Nonhuman Animal Subjects Research Articles

Zoographics in the Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior: Increasing inclusion of female animals.

We examined the zoographics, or the characteristics of nonhuman animal subjects, reported for the entirety of the Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior (JEAB) through the most recent complete year (1958-2023). Animal sex in particular was evaluated to determine whether the lack of inclusion of female subjects in other disciplines extends to JEAB. Through systematic coding of all nonhuman empirical articles, we found consistent underreporting of most zoographics and a disproportionate use of male subjects relative to female subjects. Additionally, animal sex was commonly unreported and the inclusion of both male and female subjects was sparse. Recent years show some improvement, but greater inclusion is required. Lack of female subjects in research as well as underreporting of zoographics can generate unrepresentative results and hamper replication, generalization, and translation. We provide resources to guide future research and reporting suggestions such as equal inclusion and disaggregation of data by sex. We also clarify misunderstandings about the use of both sexes in research such as beliefs that it necessarily increases the cost of research.

How Should the 3 R's Be Revised and Why?

The Principles of Humane Experimental Technique established what many know today as the "3 R's"-refinement, reduction, and replacement-when it was published in 1959. Since their formulation, these principles have guided decision-making for many about nonhuman animal subjects' uses in laboratory-based research. Discussion about how to amend or replace the 3 R's is ongoing, driven mainly by philosophical ethics approaches to nonhuman animal rights and by scientific advancement. This article explores merits and drawbacks of possible updates to and interpretations of the 3 R's.

Intersubjectivity as an analytical concept to study human-animal interaction in historical context: street dogs in Late Ottoman period.

Human knowledge pertaining to human-animal interaction is constructed by the human author, albeit the presence of animal subjects. Such a human lens is pronounced when studying human-animal interactions across history, whose nonhuman animal subjects are not only absent, and therefore eliminating the possibility of conducting empirical studies in situ, but also their experiences are filtered by the interpretative lens of human authors of extant historical accounts as well as contemporary human analysts who interpret these accounts. This article draws upon such epistemological limitations of understanding nonhuman animal presence in historical accounts and offers human-animal intersubjectivity as an analytical concept, involving generative iterability and indistinctive boundaries that emphasise intersubjective openness and relationality, to trace and disclose the continuity of human-animal co-existence. The article's historical scope is the Late Ottoman period characterised by a sense of temporal and spatial disorientation and reorientation for humans as well as street dogs during its modernisation processes.

Subalterns in the House: Sites for a Postcolonial Multispecies Ethnography

Multispecies ethnography attempts to bring to the forefront those animal lives previously overlooked by charting our shared social worlds and showing how humans and nonhumans are mutually affected by social, cultural and political processes. The resistance in postcolonial critique to focus on nonhuman animal subjects stems from making the colonised and the animal comparable and the fear that such an association may dehumanise the human subject. This paper suggests that multispecies ethnography influenced by Latour, Haraway, Tsing and others is a useful tool for analysing postcolonial contexts because of its emphasis on relation, mutuality and alliances. However, I suggest that this inheritance is rebuilt as a postcolonial multispecies ethnography because of its attention to five aspects that is common to both fields: subaltern, local, collective, representation and decolonisation. By a careful reading of these key concepts with examples from contemporary literature, I show how postcolonial multispecies ethnographies engage with hybrid identities that are culturally produced and historically situated and how they register the nonhuman animals as narrativisable subjects who are nevertheless “irretrievably heterogeneous” (284). In this ethnographic emergence, postcolonial multispecies ethnography re-dignifies the nonhuman animal subject which opens up the radical possibility of realizing their embodied perspectives.

Compensation and Limits on Harm in Animal Research.

Although researchers generally take great care to ensure that human subjects do not suffer very serious harms from their involvement in research, the situation is different for nonhuman animal subjects. Significant progress has been made in reducing unnecessary animal suffering in research, yet researchers still inflict severe pain and distress on tens of thousands of animals every year for scientific purposes. Some bioethicists, scientists, and animal welfare advocates argue for placing an upper limit on the suffering researchers may impose on animal subjects, with rare exceptions for research that promises critical social benefits. In this article, I argue against such an upper limit on harm on the grounds that researchers often can compensate animal subjects for their suffering, even severe and long-lasting suffering. If animal subjects receive adequate compensation for the harms they suffer, then there is no general limit on how much suffering researchers may impose on them for scientific purposes.

