Biobehavioral Experimental Laboratories Research Paper

Since the nineteenth century, medical and natural science research laboratories were established at universities. The Departments of Physiology at the German Universities of Leipzig (inaugurated in 1865) and Berlin (1877) were milestones for experimental research in the life sciences. Shortly thereafter, psychological laboratories were established to conduct experiments on humans and animals. Sahakian (1975, p. 138) lists 68 psychological laboratories that were founded in Europe, North America, and South America by the end of the nineteenth century. Among the first and most noteworthy were the research facilities of the German universities of Leipzig (established in 1880) and Gottingen (1881), and, in the USA, at Harvard University (approximately 1890). Most experiments on humans in psychological laboratories were conducted with single individuals. However, there were also experimental approaches addressing the behavior and cognitions of groups, or of individuals within groups.

Zoos, primarily established for the public, gave further opportunities for scientific animal observation. However, the city zoos provided only narrow and artificial habitats. Therefore, animal stations were set up to promote research in more natural settings. The controversies spawned by evolution theory led to the establishment of primate centers whose goal was to investigate the intelligence of apes. The most renowned research facilities were the primate stations in Tenerife, Spain (1912), and in Orange Park, Florida (1930).

Recent progress in computer technology not only revolutionizes experimental techniques, but also permits to overcome the spatial limits of the traditional laboratory. Work places, architectural sites, political and economic situations can be simulated, and the behavior of humans can be studied in virtual settings. Moreover, experimental tasks are presented in the Internet, and responses are collected from worldwide samples of participants.

Given this variety of institutions for behavior research, four types of laboratories will be examined: (a) Psychological laboratories for experiments with individual humans, (b) psychological laboratories for small animals, (c) animal stations, and (d) experiments with groups of humans. In addition, (e) the present tendencies of collecting experimental data via the Internet are outlined.

1. Psychological Laboratories For Experiments With Single Humans

Psychological laboratories are equipped for two purposes. Firstly, for the recording of behavior and for the monitoring of mental and emotional states; secondly, for the systematic control of environmental and individual factors which influence and determine human mental and emotional states. Experiments are designed to relate measures of behavior and internal states as dependent variables to preceding or concomitant environmental and individual factors as independent variables. Typically, these kinds of experiments are conducted with individuals. The data from these samples are then accumulated over successive experimental sessions.

As one class of dependent variables, behavioral data primarily comprise speed and quality of performance in achievement tasks. The achievements tested include learning (e.g., reproduction of texts), perception (e.g., estimating distances), problem solving (e.g., finding the shortest route in a labyrinth), and sensorimotor actions (e.g., reacting to a light signal). Besides assessing performance, behavioral records also serve as indications for habitual or transient mental and emotional states (e.g., fatigue, positive affect, and surprise). An example is observations of facial expressions indicating emotional reactions. Moreover, behavioral records reflect stable personality traits (e.g., self-efficacy, anxiety, and withdrawal).

Another class of dependent variables are self-reports. Self-reports of participants express judgments and mental processes (e.g., logical reasoning), mental structures (e.g., impressions of paintings), and emotional states (e.g., optimism). A third class of dependent variables is psycho-and neurophysiological data. Measures of the autonomic nervous system (e.g., cardiovascular and gastrointestinal activity) and the endocrine system (e.g., adrenaline and cortisol secretion) serve as evidence for stable and transient states. More directly related to cognitive and sensorimotor processes are cerebral functions (e.g., event-related brain potentials).

Several unobtrusive methods exist for collecting experimental data. These include free protocols, video and voice recordings. However, most methods are obtrusive, for instance performance tests, which entail the operation of technical devices (e.g., reaction keys for measuring the speed of manual reactions). The obtrusive methods include various kinds of psycho-and neurophysiological recordings where participants are placed in or connected with special appliances ranging from blood pressure meters to magnetic resonance tomographs.

