Judgement Bias Test Research Articles

Effect of pre-session discrimination training on performance in a judgement bias test in dogs

Spatial judgement bias tests (JBTs) can involve teaching animals that a bowl provides a reward in one location but does not in another. The animal is then presented with the bowl placed between the rewarded and the unrewarded locations (i.e., ambiguous locations) and their latency to approach reflects expectation of reward or ‘optimism’. Some suggest that greater ‘optimism’ indicates better welfare. Performance in JBTs, however, may also indicate a learning history independently from welfare determinants. We hypothesized that dogs’ ‘optimism’ in a follow-up JBT may be impacted by a learning treatment involving additional trials of a different discrimination task. Once enrolled, companion dogs (n = 16) were required to complete three study phases: (1) a pre-treatment JBT, (2) a learning treatment, and (3) a post-treatment JBT. During the JBTs, dogs were presented with five locations: one rewarded, one unrewarded, and three ambiguous (all unrewarded). Dogs were randomly assigned to a trial-based learning task—a nose-touch to the palm of the hand. In the Experimental discrimination treatment phase (n = 8), dogs were presented with two hands in each trial and only rewarded for touching one specific hand. In the Control treatment phase (n = 8), dogs were presented with one hand per trial in alternating sequence and were yoked to dogs in the Experimental group to receive the same number of rewarded and unrewarded trials (to control for possible frustration). Using a repeated measures mixed model with JBT repeated within dog, we found no difference in the change in approach latency to the ambiguous locations between the dogs across treatments. ‘Optimism’ as measured in this JBT was not altered by the additional discrimination trials used in our study.

Physically stressed bees expect less reward in an active choice judgement bias test.

Emotion-like states in animals are commonly assessed using judgment bias tests that measure judgements of ambiguous cues. Some studies have used these tests to argue for emotion-like states in insects. However, most of these results could have other explanations, including changes in motivation and attention. To control for these explanations, we developed a novel judgment bias test, requiring bumblebees to make an active choice indicating their interpretation of ambiguous stimuli. Bumblebees were trained to associate high or low rewards, in two different reward chambers, with distinct colours. We subsequently presented bees with ambiguous colours between the two learnt colours. In response, physically stressed bees were less likely than control bees to enter the reward chamber associated with high reward. Signal detection and drift diffusion models showed that stressed bees were more likely to choose low reward locations in response to ambiguous cues. The signal detection model further showed that the behaviour of stressed bees was explained by a reduction in the estimated probability of high rewards. We thus provide strong evidence for judgement biases in bees and suggest that their stress-induced behaviour is explained by reduced expectation of higher rewards, as expected for a pessimistic judgement bias.

Pecking up Optimism: Learning Opportunities Improve Mood for Sanctuary-Living Cornish Cross Chickens

ABSTRACT Understanding what influences mood (optimism/pessimism) is crucial in determining whether environments are conducive to positive welfare. This study explores the impact of learning opportunities on mood in Cornish Cross chickens (also known as “broiler chickens”), of which over nine billion individuals are raised annually for meat in the United States. We predicted that access to learning opportunities promotes optimism in these chickens. We conducted yoked-control design experimental trials and two judgment bias tests (baseline and post-experimental) with eight adult sanctuary-living hens. There were significant post-experimental between-group differences in mood, with those who had access to learning opportunities experiencing greater optimism than those who did not. These results suggest that learning and the ability to control access to rewards may contribute positively to the welfare of Cornish Cross chickens.

Are lateralized and bold fish optimistic or pessimistic?

Cognitive bias is defined as the influence of emotions on cognitive processes. The concept of the cognitive judgement bias has its origins in human psychology but has been applied to animals over the past 2 decades. In this study we were interested in determining if laterality and personality traits, which are known to influence learning style, might also be correlated with a cognitive bias in the three-spined sticklebacks (Gasterosteus aculeatus). We used the judgement bias test with the go/no-go procedure where fish were first trained to discriminate between a black and white card and, after reaching a minimum learning criterion, tested their response to an ambiguous card (grey). Optimistic subjects were expected to have a high expectation of reward associated with an ambiguous stimulus, whereas pessimistic subjects a high expectation of non-reward. We used an emergence and a mirror test to quantify boldness and laterality, respectively. We hypothesised that male, bolder and more strongly lateralized fish would be more optimistic than female, shy and less strongly lateralised fish. We found that males and more strongly lateralized fish were more optimistic than females and less strongly lateralized fish. In addition, bold males were more optimistic than shy males as we predicted, but females showed the opposite pattern. Finally, fish trained on the black colour card learned the training task faster than those trained on a white card. Our results indicate that both laterality and personality traits are linked to animals’ internal states (pessimistic or optimistic outlooks) which likely has broad implications for understanding animal behaviour particularly in a welfare context.

