Housing and personality effects on judgement and attention biases in dairy cows

Abstract

Affective states can be inferred from responses to ambiguous and threatening stimuli, using Judgement Bias Tasks (JBTs) and Attention Bias Tasks (ABTs). We investigated the separate and interactive effects of personality and housing conditions on dairy cattle affective states. We assessed personality in 48 heifers using Open-Field, Novel-Object and Runway tests. Personality effects on responses to the JBT and to the ABT were examined when heifers were housed under reference conditions. Heifers were subsequently housed under positive or negative conditions, and housing effects on animal responses in both tasks were investigated while controlling for personality. A Principal Component Analysis revealed three personality traits labelled Activity, Fearfulness and Sociability. Under reference conditions, personality influenced heifers’ responses to the JBT and to the ABT, therefore questioning the tasks’ generalizability across individuals. Against expectations, housing did not influence responses to the JBT and heifers in the negative conditions looked at the threat later than heifers in the positive or reference conditions. More research is warranted to confirm the validity and the repeatability of the JBT and of the ABT as appropriate measures of affective states in dairy cows.

Competence to thrive: resilience as an indicator of positive health and positive welfare in animals

“…Genetic and phenotypic associations of a measured trait such as flight speed with productivity, meat quality, health and reproductive performance can be utilised in animal management and breeding programs (Haskell et al 2014). In contrast to assessment of one aspect of temperament via a single test, performance of animals in a suite of tests such as judgement bias and attention bias tests in cattle can be analysed to estimate the relative contribution of various aspects of temperament to the behaviours measured in each test (Kremer et al 2021). In this example, the authors concluded that differences among individuals in activity, fearfulness (the opposite of boldness) and sociability modulated their activity in the tests.…”

“…In this example, the authors concluded that differences among individuals in activity, fearfulness (the opposite of boldness) and sociability modulated their activity in the tests. Such studies contribute to the ongoing refinement of the general concept of temperament and methods for its assessment, and enable application of the general concept and the specific tests to questions, such as the influence of affective state on performance in the tests and, conversely, the utility of the tests to measure affective state when performance is conditioned on temperament scores (Kremer et al 2021). Ongoing interpretation of the relationships among behaviours, physiology, immune function and performance support refinement of the causal model of temperament to the concept of temperament as a distributed network property embedded in physiological, immunological and performance functions as well as in behaviour (Colditz 2021)…”

Repeatability of an attention bias test for sheep suggests variable influence of state and trait affect on behaviour

“…Studies in humans have associated attention bias to threat with differences in both trait ( Bar-Haim et al, 2007 ) and state anxiety ( Quigley et al, 2012 ; Nelson et al, 2015 ). However, the relationship between personality or temperament traits and responses during attention bias testing has been scarcely examined in animals (parrots: Cussen & Mench, 2014 ; pigs: Luo et al, 2019 ; macaques: Howarth et al, 2021 ; cows: Kremer et al, 2021 ) and not yet studied in sheep. Studies examining repeatability of animal responses during consecutive attention bias tests can begin to provide information on which aspects of an animal’s affective state or personality most strongly influence animal behaviour in the test, by supporting or opposing temporal stability of behaviour, as a key aspect of personality.…”

Limitations of Spatial Judgment Bias Test Application in Horses (Equus ferus caballus)

“…In addition, there is a strong relationship between personality and emotional states. Stable personality traits can affect mood and this can influence the decision-making process and JBT results [ 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 ]. For example, proactive pigs seem to have an optimistic judgment of ambiguous cues [ 16 ], while fearful and inactive heifers are more pessimistic than inactive non-fearful heifers [ 15 ].…”

“…Stable personality traits can affect mood and this can influence the decision-making process and JBT results [ 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 ]. For example, proactive pigs seem to have an optimistic judgment of ambiguous cues [ 16 ], while fearful and inactive heifers are more pessimistic than inactive non-fearful heifers [ 15 ]. In addition, dogs scoring higher in negative personality traits (fear, aggression, and anxiety) are more likely to judge an ambiguous stimulus negatively, while dogs with higher sociability scores are more optimistic [ 14 ].…”