|
|
Spinka, M., Duncan, I. J. H., & Widowski, T. M. (1998). Do domestic pigs prefer short-term to medium-term confinement? Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci., 58(3-4), 221–232.
Abstract: A preference test was used to demonstrate that gilts have the ability to associate two sets of neutral cues with two different periods of confinement and water deprivation and to anticipate the long-term consequences of their choice in the test. Twelve gilts housed in two large, straw-bedded pens were trained to go to two sets of 12 crates, positioned on each side of a choice point, for feeding twice a day. Following initial training, the two sets of crates were marked with contrasting visual patterns and the patterns were associated with either 30 min (`short' confinement) or 240 min (`long' confinement) of confinement in the crates after entry. During 16 days of preference testing, the gilts were sent alternately to one side or the other in the mornings and allowed to choose in the afternoons. Eight gilts chose the short confinement side more often, two, the long confinement side more often and two, each side an equal number of times, indicating that most gilts learned the association and preferred to be released shortly after feeding. However, gilts still chose the long confinement side on occasion, suggesting that they did not find 240 min of confinement very aversive. When the gilts were sent to the crates in the morning, their behaviour indicated that they expected to be released or confined depending on which crate they were in. The cognitive abilities of animals with respect to perception of time and anticipation of future events have important implications for their welfare. This study demonstrates that methods can be developed to ask animals about such things.
|
|
|
|
Dyer, F. C. (1998). Spatial Cognition: Lessons from Central-place Foraging Insects. In Russell P. Balda, Irene M. Pepperberg, & Alan C. Kamil (Eds.), Animal Cognition in Nature (pp. 119–154). London: Academic Press.
Abstract: Summary Spatial orientation has played an extremely important role in the development of ideas about the behavioral capacities of animals. Indeed, as the modern scientific study of animal behavior emerged from its roots in zoology and experimental psychology, studies of spatial orientation figured in the work of many of the pioneering researchers, including Tinbergen (), von ), Watson () and .
|
|
|
|
Smith, W. J. (1998). Cognitive Implications of an Information-sharing Model of Animal Communication. In Russell P. Balda, Irene M. Pepperberg, & Alan C. Kamil (Eds.), Animal Cognition in Nature (pp. 227–243). London: Academic Press.
Abstract: Summary In social communication, one animal signals and another responds. Several cognitive steps are involved as the second animal selects its responses; these steps can be described as follows in terms of an informational model. First, the responding individual must evaluate the information made available by the signaling on the basis of other information, available from sources contextual to the signal. Second, the respondent must fit all of the relevant information into patterns generated from recall of past events (conscious recall is not generally required; pattern fitting is a fundamental skill). Third, conditional predictions must be made; and fourth, the individual must test and modify any of these predictions for which significant consequences exist. Many vertebrate animals appear to respond to signaling with considerable flexibility. Communicative events are thus complex but are by no means intractable. Indeed, communication provides us with excellent opportunities to investigate animal cognition.
|
|
|
|
Beer, C. G. (1998). Varying Views of Animal and Human Cognition. In Russell P. Balda, Irene M. Pepperberg, & Alan C. Kamil (Eds.), Animal Cognition in Nature (pp. 435–456). London: Academic Press.
Abstract: Summary In this chapter I want to stand back from the splendid empirical work on animal cognitive capacities that is the focus of this book, and look at the broader context of cognitive concerns within which the work can be viewed. Indeed even the term `cognitive ethology' currently connotes and denotes more than is represented here, as other collections of articles, such as and , exemplify. I include the current descendants of behavioristic learning theory, evolutionary epistemology, evolutionary psychology and the recent comparative turn that has been taken in cognitive science. These several approaches, despite their considerable overlap, often appear independent and even ignorant of one another. Like the proverbial blind men feeling the hide of an elephant, they touch hands from time to time, yet collectively have only a piecemeal and distributed understanding of the shape of the whole. Although each approach may indeed need the space to work out its own conceptual and methodological preoccupations without confounding interference from other views, a utopian spirit envisages an ultimate coming together, a more comprehensive realization of the synthetic approach to animal cognition that is this book's theme.
|
|
|
|
McGlone, J. J., & Hicks, T. A. (1993). Teaching standard agricultural practices that are known to be painful. J. Anim Sci., 71(4), 1071–1074.
|
|
|
|
Olesen, I., Groen, A. F., & Gjerde, B. (2000). Definition of animal breeding goals for sustainable production systems. J. Anim Sci., 78(3), 570–582.
|
|
|
|
Walter, G., & Reisner, A. (1994). Student opinion formation on animal agriculture issues. J. Anim Sci., 72(6), 1654–1658.
|
|
|
|
Davis, S. L., & Cheeke, P. R. (1998). Do domestic animals have minds and the ability to think? A provisional sample of opinions on the question. J. Anim Sci., 76(8), 2072–2079.
|
|
|
|
Gonyou, H. W. (1994). Why the study of animal behavior is associated with the animal welfare issue. J. Anim Sci., 72(8), 2171–2177.
|
|
|
|
Croney, C. C., & Millman, S. T. (2007). BOARD-INVITED REVIEW: The ethical and behavioral bases for farm animal welfare legislation. J. Anim Sci., 85(2), 556–565.
Abstract: Concerns about farm animal welfare vary among individuals and societies. As people increasingly consider the values underlying current farm animal production methods, farm animal welfare policy debates have escalated. Recent food animal protection policies enacted in the European Union have fueled highly contentious discussions about the need for similar legislative activity in the United States. Policymakers and scientists in the United States are apprehensive about the scientific assessment, validation, and monitoring of animal welfare, as well as the unforeseen consequences of moving too hastily toward legislating farm animal welfare. The potential impact of such legislation on producers, food prices, animals, and concerned citizens must also be considered. Balancing the interests of all stakeholders has therefore presented a considerable challenge that has stymied US policymaking. In this review, we examine the roles of ethics and science in policy decisions, discuss how scientific knowledge relative to animal behavior has been incorporated into animal welfare policy, and identify opportunities for additional refinement of animal welfare science that may facilitate ethical and policy decisions about animal care.
|
|
