CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 17Philosophy and Theoretical ScienceAnimal Law and WelfareAnimal testing and alternatives

The scientific study of consciousness cannot and should not be morally neutral

Open access
Mazor, Matan, Brown, Simon, Ciaunica, Anna, Demertzi, Athena, Fahrenfort, Johannes, Faivre, Nathan, Francken, Jolien C., Lamy, Dominique +7 more·2023·Perspectives on Psychological Science
DOI 10.1177/17456916221110222
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

A target question for the scientific study of consciousness is how dimensions of consciousness, such as the ability to feel pain and pleasure or reflect on one’s own experience, vary in different states and animal species. Considering the tight link between consciousness and moral status, answers to these questions have implications for law and ethics. Here we point out that given this link, the scientific community studying consciousness may face implicit pressure to carry out certain research programs or interpret results in ways that justify current norms rather than challenge them. We show that because consciousness largely determines moral status, the use of nonhuman animals in the scientific study of consciousness introduces a direct conflict between scientific relevance and ethics—the more scientifically valuable an animal model is for studying consciousness, the more difficult it becomes to ethically justify compromises to its well-being for consciousness research. Finally, in light of these considerations, we call for a discussion of the immediate ethical corollaries of the body of knowledge that has accumulated and for a more explicit consideration of the role of ideology and ethics in the scientific study of consciousness.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/17456916221110222

Cites

9 of 9 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Folk psychological attributions of consciousness may mediate future moral concern towards AI, regardless of whether AI is actually conscious.

    “First, folk psychological attributions of consciousness may mediate future moral concern towards AI, regardless of whether or not they are actually conscious (Shepherd 2018, Mazor et al. 2023).”

    From Folk psychological attributions of consciousness to large language models (2024) · cites this paper as Mazor et al. 2023

    The paper says that beliefs about consciousness shape ethics (Scientific Attribution of Consciousness, p. 3), and its Figure 1 describes conjectures about an entity’s conscious experience affecting applied ethics (p. 4). That supports the proposed link between attributed consciousness and moral concern, but the passages do not address AI specifically or establish the claim’s ‘regardless of whether AI is actually conscious’ qualification. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 64

