Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-sjtt6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-03T07:27:24.808Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

‘Pleasures’,'Pains’ and Animal Welfare: Toward a Natural History of Affect

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 January 2023

D Fraser  and
I J H Duncan
D Fraser*
Affiliation:
Faculty of Agricultural Sciences and Centre for Applied Ethics, University of British Columbia, 2357 Main Mall, Vancouver V6T 1Z4, Canada
I J H Duncan
Affiliation:
Department of Animal and Poultry Science, University of Guelph, Guelph N1G 2W1, Canada
*
† Contact for correspondence and requests for reprints
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In hedonic theories of motivation, ‘motivational affective states’ (MASs) are typically seen as adaptations which motivate certain types of behaviour, especially in situations where a flexible or learned response is more adaptive than a rigid or reflexive one. MASs can be negative (eg unpleasant feelings of hunger or pain) or positive (eg pleasant feelings associated with eating and playing). Hedonic theories often portray negative and positive MASs as opposite ends of a one-dimensional scale.

We suggest that natural selection has favoured negative and positive affect as separate processes to solve two different types of motivational problems. We propose that negative MASs (eg thirst, fear) evolved in response to ‘need situations’ where the fitness benefit of an action has increased, often because the action is needed to cope with a threat to survival or reproductive success. We propose that these negative MASs develop in response to a change in the body (eg dehydration) or the environment (eg the approach of a predator) which creates the need for action, and that negative MASs can become intense and prolonged if the threat to fitness is high and persistent. We propose that positive MASs evolved in ‘opportunity situations ‘ where an action (eg playing, exploring) has become advantageous because the fitness cost of performing it has declined. We propose that these positive MASs occur during, or as a result of, the performance of types of behaviour which are beneficial for fitness at a variety of times, not only when they are required to meet immediate needs; and that the pleasure inherent in the behaviour motivates the animal to perform it when the cost of so doing is sufficiently low. Some behaviour (eg eating) can be motivated by both positive and negative affect. Other behaviour, such as playing or fleeing from a predator, may be motivated largely by positive or negative affect alone. Our hypothesis needs to be tested, but we suggest that it corresponds well to common human experience.

The hypothesis provides a basis for predicting whether an aspect of animal management is likely to cause strong and prolonged negative affect (‘suffering’), or to prevent animals from experiencing certain types of pleasure. This distinction is important for bringing animal welfare assessment into line with ethical concerns.

Keywords

affectanimal welfareemotionevolutionfitnessmotivationsuffering
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Welfare , Volume 7 , Issue 4 , November 1998 , pp. 383 - 396
Copyright
© 1998 Universities Federation for Animal Welfare

