Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35255158›Full record

ArticleZoo biology2022

Differing animal welfare conceptions and what they mean for the future of zoos and aquariums, insights from an animal welfare audit.

Jake S Veasey

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Zoo biology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
7.9field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 35 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Behavioral Coding of Captive African Elephants (Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2024
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Pain Research and Treatment: Policy Implications.Policy insights from the behavioral and brain sciences · 2024
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Invisible Invertebrates: The Welfare of Invertebrates in Public Aquaria.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2023
    Article
  12. Fish Welfare in Public Aquariums and Zoological Collections.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2023
    Article
  13. Integrating Individual Animal and Population Welfare in Zoos and Aquariums.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2023
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Jake S VeaseyCare for the Rare c/o, School of Animal, Nottingham Trent University, Nottingham, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4989-061X
Nottingham Trent University · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Animal welfare is a growing public concern that has the potential to undermine the social license of zoos and aquariums. The lack of consensus on how animal welfare is defined across such a diverse sector combined with and a widespread belief that commercial priorities such as entertaining visitors conflicts with animal welfare, hinders efforts to effectively address this fundamental issue for the sector. Data derived from an audit of habitats across a major North American wildlife attraction revealed that holistic animal welfare assessments undertaken by animal carers embracing three principal constructs of animal welfare, correlated strongly with visitor perceptions of animal happiness. Visitor assessments of animal happiness also correlated with animal carer assessments of social, behavioural and locomotor opportunities and inversely with the prevalence of stereotypic behaviours, supporting the proposition that folk conceptions of animal welfare are more accurate than may have previously been considered to be the case. However, the holistic animal welfare assessment inversely correlated with assessments of a habitat's capacity to safeguard welfare as determined by the facility's veterinary staff, supporting the proposition that tensions exist between physical and psychological components of captive animal welfare provisioning. This further underlines the importance of clarity on how animal welfare is conceived when developing institutional animal welfare strategies. Finally, the data also showed that both holistic animal welfare assessments and visitor perceptions of animal happiness strongly correlated with the level of enjoyment experienced by visitors, challenging the belief that animal welfare competes with the commercial priorities of zoos and aquariums. The audit supports the case that maintaining high animal welfare is a commercial imperative as well as a moral obligation for zoos and aquariums and underlines the necessity to utilize conceptions of animal welfare that acknowledge the centrality of the affective states of animals in maintaining those standards.

Indexed as

Animals, ZooAnimal WelfareAnimalsStereotyped Behavioraffective statesphysical healthpsychological wellbeingpublic opinionstereotypiesveterinary

Identifiers

PMID35255158
PMCPMC9543569
OpenAlexW4221129761

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.