You Are Here:

Home > The Society > Code of Conduct and Ethical Guidelines > Guidelines for Psychologists Working with Animals

Guidelines for Psychologists Working with Animals

Psychologists work with animals for a variety of reasons. The most obvious use is in research, and it is this that has commanded most attention in the general media. Animals are also sometimes used in practical teaching within psychology degree programmes. However, these do not exhaust the possible ways in which psychologists, in their professional capacity, may work with animals.There is increasing use of animals in various forms of psychological therapy with people, and psychologists may also be asked to advise on therapy for animals whose behaviour is disordered or inconvenient. Psychologists may find themselves involved in the training and use of animals for commercial purposes. New uses are likely to appear from time to time. Many psychological studies are non-invasive and involve only observation of the animals, but some research questions cannot be answered adequately without the manipulation of animals; and all studies of captive animals necessarily involve keeping animals in confinement. Even studies of free-living animals in their natural habitat may involve disruption of the environment, or capture of animals in order to mark them.

The British Psychological Society has set up a Standing Advisory Committee on the Welfare of Animals in Psychology, to advise the Scientific Affairs Board and through it, the Society more generally on the ethical issues involved in working with animals in psychology. This Committee, with the co-operation of the Experimental Psychology Society, has produced the following guidelines for the use of all members who are engaged in psychological activities involving living animals.The majority of animal use in psychology is in research, and this is dealt with by the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986.Any scientific procedure that may cause pain, suffering, distress or lasting harm in any vertebrate (and one invertebrate octopus vulgaris) species is governed by this Act (see Section 4 below).These guidelines will provide an outline of the legal responsibilities of members of the BPS or EPS whose research is already governed by the Act; the guidelines should be taken into consideration where any work is not governed by the Act, and may provide additional help or advice. Psychologists working with animals in ways that are not covered by legislation should aim to maintain standards at least as high as those suggested here for research use, and should follow the spirit of these guidelines even where the letter cannot strictly be applied.The guidelines are general in scope, since the diversity of species and techniques used in psychology preclude the inclusion of specific details about appropriate animal care and treatment.Thus members of both Societies are reminded of their general obligation to avoid or at least minimise discomfort to living animals. It should be noted that permission to perform procedures regulated under the 1986 Act will not be granted unless the researcher can justify the costs to the animal in terms of the likely benefits of the research (see Section 4 below). In addition, when permission to perform a regulated procedure is requested, the researcher is also required to demonstrate that consideration has been given to replacing animals with alternatives whenever possible, reducing the number of animals used, and refining procedures to minimise suffering (Russell & Burch, 1959). Psychologists who work with animals should, therefore, keep abreast of new developments in animal welfare, with new ways of reducing the numbers of animals required for the procedures, and with refining the procedures so as to enhance the welfare of the animals concerned (see, for example, the publications of the Joint Working Group on Refinement).Appropriate training courses could be useful in this respect.

These guidelines will be used by the Editors of the Journals of both Societies in assessing the acceptability of submitted manuscripts. Submitted manuscripts may be rejected by an Editor if the content violates either the letter or the spirit of the guidelines. Members of The British Psychological Society using animals should consider the guidelines before embarking on a procedure, since any breach may be considered professional misconduct.

1. Legislation

Members of the Societies working in this country must familiarise themselves with the laws regarding animal welfare, and with threatened and endangered species that are relevant to their work, and conform with the spirit and letter of the relevant legislation.Wherever their work is done, Members of the Societies, or those whose work is published by the Societies, should conform to the ethical standards underlying UK legislation. A summary of the British laws designed to ensure the welfare of animals is given by Crofts (1989): detailed guidance on the operation of the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 is provided by the Home Office (HMSO 1990, 1999), the Annual Reports of the Animal Procedures Committee (HMSO-APC) and an updated summary is given every year in the annual statistics (HMSO-Stats). Lists of threatened species and laws aiming to protect them can be obtained from the International Union for the Conservation of Nature, Species Conservation Monitoring Unit (219C Huntingdon Road, Cambridge CB3 0DL, UK). Before publication of primary reports of research involving animals in the Societies’ journals, authors must confirm in their cover letter that they have adhered to the legal requirements of the country in which the study was conducted, as well as to these guidelines.

