ArticleAnimal cognition2026
Comparing behavioural sampling methods in shelter dogs: implications for enrichment studies.
Article in Animal cognition, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Animals living in human-dominated environments often face constrains on expression of natural behavioural repertoire and compromised welfare. Domestic dogs (Canis lupus familiaris) housed in shelters provide a valuable model for examining both welfare outcomes and methodological approaches to behavioural assessment in an artificial, and human organised, setting. Here we evaluate behavioural sampling methods within an ecologically valid experimental framework. Specifically, we compared continuous recording (CR) and instantaneous sampling (IS; 15s, 30s, and 6s intervals) following enrichment manipulation, reflecting a real-world research context for behavioural data collection. From a methodological perspective, results showed that IS systematically underestimated behavioural expression compared to CR, with increasing underestimation from IS-15 to IS-60. Regarding enrichment, using CR as the most reliable approach, we investigated the short-term behavioural effects of social interaction with conspecifics and food-based olfactory stimulation. We found that, while overall behavioural repertoires did not differ markedly between enrichment conditions, inactive lying increased following social interaction compared to olfactory enrichment. Stress-related behaviours were rare, indicating that neither enrichment type was aversive and that both social and olfactory enrichment can be safely implemented in shelters. Our findings highlight the importance of aligning sampling methods with specific research aims and behavioural outcomes and inform the implementation of different enrichment programs in shelter dogs. This integrated approach aligns with the principle of reduction by maximising information from a single dataset, allowing methodological and experimental conclusions under realistic conditions.
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.