Lack of reinforcement is hard to “bear”: Assessing judgment bias in grizzly bears (Ursus arctos horribilis)

ABSTRACT Cognitive biases reveal underlying affective state by indicating optimism and pessimism. This methodology may permit assessment of positive welfare in animals that have few validated positive welfare indicators, such as bears. Our goal was to validate a judgment bias test for assessing optimism in brown bears, using a touchscreen. After training the bears on a conditional discrimination, we compared responses to an ambiguous stimulus in a 2 × 2 nested design involving four experimental conditions representing presence or absence of a behind-the-scenes tour and presence or absence of a keeper training session with food reinforcement. We recorded bears’ behavior during the conditions as a measure of convergent validity. Testing revealed the possibility of pessimism in the absence of reinforcement in one bear. More frustration behaviors were also observed during the no food reinforcement conditions. This is the first experimental demonstration of brown bears using a touchscreen and one of only three reports in which bears have been reported to perform a conditional discrimination. This method of assessing underlying affective state shows promise for the future.

Unexpected appetitive events promote positive affective state in juvenile European sea bass

Some animal species exhibit considerable physiological and behavioural alterations in response to captivity. It has been hypothesized, but rarely tested, that such changes reflect a negative affective state that is associated to this specific context. In the last years, judgement bias measures have emerged as reliable indicators of animal affective state, under the assumption that individuals in a negative affective state are more likely to evaluate ambiguous stimuli as negative and display therefore pessimistic behaviours. Here, we have developed a judgement bias task for juvenile European sea bass (Dicentrarchus labrax) aiming to measure optimism/pessimism in this marine species, which have previously been reported to show important dysregulations in captive settings. Our results show that juvenile sea bass exhibit a considerable bias towards pessimistic behaviours in laboratory settings. Furthermore, juveniles that received an unexpected positive event during the judgement bias test displayed more optimistic responses toward ambiguous stimuli as compared to control fish, indicating a positive change in their affective state induced by the appetitive experience. These results reveal a direct interaction of the internal affective state with decision-making processing under ambiguity in juvenile European sea bass, highlighting therefore the potential of judgement bias tests as a tool for the advancement and improvement of our understanding of welfare in finfish aquaculture.

