Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33649476›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2021

Optimism and pasture access in dairy cows.

Andrew Crump, Kirsty Jenkins, Emily J Bethell, Conrad P Ferris, Helen Kabboush, Jennifer Weller, Gareth Arnott

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
12.1field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

28 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 53 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Listen to Us: Perceptions of Animal Voice and Agency.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2023
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

7 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Andrew CrumpCentre for Philosophy of Natural and Social Science, London School of Economics and Political Science, London, UK. andrewcrump94@gmail.com.
Kirsty JenkinsInstitute for Global Food Security, School of Biological Sciences, Queen's University, Belfast, UK.
Emily J BethellSchool of Biological and Environmental Sciences, Liverpool John Moores University, Liverpool, UK.
Conrad P FerrisAgri-Food and Biosciences Institute, Hillsborough, UK.
Helen KabboushInstitute for Global Food Security, School of Biological Sciences, Queen's University, Belfast, UK.
Jennifer WellerCenter for Animal Welfare Science, Purdue University, West Lafayette, USA.
Gareth ArnottInstitute for Global Food Security, School of Biological Sciences, Queen's University, Belfast, UK.
Queen's University Belfast · GBAgri Food and Biosciences Institute · GBLiverpool John Moores University · GBLondon School of Economics and Political Science · GBPurdue University West Lafayette · US

Funding

European Research Council 851145
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Allowing dairy cattle to access pasture can promote natural behaviour and improve their health. However, the psychological benefits are poorly understood. We compared a cognitive indicator of emotion in cattle either with or without pasture access. In a crossover experiment, 29 Holstein-Friesian dairy cows had 18 days of overnight pasture access and 18 days of full-time indoor housing. To assess emotional wellbeing, we tested cows on a spatial judgement bias task. Subjects learnt to approach a rewarded bucket location, but not approach another, unrewarded bucket location. We then presented cows with three "probe" buckets intermediate between the trained locations. Approaching the probes reflected an expectation of reward under ambiguity-an "optimistic" judgement bias, suggesting positive emotional states. We analysed the data using linear mixed-effects models. There were no treatment differences in latency to approach the probe buckets, but cows approached the known rewarded bucket slower when they had pasture access than when they were indoors full-time. Our results indicate that, compared to cattle housed indoors, cattle with pasture access display less anticipatory behaviour towards a known reward. This reduced reward anticipation suggests that pasture is a more rewarding environment, which may induce more positive emotional states than full-time housing.

Identifiers

PMID33649476
PMCPMC7921385
OpenAlexW3134793497

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.