2. Choice of species

Psychologists should choose a species that is well suited for the intended use. Choosing an appropriate subject species usually requires knowledge of that species’ natural history and some judgement of its level of sentience. Knowledge of an individual animal’s previous experience, such as whether or not it was bred in captivity, is also important.When the use involves regulated procedures, and when a variety of species can be used, the psychologist should employ the species which, in the opinion of the psychologist and other qualified colleagues, is least likely to suffer, and must justify their choice in any Project Licence application. Alternatives such as video records from previous work or computer simulations can sometimes be used, especially in teaching contexts but also for some research purposes: see Stricklin et al. (1995) and Hull (1996). Advice on computer simulations for teaching can be obtained from the CTI Psychology Centre at the University of York.

3. Number of animals

Researchers working under the 1986 Act are legally required to use the smallest number of animals necessary and sufficient to accomplish the research goals, and this principle should be generally applied.The aim of minimising the number of animals used in an experiment can be achieved by appropriate pilot studies, reliable measures of behaviour, good experimental design and the use of statistical tests (see ECVAM, 1998), Hunt (1980), Still (1982) and McConway (1992) discuss ways of reducing the number of animals used in experiments through alternative designs. In 1996, the American Psychological Association’s Task Force on Statistical Inference reported, giving guidance on the importance of taking statistical power into account when designing experiments. Copies of the report are available from the APA.

4. Procedures

The following section details procedures that are specifically covered by the Animal (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986.Any scientific procedure that may have the effect of causing an animal pain, suffering, distress or lasting harm is regarded as a regulated procedure under the Act.These terms include death, disease, injury, physiological or psychological stress, significant discomfort, or any disturbance to normal health, whether immediately or in the long term.The investigator should consider experimental designs that avoid the use of regulated procedures by, for example removing the deleterious condition (e.g. enhancing rather than impoverishing the environment as the experimental treatment) or employing situations in which naturally occurring instances of deleterious conditions are observed. Permission to perform regulated procedures requires the possession of a Project Licence, which specifies the species, numbers of animals and types of procedures that may be used. Such a licence is only granted on condition that the Project Licence Holder makes an assessment that justifies the costs to the animal against the likely benefits of the proposed programme of work. He or she is responsible for ensuring that the project is conducted legally under the terms of the Act, and in accordance with the conditions of the Project Licence. The actual performance of a regulated procedure requires the granting of a Personal Licence, which is given only to those who are competent to perform the procedures, if necessary under supervision. Personal Licence holders are also required to seek to minimise any pain, suffering or distress that might arise, given the requirements of the experimental design (AVMA 1987; Bateson 1991; and NRC 1992;). Whatever procedure is in use, any adverse effects on animals must be recognised and assessed, and immediate action taken whenever necessary (Mellor and Morton 1997; Morton 1997; Morton and Townsend 1995).According to the Animal (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 the Personal Licence holder has the primary responsibility in this regard; a Named Animal Care and Welfare Officer with responsibility for day-to-day care of the animal and a Named Veterinary Surgeon will also be available to give advice on animal health and welfare. When applying for legal permission to perform regulated procedures, investigators are also required to discuss with colleagues and others, through a Local Ethical Review process, the justification for the use of animals and the balance between costs and benefits.These Local Ethical Reviews must include not only academics but also a veterinary surgeon and a lay person, and must approve project and personal licence applications before they are passed to the Home Office. There are several models for evaluating animal research which can be of use when making ethical decisions (Orlans 1987; Shapiro and Field 1988; Porter 1992; Smith and Boyd 1991; and Morton 1998). Furthermore, when reporting research in scientific journals or otherwise, researchers must always be prepared to identify any costs to the animals involved and justify them in terms of the scientific benefit of the work.