Assessing the emotional states of dairy cows housed with or without their calves

There is growing interest in keeping dairy cows with their calves. Cow-calf contact or lack thereof is expected to affect emotional states, but this requires empirical testing. Different types of cow-calf contact may also affect the emotional states of cows. The primary objective of this study was to assess the emotional state of dairy cows with full-time (23 h/d), part-time (10 h/d), or no contact with their calves (separated 48 h after birth), using a visual judgement bias test (JBT) about one month after calving; JBT is the current gold-standard method to assess emotional state in animals by evaluating optimism or pessimism (illustrated by the proverbial half-full or half-empty water glass). The secondary objective was to compare outcomes of color- versus shape-based visual JBT. Fifty dairy cows were trained to approach a positive image on a screen (rewarded with food) and to avoid a negative image (else punished with waving bag). Once learned (>80% correct over 2 consecutive days), cows were presented with 3 ambiguous images (each presented once per day among 4 positive and 3 negative images, repeated over 4 d), and their approach responses recorded. For the color method (10 full-time, 9 part-time and 11 no-contact cows), positive and negative images were a solid red or white background; ambiguous images were shades of pink. For the shape method (8 full-time, 6 part-time and 6 no-contact cows), positive and negative images were a white circle or cross on a black background; ambiguous images were overlaid circle and cross in varying shades of gray. Cows learned to discriminate colors quicker than shapes (7.3 d, CL: 6.6 - 8.2 d; vs. 9.3 d, CL: 8.1 - 10.6 d; P = 0.01). Approaches to ambiguous colors followed a generalization curve (81.0, 33.1 and 5.0 ± 3.7% for near-positive, middle and near-negative images, respectively), but not approaches to ambiguous shapes (31.9, 25.7 and 21.9 ± 4.8%, respectively), indicating colors over shapes should be used in visual JBT for cattle. Part-time cows approached fewer ambiguous color images than full-time cows (23.5%, CL: 13.4 - 34.4%; vs. 44.8%, CL; 32.8 - 57.1%; P = 0.02) while no-contact cows were intermediate, but not different from full-time or part-time cows (37.8%, CL; 26.8 - 49.5%; P > 0.08). The color JBT results show a pessimistic bias (indicating a negative emotional state) in cows with part-time calf contact, possibly due to repeated daily separation from her young calf, relative to cows with full-time calf contact. Thus, cow-calf contact systems appear to influence the emotional state of cows depending on the practice. Cows without calf contact showed no difference in judgement bias between cows with full- or part-time calf contact, suggesting these cows probably do not experience a pervasive negative emotional state (relative to those with calf contact) approximately 30 d after calf separation. However, individual variability in judgement bias was evident for all treatments. The visual judgement bias test is a useful methodology for assessing emotional states of dairy cows; future research should prioritize understanding the emotional states of dairy cows in alternative management systems.

Fearful snake pictures make monkeys pessimistic

Judgment bias is the cognitive tendency of animals experiencing negative (or positive) affect to expect undesirable (or favorable) outcomes in ambiguous situations. The lack of examination of judgment biases induced by ecologically relevant stimuli hampers our understanding of the adaptive role of these biases. We examined whether predator-related stimuli, i.e., pictures of snakes, induce a pessimistic judgment bias in Japanese macaques (Macaca fuscata). Our subjects underwent a touchscreen-based Go/No-go judgment bias test. We found that the subjects were less likely and slower to make Go responses to ambiguous stimuli after viewing the snake pictures, indicating that pictures of snakes induce a pessimistic evaluation of ambiguous stimuli. In environments with high levels of threat, behavioral strategies that reduce risk-taking would be evolutionarily advantageous. Hence, an affective response system that lowers expectations of favorable outcomes in ambiguous situations after encountering threat-related stimuli would serve adaptive purposes, such as curbing excessive exploratory behavior.

Tickling and its effects on the affective states of laying hens

Human-animal interactions may significantly influence the productivity and welfare of animals in the livestock industry. The nature of manipulation influences the physiology and behaviour of animals positively or negatively. To improve animal welfare, it is important to not only reduce unwanted negative states (fear, pain, suffering) but also to induce positive affective states in animals. Tickling has been described in multiple studies to evoke positive affective states in rats. We tested whether a similar form of tactile stimulation induces changes in the valence of affective states of laying hens using an operant judgement bias test. Sixteen laying hens housed in deep litter pens were divided into two groups with different forms of manipulation: a handled group (n = 8) or a tickled group (n = 8). First, the animals were trained to discriminate between the positive (PS, pecks rewarded with mealworms) and negative stimuli (NS, pecks punished with white noise) in a visual discrimination task (Go/NoGo). They were then subjected to the judgement bias test, in which responses to PS, NS and ambiguous middle stimulus (MS) were recorded. All hens successfully learned to discriminate between PS and NS. The treatment did not induce changes in judgement bias test performance. Tickling in the manner we administered it and applied in adulthood, did not appear to be perceived by hens as a positive event. The treatment did not affect judgement because the behavioural assay was not sensitive enough to detect a possible effect, or chickens did not find the tickling as administered to be positive enough. Perhaps the other more playful interactions with hens, a larger dosage or the treatment at an early period of life could have greater impact.

