Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29954151›Full record

ReviewAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2018

Cognitive Bias in Zoo Animals: An Optimistic Outlook for Welfare Assessment.

Isabella L K Clegg

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Stress, Well-Being, and Reproduction in Wildlife.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2026
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Modifying the Attention Bias Test to Assess the Emotional State of Dogs.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Zoo Animal Welfare Assessment: Where Do We Stand?Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2023
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Where Do We Stand in the Domestic Dog (Frontiers in psychology · 2020
    Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Isabella L K CleggAnimal Welfare Expertise (www.animalwelfareexpertise.com), 81 Alderney St, London SW1V 4HF, UK. izziclegg@hotmail.co.uk.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cognitive bias testing measures how emotional states can affect cognitive processes, often described using the “glass half-full/half-empty” paradigm. Classical or operant conditioning is used to measure responses to ambiguous cues, and it has been reported across many species and contexts that an animal’s cognitive bias can be directly linked to welfare state, e.g., those in better welfare make more optimistic judgements. Cognitive bias testing has only recently been applied to animals and represents a key milestone in welfare science: it is currently one of the only accurate methods available to measure welfare. The tests have been conducted on many farm, laboratory, and companion animal species, but have only been carried out in zoo settings a handful of times. The aims of this review are to evaluate the feasibility of cognitive bias testing in zoos and its potential as a tool for studying zoo animal welfare. The few existing zoo cognitive bias studies are reviewed, as well as those conducted on similar, non-domesticated species. This work is then used to discuss how tests could be successfully designed and executed in zoo settings, which types of tests are most appropriate in different contexts, and how the data could be used to improve animal welfare. The review closely examines the many variables are present in the zoo which cannot be controlled as in other settings, termed here the Zoo Environment (ZE) Variables. It is recommended that tests are developed after consideration of each of the ZE Variables, and through strong collaboration between zookeepers, managers, and academic institutions. There is much unexplored potential of cognitive bias testing in the zoo setting, not least its use in investigating animal welfare in zoos. It is hoped that this review will stimulate increased interest in this topic from zoo managers, scientists, and industry regulators alike.

Indexed as

affective stateanimal-based measuresanimal welfarecognitive biaszoo animals

Identifiers

PMID29954151
PMCPMC6071086

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.