  1. American Psychiatrist Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed.).
  2. Animal Health and Welfare. (2005). Opinion of the Scientific Panel on Animal Health and Welfare (AHAW) on a request from the Commission related to the aspects of the biology and welfare of animals used for experimental and other scientific purposes. EFSA Journal , 3 (12), 292. https://doi .org/10.2903/j.efsa.2005.292 · DOI
  3. Banner, M. (2003). Review of cost-benefit assessment in the use of animals in research . The Animal Procedure Committee.
  4. Bastian, B., & Loughnan, S. (2017). Resolving the meat-paradox: A motivational account of morally troublesome behavior and its maintenance. Personality and Social Psychology Review , 21 (3), 278-299. https://doi.org/10 .1177/1088868316647562
  5. Bastian, B., Loughnan, S., Haslam, N., & Radke, H. R. M. (2012). Don't mind meat? The denial of mind to animals used for human consumption. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin , 38 (2), 247-256. https://doi.org/10 .1177/0146167211424291
  6. Bateson, P. (1986). When to experiment on animals. New Scientist , 109(1496), 30-32.
  7. Ben-Haim, M. S., Monte, O. D., Fagan, N. A., Dunham, Y., Hassin, R. R., Chang, S. W. C., & Santos, L. R. (2021). Disentangling perceptual awareness from nonconscious processing in rhesus monkeys ( Macaca mulatta ). Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA , 118 (15), Article e2017543118. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2017543118 · DOI
  8. Bentham, J. (1789/1996). The collected works of Jeremy Bentham: An introduction to the principles of morals and legislation . Clarendon Press.
  9. Campbell, G. L. (2014). classical thought and life . Oxford Handbooks.
  10. Carpenter, A. D. (2018). Illuminating community: Animals in classical Indian thought. In P. Adamson & G. F. Edwards (Eds.), Animals: A history (pp. 63-86). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780199375967.003.0005 · DOI · Paper page
  11. Carruthers, P. (2007). Invertebrate minds: A challenge for ethical theory. The Journal of Ethics , 11 (3), 275-297. https:// doi.org/10.1007/s10892-007-9015-6 · DOI
  12. Carruthers, P. (2019). Human and animal minds: The consciousness questions laid to rest . Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198843702.001.0001 · DOI
  13. Costello, K., & Hodson, G. (2014). Explaining dehumanization among children: The interspecies model of prejudice. British Journal of Social Psychology , 53 (1), 175-197. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12016 · DOI
  14. Crane, S. (2015). Medieval animal studies: Dogs at work. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfor dhb/9780199935338.013.103 · DOI
  15. Danaher, J. (2020). Welcoming robots into the moral circle: A defence of ethical behaviourism. Science and Engineering Ethics , 26 (4), 2023-2049. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948019-00119-x · DOI
  16. De Lafuente, V., & Romo, R. (2006). Neural correlates of subjective sensory experience. Nature Neuroscience , 8 , 1698-1703. https://doi.org/10.1038/nn1587 · DOI
  17. Finnigan, B. (2017). Buddhism and animal ethics. Philosophy Compass , 12 (7), Article e12424. https://doi.org/10.1111/ phc3.12424
  18. Gallup, G. G., & Anderson, J. R. (2018). The 'olfactory mirror' and other recent attempts to demonstrate self-recognition in non-primate species. Behavioural Processes , 148, 1619. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beproc.2017.12.010 · DOI
  19. Giacino, J. T., Fins, J. J., Laureys, S., & Schiff, N. D. (2014). Disorders of consciousness after acquired brain injury: The state of the science. Nature Reviews Neurology , 10 (2), 99-114. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrneurol.2013.279 · DOI
  20. Glover, J. (2006). The sanctity of life. In H. Kuhse & P. Singer (Eds.), Bioethics: An anthology (pp. 266-275). Blackwell.
  21. Grimm, H., Olsson, I. A. S., & Sandøe, P. (2019). Harmbenefit analysis-What is the added value? A review of alternative strategies for weighing harms and benefits as part of the assessment of animal research. Laboratory Animals , 53 (1), 17-27. https://doi.org/10.1177/002367721 8783004 · DOI
  22. Heath, M. (2008). Aristotle on natural slavery. Phronesis , 53 (3), 243-270. https://doi.org/10.1163/156852808X307070 · DOI
  23. Heider, F., & Simmel, M. (1944). An experimental study of apparent behavior. The American Journal of Psychology , 57 (2), 243-259. https://doi.org/10.2307/1416950 · DOI · Paper page
  24. Hollis, F., & Kabbaj, M. (2014). Social defeat as an animal model for depression. ILAR Journal , 55 (2), 221-232. https://doi.org/10.1093/ilar/ilu002 · DOI
  25. Jena, N. P. (2019). Moral dilemmas of Buddhism on animal suffering. Asian Philosophy , 29 (3), 248-263. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/09552367.2019.1662589 · DOI
  26. Johnson, L. S. M., Fenton, A., & Shriver, A. (2020). Neuroethics and nonhuman animals . Springer. https://link.springer .com/book/10.1007/978-3-030-31011-0 · DOI
  27. Jozefowiez, J., Staddon, J. E. R., & Cerutti, D. T. (2009). Metacognition in animals: How do we know that they know? Comparative Cognition & Behavior Reviews , 4 , 29-39. https://doi.org/10.3819/ccbr.2009.40003 · DOI
  28. Kammerer, F. (2019). The normative challenge for illusionist views of consciousness. Ergo: An Open Access Journal of Philosophy , 6 . https://doi.org/10.3998/ergo .12405314.0006.032 · DOI