The following more specific points may be of use.


0. Reward, deprivation and aversive stimulation

   It is not always necessary to provide all species of animals with ad libitum food intake, and in some cases this may even be considered harmful; deprivation, on the other hand, can cause distress to animals (Claasen 1994). Some levels of deprivation are regarded as regulated procedures under the Animal (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986, but others are not. Thus when arranging schedules of deprivation the experimenter should consider the animal’s normal eating and drinking habits and its metabolic requirements; a short period of deprivation for one species may be unacceptably long for another. When using deprivation or aversive stimulation, the investigator should ascertain that there is no alternative way of motivating the animal that is consistent with the aims of the experiment, and that the levels of deprivation used are no greater than necessary to achieve the goals of the experiment.Alternatives to deprivation include the use of highly preferred foods and other rewards which may motivate even satiated animals. Use of minimal levels requires a knowledge of the technical literature in the relevant area: quantitative studies of aversive stimulation are reviewed by Church (1971) and Rushen (1986) and the behaviour of satiated animals is considered by Morgan (1974). Further comments on reducing possible distress due to motivational procedures are to be found in Moran (1975) and Lea (1979).
   

0. Isolation and crowding

   Caging conditions should take into account the social behaviour of the species. Caging in isolation may be stressful to social animals; overcrowding may also cause distress, and possible harm through aggression. Because the degree of stress experienced by an animal can vary with species, age, sex, reproductive condition, developmental history and social status, the natural social behaviour of the animals concerned and their previous social experience must be considered in order to minimise such stress.The Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 lays down guidelines for the housing of laboratory animals (HMSO, 1989, 1995). For further discussion, see Dawkins’ (1988).
   

0. Aggression and predation

   The fact that the agent causing harm may be another non-human animal does not free the experimenter from the normal and legal obligations to experimental animals. Huntingford (1984) and Elwood (1991) discuss the ethical issues involved and suggest that, wherever possible, field studies of natural encounters should be used in preference to staged encounters.Where staged encounters are necessary, the use of models as targets should be considered, the number of subjects should be kept to the minimum needed to accomplish the experimental goals, and the experiments made as short as possible. Continuous observation, with intervention to stop aggression at predefined levels, and providing protective barriers and escape routes for the subjects, are also recommended.
   

0. Fieldwork

   Investigators studying free-living animals should take precautions to minimise interference with individuals as well as the populations and eco-systems of which they are a part. Capture, marking, radio-tagging, collection of physiological data such as blood or tissue samples or field experiments may not only have immediate effects on the animal, but may also have consequences such as a reduced probability of survival and reproduction.The subsequent release of the animals may also be problematic. For guidance on appropriate procedures see Kirkwood et al. (1994) and the British Wildlife Rehabilitation Council (1989). Investigators should consider the effects of such interference, and use less disruptive techniques such as recognition of individuals by the use of natural markings rather than artificial marking (Scott 1978) where possible. Cuthill (1991) discusses the ethical issues associated with field experiments, and recommends pilot investigations to assess potential environmental disruption and follow-up studies to detect and minimise persistent effects. The cost-benefit analysis of a field procedure should take into account the adverse consequences of disruption for not only the animals used as subjects but also for other animals and plants in the ecosystem (Bekoff, 1995; Bekoff and Jamieson, 1996).When an experimental protocol requires that animals be removed from the population either temporarily or on a long-term basis, investigators should ensure that suffering or discomfort are minimised not only for the removed animals but for others dependent on them (e.g. dependent offspring). Removed individuals and their dependents must be housed and cared for appropriately. Sources of further information on field techniques are the books edited by Stonehouse (1978) and Amlaner and Macdonald (1980).
   

