. +/- lab.
Ethological psych - animals studied in their own environment, interested in the animal’s behaviour in its own right and less interested in generalising the humans. Lorenz - goslings, attachment.
Comparative and ethological link
Comparative is more useful for human behaviour.
In psychology, we could get away with just comparative psychology.
Yes there’s a place for the responsible use for both psychologies.
Use of animals as a therapeutic device.
Assisted animal therapy aims to enable disturbed/socially isolated individuals to learn to trust + form relationships with other people. The bond between client + animal is formed through feeding and grooming, main aim is to transfer social skills learnt with animals to relationships with humans.
They can reduce stress and improve communication. For example equitine therapy has shown promise in ASD individuals, helping interactions/reduce anxiety. Dogs, horses, guinea pigs used.
However, some researchers argue that there is a lack of rigorous scientific evidence which questions the validity. May not always be useful if someone is allergic.
Overall AAT is in early stages, and more scientific evidence must be conducted, however it’s a positive way to use animals in research = well-kept.
Speciesism.
Speciesism - the practice of treating members of one species as morally more important than members of other species.
Utilitarian stance - what is right is whatever brings the greatest good to the greatest number. If research on a small group of animals has great benefits to society - it’s justified.
Absolutist stance - no animal experiment is ever ethical, therefore no study on animals can be justified - all animal research is wrong.
Eg seligman - helplessness in dogs. Those with utilitarian stance may argue that seligman created a theory of depression from it, which benefits humans so it’s ’worth it’.
However, those who take an absolutist stance say that in no way should animals have been used in seligman study as it was unethical, more ethical method should have been used.
Speciesism link.
Animals rights is still a new concept. ‘Animals have no responsibility so don’t have rights’.
But children don’t have responsibility and they have rights (animal rights activists)? Animals think, feel, have emotions.
Presence of animal rights activists makes it difficult to conduct research.
Overall conclusion.
Animals should not be used if it leads to their harm (psychically/psych) or if kept in poor conditions.
However, when well-kept, they can be useful when generalising their behaviour to humans and as a therapeutic device.
To improve the use of animals in psych, there should be laws which are enforced to make sure animals come to no harm in research + more scientific evidence to back up AAT.
