Simple Summary Some basic and preclinical biomedical research models require the use of animals. It is not always clear which model is best suited to a project—animals or models based on, e.g., in vitro or in silico methods? This choice is influenced not only by personal beliefs and experience, but also by societal debates. Moreover, people often process information unconsciously. In this study, 13 people involved in relevant areas of research were interviewed. The responses were qualitatively assessed and subjected to an ethical analysis. This paper presents 66 reasons why researchers use animals (27 reasons) or alternative methods (39). Many reasons are tied to the work environment (29) and to scientific standards (22). Such reasons are often pragmatic and can only be influenced by individuals to a limited extent. Other reasons were assigned to personal attitudes (11) and animal welfare (4). Even if few reasons can be rejected outright from an ethical point of view, there are good reasons to give some more weight than others, as an exemplary discussion shows. The study raises awareness of the ethical decision-making process and the underlying reasons that we are often unaware of. This can help to reflect on and justify decisions. Abstract Background: Research model selection decisions in basic and preclinical biomedical research have not yet been the subject of an ethical investigation. Therefore, this paper aims, (1) to identify a spectrum of reasons for choosing between animal and alternative research models (e.g., based on in vitro or in silico models) and (2) provides an ethical analysis of the selected reasons. Methods: In total, 13 researchers were interviewed; the interviews were analyzed qualitatively. The ethical analysis was based on the principlism approach and a value judgement model. Results: This paper presents 66 reasons underlying the choice of researchers using animal (27 reasons) or alternative models (39). Most of the reasons were assigned to the work environment (29) and scientific standards (22). Other reasons were assigned to personal attitudes (11) and animal welfare (4). Qualitative relevant normative differences are presented in the ethical analysis. Even if few reasons can be rejected outright from an ethical point of view, there are good reasons to give some more weight than others. Conclusions: The spectrum of reasons and their ethical assessment provide a framework for reflection for researchers who may have to choose between animal models and (investing in) alternatives. This can help to reflect on and ethically justify decisions.
【저자키워드】 qualitative research, animal model, bioethics, animal research, basic and preclinical research, ethical reasoning, non-animal research model,