Monkey Experiments in Neuroscience: The Case of “Triggers for Mother Love”

Author: Vivian Huang

Field of Study: Social Sciences

Program Affiliation: Source Project Research Program

Faculty Mentors: Will Glovinsky

Abstract: Due to ethical concerns about human testing and animals’ physiological similarities to humans, animals are common experiment subjects in multiple research fields. However, in the case of Margaret S. Livingstone’s 2019 study “Triggers for Mother Love,” animal advocates, fellow researchers, and other commentators argue that this experiment is unnecessarily cruel and provides little to no useful knowledge. Despite all these criticisms, the National Institutes of Health has supported Livingstone’s various experiments with $32 million in grants. Livingstone’s experiment is not an outlier: landmark studies such as Harry Harlow’s experiments on surrogate mothers have used similar methods, and scholars have highlighted other recent scientific research involving animals that they suggest are unethical and/or uninformative. This project highlights Livingstone’s study and the backlash faced by PETA, Harvard Law School, and more to argue that animal experiments like Livingstone’s persist because neuroscience researchers are accustomed to this research method.