key question

• what is the key question?

  can the use of animals in psychological research by justified?
• why is this an issue relevant in todays society?

  we want scientists to be ethical
• reasons why society cares?

  • rats don't consent and can be harmed so unethical
  • studying a rat may not generalise to a human who is more complex
  • it is difficult to understand if the costs outweigh the benefits as many animals are harmed. is it worth it for future research?
• justification of animal use?

  • One justification is ethical constraint to humans. This allows procedures to be done that are unethical for humans giving a level of control. For example in Van den Oevers study rats were unwillingly administered heroin and heads were decapitated after, meaning the human version would not be possible.
• justification of animal use?

  • applications. Without the use of rats, advances in therapy for psychology wouldn't have happened. For example Benazzouz (1993) induced parkinsons disease in monkeys and reversed the shaking symptoms by stimulating specific area in the basal ganglia
• argument against animal use?

  generalisability. behaviour of animals and humans may be similar but human behaviour is influenced by complex emotions and cognitions. Ferrari (2003) got rats to fight daily for 10 days at same time by introducing an 'intruder' rat. In the human version Ps could've worked it out by being sensible and might not even fight in the first place
• argument against animal use?

  alternatives. can reduce harm of animals and even control more variables better than using animals by using computer models/ virtual reality rather than animals