Social-pair judgment bias testing in slow-growing broiler chickens raised in low- or high-complexity environments

Impacts of environmental complexity on affective states in slow-growing broiler chickens (Gallus gallus domesticus) are unknown. Chickens’ performance in judgment bias tests (JBT) can be limited as they are tested individually, causing fear and anxiety. The objectives were to apply a social-pair JBT to assess the effect of environmental complexity on slow-growing broiler chickens` affective states, and assess the impact of fearfulness, anxiety, and chronic stress on JBT performance. Six-hundred Hubbard Redbro broilers were housed in six low-complexity (similar to commercial) or six high-complexity (permanent and temporary enrichments) pens. Twelve chicken pairs were trained (1 pair/pen, n = 24 chickens) using a multimodal approach (visual and spatial cues), with reward and neutral cues of opposing color and location. Three ambiguous cues were tested: near-positive, middle, and near-neutral cues. Approach and pecking behavior were recorded. Eighty-three percent of chickens (20/24) were successfully trained in 13 days. Fearfulness, anxiety, and chronic stress did not impact chickens’ performance. Chickens successfully discriminated between cues. Low-complexity chickens approached the middle cue faster than high-complexity chickens, indicating that they were in a more positive affective state. The environmental complexity provided in this study did not improve affective states in slow-growing broiler chickens compared to a control. A social-pair JBT resulted in excellent learning and testing outcomes in slow-growing broilers.

Affective trajectories: Are hens influenced by positive and negative changes in their living conditions?

Most studies of the effects of housing and husbandry on animals' affective states and welfare investigate the impact of stable living conditions, comparing for example, animals living in enriched environments with those living in non-enriched ones. Changes in living conditions, including from more to less enriched environments, have also been found to have effects on measures of affective state and welfare in some species. But these studies have not investigated whether it is the trajectory of change that has affected the animals (e.g., worsening conditions), or simply the nature of their final environment (e.g., non-enriched). Here, we hypothesised that laying hens living in worsening conditions across a six-week period (gradually moving from preferred to non-preferred living conditions; "Trajectory to Non-Preferred", TNP, n = 30), would show evidence of more negative affective states and poorer welfare than those living continuously in non-preferred conditions for the same duration ("Stable Non-Preferred", SNP, n = 30). We also hypothesised that hens living in improving conditions (gradually moving from non-preferred to preferred living conditions; "Trajectory to Preferred", TP, n = 30), would show evidence of more positive affective states and better welfare than those living continuously in preferred conditions ("Stable Preferred", SP, n = 30). The preferred living condition provided extensive resources and intermittent rewarding events (such as the delivery of food treats) known to be valued and preferred by most hens, while the non-preferred living condition provided just basic resources and intermittent aversive events (e.g., loud noises). The hens' affective states and welfare were measured using home-pen behavioural observations, body condition assessments, physiological stress measures (e.g., blood corticosterone, glucose, etc.), physical challenge tests, and judgement bias tests. A number of differences between hens in the trajectory and stable living conditions were found: TP hens were lighter, showed more foraging behaviour and less standing alert and head-shaking than SP hens, while TNP hens showed more head-shaking, mild feather pecking and aggressive attacking of pen mates than SNP hens. However, some of these differences failed to reach significance following Benjamini adjustments for multiple testing. The groups also did not differ in their judgement biases (measured in a sub-sample of 12 hens per experimental group), response to physical challenges, or measures of physiological stress. We conclude that the hens in the present study showed some evidence of responsiveness to 'affective trajectories' in their living conditions, but no definitive effects on their affective states and welfare.

Is the judgment bias test a good tool to assess the quality of horse management?

