Animal personality in the management and welfare of pigs

Carly O'Malley*, SP Turner, RB D'Eath, Juan Steibel, Ronald Bates, Catherine Ernst, Janice Siegford

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalLiterature reviewResearchpeer-review

Abstract

Personality is defined as individual behavioral differences that are consistent over time and across contexts and is constructed from a number of underlying traits. Over the last 27 years, studies on pig personality have investigated links between personality traits and behavioral and physiological responses. The objective of this paper was to review the literature on personality studies in pigs. Eighty-three peer-reviewed research articles were included. The most common objective of these studies was to identify personality types in pigs by comparing their response across multiple situations. The relationship with physiological responses was the next most common objective. Results were difficult to compare as there was little consistency in terminology or experimental design across studies. Only 24.1% of the studies reported reliability and even fewer explicitly assessed validity. The backtest was the most common test (used in 67.5% of the studies), though it is unclear what specific trait is being measured. Classifying pigs as proactive or reactive personality types using the backtest was common, but the relationship between backtest results and other variables are inconsistent. The human approach, novel object, and food competition tests were also popular methods. Exploration, aggressiveness, reactivity to humans, and fearfulness were the most common personality traits studied in pig populations. There was moderate support for relationships with physiological responses. Personality was related to other behaviors, such as vocalizations and social aggression. Studies on genetic control are promising, with the heritability of personality traits falling within the range seen for other traits already selected for in pigs, suggesting these traits can be considered in breeding programs to improve welfare. Pigs with reactive personality types were more influenced by their housing environment than proactive pigs. Housing influenced reactive pigs’ immune response, manipulative oral behavior, response in cognitive tasks, play behavior, and gastric lesions, which has serious implications for the management of pigs. Few studies explored the predictive power of personality traits on future physiological or behavioral outcomes of pigs, however, there is support for the potential use of personality research in improving pig welfare and productivity. In order to move forward with this field, researchers need to agree on consistent terminology and methodologies, and investigate the reliability, validity, and practicality of common personality measures in pigs.
Original languageEnglish
Article number104821
JournalApplied Animal Behaviour Science
Volume218
Early online date11 Jun 2019
DOIs
Publication statusFirst published - 11 Jun 2019

Fingerprint

Personality
Swine
swine
animals
physiological response
terminology
Terminology
aggression
play activities
peers
fearfulness
Aggression
vocalization
Research
Reproducibility of Results
Individuality
lesions (animal)
Breeding
mouth
Stomach

Keywords

  • Pig
  • Personality
  • Coping style
  • Temperament
  • Behaviour type

Cite this

O'Malley, Carly ; Turner, SP ; D'Eath, RB ; Steibel, Juan ; Bates, Ronald ; Ernst, Catherine ; Siegford, Janice. / Animal personality in the management and welfare of pigs. In: Applied Animal Behaviour Science. 2019 ; Vol. 218.
@article{940cae6c48ee499097dafba9ad425994,
title = "Animal personality in the management and welfare of pigs",
abstract = "Personality is defined as individual behavioral differences that are consistent over time and across contexts and is constructed from a number of underlying traits. Over the last 27 years, studies on pig personality have investigated links between personality traits and behavioral and physiological responses. The objective of this paper was to review the literature on personality studies in pigs. Eighty-three peer-reviewed research articles were included. The most common objective of these studies was to identify personality types in pigs by comparing their response across multiple situations. The relationship with physiological responses was the next most common objective. Results were difficult to compare as there was little consistency in terminology or experimental design across studies. Only 24.1{\%} of the studies reported reliability and even fewer explicitly assessed validity. The backtest was the most common test (used in 67.5{\%} of the studies), though it is unclear what specific trait is being measured. Classifying pigs as proactive or reactive personality types using the backtest was common, but the relationship between backtest results and other variables are inconsistent. The human approach, novel object, and food competition tests were also popular methods. Exploration, aggressiveness, reactivity to humans, and fearfulness were the most common personality traits studied in pig populations. There was moderate support for relationships with physiological responses. Personality was related to other behaviors, such as vocalizations and social aggression. Studies on genetic control are promising, with the heritability of personality traits falling within the range seen for other traits already selected for in pigs, suggesting these traits can be considered in breeding programs to improve welfare. Pigs with reactive personality types were more influenced by their housing environment than proactive pigs. Housing influenced reactive pigs’ immune response, manipulative oral behavior, response in cognitive tasks, play behavior, and gastric lesions, which has serious implications for the management of pigs. Few studies explored the predictive power of personality traits on future physiological or behavioral outcomes of pigs, however, there is support for the potential use of personality research in improving pig welfare and productivity. In order to move forward with this field, researchers need to agree on consistent terminology and methodologies, and investigate the reliability, validity, and practicality of common personality measures in pigs.",
keywords = "Pig, Personality, Coping style, Temperament, Behaviour type",
author = "Carly O'Malley and SP Turner and RB D'Eath and Juan Steibel and Ronald Bates and Catherine Ernst and Janice Siegford",
year = "2019",
month = "6",
day = "11",
doi = "10.1016/j.applanim.2019.06.002",
language = "English",
volume = "218",
journal = "Applied Animal Behaviour Science",
issn = "0168-1591",
publisher = "Elsevier",

}

Animal personality in the management and welfare of pigs. / O'Malley, Carly; Turner, SP; D'Eath, RB; Steibel, Juan; Bates, Ronald; Ernst, Catherine; Siegford, Janice.

