To what extent does animal research provide insight into human behavior?
Animal research is often used to get an insight into human behavior, especially
when studying the brain. Animal research is research that uses non-human models/
participants to receive information on theories, such as localization, neuroplasticity, and
neurotransmitters.
There are several different reasons why animals are used in research. The first
reason is the ethical consideration, animals are used in cases where testing humans would
be unethical. Animals are also used in research because they have a shorter lifespan than
humans, allowing researchers to study a lifetime in just 2-3 years. Animals are less
expensive than humans, in fact, the latest need to be recruited and paid. Animals also have
a similar brain structure and DNA as humans and they are susceptible to many of the same
health problems. Research with animals is highly controlled and standardized. Finally, the
cause-and-effect relationship between the IV and the DV is easily recognized.
A study that shows how animal research provides insight into human behavior, is
Rozenweig and Benett’s study. The study aimed to investigate whether environmental
factors such as a rich or impoverished environment affect the development of neurons in
the cerebral cortex. The method consisted of placing rats in either an enriched environment
(EC) or an impoverished condition (IC). The 10-12 rats of the enriched environment were in
a cage but they were provided with different stimulus objects to explore and play with.
This group also received maze training. While the rats in the group’s impoverished
condition were divided, each rat was in an individual cage, so they were isolated and had no
stimulation. The rats typically spent 30 to 60 days in their respective environments before they
were killed so the researchers could study changes in brain anatomy. The results were that
the anatomy of the brain was different for rats in the EC and the IC. The brains of EC rats
had increased thickness and higher weight of the cortex. EC rats had developed more
acetylcholine receptors in the cerebral cortex, an important neurotransmitter in learning
and memory. The conclusions were that the research challenged the belief that brain weight
cannot change, which is an important finding. Follow-up of this research indicated that just 2
hours a day in an enriched environment produced the same plastic changes in the brain as
in rats that had been constantly in the EC condition. This shows that the brain can change
and adapt to new situations. Since brain plasticity is assumed to follow the same pattern in
animals and humans the study implies that the human brain will also be affected by
environmental factors such as intellectual and social stimulation.
This animal experiment is highly controlled since it was conducted in a laboratory. There
was manipulation of the IV and a cause-and-effect relationship was established between
the IV and the DV. This experiment was easy to replicate because it had standardized
procedures.
Besides this, it is not clear though whether the results were carefully generalized to
humans unless human research has the same results. It is also not clear which of the two
variables influenced the brain structure. In addition, this experiment has the ethical
consideration of killing the rats after the procedures. The insight we get from this is that the
, environment plays an important role in the development of the brain, which supports the
theory of neuroplasticity.
A second study showing how animal research provides insight into human behavior is
LeDoux’s study. The study aimed to investigate the role of the hippocampus and amygdala
in fear conditioning. The method used was that LeDoux divided rats into three conditions.
The control condition (unlesioned), the amygdala lesioned condition, and the
hippocampus lesion condition. The researchers then attempted to condition the rats in
both the experimental and control conditions to associate the sound of a tone with an
electric shock. The results showed that the rats whose amygdala was lesioned had
resistance to fear conditioning, whereas the rats who had their hippocampus lesioned
could be conditioned to fear the context in which the shock was administered but not the
cue (tone presented) of the shock. The conclusion was that the role the amygdala serves in
fear conditioning is associative, whereas the role the hippocampus plays in one of relaying
sensory information. Emotional memories are not from one area of the brain but rather
the hippocampus and amygdala work simultaneously together to create them.
The strengths of this study are that it helps to understand of memory and emotion. It
supports the theory of localization stating the importance of the amygdala in emotions and
the hippocampus in memory formation. It also shows the interaction between those two
brain parts. The study also provides information that could not have been acquired if
non-human methods animals were not used.
On the other hand, the limitations of the study are a reductionist view of fear, since the
researcher did not take into account that fear is not only created by learning/conditioning.
It is also a lab experiment so there is the risk of high control of variables and easy
replication (standardized procedures). There are also issues surrounding ecological validity.
In the end, the three “R’s” of non-human participants should be considered - reduce,
replace, and refine.
The insight we get from this study is the role of the amygdala on emotions and the role of
the hippocampus on memory formation, supporting the theory of localization.
Besides this, findings from animal research cannot be fully generalized to humans.
The first reason why they cannot be generalized is that there are some structural and
genetic differences between humans and animals. The studies lack ecological validity,
which means that they are difficult to generalize in natural settings. Some
features/conditions/symptoms that humans have cannot be created in labs. Also, it must
be remembered that human behavior is much more complex than animal behavior.
In conclusion, animal research provides insight into human behavior, particularly when
studying the brain.
