Literature DB >> 34982301

A promising novel judgement bias test to evaluate affective states in dogs (Canis familiaris).

Carlotta Burani1,2, Annalisa Pelosi3, Paola Valsecchi4.   

Abstract

The judgement bias test represents one of the most applied tools to evaluate animals' optimistic/pessimistic attitude and to infer their emotional and welfare state accordingly. The judgement bias test (JBT) has been used several times with dogs (Canis familiaris), in most cases using a spatial test that evaluates the dog's attitude towards a bowl placed in ambiguous positions (located between two unambiguous trained positions associated with opposite outcomes). Results are contrasting and methodological and statistical caveats emerged: dogs struggled to learn the association between unambiguous positions and their outcomes, they hardly discriminated between adjacent locations and they might be influenced by researchers. Therefore, we propose a novel paradigm, aimed at easing the learning process and at achieving more reliable measures. Improvements of the novel paradigm are the increased difference between payoffs of trained locations, the reduction of the number of trials and of their length and the removal of the potential influence of researchers. Results showed that 98% of dogs reached the learning criterion and that their learning appeared more stable: dogs behaved differently between the two trained stimuli and the variability of responses towards these stimuli was lower than the one towards ambiguous stimuli. Behavioural analyses confirmed that dogs fully learned outcomes associated with trained stimuli and that they were hesitant towards ambiguous stimuli. Furthermore, dogs managed to successfully discriminate between each pair of adjacent locations. These results suggest that this protocol is a promising tool to assess judgement biases in dogs and to evaluate their affective state.
© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Dog; Emotion; Judgement bias; Optimism; Pessimism; Welfare

Mesh:

Year:  2022        PMID: 34982301     DOI: 10.1007/s10071-021-01596-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Anim Cogn        ISSN: 1435-9448            Impact factor:   2.899


  24 in total

1.  Animal behaviour: cognitive bias and affective state.

Authors:  Emma J Harding; Elizabeth S Paul; Michael Mendl
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2004-01-22       Impact factor: 49.962

2.  Anxiety, depression, and the anticipation of future positive and negative experiences.

Authors:  A K MacLeod; A Byrne
Journal:  J Abnorm Psychol       Date:  1996-05

3.  Attentional bias in emotional disorders.

Authors:  C MacLeod; A Mathews; P Tata
Journal:  J Abnorm Psychol       Date:  1986-02

4.  Evaluation of a novel translational task for assessing emotional biases in different species.

Authors:  Michael H Anderson; Chloë Hardcastle; Marcus R Munafò; Emma S J Robinson
Journal:  Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci       Date:  2012-06       Impact factor: 3.282

5.  Oxytocin induces positive expectations about ambivalent stimuli (cognitive bias) in dogs.

Authors:  Anna Kis; Anna Hernádi; Orsolya Kanizsár; Márta Gácsi; József Topál
Journal:  Horm Behav       Date:  2014-12-18       Impact factor: 3.587

6.  Magnitude of negative interpretation bias depends on severity of depression.

Authors:  Jong-Sun Lee; Andrew Mathews; Sukhi Shergill; Jenny Yiend
Journal:  Behav Res Ther       Date:  2016-05-26

7.  Agitated honeybees exhibit pessimistic cognitive biases.

Authors:  Melissa Bateson; Suzanne Desire; Sarah E Gartside; Geraldine A Wright
Journal:  Curr Biol       Date:  2011-06-21       Impact factor: 10.834

8.  Personality traits affecting judgement bias task performance in dogs (Canis familiaris).

Authors:  Shanis Barnard; Deborah L Wells; Adam D S Milligan; Gareth Arnott; Peter G Hepper
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2018-04-27       Impact factor: 4.379

9.  Evidence that emotion mediates social attention in rhesus macaques.

Authors:  Emily J Bethell; Amanda Holmes; Ann Maclarnon; Stuart Semple
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-08-30       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 10.  Modelling cognitive affective biases in major depressive disorder using rodents.

Authors:  Claire A Hales; Sarah A Stuart; Michael H Anderson; Emma S J Robinson
Journal:  Br J Pharmacol       Date:  2014-07-01       Impact factor: 8.739

View more
  1 in total

1.  The effect of repeated testing on judgement bias in domestic dogs (Canis familiaris).

Authors:  Clara Wilson; Nathan Hall; Edgar O Aviles-Rosa; Kerry Campbell; Gareth Arnott; Catherine Reeve
Journal:  Anim Cogn       Date:  2022-09-12       Impact factor: 2.899

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.