0. Anaesthesia, analgesia and euthanasia.

   After conducting surgical procedures, attention should be given to proper pre- and post-operative care in order to minimise preparatory stress and residual effects. Regular and frequent post-operative monitoring of the animal’s condition is essential, and it is a requirement of the Personal Licence that if at any time an animal is found to be suffering severe pain or distress it must be killed humanely using an approved technique (see Section 7 below). Unless specifically contra-indicated by the experimental design, procedures that are likely to cause pain or discomfort should be performed only on animals that have been adequately anaesthetised, and analgesics should be used after such procedures to minimise pain and distress whenever possible (Green 1979; and Flecknell 1996).

5. Procurement of animals

Common laboratory species, listed under Schedule 2 of the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986, must come from Home Office Designated Breeding and Supply Establishments. Other species should only come from reputable suppliers.The list of species is updated and reported in the Annual Reports of the Animal Procedures Committee. Further advice about purchasing animals may be obtained from the Laboratory Animal Breeders Association, c/o Harlan UK Ltd., Shaw’s Farm, Blackthorn, Bicester OX6 0TP. Guidance relevant to wild-caught animals can be found in the ASAB/ABS Guidelines for the treatment of animals in behavioural research and teaching (1997).

6. Housing and animal care

The researcher’s responsibilities extend also to the conditions under which the animals are kept when not being studied. If a regulated procedure is being used then these are governed by the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986; this principle should be extended to animals used for other purposes, and the housing conditions and husbandry practices must at least reach the standards required by the guidelines and codes issued under that legislation.

The 1986 European Convention (20) provides that ‘Any animal used or intended for use in a procedure shall be provided with accommodation, and environment, at least a minimum of freedom of movement, food, water and care, appropriate to its health and well being. Any restriction on the extent to which an animal can satisfy its physiological and ecological needs shall be limited as far as practicable.’ Normal maintenance of captive animals should thus incorporate, as much as possible, aspects of the natural living conditions deemed important to welfare and survival (Poole, 1998). Consideration should be given to providing features such as natural materials, refuges, perches and dust and water baths. Frequency of cage cleaning should represent a compromise between the level of cleanliness necessary to prevent diseases and the amount of stress imposed by the cleaning process. Companions should be provided for social animals where possible, providing that this does not lead to suffering or injury. The housing regime should provide adequate exercise and cognitive stimulation.

The nature of human-animal interactions during routine care and experimentation should be considered by investigators. Depending upon species, rearing history and the nature of the interaction, animals may perceive humans as conspecifics, predators or symbionts (Estep & Hetts, 1992). Special training of animal care personnel can help in implementing procedures that foster habituation of animals to caretakers and researchers and minimise stress. Stress can also be reduced by training animals to co-operate with handlers and experimenters during routine husbandry and experimental procedures (Biological Council, 1992; Joint Working Group on Refinement, 1993b, 1998).

Some experimental procedures used in psychology may involve special housing conditions (e.g. social isolation). Even under such conditions these Guidelines are still applicable to the non-manipulated environmental conditions (See 4b above, on social isolation).

7. Final disposal of animals

If an animal has been used in a procedure regulated by the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 its re-use is very tightly controlled and requires Home Office approval. In other circumstances, when research projects or teaching exercises using captive animals are completed, it may sometimes be appropriate to distribute animals to colleagues for further study or breeding. However, if animals are distributed, care must be taken to ensure that they continue to receive a high standard of care. If animals must be killed during or subsequent to a study this must be done as humanely and painlessly as possible; acceptable methods for particular species are defined in Schedule 1 of the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 (HMSO, 1997). Death of the animals must be confirmed before their bodies are disposed of.A veterinary surgeon should be consulted for advice on methods of euthanasia that are appropriate for species not listed in Schedule 1. For information on euthanasia methods see AVMA (1993), and Close et al. (1996, 1997).