Assessing the relationship between the human learned helplessness depression model and anhedonia.

The learned helplessness (LH) model is one of the most commonly used acute stress models to explain depression and it has shown good face and predictive validity. However, despite being able to induce depressed-like behaviors and corresponding psychophysiological changes, there is little evidence showing that the LH paradigm can produce anhedonia, a core symptom seen in all forms of depression in humans. So far a couple of studies showed that rodents bred for helplessness develop anhedonic-like behaviors in response to stress; yet, to the best of our knowledge, no similar human research has tried to investigate the direct relationship between the LH model and anhedonia. In the present study, we use a modified version of the original LH task to experimentally and temporarily induce learned helplessness in college students and then examine if the human LH paradigm induces anhedonia. We aim to 1: address the ill-defined connection between the LH model and anhedonia, and 2: directly assess helplessness in humans as opposed to the majority of non-human animal subjects used in the helplessness literature. We believe that our study will fill an important gap in the learned helplessness model literature, and will advance our understanding of the relationship between depression and perceived control, as well as place limitations to what can and cannot be inferred from non-human animal data in this topic.

Novel approaches for strengthening human fear extinction: The roles of novelty, additional USs, and additional GSs

Since Watson and Rayner's (1920) initial demonstration that human fear can be learned by means of Pavlovian conditioning, neuroscientific and behavioral studies have provided a thorough understanding of fear acquisition. Less is known about the manner in which we can harness insights from Pavlovian conditioning research to reduce fears and, most importantly, make the reduction of fear lasting and resistant against relapse. The current paper reviews three manipulations that have shown promise in achieving a reduction of conditional fear that is more resistant to relapse than is the reduction of conditional fear after standard extinction: novelty-facilitated extinction training, presentation of conditional-unconditional stimulus pairings or of unpaired unconditional stimuli during extinction, and extinction with additional stimuli that are similar to the original conditional stimuli. It summarizes past research involving human and non-human animal subjects and highlights knowledge gaps in the current literature. Moreover, it discusses potential mechanisms that mediate the reduction of fear seen as a result of these manipulations in an attempt to enhance our understanding of what renders fear extinction less vulnerable to the known pathways to fear relapse. It is hoped that this review will contribute to the achievement of the goal that was denied to Watson and Rayner, the development of experimental techniques that can be utilized to remove conditioned emotional responses permanently.

A review of investigations of operant renewal with human participants: Implications for theory and practice.

Operant renewal is the recurrence of a previously eliminated target behavior as a function of changing stimulus contexts. Renewal as a model of treatment relapse in humans suggests that a change in stimulus conditions or context is sufficient to produce relapse of a previously eliminated maladaptive behavior. The extent to which general findings from operant renewal studies involving nonhuman animal subjects are supported by relapse studies involving human participants is unknown. We conducted a systematic review of studies demonstrating or mitigating operant renewal in human participants in peer-reviewed studies found in PsycINFO, ERIC, PubMed, and Scopus between 1980 and 2019. We identified 12 studies involving 61 participants and 93 cases of operant renewal. We coded descriptive data on participant and study characteristics and calculated summary statistics. Results indicated that the renewal effect was a robust phenomenon, supported by demonstrations in both clinical and human-laboratory studies, and across a variety of variables and experimental preparations. However, there were relatively few studies involving human participants that attempted to reduce or eliminate renewal of clinically meaningful behavior. We discuss variables relevant for studying renewal in socially meaningful contexts, practical limitations of observing the renewal effect in real-world settings, implications for theoretical models of renewal, and identify barriers to methodology unique to human participants. We provide directions for future research related to implementing and translating nonhuman animal studies of renewal to applied settings.

