Logo image
The sensitivity of QBA assessments of sheep behavioural expression to variations in visual or verbal information provided to observers
Journal article   Open access   Peer reviewed

The sensitivity of QBA assessments of sheep behavioural expression to variations in visual or verbal information provided to observers

P.A. Fleming, S.L. Wickham, C.A. Stockman, E. Verbeek, L. Matthews and F. Wemelsfelder
Animal, Vol.9(5), pp.878-887
2015
pdf
sensitivity_of_QBA_assessments.pdfDownloadView
Published (Version of Record) Open Access
url
Link to Published Version *Subscription may be requiredView

Abstract

Qualitative behavioural assessment (QBA) is based on observers’ ability to capture the dynamic complexity of an animal’s demeanour as it interacts with the environment, in terms such as tense, anxious or relaxed. Sensitivity to context is part of QBA’s integrative capacity and discriminatory power; however, when not properly managed it can also be a source of undesirable variability and bias. This study investigated the sensitivity of QBA to variations in the visual or verbal information provided to observers, using free-choice profiling (FCP) methodology. FCP allows observers to generate their own descriptive terms for animal demeanour, against which each animal’s expressions are quantified on a visual analogue scale. The resulting scores were analysed with Generalised Procrustes Analysis (GPA), generating two or more multi-variate dimensions of animal expression. Study 1 examined how 63 observers rated the same video clips of individual sheep during land transport, when these clips were interspersed with two different sets of video footage. Scores attributed to the sheep in the two viewing sessions correlated significantly (GPA dimension 1: r s=0.95, P<0.001, GPA dimension 2: r s=0.66, P=0.037) indicating that comparative rankings of animals on expressive dimensions were highly similar, however, their mean numerical scores on these dimensions had shifted (RM-ANOVA: Dim1: P<0.001, Dim2: P<0.001). Study 2 investigated the effect of being given different amounts of background information on two separate groups of observers assessing footage of 22 individual sheep in a behavioural demand facility. One group was given no contextual information regarding this facility, whereas the second group was told that animals were moving towards and away from a feeder (in view) to access feed. Scores attributed to individual sheep by the two observer groups correlated significantly (Dim1: r s=0.92, P<0.001, Dim2: r s=0.52, P=0.013). A number of descriptive terms were generated by both observer groups and used in similar ways, other terms were unique to each group. The group given additional information about the experimental facility scored the sheep’s behaviour as more ‘directed’ and ‘focused’ than observers who had not been told. Thus, in neither of the two studies did experimentally imposed variations in context alter the characterisations of animals relative to each other, but in Study 1 this did affect the mean numerical values underlying these characterisations, indicating a need for careful attention to the use of visual analogue scales.

Details

UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

This output has contributed to the advancement of the following goals:

#13 Climate Action

Source: InCites

Metrics

132 File views/ downloads
60 Record Views

InCites Highlights

These are selected metrics from InCites Benchmarking & Analytics tool, related to this output

Collaboration types
Domestic collaboration
International collaboration
Citation topics
3 Agriculture, Environment & Ecology
3.51 Dairy & Animal Sciences
3.51.799 Farm Animal Welfare
Web Of Science research areas
Agriculture, Dairy & Animal Science
Veterinary Sciences
ESI research areas
Plant & Animal Science
Logo image