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Appleby, M C and Lawrence, A B 1987 Food restriction as a cause of stereotypic behaviour in tethered gilts. Animal Production 45: 103–110Google Scholar
Barnard, C J and Hurst, J L 1996 Welfare by design: the natural selection of welfare criteria. Animal Welfare 5: 405–433CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bentham, J 1823 An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation. Clarendon Press: Oxford, UKGoogle Scholar
Berridge, K C 1996 Food reward: brain substrates of wanting and liking. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews 20: 1–25CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bindra, D 1969 A unified interpretation of emotion and motivation. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 159: 1071–1083CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bridges, R 1912 Poetical Works of Robert Bridges. Oxford University Press: London, UK. (The passage quoted is from ‘To Robert Burns - An epistle on instinct’, originally published in 1902.)Google Scholar
Broom, DM 1991 Animal welfare: concepts and measurement. Journal of Animal Science 69: 4167–4175CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Broom, D M and Johnson, K G 1993 Stress and Animal Welfare. Chapman and Hall: London, UKCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burkhardt R W Jr 1997 The founders of ethology and the problem of animal subjective experience. In: Dol, M, Kasanmoentalib, S, Lijmbach, S, Rivas, E and van den Bos, R (eds) Animal Consciousness and Animal Ethics pp 1–13. Van Gorcum: Assen, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
Cabanac, M 1992 Pleasure: The common currency. Journal of Theoretical Biology 155: 173–200CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dawkins, M S 1980 Animal Suffering. Chapman and Hall: London, UKCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dawkins, M S 1990 From an animal's point of view: Motivation, fitness, and animal welfare. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 13: 1–9 and 54–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dennett, D C 1987 The Intentional Stance. MIT Press/Bradford Books: Cambridge, USAGoogle Scholar
Duncan, I J H 1970 Frustration in the fowl. In: Freeman, B M and Gordon, R F (eds) Aspects of Poultry Behaviour pp 15–31. British Poultry Science Ltd: Edinburgh, UKGoogle Scholar
Duncan, I J H 1992 Behavioral assessment of welfare. In: Mench, J A, Mayer, S J and Krulisch, L (eds) The Well-being of Agricultural Animals in Biomedical and Agricultural Research pp 62–68. Scientists’ Center for Animal Welfare: Washington, DC, USAGoogle Scholar
Duncan, IJH 1996 Animal welfare defined in terms of feelings. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, Section A, Animal Science, Supplement 27: 29–35Google Scholar
Duncan, IJH and Dawkins, M S 1983 The problem of assessing ‘well-being’ and ‘suffering’ in farm animals. In: Smidt, D (ed) Indicators Relevant to Farm Animal Welfare pp 13–24. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers: The Hague, The NetherlandsCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duncan, IJH and Fraser, D 1997 Understanding animal welfare. In: Appleby M C and Hughes B O (eds) Animal Welfare pp 19-31. CAB International: Wallingford, UKGoogle Scholar
Duncan, IJH and Kite, V G 1987 Some investigations into motivation in the domestic fowl. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 18: 387–388CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Epstein, A N 1982 Instinct and motivation as explanations for complex behaviour. In: Pfaff, D W (ed) The Physiological Mechanisms of Motivation pp 25–58. Springer: New York, USACrossRefGoogle Scholar
Follensbee, M E, Duncan, IJH and Widowski, T M 1992 Quantifying nesting motivation of domestic hens. Journal of Animal Science 70 (Supplement 1): 164Google Scholar
Fraser, D 1975 The ‘teat order’ of suckling pigs. II. Fighting during suckling and the effects of clipping the eye teeth. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 84: 393–399CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fraser, D 1980 A review of the behavioural mechanism of milk ejection of the domestic pig. Applied Animal Ethology 6: 247–255Google Scholar
Fraser, D 1990 Behavioural perspectives on piglet survival. Journal of Reproduction and Fertility, Supplement 40: 355–370Google ScholarPubMed
Fraser, D 1993 Assessing animal well-being: Common sense, uncommon science. In: Food Animal Well-being pp 37–54. Purdue University Office of Agricultural Research Programs: West Lafayette, USAGoogle Scholar
Fraser, D, Phillips, P A, Thompson, B K and Tennessen, T 1991 Effect of straw on the behaviour of growing pigs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 30: 307–318CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fraser, D and Thompson, B K 1986 Variation in piglet weights: Relationship to suckling behavior, parity number and farrowing crate design. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 66: 31–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fraser, D, Weary, D M, Pajor, E A and Milligan, B N 1997 A scientific conception of animal welfare that reflects ethical concerns. Animal Welfare 6: 187–205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilbert, A B and Wood-Gush, D G M 1965 The control of the nesting behaviour of the domestic hen. II. The effect of cocaine in the post-ovulatory follicle. Animal Behaviour 13: 284–285CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gray, JA 1987 The Psychology of Fear and Stress, 2nd edition. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UKGoogle Scholar
Haugeland, J 1993 Pattern and being. In: Dahlbom, B (ed) Dennett and his Critics: Demystifying Mind pp 53–69. Blackwell Publishers: Oxford, UKGoogle Scholar
Herrnstein, R J 1977 The evolution of behaviorism. American Psychologist 32: 593–603CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hughes, B O, Gilbert, A B and Brown, M F 1986 Categorisation and causes of abnormal egg shells: relationship with stress. British Poultry Science 27: 325–337CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hume, D 1777 (reprinted 1975) Enquiries Concerning Human Understanding and Concerning the Principles of Morals, 3rd edition. Clarendon Press: Oxford, UKGoogle Scholar
Izard, C E 1993 Four systems for emotion activation: Cognitive and noncognitive processes. Psychological Review 100: 68–90CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kenny, A 1970 Descartes’ Philosophical Letters. Clarendon: Oxford, UKGoogle Scholar
Lawrence, A B, Appleby, M C and Macleod, H A 1988 Measuring hunger in the pig using operant conditioning: the effect of food restriction. Animal Production 47: 131–137Google Scholar
Le Magnen, J 1985 Hunger. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UKGoogle Scholar
Martin, P and Caro, T M 1985 On the functions of play and its role in behavioral development. Advances in the Study of Behaviour 15: 59–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDougall, W 1926 An Introduction to Social Psychology, revised edition. John W Luce and Co: Boston, USAGoogle Scholar
McFarland, D 1981 The Oxford Companion to Animal Behaviour. Oxford University Press: Oxford, UKGoogle Scholar
McFarland, D 1985 Animal Behaviour: Psychology, Ethology and Evolution. Longman Scientific & Technical: Harlow, UKGoogle Scholar
McNamara J M and Houston A 1 1986 The common currency for behavioral decisions. American Naturalist 127: 358–378CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rollin, B E 1990 The Unheeded Cry. Oxford University Press: Oxford, UKGoogle Scholar
Romanes, G J 1884 (reprinted 1969). Mental Evolution in Animals. AMS Press: New York, USAGoogle Scholar
Solomon, R L and Corbit, J D 1974 An opponent process theory of motivation: 1. Temporal dynamics of affect. Psychological Review 81: 119–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spencer, H 1855 The Principles of Psychology. Longmen, Brown, Green, and Longmans: London, UKCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stephens, D W and Krebs, J R 1986 Foraging Theory. Princeton University Press: Princeton, USAGoogle Scholar
Toates, F 1986 Motivational Systems. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UKGoogle Scholar
Toates, F 1987 The relevance of models of motivation and learning to animal welfare. In: Wiepkema, P R and van Adrichem, P W M (eds) Biology of Stress in Farm Animals: An Integrative Approach pp 153–186. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers: Dordrecht, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
Wood-Gush, D G M 1969 Laying in battery cages. World's Poultry Science Journal 25: 145Google Scholar
Wood-Gush, D G M and Gilbert, A B 1969 Observations on the laying behaviour of hens in battery cages. British Poultry Science 10: 29–36CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Young, P T 1959 The role of affective processes in learning and motivation. Psychological Review 66: 104–125CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Young, P T 1973 Emotion in Man and Animal. Robert E Krieger Publishing Co: Huntington, USAGoogle Scholar