Animal research is often used to get an insight into human behavior, especially
when studying the brain. Animal research is research that uses non-human models/
participants to receive information on theories, such as localization, neuroplasticity, and
neurotransmitters.
There are several different reasons why animals are used in research. The first
reason is the ethical consideration, animals are used in cases where testing humans would
be unethical. Animals are also used in research because they have a shorter lifespan than
humans, allowing researchers to study a lifetime in just 2-3 years. Animals are less
expensive than humans, in fact, the latest need to be recruited and paid. Animals also have
a similar brain structure and DNA as humans and they are susceptible to many of the same
health problems. Research with animals is highly controlled and standardized. Finally, the
cause-and-effect relationship between the IV and the DV is easily recognized.
A study that shows how animal research provides insight into human behavior, is
Rozenweig and Benett’s study. The study aimed to investigate whether environmental
factors such as a rich or impoverished environment affect the development of neurons in
the cerebral cortex. The method consisted of placing rats in either an enriched environment
(EC) or an impoverished condition (IC). The 10-12 rats of the enriched environment were in
a cage but they were provided with different stimulus objects to explore and play with.
This group also received maze training. While the rats in the group’s impoverished
condition were divided, each rat was in an individual cage, so they were isolated and had no
stimulation. The rats typically spent 30 to 60 days in their respective environments before they
were killed so the researchers could study changes in brain anatomy. The results were that
the anatomy of the brain was different for rats in the EC and the IC. The brains of EC rats
had increased thickness and higher weight of the cortex. EC rats had developed more
acetylcholine receptors in the cerebral cortex, an important neurotransmitter in learning
and memory. The conclusions were that the research challenged the belief that brain weight
cannot change, which is an important finding. Follow-up of this research indicated that just 2
hours a day in an enriched environment produced the same plastic changes in the brain as
in rats that had been constantly in the EC condition. This shows that the brain can change
and adapt to new situations. Since brain plasticity is assumed to follow the same pattern in
animals and humans the study implies that the human brain will also be affected by
environmental factors such as intellectual and social stimulation.
This animal experiment is highly controlled since it was conducted in a laboratory. There
was manipulation of the IV and a cause-and-effect relationship was established between
the IV and the DV. This experiment was easy to replicate because it had standardized
procedures.
Besides this, it is not clear though whether the results were carefully generalized to
humans unless human research has the same results. It is also not clear which of the two
variables influenced the brain structure. In addition, this experiment has the ethical
consideration of killing the rats after the procedures. The insight we get from this is that the
, environment plays an important role in the development of the brain, which supports the
theory of neuroplasticity.
A second study showing how animal research provides insight into human behavior is
LeDoux’s study. The study aimed to investigate the role of the hippocampus and amygdala
in fear conditioning. The method used was that LeDoux divided rats into three conditions.
The control condition (unlesioned), the amygdala lesioned condition, and the
hippocampus lesion condition. The researchers then attempted to condition the rats in
both the experimental and control conditions to associate the sound of a tone with an
electric shock. The results showed that the rats whose amygdala was lesioned had
resistance to fear conditioning, whereas the rats who had their hippocampus lesioned
could be conditioned to fear the context in which the shock was administered but not the
cue (tone presented) of the shock. The conclusion was that the role the amygdala serves in
fear conditioning is associative, whereas the role the hippocampus plays in one of relaying
sensory information. Emotional memories are not from one area of the brain but rather
the hippocampus and amygdala work simultaneously together to create them.
The strengths of this study are that it helps to understand of memory and emotion. It
supports the theory of localization stating the importance of the amygdala in emotions and
the hippocampus in memory formation. It also shows the interaction between those two
brain parts. The study also provides information that could not have been acquired if
non-human methods animals were not used.
On the other hand, the limitations of the study are a reductionist view of fear, since the
researcher did not take into account that fear is not only created by learning/conditioning.
It is also a lab experiment so there is the risk of high control of variables and easy
replication (standardized procedures). There are also issues surrounding ecological validity.
In the end, the three “R’s” of non-human participants should be considered - reduce,
replace, and refine.
The insight we get from this study is the role of the amygdala on emotions and the role of
the hippocampus on memory formation, supporting the theory of localization.
Besides this, findings from animal research cannot be fully generalized to humans.
The first reason why they cannot be generalized is that there are some structural and
genetic differences between humans and animals. The studies lack ecological validity,
which means that they are difficult to generalize in natural settings. Some
features/conditions/symptoms that humans have cannot be created in labs. Also, it must
be remembered that human behavior is much more complex than animal behavior.
In conclusion, animal research provides insight into human behavior, particularly when
studying the brain.
