↓ Skip to main content

Judgement bias in goats (Capra hircus): investigating the effects of human grooming

Overview of attention for article published in PeerJ, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
41 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
113 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Judgement bias in goats (Capra hircus): investigating the effects of human grooming
Published in
PeerJ, October 2016
DOI 10.7717/peerj.2485
Pubmed ID
Authors

Luigi Baciadonna, Christian Nawroth, Alan G. McElligott

Abstract

Animal emotional states can be investigated by evaluating their impact on cognitive processes. In this study, we used a judgement bias paradigm to determine if short-term positive human-animal interaction (grooming) induced a positive affective state in goats. We tested two groups of goats and trained them to discriminate between a rewarded and a non-rewarded location over nine training days. During training, the experimental group (n = 9) was gently groomed by brushing their heads and backs for five min over 11 days (nine training days, plus two testing days, total time 55 min). During training, the control group (n = 10) did not experience any direct interaction with the experimenter, but was kept unconstrained next to him for the same period of time. After successful completion of the training, the responses (latency time) of the two groups to reach ambiguous locations situated between the two reference locations (i.e., rewarded/non-rewarded) were compared over two days of testing. There was not a positive bias effect after the animals had been groomed. In a second experiment, 10 goats were tested to investigate whether grooming induced changes in physiological activation (i.e., heart rate and heart rate variability). Heart rate increased when goats were groomed compared to the baseline condition, when the same goats did not receive any contact with the experimenter. Also, subjects did not move away from the experimenter, suggesting that the grooming was positively accepted. The very good care and the regular positive contacts that goats received from humans at the study site could potentially account for the results obtained. Good husbandry outcomes are influenced by animals' perception of the events and this is based on current circumstances, past experiences and individual variables. Taking into account animals' individual characteristics and identifying effective strategies to induce positive emotions could increase the understanding and reliability of using cognitive biases paradigms to investigate and promote animal welfare.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 41 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 113 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 2%
Italy 1 <1%
Unknown 110 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 18%
Student > Bachelor 19 17%
Researcher 16 14%
Student > Master 12 11%
Other 6 5%
Other 13 12%
Unknown 27 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 37 33%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 11 10%
Psychology 9 8%
Environmental Science 4 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 3%
Other 10 9%
Unknown 39 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 27. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 April 2024.
All research outputs
#1,428,503
of 25,200,621 outputs
Outputs from PeerJ
#1,496
of 15,036 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#25,350
of 326,739 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PeerJ
#32
of 319 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,200,621 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 15,036 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 326,739 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 319 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.