|
|
van de Waal, E., & Bshary, R. (2011). Social-learning abilities of wild vervet monkeys in a two-step task artificial fruit experiment. Anim Behav, 81.
|
|
|
|
Morand-Ferron, J., Cole, E. F., Rawles, J. E. C., & Quinn, J. L. (2011). Who are the innovators? A field experiment with 2 passerine species. Behav Ecol, 22.
|
|
|
|
A. Wiggins, & K. Crowston. (2011). From Conservation to Crowdsourcing: A Typology of Citizen Science. In 2011 44th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (pp. 1–10). 2011 44th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.
Abstract: Citizen science is a form of research collaboration involving members of the public in scientific research projects to address real-world problems. Often organized as a virtual collaboration, these projects are a type of open movement, with collective goals addressed through open participation in research tasks. Existing typologies of citizen science projects focus primarily on the structure of participation, paying little attention to the organizational and macrostructural properties that are important to designing and managing effective projects and technologies. By examining a variety of project characteristics, we identified five types-Action, Conservation, Investigation, Virtual, and Education- that differ in primary project goals and the importance of physical environment to participation.
|
|
|
|
Bücheler, T., & Sieg, J. H. (2011). Understanding Science 2.0: Crowdsourcing and Open Innovation in the Scientific Method. Proceedings of the 2nd European Future Technologies Conference and Exhibition 2011 (FET 11), 7, 327–329.
Abstract: The innovation process is currently undergoing significant change in many industries. The World Wide Web has created a virtual world of collective intelligence and helped large groups of people connect and collaborate in the innovation process [1]. Von Hippel [2], for instance, states that a large number of users of a given technology will come up with innovative ideas. This process, originating in business, is now also being observed in science. Discussions around “Citizen Science” [3] and “Science 2.0” [4] suggest the same effects are relevant for fundamental research practices. “Crowdsourcing” [5] and “Open Innovation” [6] as well as other names for those paradigms, like Peer Production, Wikinomics, Swarm Intelligence etc., have become buzzwords in recent years. However, serious academic research efforts have also been started in many disciplines. In essence, these buzzwords all describe a form of collective intelligence that is enabled by new technologies, particularly internet connectivity. The focus of most current research on this topic is in the for-profit domain, i.e. organizations willing (and able) to pay large sums to source innovation externally, for instance through innovation contests. Our research is testing the applicability of Crowdsourcing and some techniques from Open Innovation to the scientific method and basic science in a non-profit environment (e.g., a traditional research university). If the tools are found to be useful, this may significantly change how some research tasks are conducted: While large, apriori unknown crowds of “irrational agents” (i.e. humans) are used to support scientists (and teams thereof) in several research tasks through the internet, the usefulness and robustness of these interactions as well as scientifically important factors like quality and validity of research results are tested in a systematic manner. The research is highly interdisciplinary and is done in collaboration with scientists from sociology, psychology, management science, economics, computer science, and artificial intelligence. After a pre-study, extensive data collection has been conducted and the data is currently being analyzed. The paper presents ideas and hypotheses and opens the discussion for further input.
|
|
|
|
Holzapfel, M., Wagner, C., & Kluth, G. et al. (2011). Zur Nahrungsökologie der Wölfe (Canis lupus) in Deutschland. Beiträge zur Jagd- und Wildforschung, 36, 117–128.
|
|
|
|
Romero L. M. (2011). Using the reactive scope model to understand why stress physiology predicts survival during starvation in Galápagos marine iguanas. Gen Comp Endocrinol, .
Abstract: Even though the term “stress” is widely used, a precise definition is notoriously difficult. Notwithstanding this difficulty, stress continues to be an important concept in biology because it attempts to describe how animals cope with environmental change under emergency conditions. Without a precise definition, however, it becomes nearly impossible to make testable a priori predictions about how physiological and hormonal systems will respond to emergency conditions and what the ultimate impact on the animal will be. The reactive scope model is a recent attempt to formulate testable predictions. This model provides a physiological basis to explain why corticosterone negative feedback, but not baseline corticosterone concentrations, corticosterone responses to acute stress, or the interrenal capacity to secrete corticosterone, is correlated with survival during famine conditions in Galápagos marine iguanas. Reactive scope thus provides a foundation for interpreting and predicting physiological stress responses.
|
|
|
|
Burgon, H. L. (2011). ‘Queen of the world’: experiences of ‘at-risk’ young people participating in equine-assisted learning/therapy. Journal of Social Work Practice, 25(02), 165–183.
Abstract: There is a significant body of research into the benefits of animal-assisted therapy (AAT) but less into the fields known as equine-assisted learning and therapy (EAL/EAT) where horses are incorporated in therapeutic and learning interventions. This paper explores the experiences of seven ?at-risk? young people who participated in a therapeutic horsemanship (TH) programme. The study followed a practice-near approach seeking to capture the young people's experiences within a participative ethnography. Themes related to the risk and resilience literature such as self-confidence, self-esteem, self-efficacy and a sense of mastery, empathy and the opening of positive opportunities are explored in this paper.
|
|
|
|
Baragli, P., Mariti, C., Petri, L., De Giorgio, F., & Sighieri, C. (2011). Does attention make the difference? Horses' response to human stimulus after 2 different training strategies. J Vet Behav Clin Appl Res, 6(1), 31–38.