8. Animals in psychology teaching

Different considerations apply to the different levels of education ranging from secondary school through undergraduate to postgraduate. At every level where animals are used, the opportunity should be taken to discuss, with students, the ethical issues involved. Students should be encouraged to form their own ethical assessments and must not be required to carry out any experimental manipulation that they judge to be inappropriate. It is the responsibility of teachers to ensure that students are trained and competent to carry out whatever is required of them. At secondary school and the undergraduate level, it may be appropriate to include some work involving live animals.The use of animals for demonstrations of known facts using regulated procedures is prohibited unless they may not be taught effectively by any other means.There may, however, be some occasions on which students may use animals individually for teaching purposes in ways that are not covered by this legislation, but these by definition will not involve procedures believed to cause any harmful consequence. Observation of animals in their natural habitat may be encouraged provided that neither the animals nor the habitat are manipulated.The use of film and video brings valuable opportunities for the observation of formal manipulative studies.

Students who have career aspirations in professional psychology may have a special interest in animal psychology. They may wish to carry out final year experimental projects involving animals. If such projects may involve pain or suffering, they are only legally permissible if they form part of an ongoing piece of research, and where the study would otherwise have been conducted by the supervisor or his/her research team as work approved under an existing Project Licence. It is a legal requirement that any regulated procedures required by such projects will normally be performed by a Personal Licence holder; in some circumstances tasks may be delegated provided they are closely supervised by a Personal Licence holder (See Home Office, 1990 Appendix VII).

At the postgraduate level, any student wishing to use legally regulated procedures with animals must hold a Personal Licence. Home Office accredited training courses must be taken as a prerequisite to obtaining a licence. During this preparatory period, the situation is broadly similar to that of the undergraduate student research project.

9. The use of animals for therapeutic purposes

A variety of animal species are currently used by psychologists as aides or adjuncts to therapy. An example of this is the use of pet dogs as ‘co-therapists’ in the clinical setting, either through direct contact and interaction with the client/patient, or simply by their presence in the consulting room during a therapy session. Other examples include horse riding for disabled children, companion animal visiting schemes in hospitals or hospices, and pet keeping schemes within prison rehabilitation programmes. In addition, animals such as spiders and snakes are used in behaviour therapy for the treatment of specific animal phobias.

In all these cases, considerations concerning the general care and welfare of therapeutic animals are similar to those outlined for experimental animals. In addition, however, a number of specific considerations can be noted.The individual temperament and training of such animals should be appropriate for the planned task (e.g. a hospital visiting dog should be calm, placid and sociable with people), and should, therefore, be assessed carefully prior to use. Care should also be taken that contact between the therapeutic animal and client/patient is monitored at all times. Therapeutic interactions, especially with children, can be very demanding and tiring for an animal. Such animals should, therefore, be given regular rest periods during therapy sessions.They should also have the opportunity to retreat from threatening situations or interactions, should they arise.

10. Obtaining further information

There are a number of organisations that provide publications and detailed information about the care and use of animals.The Universities Federation for Animal Welfare (The Old School, Brewhouse Lane, Wheathampstead, Hertfordshire AL4 8AN, UK) is particularly relevant to British psychologists, and has produced a Handbook on the Care and Management of Laboratory Animals (Poole, 1987). Information is also available from The Canadian Council on Animal Care (1105-151 Slater Street, Ottawa, Ontario, K1P 5H3, Canada), and the Scientists Centre for Animal Welfare (4805 St. Elmo Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20814, USA) which publishes a series of bibliographics on special topics, and can also provide individualised database searches for investigators on potential alternatives, including techniques for replacement with non-animal models or alternative species, methods for reducing the total number of animals necessary to address the research question, and experimental refinements which can reduce pain and stress.

Psychologists working with animals should inform themselves about the debate on the desirability of animal research. The opposing arguments can be found in literature published by the British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection, Research Defence Society, Fund for the Replacement of Animals in Medical Experiments and the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. Relevant books include DeGrazia (1996) and Dawkins (1993).

References

For all references please refer to the PDF version of the Code.