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

PA Fleming, SL Wickham, CA Stockman, E Verbeek, L Matthews, F Wemelsfelder

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

9 Citations (Scopus)

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: rs = 0.95, P<0.001, GPA dimension 2: rs = 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: rs = 0.92, P<0.001, Dim2: rs = 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.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)878 - 887
Number of pages10
JournalAnimal
Volume9
Issue number5
DOIs
Publication statusFirst published - May 2015

Fingerprint

Sheep
Visual Analog Scale
Surgical Instruments
Analysis of Variance

Bibliographical note

1023365

Keywords

  • Free-choice profiling
  • Generalised Procrustes analysis (GPA)
  • Qualitative behaviour assessment (QBA)
  • Sheep
  • Visual analogue scale

Cite this

Fleming, PA ; Wickham, SL ; Stockman, CA ; Verbeek, E ; Matthews, L ; Wemelsfelder, F. / The sensitivity of QBA assessments of sheep behavioural expression to variations in visual or verbal information provided to observers. In: Animal. 2015 ; Vol. 9, No. 5. pp. 878 - 887.
@article{506d9347ed4c4f6e8ac864ca4adbd1d9,
title = "The sensitivity of QBA assessments of sheep behavioural expression to variations in visual or verbal information provided to observers",
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: rs = 0.95, P<0.001, GPA dimension 2: rs = 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: rs = 0.92, P<0.001, Dim2: rs = 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.",
keywords = "Free-choice profiling, Generalised Procrustes analysis (GPA), Qualitative behaviour assessment (QBA), Sheep, Visual analogue scale",
author = "PA Fleming and SL Wickham and CA Stockman and E Verbeek and L Matthews and F Wemelsfelder",
note = "1023365",
year = "2015",
month = "5",
doi = "10.1017/S1751731114003164",
language = "English",
volume = "9",
pages = "878 -- 887",
journal = "Animal",
issn = "1751-7311",
publisher = "Cambridge University Press",
number = "5",

}

The sensitivity of QBA assessments of sheep behavioural expression to variations in visual or verbal information provided to observers. / Fleming, PA; Wickham, SL; Stockman, CA; Verbeek, E; Matthews, L; Wemelsfelder, F.

In: Animal, Vol. 9, No. 5, 05.2015, p. 878 - 887.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - The sensitivity of QBA assessments of sheep behavioural expression to variations in visual or verbal information provided to observers

AU - Fleming, PA

AU - Wickham, SL

AU - Stockman, CA

AU - Verbeek, E

AU - Matthews, L

AU - Wemelsfelder, F

N1 - 1023365

PY - 2015/5

Y1 - 2015/5

N2 - 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: rs = 0.95, P<0.001, GPA dimension 2: rs = 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: rs = 0.92, P<0.001, Dim2: rs = 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.

AB - 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: rs = 0.95, P<0.001, GPA dimension 2: rs = 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: rs = 0.92, P<0.001, Dim2: rs = 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.

KW - Free-choice profiling

KW - Generalised Procrustes analysis (GPA)

KW - Qualitative behaviour assessment (QBA)

KW - Sheep

KW - Visual analogue scale

U2 - 10.1017/S1751731114003164

DO - 10.1017/S1751731114003164

M3 - Article

VL - 9

SP - 878

EP - 887

JO - Animal

JF - Animal

SN - 1751-7311

IS - 5

ER -