Challenges and opportunities in bridging behavior, physiology, and anatomy in translational hearing research

The Acoustical Society of America has a long, rich history of physiology research aimed at understanding the neural mechanisms underlying hearing and hearing dysfunction. In particular, this research has included pivotal studies in animal models that reveal the neurobiology of hearing and hearing disorders. More recently, research in animal models and research in human subjects have been considered in completely separate conferences or sessions. This situation presents a barrier to communicating important scientific information and fostering collaborations that bridge the gap between research in animal models and human listeners. It is crucial that the two types of research interface and inform one another to maximize translational potential and converge on fundamental knowledge. Experimental manipulations can be performed in non-human animals that cannot be performed in humans, but human and non-human animals can also be tested using similar techniques to increase translatability. Examples of mouse models tested using detailed analysis of synapse-level changes, clinically relevant evoked potentials, and behavioral tests will be presented. Areas for mutually beneficial interdisciplinary investigation will be discussed with the intention of inspiring new lines of communication between researchers focused on non-human animal and human subjects research.

Nonhuman Animal Suffering

Each year millions of nonhuman animals are exposed to suffering in universities as they are routinely (ab)used in teaching and research in the natural sciences. Drawing on the work of Giroux and Derrida, we make the case for a critical pedagogy of nonhuman animal suffering. We discuss critical pedagogy as an underrepresented form of teaching in universities, consider suffering as a concept, and explore the pedagogy of suffering. The discussion focuses on the use of nonhuman animal subjects in universities, in particular in teaching, scientific research, and associated experiments. We conclude that a critical pedagogy of nonhuman animal suffering has the capacity to contribute to the establishment of a practical animal ethics conducive to the constitution of a radically different form of social life able to promote a more just and non-speciesist future in which nonhuman animals are not used as resources in scientific research in universities.

An Insufferable Business: Ethics, Nonhuman Animals and Biomedical Experiments.

Simple SummaryThis paper explores the ways in which biomedical research that uses nonhuman animal subjects generates financial profits and gains for humans who are associated with the industry. Research establishments, scientists, regulators and persons that inspect laboratories for compliance, those associated with granting licences, companies that sell nonhuman animal subjects and that supply equipment for the research, and corporations that market the resulting products are among those that benefit financially. These profits are rarely discussed—they seem to be camouflaged by the focus of the moral convention that assumes that human health-related needs prevail over those of the nonhuman animals who are so used. The paper concludes by calling for an end to the denigration of nonhuman animals as experimental subjects who can be used as commodities for profit-maximisation and as tools in experiments for human health benefits.Each year millions of nonhuman animals suffer in biomedical experiments for human health benefits. Clinical ethics demand that nonhuman animals are used in the development of pharmaceuticals and vaccines. Nonhuman animals are also used for fundamental biomedical research. Biomedical research that uses nonhuman animals is big business but the financial gains are generally occluded. This paper explores how such research generates profits and gains for those associated with the industry. Research establishments, scientists, laboratories, companies that sell nonhuman animal subjects, that supply equipment for the research, and corporations that market the resulting products are among those that benefit financially. Given the complex articulation of ethical codes, enormous corporate profits that are secured and personal returns that are made, the accepted moral legitimacy of such experiments is compromised. In order to address this, within the confines of the moral orthodoxy, more could to be done to ensure transparency and to extricate the vested financial interests from the human health benefits. But such a determination would not address the fundamental issues that should be at the heart of human actions in respect of the nonhuman animals who are used in experiments. The paper concludes with such an address by calling for an end to the denigration of nonhuman animals as experimental subjects who can be used as commodities for profit-maximisation and as tools in experiments for human health benefits, and the implementation of a more inclusive ethic that is informed by universal concern about the suffering of and compassion for all oppressed beings.

Confronting ethical permissibility in animal research: rejecting a common assumption and extending a principle of justice

A common assumption in the selection of nonhuman animal subjects for research and the approval of research is that, if the risks of a procedure are too great for humans, and if there is a so-called scientific necessity, then it is permissible to use nonhuman animal subjects. I reject the common assumption as neglecting the central ethical issue of the permissibility of using nonhuman animal subjects and as being inconsistent with the principle of justice used in human subjects research ethics. This principle requires that certain classes of individuals not be subjected to a disproportionate share of the burdens or risks of research. I argue for an extension of this principle to nonhuman animal research and show that a prima facie violation of the principle occurs because nonhuman animals bear an overwhelmingly disproportionate share of the risks of research without sufficient justification or reciprocal benefit.