  29. Kant, I. (2002). Groundwork of the metaphysic of morals. In L. Pasternack (Ed.), Immanuel Kant: Groundwork of the metaphysic of morals in focus (pp. 17-98). Routledge. (Original work published 1785)
  30. Kirlic, N., Young, J., & Aupperle, R. L. (2017). Animal to human translational paradigms relevant for approach avoidance conflict decision making. Behaviour Research and Therapy , 96, 14-29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brat .2017.04.010 · DOI
  31. Kitcher, P. (2003). Science, truth, and democracy . Oxford University Press.
  32. Koch, C., Massimini, M., Boly, M., & Tononi, G. (2016). Neural correlates of consciousness: Progress and problems. Nature Reviews Neuroscience , 17 (5), 307-321. https:// doi.org/10.1038/nrn.2016.22 · DOI · Paper page
  33. Kozak, M. N., Marsh, A. A., & Wegner, D. M. (2006). What do I think you're doing? Action identification and mind attribution. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 90 (4), 543-555. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.90.4.543. · DOI
  34. Lagercrantz, H. (2014). The emergence of consciousness: Science and ethics. Seminars in Fetal and Neonatal Medicine , 19 (5), 300-305. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.siny .2014.08.003 · DOI
  35. LeDoux, J. E. (2021). What emotions might be like in other animals. Current Biology , 31 (13), R824-R829. https://doi .org/10.1016/j.cub.2021.05.005 · DOI
  36. Lee, A. Y. (2019). Is consciousness intrinsically valuable? Philosophical Studies , 176 (3), 655-671. https://doi.org/ 10.1007/s11098-018-1032-8 · DOI
  37. Le Neindre, C., Bernard, E., Boissy, A., Boivin, X., Calandreau, L., Delon, N., Deputte, B., Desmoulin-Canselier, S., Dunier, M., Faivre, N., Giurfa, M., Guichet, J.-L., Lansade, L., Larrère, R., Mormède, P., Prunet, P., Schaal, B., Servière, J., & Terlous, C. (2017). Animal consciousness . European Food Safety Author. https://efsa.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdfdirect/ 10.2903/sp.efsa.2017.EN-1196 · DOI
  38. Leopold, D. A., & Logothetis, N. K. (1996). Activity changes in early visual cortex reflect monkeys' percepts during binocular rivalry. Nature , 379 (6565), 549-553. https://doi .org/10.1038/379549a0 · DOI
  39. Levy, N. (2014). The value of consciousness. Journal of Consciousness Studies , 21 , 127-138.
  40. Maier, S. F. (1984). Learned helplessness and animal models of depression. Progress in Neuro-Psychopharmacology and Biological Psychiatry , 8 (3), 435-446. https://doi .org/10.1016/S0278-5846(84)80032-9 · DOI
  41. Mill, J. S. (2015). On liberty, utilitarianism, and other essays . Oxford University Press. (Original work published 1863)
  42. Nieder, A., Wagener, L., & Rinnert, P. (2020). A neural correlate of sensory consciousness in a corvid bird. Science , 369 (6511), 1626-1629. https://doi.org/10.1126/science .abb1447 · DOI · Paper page
  43. Nozick, R. (1974). Anarchy, state and Utopia . Basic Books. Nuffield Council on Bioethics. (Ed.). (2005). The ethics of research involving animals . Nuffield Council on Bioethics.
  44. Oreskes, N. (2021). Why trust science? Princeton University Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9780691222370 · DOI
  45. Oreskes, N., & Conway, E. M. (2011). Merchants of doubt: How a handful of scientists obscured the truth on issues from tobacco smoke to global warming . Bloomsbury Publishing.
  46. Panoz-Brown, D., Iyer, V., Carey, L. M., Sluka, C. M., Rajic, G., Kestenman, J., Gentry, M., Brotheridge, S., Somekh, I., Corbin, H. E., Tucker, K. G., Almeida, B., Hex, S. B., Garcia, K. D., Hohmann, A. G., & Crystal, J. D. (2018). Replay of episodic memories in the rat. Current Biology , 28 (10), 1628-1634.e7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2018.04.006 · DOI · Paper page
  47. Plotnik, J. M., de Waal, F. B. M., & Reiss, D. (2006). Selfrecognition in an Asian elephant. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA , 103 (45), 17053-17057. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0608062103 · DOI · Paper page
  48. Posner, M. I. (1994). Attention: The mechanisms of consciousness. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA , 91 (16), 7398-7403. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.91.16.7398 · DOI · Paper page
  49. Redinbaugh, M. J., Phillips, J. M., Kambi, N. A., Mohanta, S., Andryk, S., Dooley, G. L., Afrasiabi, M., Raz, A., & Saalmann, Y. B. (2020). Thalamus modulates consciousness via layer-specific control of cortex. Neuron , 106 (1), 66-75.e12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2020.01.005 · DOI · Paper page
  50. Rosenthal, D. (2005). Consciousness and mind . Clarendon Press. Sachidhanandam, S., Sreenivasan, V., Kyriakatos, A., Kremer, Y., & Petersen, C. (2013). Membrane potential correlates of sensory perception in mouse barrel cortex. Nature Neuro­ science , 16 , 1671-1677. https://doi.org/10.1038/nn.3532 · DOI · Paper page
  51. Shepherd, J. (2018). Consciousness and moral status . Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315396347 · DOI · Paper page
  52. Siewert, C. (1998). The significance of consciousness . Princeton University Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400822720 · DOI
