‘Using non-human animals in psychology is useful but also problematic’.
To what extent do you agree with this statement? Justify your answer using your psychological
knowledge. (25)
Response:
Using non-human animals in psychology is useful but also problematic for many reasons due to the costs for
the non-human animals which may have strong benefits for society. The psychology BPS guidelines propose
that when psychologists are conducting research with animals they should take several things into account.
Firstly, they should heed the 3Rs: replace (animals with a suitable alternative, such as brain scans), reduce
(the amount of suffering the animal is exposed to such as by giving them painkillers) and refine (refine the
procedures to make sure the animals experience a reduced amount of harm if possible). An example of a
study which breaks this guideline is Sheridan & King who got their participants to administer shocks to a
puppy as a way to see the differences in obedience in men and women. They found that all the women
administered the highest voltage, meaning that women are more obedient than men. This is ground-breaking
research for psychology, however it does not justify for not finding an ethical alternative and reducing the
amount of harm to the puppy, therefore using non-human animals in psychology can be useful but also
problematic as researchers can breach ethical guidelines.
Furthermore, another reason why using non-human animals is useful but also problematic is the use of
comparative psychology. Comparative psychology aims to compare animals to humans. A famous study
includes Harry Harlow (1959). Harlow placed infant rhesus monkeys in a cage with two mothers: one was
wired and had a feeding bottle attached to it, the other was covered in soft cloth. Harlow found that the
monkeys spent most of their time on the cloth mother and clung to it when frightened. This suggests that
warmth and care produce a stronger emotional bond between a mother and baby as opposed to feeding. This
is strong evidence as it can be applied to humans and give us a greater idea on what is important in the
emotional development of an infant. This study was useful because Harlow wouldn’t have been able to
conduct this experiment on human babies due to issues of consent and it would have been highly unethical
so, by using monkeys, Harlow conformed to the BPS guideline of using animals suited to the research
purpose because monkeys have been found to be genetically similar to humans. Therefore, comparative
psychology is useful as findings can be generalised to humans in a more ethical way. However, this is
problematic because the harm which was avoided in the humans was in fact evident in the rhesus monkeys.
This is because as adults, the rhesus monkeys used in the study were found to have social difficulties, and
they rejected their own infants. This is problematic as monkeys are supposed to be social animals, however,
this study psychological harmed them and stifled their proper development as monkeys.
In addition, this suggests that monkeys have sentience. Sentience is when a species has self-awareness and
has the ability to feel pain and experience emotions. Therefore, Harlow’s study has had an emotional impact
on the monkeys which is problematic. Furthermore, this ignites the issue of speciesism. Singer proposed that
using a non-human animal in research based on their species is no different to sexism or racism. Therefore,
this suggests that the monkeys should not have been used just because it avoids harm in humans. This
devalues their species. Therefore, Harlow’s research is highly problematic, however, his evidence was
highly significant in the way it shows that love and warmth is important to a child’s development.
Moreover, ethological psychology is used to observe animals in their natural habitat with little interference
to their surroundings. For example, Dian Fossey observed gorillas in the wild for several years as she
wanted to study their social interactions. Her work was made famous by the film ‘Gorillas in the Mist’.
Ethological psychology is useful because it gains insight into animal’s behaviour but without breaking any
ethical guidelines. This suggests that if Harry Harlow conducted his study on monkeys by observing them in
their natural habitat it would have been much more ethical as he could get the same results by observing
infants with their mothers in the wild without having to separate the monkeys from their mothers. Therefore,
the results would have been equally as useful to society but without the problematic consequences.
To what extent do you agree with this statement? Justify your answer using your psychological
knowledge. (25)
Response:
Using non-human animals in psychology is useful but also problematic for many reasons due to the costs for
the non-human animals which may have strong benefits for society. The psychology BPS guidelines propose
that when psychologists are conducting research with animals they should take several things into account.
Firstly, they should heed the 3Rs: replace (animals with a suitable alternative, such as brain scans), reduce
(the amount of suffering the animal is exposed to such as by giving them painkillers) and refine (refine the
procedures to make sure the animals experience a reduced amount of harm if possible). An example of a
study which breaks this guideline is Sheridan & King who got their participants to administer shocks to a
puppy as a way to see the differences in obedience in men and women. They found that all the women
administered the highest voltage, meaning that women are more obedient than men. This is ground-breaking
research for psychology, however it does not justify for not finding an ethical alternative and reducing the
amount of harm to the puppy, therefore using non-human animals in psychology can be useful but also
problematic as researchers can breach ethical guidelines.
Furthermore, another reason why using non-human animals is useful but also problematic is the use of
comparative psychology. Comparative psychology aims to compare animals to humans. A famous study
includes Harry Harlow (1959). Harlow placed infant rhesus monkeys in a cage with two mothers: one was
wired and had a feeding bottle attached to it, the other was covered in soft cloth. Harlow found that the
monkeys spent most of their time on the cloth mother and clung to it when frightened. This suggests that
warmth and care produce a stronger emotional bond between a mother and baby as opposed to feeding. This
is strong evidence as it can be applied to humans and give us a greater idea on what is important in the
emotional development of an infant. This study was useful because Harlow wouldn’t have been able to
conduct this experiment on human babies due to issues of consent and it would have been highly unethical
so, by using monkeys, Harlow conformed to the BPS guideline of using animals suited to the research
purpose because monkeys have been found to be genetically similar to humans. Therefore, comparative
psychology is useful as findings can be generalised to humans in a more ethical way. However, this is
problematic because the harm which was avoided in the humans was in fact evident in the rhesus monkeys.
This is because as adults, the rhesus monkeys used in the study were found to have social difficulties, and
they rejected their own infants. This is problematic as monkeys are supposed to be social animals, however,
this study psychological harmed them and stifled their proper development as monkeys.
In addition, this suggests that monkeys have sentience. Sentience is when a species has self-awareness and
has the ability to feel pain and experience emotions. Therefore, Harlow’s study has had an emotional impact
on the monkeys which is problematic. Furthermore, this ignites the issue of speciesism. Singer proposed that
using a non-human animal in research based on their species is no different to sexism or racism. Therefore,
this suggests that the monkeys should not have been used just because it avoids harm in humans. This
devalues their species. Therefore, Harlow’s research is highly problematic, however, his evidence was
highly significant in the way it shows that love and warmth is important to a child’s development.
Moreover, ethological psychology is used to observe animals in their natural habitat with little interference
to their surroundings. For example, Dian Fossey observed gorillas in the wild for several years as she
wanted to study their social interactions. Her work was made famous by the film ‘Gorillas in the Mist’.
Ethological psychology is useful because it gains insight into animal’s behaviour but without breaking any
ethical guidelines. This suggests that if Harry Harlow conducted his study on monkeys by observing them in
their natural habitat it would have been much more ethical as he could get the same results by observing
infants with their mothers in the wild without having to separate the monkeys from their mothers. Therefore,
the results would have been equally as useful to society but without the problematic consequences.