In: Applied Animal Behaviour Science, Vol. 218, 104821, 09.2019.

Research output: Contribution to journalLiterature reviewResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Animal personality in the management and welfare of pigs

AU - O'Malley, Carly

AU - Turner, SP

AU - D'Eath, RB

AU - Steibel, Juan

AU - Bates, Ronald

AU - Ernst, Catherine

AU - Siegford, Janice

PY - 2019/6/11

Y1 - 2019/6/11

N2 - Personality is defined as individual behavioral differences that are consistent over time and across contexts and is constructed from a number of underlying traits. Over the last 27 years, studies on pig personality have investigated links between personality traits and behavioral and physiological responses. The objective of this paper was to review the literature on personality studies in pigs. Eighty-three peer-reviewed research articles were included. The most common objective of these studies was to identify personality types in pigs by comparing their response across multiple situations. The relationship with physiological responses was the next most common objective. Results were difficult to compare as there was little consistency in terminology or experimental design across studies. Only 24.1% of the studies reported reliability and even fewer explicitly assessed validity. The backtest was the most common test (used in 67.5% of the studies), though it is unclear what specific trait is being measured. Classifying pigs as proactive or reactive personality types using the backtest was common, but the relationship between backtest results and other variables are inconsistent. The human approach, novel object, and food competition tests were also popular methods. Exploration, aggressiveness, reactivity to humans, and fearfulness were the most common personality traits studied in pig populations. There was moderate support for relationships with physiological responses. Personality was related to other behaviors, such as vocalizations and social aggression. Studies on genetic control are promising, with the heritability of personality traits falling within the range seen for other traits already selected for in pigs, suggesting these traits can be considered in breeding programs to improve welfare. Pigs with reactive personality types were more influenced by their housing environment than proactive pigs. Housing influenced reactive pigs’ immune response, manipulative oral behavior, response in cognitive tasks, play behavior, and gastric lesions, which has serious implications for the management of pigs. Few studies explored the predictive power of personality traits on future physiological or behavioral outcomes of pigs, however, there is support for the potential use of personality research in improving pig welfare and productivity. In order to move forward with this field, researchers need to agree on consistent terminology and methodologies, and investigate the reliability, validity, and practicality of common personality measures in pigs.

AB - Personality is defined as individual behavioral differences that are consistent over time and across contexts and is constructed from a number of underlying traits. Over the last 27 years, studies on pig personality have investigated links between personality traits and behavioral and physiological responses. The objective of this paper was to review the literature on personality studies in pigs. Eighty-three peer-reviewed research articles were included. The most common objective of these studies was to identify personality types in pigs by comparing their response across multiple situations. The relationship with physiological responses was the next most common objective. Results were difficult to compare as there was little consistency in terminology or experimental design across studies. Only 24.1% of the studies reported reliability and even fewer explicitly assessed validity. The backtest was the most common test (used in 67.5% of the studies), though it is unclear what specific trait is being measured. Classifying pigs as proactive or reactive personality types using the backtest was common, but the relationship between backtest results and other variables are inconsistent. The human approach, novel object, and food competition tests were also popular methods. Exploration, aggressiveness, reactivity to humans, and fearfulness were the most common personality traits studied in pig populations. There was moderate support for relationships with physiological responses. Personality was related to other behaviors, such as vocalizations and social aggression. Studies on genetic control are promising, with the heritability of personality traits falling within the range seen for other traits already selected for in pigs, suggesting these traits can be considered in breeding programs to improve welfare. Pigs with reactive personality types were more influenced by their housing environment than proactive pigs. Housing influenced reactive pigs’ immune response, manipulative oral behavior, response in cognitive tasks, play behavior, and gastric lesions, which has serious implications for the management of pigs. Few studies explored the predictive power of personality traits on future physiological or behavioral outcomes of pigs, however, there is support for the potential use of personality research in improving pig welfare and productivity. In order to move forward with this field, researchers need to agree on consistent terminology and methodologies, and investigate the reliability, validity, and practicality of common personality measures in pigs.

KW - Pig

KW - Personality

KW - Coping style

KW - Temperament

KW - Behaviour type

U2 - 10.1016/j.applanim.2019.06.002

DO - 10.1016/j.applanim.2019.06.002

M3 - Literature review

VL - 218

JO - Applied Animal Behaviour Science

JF - Applied Animal Behaviour Science

SN - 0168-1591

M1 - 104821

ER -