|
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.
|
|
|
Duncan, I. J. H. (1995). D.G.M. Wood-Gush Memorial Lecture: An applied ethologist looks at the question “Why?”. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci., 44(2-4), 205–217.
Abstract: The question “Why does an animal behave as it does?” can be answered in terms of ontogeny, function, phylogeny and causation. The achievements of applied ethology relative to those four approaches are reviewed, gaps in our knowledge are identified and predictions for fruitful avenues of future research are made. Ontogenic studies have been useful in the past and it is suggested that studies of the effects of early experience on the sexual behaviour of animals used in artificial breeding schemes might pay dividends. It is proposed that functional studies should be approached cautiously. More information is required on the process of domestication in order to increase the chances of success in the trend to farm exotic species. Studies on causation are likely to continue to be the mainstay of applied ethological research. It is suggested that within this category, studies on states of suffering, motivation and cognition are urgently required to answer the most pressing questions on animal welfare.
|
|
|
Heyes, C. M. (1993). Imitation, culture and cognition. Anim. Behav., 46(5), 999–1010.
Abstract: Abstract. This paper examines the significance of imitation in non-human animals with respect to the phylogenetic origins of culture and cognitive complexity. It is argued that both imitation (learning about behaviour through nonspecific observation) and social learning (learning about the environment through conspecific observation) can mediate social transmission of information, and that neither is likely to play an important role in supporting behavioural traditions or culture. Current evidence suggests that imitation is unlikely to do this because it does not insulate information from modification through individual learning in the retention period between acquisition and re-transmission. Although insignificant in relation to culture, imitation apparently involves complex and little-understood cognitive operations. It is unique in requiring animals spontaneously to equate extrinsic visual input with proprioceptive and/or kinaesthetic feedback from their own actions, but not in requiring or implicating self-consciousness, representation, metarepresentation or a capacity for goal-directed action.
|
|
|
Duncan, I. J. H., & Petherick, J. C. (1989). Proceeding (Paper presented at the Winter Meeting of the Society for Veterinary Ethology, London, Great Britain, 30 November 1988)Cognition: The implications for animal welfare. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci., 24(1), 81–1010.
|
|
|
Walker, S. (1989). An introduction to animal cognition : By . Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum (1988). Pp. viii + 328. Price [pound sign]8.95 paperback. Anim. Behav., 37(Part 3), 521–522.
|
|
|
Inglis, I. (1985). H.L. Roitblat, T.G. Bever and H.S. Terrace, Editors, Animal Cognition, Lawrence Erlbaum, New Jersey (1984), p. 682. Anim. Behav., 33(1), 344–345.
|
|
|
McFarland, D. J. (1984). Roger L. Mellgren, Editor, Animal Cognition and Behavior, North-Holland, Amsterdam (1983), p. xi. Anim. Behav., 32(2), 634–635.
|
|