Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

The three Rs: a restrictive and refutable rigmarole.

H Lansdell

    Ethics & Behavior
    |January 1, 1993
    PubMed
    Summary
    This summary is machine-generated.

    Related Concept Videos

    You might also read

    Related Articles

    Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

    Sort by
    Same author

    Intelligence test scores from infancy to adulthood for a craniopagus twin pair neurosurgically separated at 4 months of age.

    Psychological reports·1999
    Same author

    Factors related to speed of assembling blocks without boundary frames after trials with the frames.

    Journal of clinical psychology·1990
    Same author

    Sex differences in brain and personality correlates of the ability to identify popular word associations.

    Behavioral neuroscience·1989
    Same author

    Laboratory animals need only humane treatment: animal "rights" may debase human rights.

    The International journal of neuroscience·1988
    Same author

    Factor analysis of the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale subtests and the Halstead-Reitan Category and Tapping Tests.

    Journal of consulting and clinical psychology·1977
    Same author

    Asymmetrical cerebral function for two WAIS factors and their recovery after brain injury.

    Journal of consulting and clinical psychology·1975
    Same journal

    Incidental Genetic Findings Discovered During Autopsy: An Ethical Analysis of Patient Confidentiality Post-Mortem.

    Ethics & behavior·2025
    Same journal

    Ethical considerations for the use of ecological momentary assessment in non-suicidal self-injury research.

    Ethics & behavior·2025
    Same journal

    Addressing Fraudulent Responses in Quantitative and Qualitative Internet Research: Case Studies from Body Image and Appearance Research.

    Ethics & behavior·2025
    Same journal

    Research ethics education needs assessment in Serbian medical researchers.

    Ethics & behavior·2025
    Same journal

    Aligning values with standards: a comparison of professional values in Continuing Education standards.

    Ethics & behavior·2024
    Same journal

    Implementation of a Risk Reduction Protocol in Youth Violence Research.

    Ethics & behavior·2024
    See all related articles

    Biological scientists should reject the "three Rs" principles for animal research. While aiming to reduce animal use and suffering, these guidelines may hinder scientific progress and are not fully relevant.

    Area of Science:

    • Animal research ethics
    • Biomedical science principles

    Background:

    • The "three Rs" (reduction, refinement, replacement) were proposed in 1959 for animal research.
    • These principles aim to minimize animal use and suffering in scientific studies.

    Purpose of the Study:

    • To evaluate the arguments for and against the adoption of the "three Rs" by scientists.
    • To determine the relevance and impact of the "three Rs" on the scientific enterprise.

    Main Methods:

    • Consideration of arguments supporting the "three Rs".
    • Analysis of arguments that the "three Rs" are restrictive and not fully relevant.
    • Critical review of the principles' applicability in modern biological research.

    Main Results:

    Keywords:
    Biomedical and Behavioral Research

    Related Experiment Videos

  • Arguments exist both for supporting and for finding the "three Rs" restrictive.
  • The principles may not be fully relevant to the broader scientific enterprise.

    • Conclusions:

    • Biological scientists should not accept the "three Rs" principles.
    • The adoption of these principles may impede scientific advancement and discovery.