ReviewAnimal welfare (South Mimms, England)2024
Expanding perspectives and understanding relational potential: Are mutually beneficial human-animal relationships compatible with current animal agricultural practices?
Review in Animal welfare (South Mimms, England), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Step Too Far? Public Perceptions on Navigating the Introduction of Robot Technologies into the Human-Animal Relationship in Agriculture.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026Article
- The 3Fs as conditions of being: relational ontology and equine welfare in disaster response and reconciliation.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Animal agriculture employs approximately one-eighth of world's human population and results in the slaughter of over 160 billion animals annually, representing perhaps the most extensive intertwining of human and animal lives on the planet. In principle, close, intersubjective relationships (involving shared attention and mental states) between humans and the animals in agriculture are possible, though these are infrequently studied and are unlikely to be achieved in farming, given systemic constraints (e.g. housing and management). Much scientific research on human-animal relationships within agriculture has focused upon a fairly restricted range of states (e.g. reducing aversive human-animal interactions within standard systems, toward improving productivity and reducing injuries to workers). Considering human-animal relations along a continuum, we review scholarship supporting the rationale for expanding the range of relationships under consideration in animal welfare research, given the impacts these relationships can have on both animals and stockpersons, increasing consumer demand for humane food products, and the goal of providing animals under our care with good lives. Looking toward traditions that encourage taking the perspective of, and learning from non-humans, we provide entry points to approaches that can enable animal welfare research to expand to investigate a broader range of human-animal relationship states. By showing the potential for close mutually beneficial human-animal relationships, this line of research highlights pathways for understanding and improving the welfare of animals used in agriculture.
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.