Abstract: We hypothesized that in an open environment, horses cope with a series of challenges in
their interactions with human beings. If the horse is not physically constrained and is free to move
in a small enclosure, it has additional options regarding its behavioral response to the trainer. The
aim of our study was to evaluate the influence of 2 different training strategies on the horse’s behavioral
response to human stimuli. In all, 12 female ponies were randomly divided into the following 2
groups: group A, wherein horses were trained in a small enclosure (where indicators of the level of
attention and behavioral response were used to modulate the training pace and the horse’s control over
its response to the stimuli provided by the trainer) and group B, wherein horses were trained in a closed
environment (in which the trainer’s actions left no room for any behavioral response except for the one
that was requested). Horses’ behavior toward the human subject and their heart rate during 2 standardized
behavioral tests were used to compare the responses of the 2 groups. Results indicated that the
horses in group A appeared to associate human actions with a positive experience, as highlighted by
the greater degree of explorative behavior toward human beings shown by these horses during the tests.
The experience of the horses during training may have resulted in different evaluations of the person, as
a consequence of the human’s actions during training; therefore, it seems that horses evaluate human
beings on daily relationship experiences.
|
|
|
|
Hartmann, E., Keeling, L. J., & Rundgren, M. (2011). Comparison of 3 methods for mixing unfamiliar horses (Equus caballus). J Vet Behav Clin Appl Res, 6(1), 39–49.
Abstract: Horses are likely to exhibit aggression when meeting for the first time. Therefore, this study compared 3 methods for mixing horses to evaluate their effectiveness in reducing aggressive interactions: (1) mixing pairs of horses in a paddock (P, 10 minutes, 15 tests), (2) introducing 1 unfamiliar horse to a pair of familiar, resident horses in a paddock (PP, 10 minutes, 15 tests), (3) allowing limited physical contact between pairs of horses for a short period of pre-exposure in neighboring boxes (B, 5 minutes, 16 tests) before mixing them in a paddock (BP, 10 minutes 16 tests). A total of 16 Swedish Standardbred mares, aged 6-18 years (mean age ± SD: 11 ± 4.4), were included in the study. Half of the horses were familiar with each other (resident horses, n = 8), whereas the other half were bought in from a variety of sources (unfamiliar horses, n = 8). Social interactions, consisting of behaviors from the sender, the receiver, and the subsequent sender's response, were recorded continuously as frequencies. There were no differences in the frequencies of aggressive behaviors between the 3 mixing methods, including those aggressive behaviors in which physical contact had been attempted (kick, strike). Although resident horses were overall more aggressive (median number of aggressive behaviors per horse, 62; Q1, 36; Q3, 68.5) than unfamiliar horses (median per horse, 4; Q1, 2; Q3, 12.5) during all tests (U = 97, P = 0.003), none of the 62 tests needed to be terminated. Unfamiliar horses did not receive more aggression from resident horses in PP (mean per test ± SD: 5.1 ± 3.1) than in P (mean per test ± SD: 6.4 ± 4.9) (t = 0.63, P = 0.544). However, the behavior “attack” was more frequent in PP (median per test, 2; Q1, 0; Q3, 5) than in P (median per test, 0; Q1, 0; Q3, 1) (U = 282, P = 0.042), and “flee” was more frequent in PP (median per test, 6; Q1, 4; Q3, 8) than in P (median per test, 1; Q1, 0; Q3, 6) (U = 290, P = 0.018). Pre-exposure in boxes did not reduce aggression in BP (median per test, 7; Q1, 4.3; Q3, 11.8) as compared with P (median per test, 6; Q1, 2; Q3, 16) (U = 264, P = 0.767), but during pre-exposure in B tests, horses exchanged more nonaggressive (median per test, 2; Q1, 0.3; Q3, 4) than aggressive (median frequency of aggressive behavior, 0; Q1, 0; Q3, 1) (W = 71, P = 0.013) and mixed interactions (median per test, 0; Q1, 0; Q3, 1) (W = 92, P = 0.016) through the opening. Results suggest mixing an unfamiliar horse with 2 resident horses at the same time instead of one by one may be preferable. In this way, the total aggression received by the unfamiliar horse will potentially be less, even though aggressive interactions may be more intense.
|
|
|
|
Riebli, T., Avgan, B., Bottini, A. - M., Duc, C., Taborsky, M., & Heg, D. (2011). Behavioural type affects dominance and growth in staged encounters of cooperatively breeding cichlids. Anim. Behav., 81(1), 313–323.
Abstract: In animals, behavioural properties such as aggressive propensity are often consistent over a life span, and they may form part of a behavioural syndrome. We studied how aggressive propensity influences dominance, contest behaviour and growth in the cooperatively breeding cichlid fish Neolamprologus pulcher. We tested whether intrinsic aggressive propensity (1) influences dominance in paired contests, (2) causes different aggression levels in contests with partners matched for aggressive propensity compared to unmatched partners, and how it (3) affects growth rate in groups that were either matched or unmatched for aggressive propensity. Intrinsic aggressive propensity was first scored with a mirror test and classified as high, medium or low. Thereafter we tested fish with either high or low aggressive propensity with partners matched for size and either matched or unmatched for aggressive type in a paired contest for a shelter. We scored dominance, aggression and submission. As predicted, (1) dominance was more clearly established in unmatched than in matched contests and (2) individuals with high aggressive propensity launched more attacks overall than fish with low intrinsic aggressiveness, suggesting a higher propensity to escalate independently of winning or losing the paired contest. However, contrary to expectation, (3) individuals with low aggressiveness grew faster than aggressive ones in unmatched groups, whereas the opposite occurred in matched groups. This suggests that individuals with low aggressive propensity may benefit from conflict evasion, which might allow them to gain dominance in the future owing to larger body size.
|
|
