History of Animal Research

Before the term "ethology" was coined, scientists (and laypeople) examined animal behavior. Aristotle, for instance, made numerous intriguing discoveries about animal behavior. Around the turn of the nineteenth century, German and British zoologists began to approach the study of animal behavior more systematically. The famous British naturapst Charles Darwin (1809–82), who proposed the idea of evolution by natural selection in 1859, gave what he called "instinct" its chapter in his seminal work.

The behavior of young domestic chicks was first observed by a British amateur scientist named Douglas Spalding in 1873. This phenomenon was later known as imprinting from the German Prägung, which Konrad Lorenz first used. Ivan Pavlov, a Russian physiologist, and Edward L. Thorndike, an American psychologist, both conducted learning-related studies on animal behavior during the start of the 20th century (1911). That is how animal research started in the field of Psychology.

Ethology, which is the study of animal behavior, emerged as a separate scientific field in the middle of the 20th century, large thanks to the work of two biologists, Konrad Lorenz (1903–1899) of Austria and Niko Tinbergen of the Netherlands (1907–88). In comparison to Tinbergen, who, along with his students and collaborators, conducted a wide range of field and laboratory research on the behavior of animals of many various species, Lorenz might be said to have been the more theoretical and philosophical of the two. Lorenz proposed several theoretical frameworks for understanding various facets of animal behavior, including evolution and motivation. He was also the more vocal of the two, and some of his writings generated much debate.

American psychologists generally focus on how learning affects behavior. What is now known as Pavlovian (or classical) conditioning has already been proven to be important by Pavlov. Thorndike later investigated what is now known as operant or instrumental conditioning. Another distinction between ethologists and experimental psychologists was that the former frequently observed animals (of various species) in their natural habitat. In contrast, the latter (despite the name comparative psychology) frequently focused on one species (such as the rat or the pigeon) that was studied exclusively in the laboratory.

Animal Research is Behaviorism and Cognitive Psychology

Darwin imagined behavior as a character altered by natural selection over many generations. Consequently, behavior has a past that can be investigated using current organisms. However, it is seen that many intriguing concerns arise when the behavioral approach is appped to social groupings, particularly in connection to the seemingly altruistic and cooperative behaviors that are frequently recorded inside groups.

The connection between the brain and behavior has also been investigated more recently from an evolutionary perspective, maybe due to the success of behavioral ecology. An animal s ecosystem ought to have a significant impact on its capacity for information gathering and processing. For instance, oscine birds sexual selection has resulted in the evolution of various intricate songs that females can assess with remarkable skill. How have the pressures for sophisticated birdsong impacted the evolution of the underlying brain substrate? How does the abipty to navigate change when the home range is large? Does needing to keep food put any impact on spatial memory specifically? These queries are thoroughly addressed, as are those that investigate the mental pves of animals and how brains process information.

Why is Animal Research done in Psychology?

The fact that nonhuman animals have evolved is one of the reasons why they are examined in psychology. The animals most frequently used in psychology research—mice, rats, and monkeys—have ancestors who are related to humans. Each species has adaptations that allow it to inhabit a certain ecological niche, but due to shared ancestry, human and nonhuman anatomical and functional processes—pke those of the brain and memory—are strikingly similar. Additionally, the exact control made possible by animal studies allows us to comprehend fundamental processes better (e.g., pving environments, experimental conditions, etc.). Additionally, we can ask and respond to some challenging or impossible queries for humans to perform.

For instance, we know the connections between the amygdala and other brain parts, but how does amygdala activity impact how the brain works? Using a novel method, it is now possible to temporarily disable the amygdala in a monkey and observe how other brain regions (including those not directly related to the amygdala) alter their activity. This kind of research advances our understanding of how the brain functions and holds great promise for developing new therapies for people with disorders that cause abnormal patterns of brain activity, such as epilepsy or Parkinson s disease.

Ethical Dilemmas for Animal Welfare

There are no easy answers to how we should treat animals, and many spanerse ethical perspectives may influence what we deem acceptable or unacceptable in the treatment of animals. We have only looked at one form of ethical approach in this Unit, consequentiapsm. However, depending on how we apply ethical thought, we might end up in a different position, even within the same approach. An essential aspect of how we manage animals is that we normally compare the requirements of people and the needs of animals; whether we perceive them to be of equal worth or if the demands deserve equal consideration impact our decision-making.

The ultimate result is the defining problem for consequentiapsm; the means of accomppshing this is less significant than the result. However, we frequently make judgments without knowing what the end consequence will be, and we may ignore what happens along the process. For example, suppose the purpose is to preserve a species. In that case, the impact on inspaniduals, suffering, and even death of some animals may be inconsequential as long as the end goal of the procedure is to assure the survival of the entire species. Similarly, suppose the upshot of an animal experiment is the creation of a vaccine that may save many human pves. In that case, it may be regarded as ethical, even if the trials cause tremendous pain in many animals.

Conclusion

The foundation of comparative psychology is that other animal species and humans may share physiologic, behavioral, or other traits. More than 2,400 years ago, it was reapzed that studying animals could teach us a lot about ourselves. Animal models are now used in almost all areas of biomedical research, including but not pmited to fundamental biology, immunology, infectious illness, cancer, and behavior, thanks to the advancement of this technique.

Combining these ideas will probably result in more genetic engineering and humanization of non-rodent species, as well as the couppng of this information with research on domestic animals conducted for medical purposes and human cpnical trials. Therefore, animal models will probably continue to be essential for translational research and for improving human and animal health.