Psychologists Are Addressing? Both Psychologists

¶ … psychologists are addressing?

Both psychologists are addressing the ethical issues involved in using animals for experimental psychological research.

* What is psychologist a's point-of-view? Psychologist B's?

Psychologist a believes that research animals are rarely treated inhumanely, and the important contributions to scientific research gleaned from their use far outweigh any risks to the animals. Psychologist B, on the other hand, sees much more harm than benefit from using research animals, and believes the animals are regularly subjected to mistreatment.

* What factors might be influencing psychologist a's point-of-view?

A may be influenced by the fact that she has personal experience with the benefits of animal research with respect to biofeedback techniques used to treat high blood pressure. She also may be influenced by evidence from research that found no verifiable cruelty in 600 alleged cases of research animal abuse.

* What factors might be influencing psychologists B's point-of-view?

B may be influenced by her personal experiences witnessing research animal cruelty, and the fact that she believes many experiments involving animals do not end up benefiting medicine or psychology.

* List the arguments of each psychologist (Psychologist a and Psychologist B)

Psychologist a arguments:

There is a study of 600 alleged cases of animal abuse in research settings that found no concrete evidence of cruelty.

If cruelty does occur, it is rarely in psychological experiments.

Biofeedback techniques used to treat high blood pressure were developed with the help of lab rats and other animals.

It is difficult to argue that animals should have the same rights as human beings, since even animal right activists believe in forced sterilization for pets.

Psychologist B. arguments:

She has seen firsthand some cases on abuse involving research animals.

Experiments involving animals rarely benefit the scientific community and most often benefit commercial enterprises.

Just because an experiment works on one species does not mean it will work on humans.

Just because an experiment does not work on one species does not mean that it can't work for humans (e.g. penicillin).

* Keeping in mind the three bulleted criteria for evaluating arguments listed at the beginning of this activity, do you think both psychologists present sound arguments? Explain your answer.

Based on the criteria presented for evaluating points-of-view, I believe that both psychologists present some sound arguments, and others that are biased. For example, a has proof from a study of 600 incidents that could not verify animal cruelty, while B. has only personally witnessed what in her opinion is animal abuse on a few occasions. Therefore, a's statements can be backed from other sources, while B's opinion statements cannot. In addition, the majority of B's statements are generalized opinions and difficult to verify, such as: "There can be no doubt that animals involved in psychological research suffer," and "If a single experiment involving animals could cure a major disease, then such use could possibly be justified. However, this situation is rare and almost nonexistent." B. does present verifiable evidence that results for one species will not always match the results for humans, but she only gives two examples of these types of cases. She also does not offer any proof that the vast majority of experiments on animals are for commercial purposes; yet this information could be verified from outside sources.

On the other hand, a's argument that many psychological experiments using animals yield important discoveries is weak because the only example she gives is the biofeedback case. Also, she can only give one example of a case where animal rights activists don't expect the same treatment for animals as humans, and there are many reasons to argue for controlling the pet population.

* Is there an advantage to being presented with more than one point-of-view on an issue? Explain your answer.

Absolutely. In most cases, there is some truth in almost any point-of-view based on individual experience and knowledge, so getting to the "whole truth" therefore involves considering the most verifiable aspects of as many points-of-view as possible.

* Discuss your views about animals being used in research projects that are intended to benefit humans. Explain the factors that influence your personal opinions.

I personally believe, based on what I have read, that animals experience the same emotions as human beings; they are just not capable of the rational thought that often exacerbates or ameliorates those feelings. Therefore, I do not believe that any animal should ever be used in an experiment for the benefit of humans; no animal should ever have to endure something we would consider cruel for a human being. If researchers are prohibited from using animals to carry out experiments, I believe they will be creative enough to find other ways to test their hypotheses that do not involve harming living creatures.

Journal Activity 2

* What is the dependent variable?

The dependent variable is difference threshold.

* What independent variable was tested?

The independent variable is age.

* What unidentified independent variables might have influenced the results?

Unidentified independent variables that may have influenced the result include gender, IQ, what the child ate or drank so far that day, and vision acuity.

Journal Activity 2

* What dependent variable did Ronald's group identify?

Ronald's group identified the ability to touch your own nose with eyes shut as the dependent variable.

* What independent variables can you identify?

The experiment was supposed to use gender and noise level as the independent variables.

* Were the variables effectively manipulated? Why or why not?

The variables were not effectively manipulated because they did not carefully control them with measurements, they did not account for other independent variables such as age, and their sample size was way too small.

* How could you improve the experiment?

The experiment could be improved if they randomly selected two large groups of males and two large groups of females from the same age group and general intelligence level, and then conducted two different experiments -- one with carefully controlled noise on male group #1 and female group #1, and one in a carefully controlled quiet environment on male group #2 and female group #2 .

* Now construct your own experiment; measuring both dependent and independent variables to determine how a lack of sleep influences performance on a math quiz which emphasizes solutions to word problems.

For this experiment, I would randomly select 200 male and 200 female students from the same level math class in schools across the same time zone. I would then randomly divide those groups, keeping males and females separate, into two more groups. The first group of 100 boys and 100 girls would be woken at 3 a.M. By a phone call and immediately asked to take the math quiz online. The second group of 100 boys and 100 girls would be allowed to sleep in until 6 a.M. before being woken and asked to take the quiz online. All group members would receive phone calls every half hour 9 P.M. until 12 a.M. To make sure they had not fallen asleep early. Only those who successfully stayed awake until midnight and successfully participated in the online quiz would be considered in the results.

Journal Activity 3

Intelligence

* True or false? If data show that saying a number over and over is a necessary and sufficient condition for committing the number to memory, then people who want to memorize a phone number must repeat it several times.

Yes, this would be true.

* a research study looking for early signs of Alzheimer's disease studied the brains of 14 deceased nuns and examined the autobiographies of the nuns, which were written early in their lives. Of the 5 nuns diagnosed with Alzheimer's, all showed low-idea density in their writing, which means they included very little descriptive information in their writing. The writing of the nuns without Alzheimer's did not show this characteristic. The researcher's believed that low-density writing might be a predictor for the development of Alzheimer's. Using a for Alzheimer's and LDW for low-density writing, write a statement that describes the relationship between Alzheimer's disease and low-density writing demonstrated by this study.

If LDW occurs, then a occurs.

Is the relationship one of necessary condition, sufficient condition, or necessary and sufficient condition?

The relationship is one of sufficient condition.

Do you think this study is sufficient to come to that conclusion? Why or why not?