Animal welfare should include the possibility of animals experiencing positive emotions. Emotions influence the cognitive process, and judgment bias tests (JBTs) are employed in different species, to assess the optimistic or pessimistic expectation of an individual and its affective state. Only recently the JBTs have been applied to horses. This research aims to investigate the relationship between a spatial JBT and hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis (HPA) chronic and acute activation in forty-one animals hosted in different kinds of environments: traditional stables (TS), natural boarding (NB), and ethological stable (ES). Fecal (FC) and horsehair (HC) cortisol concentrations were quantified for each subject through Radio-Immuno-Assay (RIA). Body condition score (BCS), as an indirect index of animal motivation towards food, and personality traits were measured to explore their possible influence on JBT results. Horses had to distinguish a positive position (P), where a bucket full of food was positioned, from a negative one (N), with an empty bucket. Then, 3 intermediate positions (Near Negative-NN, Near positive-NP, and Medium-M) with an empty bucket were presented to the subject one at a time. Only 20 subjects out of 41 completed the JBT and were included in the statistical analysis, and both BCS and P position, whether at the right or the left of the subject, seems to have influenced the inclusion rate. Only the ES group registered a significantly lower score in NN, suggesting a more optimistic affective state, whereas NB and TS did not significantly differ in their responses. Despite this, horses from NB recorded higher FC concentration than TS subjects during all the phases of the test, but lower HC levels, which could suggest a generally lower level of chronic stress but its interpretation presents several confounding factors. These results put into question whether JBT is indeed a good test to monitor the quality of the management, as it does not seem to reflect the chronic physiological state of the animals and could be influenced by a state of acute stress, caused by the test procedure. Due to these confounding factors, this procedure should be accompanied by other indicators. Finally, to include more animals and exclude possible biases, the structure of the JBT and the employment of food as a reward should be evaluated considering the peculiarities of the species and individual motivations.

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

Affective states are of increasing interest in the assessment of animal welfare. This research aimed to evaluate the possible limitations in the application of a spatial judgment bias test (JBT) in horses, considering the influence of stress level, personality traits, and the possible bias due to the test structure itself. The distinction between two positions, one rewarded (Positive) and the other not (Negative), was learned by 10 horses and 4 ponies,. Then, the latency to reach three unrewarded ambiguous positions (Near Positive, Middle, Near Negative) was measured. Furthermore, the validated Equine Behavior Assessment and Research Questionnaire (E-BARQ) was employed to assess personality traits. Fecal and hair cortisol levels were measured through radioimmunoassay (RIA), and the frequency of behavioral stress indicators was recorded. Results showed that horses that had the rewarded position (Positive) on the right approached Near Negative and Middle faster than those that had Positive on the left. Certain personality traits influenced the latency to reach Middle and Near Positive, but chronic stress did not seem to affect horses' judgment bias. This preliminary study highlighted several limitations in the employment of spatial JBT for the assessment of affective state in horses and that personality traits can partially influence the cognitive process. Further research is needed to refine the use of this test in horses, considering the peculiarities both of species and of individuals.

Transcriptional profiles in the mouse amygdala after a cognitive judgment bias test largely depend on the genotype.

Background: The amygdala is crucial for emotional cognitive processing. Affective or emotional states can bias cognitive processes, including attention, memory, and decision-making. This can result in optimistic or pessimistic behaviors that are partially driven by the activation of the amygdala. The resulting emotional cognitive bias is a common feature of anxiety and mood disorders, both of which are interactively influenced by genetic and environmental factors. It is also known that emotional cognitive biases can be influenced by environmental factors. However, little is known about the effects of genetics and/or gene-environment interactions on emotional cognitive biases. We investigated the effects of the genetic background and environmental enrichment on the transcriptional profiles of the mouse amygdala following a well-established cognitive bias test. Methods: Twenty-four female C57BL/6J and B6D2F1N mice were housed either in standard (control) conditions or in an enriched environment. After appropriate training, the cognitive bias test was performed on 19 mice that satisfactorily completed the training scheme to assess their responses to ambiguous cues. This allowed us to calculate an "optimism score" for each mouse. Subsequently, we dissected the anterior and posterior portions of the amygdala to perform RNA-sequencing for differential expression and other statistical analyses. Results: In general, we found only minor changes in the amygdala's transcriptome associated with the levels of optimism in our mice. In contrast, we observed wide molecular effects of the genetic background in both housing environments. The C57BL/6J animals showed more transcriptional changes in response to enriched environments than the B6D2F1N mice. We also generally found more dysregulated genes in the posterior than in the anterior portion of the amygdala. Gene set overrepresentation analyses consistently implicated cellular metabolic responses and immune processes in the differences observed between mouse strains, while processes favoring neurogenesis and neurotransmission were implicated in the responses to environmental enrichment. In a correlation analysis, lipid metabolism in the anterior amygdala was suggested to influence the levels of optimism. Conclusions: Our observations underscore the importance of selecting appropriate animal models when performing molecular studies of affective conditions or emotional states, and suggest an important role of immune and stress responses in the genetic component of emotion regulation.