  53. Smith, J. A., Andrews, P. L. R., Hawkins, P., Louhimies, S., Ponte, G., & Dickel, L. (2013). Cephalopod research and EU Directive 2010/63/EU: Requirements, impacts and ethical review. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology , 447 , 31-45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jembe .2013.02.009 · DOI
  54. Solvi, C., Al-Khudhairy, S. G., & Chittka, L. (2020). Bumble bees display cross-modal object recognition between visual and tactile senses. Science , 367 (6480), 910-912. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aay8064 · DOI
  55. Sorabji, R. (2018). Animal minds and human morals: The origins of the western debate . Cornell University Press. https://doi.org/10.7591/9781501717888 · DOI
  56. Strawson, G. (2018). The consciousness deniers. The New York Review , March 13. https://www.nybooks.com/daily/ 2018/03/13/the-consciousness-deniers/#:~:text=One%20 of%20the%20strangest%20things,%2C%20in%20fact%2C%20 an%20illusion.&text=What%20is%20the%20silliest%20 claim%20ever%20made%3F https://www.nybooks.com/daily/2018/03/13/the-consciousness-deniers/#:~:text=One%20of%20the%20strangest%20things,%2C%20in%20fact%2C%20an%20illusion.&text=What%20is%20the%20silliest%20claim%20ever%20made%3F
  57. Suddendorf, T., & Corballis, M. C. (2007). The evolution of foresight: What is mental time travel, and is it unique to humans? Behavioral and Brain Sciences , 30 (3), 299-313. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X07001975 · DOI · Paper page
  58. Sunstein, C. R., & Nussbaum, M. C. (2004). Animal rights: Current debates and new directions . Oxford University Press.
  59. Taschereau-Dumouchel, V., Michel, M., Lau, H., Hofmann, S. G., & LeDoux, J. E. (2022). Putting the 'mental' back in 'mental disorders': A perspective from research on fear and anxiety. Molecular Psychiatry , 27 , 1322-1330. https:// doi.org/10.1038/s41380-021-01395-5 · DOI
  60. Tulving, E. (2005). Episodic memory and autonoesis: Uniquely human? In H. S. Terrace & J. Metcalfe (Eds.), The missing link in cognition: Origins of self-reflective consciousness (pp. 3-56). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/ 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195161564.003.0001 · DOI
  61. Vugt, B., van Dagnino, B., Vartak, D., Safaai, H., Panzeri, S., Dehaene, S., & Roelfsema, P. R. (2018). The threshold for conscious report: Signal loss and response bias in visual and frontal cortex. Science , 360 (6388), 537-542. https:// doi.org/10.1126/science.aar7186 · DOI · Paper page
  62. Wada, M., Takano, K., Ora, H., Ide, M., & Kansaku, K. (2016). The rubber tail illusion as evidence of body ownership in mice. The Journal of Neuroscience , 36 (43), 11133-11137. https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3006-15.2016 · DOI
  63. Willner, P. (2017). The chronic mild stress (CMS) model of depression: History, evaluation and usage. Neuro­ biology of Stress , 6 , 78-93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ynstr .2016.08.002 · DOI
  64. Yuki, S., & Okanoya, K. (2017). Rats show adaptive choice in a metacognitive task with high uncertainty. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Learning and Cogni­ tion , 43 (1), 109-118. https://doi.org/10.1037/xan00 00130 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Mazor, M., Brown, S., Ciaunica, A., Demertzi, A., Fahrenfort, J., Faivre, N., Francken, J. C., Lamy, D., Lenggenhager, B., Moutoussis, M., Nizzi, M.-C., Salomon, R., Soto, D., Stein, T., & Lubianiker, N.
Affiliations
  • University of London (GB)
  • Johns Hopkins University (US)
  • University of Lisbon (PT)
  • Physiology of Cognition, GIGA Consciousness Research Unit, Université de Liège
  • Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam (NL)
  • Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR)
  • Radboud University Nijmegen (NL)
  • Tel Aviv University (IL)
  • University of Zurich (CH)
  • Wellcome Centre for Human Neuroimaging (GB)
  • Dartmouth College (US)
  • Bar-Ilan University (IL)
  • Ikerbasque (ES)
  • University of Amsterdam (NL)
Corresponding author
Mazor, Matan
ORCID
Venue
Perspectives on Psychological Science
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2022-09-28
Volume
18
Issue
3
Pages
535-543
ISSN
  • 1745-6916 (ISSN-L)
  • 1745-6924
DOI
10.1177/17456916221110222
OpenAlex
W4297513155
Cited by
17
References
9
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 5
FWCI
3.45
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Perspectives on Psychological Science (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UvA-DARE (University of Amsterdam) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • VU Research Portal (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • HAL (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Communities in ADDI (University of the Basque Country) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • ORBi (University of Liège) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Hispana (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Philosophy and Theoretical Science
  • Social Sciences › Law › Animal Law and Welfare
  • Health Sciences › Veterinary › Small Animals › Animal testing and alternatives
Keywords
consciousness studies, moral status, animal welfare, research ethics, science and ideology, pleasure and pain, self-awareness
MeSH terms
Animals, Consciousness, Humans, Morals, Ethics, Research

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review