The ‘Animal-Advocacy Agenda’: Exploring Sociology for Non-Human Animals

This paper focuses on sociology and the study of human non-human animal relations. Using as a catalyst referees' comments on a previous paper about experiments using non-human animal subjects, in this present paper three problematics are identified and discussed. These problematics centre on the ‘acceptable’ content of sociological inquiry, the ‘permissibility’ of advocacy-oriented sociology, and the ‘admissibility’ of non-human animal-advocacy to advocacy-oriented sociology. The three problematics are explored through the lens of reflexive and critical sociology. Two central questions are raised: first, should sociology include the study of nonhuman animals and secondly, can sociology advocate for non-human animals? The paper concludes with an affirmative response to both of these questions. The paper ends by stressing that sociology has so much to offer the study of human non-human animal relations. Professional sociologists have a key role to play in enabling this work to move from margins to centre in published sociology.

ANIMAL RESEARCH IN THE JOURNAL OF APPLIED BEHAVIOR ANALYSIS

This review summarizes the 6 studies with nonhuman animal subjects that have appeared in the Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis and offers suggestions for future research in this area. Two of the reviewed articles described translational research in which pigeons were used to illustrate and examine behavioral phenomena of applied significance (say-do correspondence and fluency), 3 described interventions that changed animals' behavior (self-injury by a baboon, feces throwing and spitting by a chimpanzee, and unsafe trailer entry by horses) in ways that benefited the animals and the people in charge of them, and 1 described the use of trained rats that performed a service to humans (land-mine detection). We suggest that each of these general research areas merits further attention and that the Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis is an appropriate outlet for some of these publications.

Apparatuses of Animality: Foucault Goes to a Slaughterhouse

The work of Michel Foucault is not often considered in animal ethics discussions, but I believe that many of his insights can be fruitfully extended into this area of philosophical inquiry. In this paper, I present the slaughterhouse as a technology of power that is complicit in the domination and objectification of both human and nonhuman animal subjects. I begin by arguing that Foucault’s notion of an “apparatus” is a useful methodological tool for thinking about the constellation of spaces and discourses in which various bodies (both human and nonhuman) find themselves enmeshed. Next, I outline Foucault’s multifaceted conceptualization of “power,” and I consider whether it makes sense to think of other animals as implicated in “power relations” in the various Foucauldian senses. Finally, I analyze a journalistic account of a contemporary slaughterhouse. Here, I argue that a variety of hierarchies (spatial, racial, species, etc.) dovetail to create an environment in which care and concern are virtually impossible. By coupling a Foucauldian analysis with certain insights developed in the bioethical work of Ralph Acampora, I offer a normative critique of an institution that has pernicious effects on both human and nonhuman animals.

More on Animal Research

You have accessThe ASHA LeaderInbox1 Jan 2010More on Animal Research Shirley Charney Feldman Shirley Charney Feldman Google Scholar More articles by this author https://doi.org/10.1044/leader.IN4.15012010.38 SectionsAbout ToolsAdd to favorites ShareFacebookTwitterLinked In I am writing to express my wholehearted agreement with Holly Openshaw’s letter in the Nov. 3, 2009, issue. I have actively opposed vivisection for years, and I was comforted to see that others in our profession are also concerned about this issue. As Openshaw stated, “…it is morally wrong to use animals as test subjects,” even if they are well-treated, which is often not the case. In fact, exposés on national television, as well as other sources, have been providing evidence of problems in the care of research animals for years, including outright abuse in some facilities. Unfortunately, USDA enforcement of the Animal Welfare Act is highly inconsistent. In addition to the ethical problem, the results obtained in non-human animal subjects are frequently not applicable to humans. In some cases, relying on these data has been seriously detrimental to human health (for example, the occurrence of birth defects in babies of mothers who were given the drug Thalidomide while pregnant). A final concern is that animal research is paid for with the limited funds that could be better spent on projects utilizing newer methodologies with higher validity for human patients. As a practicing SLP for more than 20 years, the results of non-human animal studies have never been relevant to my treatment of human patients. I look forward to the day when this outdated, inhumane, unreliable practice will be a part of history, like so many others once thought of as acceptable. Author Notes Shirley Charney Feldman, Montgomery Village, Md. Additional Resources FiguresSourcesRelatedDetails Volume 15Issue 1January 2010 Get Permissions Add to your Mendeley library History Published in print: Jan 1, 2010 Metrics Downloaded 66 times Topicsasha-topicsleader_do_tagleader-topicsasha-article-typesCopyright & Permissions© 2010 American Speech-Language-Hearing AssociationLoading ...