The instructions and tasks provided for the participants are the crucial aspects of the independent variables. These tasks may be tests of memory and learning, or of cognitive and motor skills. They may initiate logical judgments and actions, and may arouse emotions. Instructions not only serve to explain the requirements of the experimental tasks, but are also designed to affect the participants’ motivation, attitudes, and moods. A plethora of devices exists for various experimental designs such as the presentation of visual or acoustic stimuli and for the control of environmental variations, which permit to study learning, movement, communication, and self-regulation. The appliances should guarantee precise and stable conditions over repeated trials. They also enable the scientist to control the variations in experimental conditions, such as the time of exposure to visual stimuli as measured in milliseconds.

The establishment of psychological laboratories for humans benefited from growing expertise in pertinent experimental techniques and the feasibility of exact measurements. Many experimental investigations depended on the progress made in precision mechanics. In the early stages of experimental psychology, most research laboratories employed a mechanical engineer. The advent of electronic elements also revolutionized experimentation, and has brought electronic engineers into the psychological laboratories. Increasing demands and standardization requirements permitted the commercial production of the devices used in psychological research. Thereafter, more and more technical research instruments were purchased and maintained by commercial companies, and the technical work force within the research laboratories diminished. This process continued when laboratory computers became available which could be adapted to various experimental purposes by specialized software.

For many decades, most psychological laboratories for humans were part of the university departments of psychology. Most of them were rather small, consisted of a few rooms, and were located alongside offices and classrooms. Some were insulated for sound or light protection to permit better control over sensory stimulation. Some were electrically shielded to enable electrophysiological data collection. Laboratories in psychological departments were rarely set up as central, permanent research units. Neither were they equipped for a variety of research tasks. Most of them served a specialized form of research (e.g., perception psychology). They were maintained by individual researchers and small work groups, and were often transferred to other purposes once a project or a contract was terminated. However, psychology departments had a policy of employing at least one experimentalist in their staff who raised funds and/organized a laboratory for scientific research and academic training.

As brain research gained in recognition, special institutions of neuroscience with a high emphasis on medical and biological expertise have established laboratories for the study of human cognition and behavior. A similar increase in number and scientific impact has occurred in regard to research institutes devoted to cognitive science, computer science, and multimedia applications. The newer institutions operate on long-term projects, and are often sponsored by corporations rather than individuals. Consequently, they tend to outperform university departments of psychology in attracting funds for more spacious laboratories with costly equipment such as high-resolution magnetic resonance imaging and high technology environments.

2. Psychological Laboratories For Small Animals

Two issues have dominated in laboratory research with small animals: the laws governing the acquisition of behavior, and the neural basis of behavior. The first issue was primarily investigated in learning studies which varied environmental stimuli eliciting responses, drive states, the reinforcement of behavior (i.e., reward and punishment), and the role of practice. This research has promoted special training devices such as mazes and boxes with food dispensers, electric grids, etc., where animals could operate buttons or change locations to obtain rewards or to avoid punishments. In neuropsychological experiments the effects of brain lesions and the patterns of electrical brain waves have been investigated. Functional centers of an animal’s brain were surgically removed, or nervous pathways were disconnected. After the animal had recovered from surgery, its capacity for learning, discrimination, etc., was tested in order to ascertain the impact of the lesions. Alternatively, electrodes were implanted in functional centers, and subsequently the activation of various brain areas was determined during maze exploration, water intake, etc. Advances in research technology have also revolutionized the work in the animal laboratory. Above all, new techniques for monitoring ongoing nervous processes and for analyzing the structure of nervous tissues have facilitated the understanding of the neural basis of behavior. Moreover, the influence of endocrine secretions on behavior has been extensively studied.

These investigations were primarily performed with rodents (mainly mice and rats) and birds (mainly pigeons), and sometimes with domesticated animals such as cats and dogs, or small fish. Animals of these species are fairly easy to handle. They can be kept in separate cages and aquariums, and moved to the experimental locations. They are small enough to fit into a table-size apparatus, and large enough for precise surgery and observation. Moreover, their learning history, their diet, their environment, and other vital factors can be controlled experimentally. After the completion of the experiment they can be sacrificed in order to verify the location of lesions and electrodes.

