Study Edexcel Psychology ethics questions by applying human and animal research principles, protection from harm, informed consent and realistic alternatives.
A team of researchers tested whether there was a specific location in the brain where memory is stored. Instead of using human participants, the researchers taught rats how to find their way around a maze and then removed sections of the rats' brains. Despite removing brain tissue from almost every area of the brain, the rats were still able to complete the maze. The researchers were unable to locate a specific area of the brain that stored memories.
Criticisms of unethical practices with animals and humans have been dismissed by some researchers who claim that regardless of the actions taken during research, the outcomes are for the 'greater good' of society.
To what extent do the potential outcomes of human and animal research outweigh ethical responsibility?
You must make reference to the context in your answer.
AO1 (8 marks) AO2 (4 marks) AO3 (8 marks)
AO1
- Animal research is governed by the Scientific Procedures Act (1986) so
it is conducted with consideration for the animals.
- Research with people has to meet the Code of Ethics and Conduct
(2009) so people are safe.
- Respect must be shown to human participants during research so their
needs should always be met.
- Animals are given good conditions to live in so they do not suffer and
are well looked after.
- Informed consent can be gained from human participants before they
take part.
- Some early psychology did cause unnecessary distress to
people/animals.
AO2
- Intentional damage to the brains of the rats is more ethical than
damaging the brain of a human to test memory.
- The brain damage caused to the rats shows that memory is located in
more than one area of the brain, so has added to psychological
knowledge.
- The brain damage caused to the rats did not provide conclusive
evidence of memory stores, so the harm caused was not outweighed
by any benefit to the 'greater good'.
- There is not a need to harm rats' brains as there are case studies of
humans that can be used instead.
\begin{tabular}[t]{|l|l|l|}
\hline
AO3
- Milgram (1963) caused distress to participants but without this he
would not have been able to explain obedience to authority, so the
distress was outweighed by the benefit to society.
- Harlow (1958) was criticised for cruelty to monkeys in his research
into attachment, this was unnecessary but did generate a public
awareness of animal cruelty in society, so raised awareness.
- Rats have been used to study symptoms and treatments of
schizophrenia by causing brain lesioning or dopamine imbalances
intentionally, this has led to successful drug treatments for people with
schizophrenia, so the benefit to human society has outweighed the
way the animals have been treated.
- Skinner studied pigeons and attempted to train them to carry missiles
during WWII, this is unethical as the animals would have been sent to
their deaths, however during the time of war it was considered
acceptable to attempt to use animals in this way.
- The case of HM can be considered unethical as he would never have
fully understood his role in research due to his memory failure,
therefore he was studied over his entire lifetime without ever providing
fully informed consent, although the outcomes have given society a
better understanding of the functions of human memory.
- Bowlby (1944) studied maternal deprivation using a case study of
juveniles, this was ethical as he did not create any artificial condition
to cause deprivation, therefore research can take place without the
need to cause any harm to participants, so outcomes can be achieved
alongside ethical considerations.
- Watson and Rayner (1920) created a situation whereby Little Albert
developed a phobia, this was highly unethical and the outcome does
not outweigh ethical consideration as the theory could have been
tested with animals.
- Pavlov studied salivation in dogs to theorise that people and animals
could be conditioned to behave in certain ways, this study is unlikely
to have caused distress to the dogs and has led to systematic
desensitisation therapy, so research can take place without harm to
create outcomes that still benefit our understanding of behaviour.
Look for other reasonable marking points.
(20)