Understanding the workings of the mind and human behavior is the goal of psychological study. Creatures are used in experiments and observation to study non-human animals, leading to the development of psychological research on them. Experimental methods include electric shocks, pharmaceutical injections, food deprivation, mother separation, and brain function alteration to study the effects on behavior and sensory and cognitive abilities.
Non-human primates, cats, dogs, rabbits, rats, and other rodents are the most often used animals in psychological experiments. Nevertheless, animals are also used in behavior therapy and psychology programs to treat phobias. In the US, 80% of members of the American Psychological Association support employing animals in psychological research.
Because of his deliberate application of the scientific method and denial of anthropomorphism and anecdotalism, E. L. Thorndike stands at the beginning of a century of animal studies in psychology. Numerous psychological research has in the past tested various theories on animals. A psychologist named Dr. Harlow used monkeys in trials to show the effects of social isolation, a psychologist named Skinner used pigeons to study superstition, and a psychologist named Pavlov used dogs to study operant conditioning in 1980.
The use of non-human animals in a psychological study is controversial, and many ethical arguments exist for and against it. It is difficult to justify why we treat animals in ways that we would not treat humans simply because of the presumption that they are similar to us.
On the one hand, this implies that they are a useless subject sample in most research if we assert that they are completely different from us and cannot feel and suffer like us. On the other hand, if they resemble humans sufficiently to serve as good experimental subjects, they could be able to experience human-like suffering, and there is no reason to deny them the same rights we have granted to other weaker groups. Of course, they are unable to express their suffering to us vocally. Although we are willing to assume that they can suffer like humans, neither a human newborn nor a person with mental retardation can. We do not know if animals experience pain similar to that of humans. What is certain is that, just like people, animals will do anything to protect their freedom, life, and ability to feel pain.
Ethical issues in psychological research with animals can be studied as −
Humans believe there is nothing morally wrong with using the ability to subjugate creatures to our will (e.g., "We have a right to do whatever we decide we have a right to do"). Morality and ability are separate concepts. Surely we do not believe it is appropriate to conduct experiments on people with mental disabilities (even though they would make a far better subject sample than animals in most cases). Although we can do so, we can be proud that we shield others who are unable to shield themselves.
Before pursuing the "silly bourgeois cause" of animal rights, we should be concerned with humanely treating other species members. The human concern is treated prior to animal concern.
One more concern is understanding the importance of studying animals to comprehend humans better. Animals are helpful because they psychologically or biologically resemble humans, and most animal research aims to extrapolate the findings to the human race. Both proponents and opponents of animal testing can cite instances of trials whose findings proved to be either true or false for humans.
Researchers conducting nonhuman animal research are aware that doing so could result in damages, ranging from the relatively modest (such as taking a blood sample) to the more serious (e.g., neurosurgery). A large body of psychological research focuses on animal welfare and identifying best practices for housing and caring for captivity animals. This research community attempts to mitigate some of the harms by, for example, ensuring that the animals' psychological well-being is optimized.
Even so, some injuries will inevitably persist, and it is morally necessary to balance those harms against the research's potential gains (for both humans and the animals themselves). The possible hazards to humans of not conducting the research are also crucial to take into account. Without animal research, for instance, viable cures for human disorders like Alzheimer's disease may still be discovered. However, it will undoubtedly take decades longer, and in the meantime, millions more people will suffer.
Many animal-based teaching techniques are less effective than non-animal approaches for teaching complicated biological processes and anatomy, such as computer simulations, interactive CD-ROMs, movies, charts, and lifelike models. According to research, many students at all educational levels find it upsetting to kill live animals for dissection and experiments. Some even decide against pursuing professions in science rather than going against their moral code.
According to a 2013 PETA India poll of Bombay Veterinary College final-year students, 63% of respondents claimed that practicing painful techniques on living animals and performing terminal surgery cause grief and have a significant psychological impact on students. Further, 73% agreed that ethically sourced or donated bodies are effective replacements for killing healthy calves for anatomical studies, and 65% thought that non-harmful teaching methods like simulation software, models, manikins, etc., are just as effective as those achieved by using live animals. In addition, 69% suggested that there should be a policy allowing students to object on moral grounds to the use of live animals in favor of more contemporary humane techniques.
Animals are used extensively in practical lessons for anatomy, physiology, pharmacology, surgery, and clinical internship training. Animals are required for these topics' fundamental demonstrations of the handling idea, anatomical aspects, and veterinary procedure demonstrations for skill development. Before, during, and after the handling or demonstration, the animals endure stress, pain, and suffering. Therefore, from the standpoint of animal welfare, we should look for alternatives to using animals.
Many studies have employed animals as subjects, and the results have helped people in many ways. In reality, because of their immediate effects, human illnesses have been understood for long-term durability. Psychologists have consistently questioned the use of animals in many types of studies based on various factors. In this situation, the advantages of employing animals in the study will hold people's interest over time. Behavioral research depends on particular model elements that might vary in animals, as is normal.
Physics
Biology
Chemistry
Mathematics
Economics
Psychology
Environmental Science
Social Studies
Fashion Studies
English