Anthropomorphism is not a Four-Letter Word

Abstract

In recent years animal experimentation in American psychology has been subjected to harsh criticism from inside and outside the discipline (Bannister 1981; Giannelli, this volume; Griffin 1976, 1984; MacDonald and Dawkins 1981; Rollin 1981). The critics have warned of a loss of both an ethical framework and a creative spark in contemporary psychology. It is no secret that much of what passes for good science in psychology is trivial, boring, repetitive, and inhumane. I think that many of the factors that stifle creativity in this field are the same ones that lead researchers to conduct studies that are ethically impoverished. Conversely, I believe that an empathic and humane viewpoint often encourages scientists to ask valid scientific questions that are fresh, challenging, and beneficial to human and non-human animals alike.

This paper is based on invited presentations at the Conference on the Perception of Animals in American Culture, National Zoological Park, Washington, D.C., November 1983 and the American Psychological Association, Toronto, Canada, August 1984.