Non-Human Animals

• Intro

• In psychology, ethical issues have arisen regarding the use of non-human animals (NHAs), particularly in relation to protection from harm.

• The primary reason psychological research is conducted on NHAs is that it allows researchers to explore areas they would be unable to investigate with humans due to ethical and moral concerns.

• Animals are often chosen because they are less expensive to use, and the benefits of such research are deemed to outweigh the costs to the animals.

• In this essay, I will discuss how the use of NHAs in psychology can be both beneficial and problematic

Legislation & guidelines

• Support for Use

  • Animal research is regulated to protect welfare.

  • British Psychological Society (BPS) provides ethical guidelines for when and how animal research can be conducted.

  • Researchers must follow the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986.

  The 3Rs Principle

  • Overseen by the National Centre for the Replacement, Refinement and Reduction of Animals in Research.

  • Replacement – use alternatives (e.g., computer models, cell cultures).

  • Reduction – use fewer animals while maintaining reliable results.

  • Refinement – minimise stress or pain and improve welfare.

  Additional Ethical Safeguards

  • Bateson’s Decision Cube (1986) assesses Quality of research / Level of animal suffering / Likelihood of significant benefit

  • Research licences are granted by the UK Home Office only if these criteria are met.

  Limitations / Ethical Issues

  • Some question the morality of causing harm to animals, even if there are potential scientific benefits.

  • Measuring animal suffering can be difficult, as some animals show little outward distress.

  Conclusion

  • Strict regulation attempts to balance scientific progress with animal welfare.

  • Animal research is only permitted, when necessary, justified, and carefully controlled

Ethological & Comparative

Support for NHA Research

• Ethology studies animals in their natural environment, observing behaviour without interference.

• Konrad Lorenz observed goslings following him after hatching, demonstrating Imprinting.

• Led to the concept of a Critical Period – a limited time when attachment forms.

• Research provided valuable insights into innate behaviour and evolutionary explanations of attachment.

Challenges / Ethical Concerns

• Comparative Psychology studies animals to generalise findings to humans.

• Assumes similar learning processes and biological systems between humans and animals.

• Some studies raised ethical concerns.

Example of Ethical Criticism

• Harry Harlow (1959) studied maternal deprivation in rhesus monkeys.

• Monkeys experienced psychological and emotional harm, raising serious ethical concerns.

• Such research would likely not meet modern 3Rs standards.

Conclusion

• Some argue the benefits to human understanding outweigh the harm to animals (a utilitarian perspective).

• However, ethical concerns remain significant, meaning the use of animals in psychology continues to be debated

Animal Assisted Therapy

• Support for NHA Use

  • Animal Assisted Therapy (AAT) helps individuals develop attachment, trust, and social skills.

  • Interacting with animals (e.g., grooming or talking) can encourage bonding and transferable social skills.

  • Friedmann et al. (2009) found AAT can help address emotional difficulties in individuals with Schizophrenia and Down Syndrome.

  • Allen (2003) reported that pets can lower blood pressure, reduce stress, and decrease cardiovascular risk.

  • Suggests animals can improve wellbeing and social relationships.

  Challenges / Ethical Issues

  • Some researchers argue improvements may be due to extra attention from therapists, not the animals themselves.

  • Using animals for human benefit may demonstrate speciesism (valuing human needs over animal welfare).

  • Animals used in therapy cannot withdraw consent and may not be protected by the same regulations as research animals.

  Research Criticism

  • Equine-Related Treatments (ERT) studies have been criticised for low validity.

  • Anestis et al. (2014) suggested improvements may be no greater than natural recovery over time.

  Conclusion

  • While AAT may offer psychological and health benefits, questions remain about validity and ethics, meaning the use of

  animals in therapy is still debated

Speciesm & Animal Rights

• Speciesism Debate

  • Peter Singer (1975) argued that discrimination based on species is speciesism, comparable to racism or sexism.

  • Suggests using animals in research is ethically problematic.

  Counterargument

  • Gray argued humans have a special moral duty of care to other humans, so speciesism cannot be equated with racism or sexism.

  Animal Rights Perspective

  • Regan (1984) argued animals have inherent rights and therefore should never be used in research.

  Utilitarian Perspective

  • Singer takes a utilitarian view: animal research may be justified if the benefits (e.g., medical advances) outweigh the suffering

  caused.

  Criticisms of Animal Rights

  • Rights are often linked to responsibilities within society (e.g., citizenship).

  • Since animals cannot hold social responsibilities, some argue they cannot possess rights in the same way as humans.

  Validity Issue

  • A further concern is whether findings from animal studies can be generalised to humans, particularly for drug reactions or

  behaviour.

  Conclusion

  • Ethical debates about speciesism, animal rights, and validity mean the use of animals in psychological research remains

  controversial

The Law

Necessity of Animal Research

• Not all animal research should be halted; some is legally required.

• British law mandates new drugs (e.g., antidepressants) be tested on ≥2 mammal species.

• Research can cause pain and suffering, but provides critical benefits, e.g., enabling people with

mental health disorders to lead relatively normal lives.

• Addiction research also relies on animals to understand behaviour.

• ‘Specially protected species’ (mammals) make up <1% of total research.

Regan’s Perspective

• Tom Regan’s concept of ‘subject of a life’:

• Individuals with inherent value should be treated with respect and not exploited.

• All mature mammals qualify as subjects of a life → ethical concerns for research.

Conclusion

• NHA research is scientifically valuable but ethically complex, balancing human benefits with the

rights and welfare of animal s

Conclusion

Benefits of NHA Research

• Enables development of treatments not possible in humans (e.g., Alzheimer’s).

• Allows study of concepts that would be unethical to investigate in humans.

• Bateson’s Decision Cube and legislation safeguard animal welfare and ensure research

quality.

Drawbacks & Ethical Considerations

• Animals are sentient beings (e.g., chimpanzees show self-awareness).

• Limitations of decision frameworks:

• Hard to predict potential benefits before research.

• Difficult to assess degree of animal suffering accurately.

Conclusion

NHA research is scientifically valuable but raises significant ethical concerns.

• Balancing human benefits with animal welfare is a central challenge in psychology.