Engineers associated with the laboratory first manufactured the technical devices employed in the training and testing of small animals. In recent decades, they have been produced commercially. Cages and surgical instruments had always been available from medical and biological research. Special locations outside the actual laboratory were often reserved for surgical procedures, microscopy, etc.

Until 1970, animal labs for the study of learning and other psychological functions were part of psychology and biology departments. Medical schools maintained such units for brain research. Typically, these laboratories were located near offices and classrooms. In biology and medicine rather than in psychology, animal laboratories were established as permanent institutions, parallel to other animal labs which investigated basic physiological functions, pathologies, and pharmacological treatments. Caretakers, who feed the animals, clean the cages, etc., complement the scientific and technical staff.

Apparently, small animals often served as substitutes for humans, since they were easier to control, and, above all, less protected by ethical and legal norms. Since 1970, both the public concern and the legislation regarding the protection of animals have militated against invasive and severely restrictive measures in animal experiments. In consequence, laboratories for small animals have diminished in number and size.

3. Animal Stations

Animal stations may consist of several departments, which work on different research projects. In the biomedical branch, there is an emphasis on immunology, virology, and pharmacology, as well as on surgical and post-surgical treatment. In the biogenetic branch, reproduction is the primary object of investigation. From the psychological point of view, studies on intelligence, communication, and social organization are most salient. Regarding intelligence, many studies have focused on the problem solving abilities of animals (e.g., the construction and use of tools). Communication includes vocal messages, gestures, and bodily, most notably facial expressions. In going beyond their natural repertoire, some animals have been trained to use a symbolic language (e.g., American Sign Language as used by the deaf ). In the social domain, hierarchies, and roles (e.g., leadership and subordination in herds, selection of partners in mating), helping behavior and aggression (e.g., sharing and defending a territory, social support), and their impact on health (psychosocial stress) are major research topics. Due to recent methodological advances, behavioral studies are often performed in collaboration with brain research. Moreover, intriguing new findings have deepened our understanding of the genetic basis of animal behavior.

Traditionally, monkeys (orangutans, chimpanzees, macaques, etc.) have been the preferred species in animal stations because of their genetic resemblance to humans. Primates exhibit high intelligence in instrumental tasks and develop considerable conceptual and linguistic skills when trained in sign language. They build families and groups with stable social structures. However, monkeys are unable to overcome their natural limitations regarding articulation. Besides primates, many other species are investigated scientifically. For instance, some researchers study how singing birds communicate over long distances in elaborated vocal codes. Also highly popular among scientists are dolphins.

Animal stations are more spacious than the laboratories for small animals (see Sect. 2). Rather than being transported from a narrow cage to an experimental device, the animals live and are studied in larger cages or in fenced natural resorts. The stations are typically located outside of educational centers. If associated with a zoo, however, they may be close to a city. An example is the Animal Behavior Research Team, a joint organization of West Chester University and the Philadelphia zoo. Although the animals are held in captivity, their living conditions bear a close resemblance to the animals’ natural habitats. Some centers combine research on captive animals with wildlife observations. An example is the Kewalo Basin Marine Mammal Laboratory of the University of Hawaii. This institute studies whales in the Hawaiian waters as well as the intellectual potential of dolphins housed in a basin.

