Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T09:20:44.622Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Interpretation of ambiguous spatial stimuli in cats

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2023

G Tami ,
C Torre ,
M Compagnucci  and
X Manteca
G Tami*
Affiliation:
Carrer de les Arts 16, Corbera de Llobregat, Barcelona 08757, Spain Department de Ciencia Animal y de los Alimentos, Facultat de Veterinària, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona 08193, Spain
C Torre
Affiliation:
Affinity Petcare, Pl Xavier Cugat, 2-Edificio D, 3a Planta, St Cugat Nord 08174, Spain
M Compagnucci
Affiliation:
Affinity Petcare, Pl Xavier Cugat, 2-Edificio D, 3a Planta, St Cugat Nord 08174, Spain
X Manteca
Affiliation:
Department de Ciencia Animal y de los Alimentos, Facultat de Veterinària, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona 08193, Spain
*
* Contact for correspondence and requests for reprints: [email protected]
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

The aim of this paper was to develop a protocol to study the interpretation of ambiguous stimuli in cats as a measure of welfare. Ten cats were trained to discriminate between a rewarded position (R) and an unrewarded one (U), as measured by the approach latency for each position. After discrimination, they were exposed to three ambiguous unrewarded positions (R-near, R/U-equidistant, U-near) distributed at intermediate points between R and U. Approach latency increased as increasing the distance from the rewarded position: latencies to approach R and R-near were significantly shorter than for R/U-equidistant, U-near and U. This protocol should be further studied to assess its effectiveness in highlighting differences according to the welfare level of individual cats.

Keywords

animal welfarecatcat cognitioncognitive biasinterpretation of ambiguous stimulispatial location
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Welfare , Volume 20 , Issue 2 , May 2011 , pp. 185 - 189
Copyright
© 2011 Universities Federation for Animal Welfare

References

Burman, OHP, Parker, R, Paul, ES and Mendl, M 2008 A spatial judgement task to determine background emotional state in laboratory rats, Rattus norvegicus. Animal Behaviour 76: 801–809CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carlstead, K, Brown, JL and Strawn, W 1993 Behavioral and physiological correlates of stress in laboratory cats. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 38: 143–158CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Casey, RA and Bradshaw, JWS 2007 The assessment of welfare. In: Rochlitz, I (ed) The Welfare of Cats pp 23–46. Springer: The NetherlandsCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gunn-Moore, D, Moffat, K, Christe, LA and Head, E 2007 Cognitive dysfunction and the biology of ageing in cats. Journal of Small Animal Practice 48: 546–553CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harding, E, Paul, ES and Mendl, M 2004 Cognitive bias and affective state. Nature 427: 312CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Harrison, J and Buchwald, J 1983 Eyeblink conditioning deficits in the old cat. Neurobiology of Aging 4: 45–51CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kessler, MR and Turner, DC 1997 Stress and adaptation of cats (Felis silvestris catus) housed singly, in pairs and in groups in boarding catteries. Animal Welfare 6: 243–254Google Scholar
Levine, MS, Lloyd, RL, Fisher, RS, Hull, CD and Buchwald, NA 1987 Sensory, motor and cognitive alterations in aged cats. Neurobiology of Aging 8: 253–263CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McCune, S, Stevenson, J, Fretwell, L, Thompson, A and Mills, DS 2008 Ageing does not significantly affect performance in a spatial learning task in the domestic cat (Felis silvestris catus). Applied Animal Behaviour Science 112: 345–356CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mendl, M, Burman, O, Laughlin, K and Paul, E 2001 Animal memory and animal welfare. Animal Welfare 10: S141–S159Google Scholar
Nygren, TE, Isen, AM, Taylor, PJ and Dulin, J 1996 The influence of positive affect on the decision rule in risk situations. Organizational Behaviour and Human Decision Processes 66: 59–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olton, DS and Samuelson, RJ 1976 Remembrance of places passed; spatial memory in rats. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes 2: 97–116Google Scholar
Paul, ES, Harding, EJ and Mendl, M 2005 Measuring emotional processes in animals: the utility of a cognitive approach. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews 29: 469–491CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Segerstrom, SC 2001 Optimism and attentional bias for negative and positive stimuli. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 27: 1334–1343CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spruijt, BM, van den Bos, R and Pijlman, FTA 2001 A concept of welfare based on reward evaluating mechanisms in the brain: anticipatory behaviour as an indicator for the state of reward systems. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 72: 145–171CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thorpe, CM, Petrovic, V and Wilkie, DM 2002 How rats process spatiotemporal information in the face of distraction. Behavioural Processes 58: 79–90CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
van den Bos, R, Meijer, MK, van Renselaar, JP, van der Harst, JE and Spruijt, BM 2003 Anticipation is differently expressed in rats (Rattus norvegicus) and domestic cats (Felis silvestris catus) in the same Pavlovian conditioning paradigm. Behavioural Brain Research 141: 83–89Google Scholar
Van der Harst, JE, Fermont, PCJ, Bilstra, AE and Spruijt, BM 2003 Access to enriched housing is rewarding to rats as reflected by their anticipatory behaviour. Animal Behaviour 66: 493–504CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilner, P, Muscat, R and Papp, M 1992 Chronic mild stress-induced anhedonia: a realistic animal model of depression. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews 16: 525–534CrossRefGoogle Scholar