↓ Skip to main content

A Framework to Assess the Impact of New Animal Management Technologies on Welfare: A Case Study of Virtual Fencing

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Veterinary Science, August 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (62nd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (64th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
60 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
76 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A Framework to Assess the Impact of New Animal Management Technologies on Welfare: A Case Study of Virtual Fencing
Published in
Frontiers in Veterinary Science, August 2018
DOI 10.3389/fvets.2018.00187
Pubmed ID
Authors

Caroline Lee, Ian G. Colditz, Dana L. M. Campbell

Abstract

To be ethically acceptable, new husbandry technologies and livestock management systems must maintain or improve animal welfare. To achieve this goal, the design and implementation of new technologies need to harness and complement the learning abilities of animals. Here, from literature on the cognitive activation theory of stress (CATS), we develop a framework to assess welfare outcomes in terms of the animal's affective state and its learned ability to predict and control engagement with the environment, including, for example, new technologies. In CATS, animals' perception of their situation occurs through cognitive evaluation of predictability and controllability (P/C) that influence learning and stress responses. Stress responses result when animals are not able to predict or control both positive and negative events. A case study of virtual fencing involving avoidance learning is described. Successful learning occurs when the animal perceives cues to be predictable (audio warning always precedes a shock) and controllable (operant response to the audio cue prevents receiving the shock) and an acceptable welfare outcome ensues. However, if animals are unable to learn the association between the audio and shock cues, the situation retains low P/C leading to states of helplessness or hopelessness, with serious implications for animal welfare. We propose a framework for determining welfare outcomes and highlight examples of how animals' cognitive evaluation of their environment and their ability to learn relates to stress responses. New technologies or systems should ensure that predictability and controllability are not at low levels and that operant tasks align with learning abilities to provide optimal animal welfare outcomes.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 76 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 76 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 12 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 14%
Student > Master 10 13%
Student > Bachelor 6 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 4%
Other 9 12%
Unknown 25 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 32 42%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 5 7%
Environmental Science 3 4%
Computer Science 2 3%
Psychology 2 3%
Other 5 7%
Unknown 27 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 June 2019.
All research outputs
#7,060,251
of 23,096,849 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Veterinary Science
#1,233
of 6,392 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#122,438
of 333,742 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Veterinary Science
#30
of 90 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,096,849 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,392 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 333,742 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 90 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.