In terms of budget, facilities, and staff size the larger animal stations have achieved a high status among scientific institutions. The Yerkes Primate Research Center in Atlanta, Georgia, maintains a permanent staff of 50 scientists who work in collaboration with more than 100 visiting researchers. The Primate Center in Gottingen, Germany, employs a staff of more than 70 scientists. An equal or even greater number of technical and administrative staff members, including caretakers, are employed by these respective organizations. Animal stations are funded on a long-term basis by government agencies and private foundations. Moreover, they raise funds by short-term grants and contracts, and they also receive personal donations. The first and prototypical stations were financed by private foundations: in Europe, the German Samson foundation paid for the Primate Station at Tenerife, Spain; in the USA, the Carnegie and the Rockefeller foundations, respectively, enabled the establishment of Yale University’s Primate Center in Orange Park, Florida. After World War II, national institutions assumed responsibility for the larger stations. For instance, the Primate Center in Gottingen, Germany, is organized as a private company, subsidized by the German Federal Government and the Federal State of Lower Saxony. The Primate Research Center in Orange Park, Florida, named after its founder Robert Yerkes, was sold for 1$ by Yale University to Emory University in 1956. In 1965, the center moved to Atlanta, Georgia. Now it is among the eight institutions sponsored by the American National Institute of Health within its primate research program.

4. Experiments With Groups Of Humans

Experiments with groups of humans serve the purpose of demonstrating principles and testing propositions of the social sciences. Popular paradigms include: the individual in the social context (i.e., changes in achievement, creativity, attitudes, etc., in the presence of other individuals and social models, under social pressure, etc.), group organization (e.g., leadership, division of labor, communication structure); group performance (e.g., problem solving, decision making), cooperation and tension in groups (e.g., group coherence, morale, deviant behavior). In order to enhance the control over experimental conditions and the assessment of individual data, the number of individuals in a group is usually limited to numbers of two to twelve.

The effect of observers, competitors, etc. on individual behavior (e.g., problem solving, learning) has been investigated in standard laboratory settings (see Sect. 1). In studying communication within groups, multi-channel systems permit the exchange of written or oral messages (e.g., computer networks). Communications and other social interactions (e.g., creative group work, aggressive behavior in dyads) are carefully observed and recorded (e.g., on videotape). In some laboratories, observers and recording devices are concealed behind a one-way mirror.

Research facilities for field experiments in social psychology were mostly provided by psychological departments. Numerous field experiments were conducted in real-life settings (e.g., in firms or youth clubs). A noteworthy model for a research unit, which organized such field experiments, was the Center of Group Dynamics, established in 1945 at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Boston.

In the tradition of game theory, subjects were confronted with experimental tasks simulating political and economic decision-making. Provided with an appropriate computer model of the situation (e.g., strategic bargaining, alliance formation), cooperative or competitive groups could gather pertinent information and take measures to stabilize or change the system. The impact of these measures was subsequently computed, and participants were confronted with the consequences of their actions. Thus, decision processes were examined for several consecutive periods of virtual time. Such simulation studies were mainly conducted in social science and economic departments.

5. Globalization Of Laboratory Tests

When experimental tasks are presented by electronic media and responses are transmitted to a central processor; there is no need to restrict the experimental situation to a single workplace. Therefore, many experiments can now be conducted via the Internet. A special site for psychological experiments with humans is provided on behalf of the American Psychological Society (http://www.psych.hanover.edu/APS/exponnet.html). The main topics represented in this service are sensation and perception, learning and cognition, social psychology, psycholinguistics, and decision-making. Internet experiments attract large numbers of participants. However, the worldwide distribution of participants and the multimedia context cause some problems in psychological experimentation with humans, most notably a lack of commitment to the purpose of the experiment.

Bibliography:

1. Boring E G 1950 A History of Experimental Psychology. Appleton-Century-Crofts, New York
2. Cartwright D, Zander A (eds.) 1953 Group Dynamics. Row and Petersen, Evanston, IL
3. Sahakian W 1975 History and Systems of Psychology. Wiley, New York
4. Selten R 1991 Game Equilibrium Models, 4 Vols. Springer, Heidelberg, Germany
5. Vaitl D 1998 Psychophysiology in Europe. Journal of Psycho- physiology 12: 172–83
6. Yerkes R M 1943 Chimpanzees. A Laboratory Colony. Yale University Press, New Haven, CT