Metaphysical and Ethical Perspectives on Creating Animal-Human Chimeras

This paper addresses several questions related to the nature, production, and use of animal-human (a-h) chimeras. At the heart of the issue is whether certain types of a-h chimeras should be brought into existence, and, if they are, how we should treat such creatures. In our current research environment, we recognize a dichotomy between research involving nonhuman animal subjects and research involving human subjects, and the classification of a research protocol into one of these categories will trigger different ethical standards as to the moral permissibility of the research in question. Are a-h chimeras entitled to the more restrictive and protective ethical standards applied to human research subjects? We elucidate an Aristotelian-Thomistic metaphysical framework in which to argue how such chimeras ought to be defined ontologically. We then examine when the creation of, and experimentation upon, certain types of a-h chimeras may be morally permissible.

Encoding of relative enclosure size in a dynamic three-dimensional virtual environment by humans

Human participants searched in a dynamic three-dimensional virtual-environment rectangular enclosure for a distinctly colored bin located in one of the four corners. During test trials, all bins were rendered identical in color, and the shape of the rectangular search space either remained the same or was modified to a relatively sized contracted rectangle, an expanded rectangle, or a square. Participants made one choice response during test trials. In the rectangular enclosures, more of participants' choice responses were allocated to the geometrically correct corners than to the geometrically incorrect corners. In the square enclosure, participants' choice responses were allocated equivalently to each of the four corners. Results replicate previous enclosure size studies demonstrating encoding of enclosure geometry with human and non-human animal subjects conducted in real environments and extend these results to include encoding of relative enclosure geometry. Results are discussed with respect to theoretical accounts of geometry learning.

Critical bands and critical ratios in animal psychoacoustics: An example using chinchilla data

This paper suggests that critical ratios obtained in noise-masked tone studies are not good indicators of critical bandwidths obtained in both human and nonhuman animal subjects. A probe-tone detection study using chinchilla subjects suggests that they may be broadband processors in detection tasks as opposed to human subjects who use narrow-band, critical-band processing. If chinchilla and other nonhuman animal subjects are wideband processors, this can partially explain why their critical ratios are significantly greater than those measured in human subjects. Thus, large critical ratios obtained for nonhuman animals may indicate processing inefficiency rather than wide critical bands.

The effects of physical context changes and multiple extinction contexts on two forms of renewal in a conditioned suppression task with humans

Three experiments examined the effects of physical context changes and multiple extinction contexts on the renewal of conditioned suppression in humans. A conditioned suppression task used an undesirable event as the unconditional stimulus (US). One conditional stimulus (CS+) predicted the occurrence of the US and another (CS−) predicted US absence. In Experiment 1 ( N = 32), conditioned suppression was acquired to the CS+ in one context and extinguished in a different context. An increase in suppression was found for the CS+ and not for the CS− when subsequent test trials were conducted in the acquisition context (ABA renewal). Experiment 2 ( N = 32) tested for ABC Renewal and showed increased suppression to both the CS+ and CS− when test was conducted in a novel context. Experiment 3 ( N = 80) showed that these two effects were abolished when extinction was conducted in multiple contexts. The experiments extend the ABA renewal of conditioned suppression found with non-human animal subjects and the reduction of renewal by extinction in multiple contexts. Context changes may also facilitate cue competition effects after training with elementary stimuli, as shown by the effects of US omission in the ABA and ABC renewal groups.