ArticleAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2019
Assessing and Enhancing the Welfare of Animals with Equivocal and Reliable Cues.
Article in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Anticipatory Behavior and Enrichment: Insights into Assessing and Managing Harbor Seal (Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025Article
- Anticipatory Behaviour During the Approach to Feeding Times as a Measure of Horse Welfare.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2024Article
- Human interventions in a behavioural experiment for Asian Elephants (Elephas maximus).Animal cognition · 2023Article
- Space, time, and context drive anticipatory behavior: Considerations for understanding the behavior of animals in human care.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2022Review
- Pasture access and eye temperature in dairy cows.Journal of applied animal welfare science : JAAWSArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The actions of human caretakers strongly influence animals living under human care. Here, we consider how intentional and unintentional signals provided by caretakers can inform our assessment of animals' well-being as well as help to support it. Our aim is to assist in further developing techniques to learn animals' affective state from their behavior and to provide simple suggestions for how animal caretakers' behavior can support animal welfare. We suggest that anticipatory behavior towards expected rewards is related to decision-making behavior as viewed through the cognitive bias lens. By considering the predictions of the theories associated with anticipatory behavior and cognitive bias, we propose to use specific cues to probe the cumulative affective state of animals. Additionally, our commentary draws on the logic of reward sensitivity and judgement bias theories to develop a framework that suggests how reliable and equivocal signals may influence animals' affective states. Application of this framework may be useful in supporting the welfare of animals in human care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.