Cognitive bias in animal behavior science: a philosophical perspective

Emotional states of animals influence their cognitive processes as well as their behavior. Assessing emotional states is important for animal welfare science as well as for many fields of neuroscience, behavior science, and biomedicine. This can be done in different ways, e.g. through assessing animals’ physiological states or interpreting their behaviors. This paper focuses on the so-called cognitive judgment bias test, which has gained special attention in the last 2 decades and has become a highly important tool for measuring emotional states in non-human animals. However, less attention has been given to the epistemology of the cognitive judgment bias test and to disentangling the relevance of different steps in the underlying cognitive mechanisms. This paper sheds some light on both the epistemology of the methods and the architecture of the underlying cognitive abilities of the tested animals. Based on this reconstruction, we propose a scheme for classifying and assessing different cognitive abilities involved in cognitive judgment bias tests.

Can Early Environmental Enrichment Buffer Stress from Commercial Hatchery Processing in Laying Hens?

Under commercial conditions, laying hen chicks are exposed to a range of stressful events immediately after hatch. Here, we studied whether environmental enrichment was able to reduce the stress sensitivity of these chicks. A total of 50 hatchery chicks (HC) and 50 control chicks (CC) were raised in enriched pens (E), while 53 HC + 53 CC were raised in standard non-enriched floor pens (NE). HC weighed less on day one, but there was no effect of hatchery treatment at later ages. HC were more pessimistic in a cognitive judgement bias test and emitted more distress calls when socially isolated, indicating that hatchery stress affected behaviour and stress sensitivity. However, enrichment did not affect the behaviour in any of these tests. We found no effects of hatchery stress in a novel environment, but indications that enrichment may have increased fearfulness of HC. The sensitivity of the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis was reduced in HC-E compared to HC-NE, indicating that enrichment buffered the physiological stress sensitivity in HC; however, the opposite pattern was found in CC. In conclusion, our results show complex and somewhat contradictory effects on the ability of enrichment to buffer the consequences of stress in commercial hatcheries.

Impact of environmental complexity and stocking density on affective states of rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss).

Environmental condition, such as environmental complexity or stocking density, can directly or indirectly influence animal emotion and ultimately, affective state. Affective states of animals can be assessed through judgement bias tests, evaluating responses to ambiguous situations. In this study, we aimed to determine whether environmental complexity and stocking density impacted rainbow trout affective state. Rainbow trout (n = 108) were housed in recirculating aquaculture systems under commercial conditions while trained at tank-level to discriminate between a positively reinforced chamber (feed) in one location and a negative chamber (positive punishment; chase by net for 1s) in the opposing location. Fish from successful tanks (two out of five tanks) were then housed in treatment tanks of either high- or low- environmental complexity at either high (165 fish/m3) or low (69 fish/m3) stocking density. Trained fish were tested for latencies to approach three intermediate, ambiguous chambers. Fish housed in high-density tanks were faster to enter all chambers than those housed in low-density tanks (8.5s vs. 15.2s; P = 0.001), with faster entries into the positive (7.4s vs. 15.2s; P = 0.02) and near-negative chambers (10.2s vs. 17.4s; P = 0.006), suggesting that these fish were more optimistic to receive a feed reward. Tank complexity did not affect test outcomes. No differences between treatments were observed between body weight, length, and plasma cortisol. Overall, rainbow trout are capable of discriminating between cues during a judgement bias test and fish housed in high-density environments respond more optimistically in ambiguous situations compared to fish in low-density environments.

How Inhibitory Control Relates to Positive and Negative Affective States in Red Junglefowl.

Individual differences in inhibitory control, an aspect of cognition, are found in many species. How this variation links to affective states is not much explored, and could be relevant for welfare. As less fearful, more optimistic, individuals may act more impulsively, inhibitory control could link to less negative, more positive, affective states. Alternatively, poorer inhibitory control could associate with more negative, less positive, affective states, as poorer inhibitory control can result in individuals being less able to adapt to changing environments and more likely to show stereotypies. We here explored in three cohorts (N = 209) of captive red junglefowl, the ancestor of domestic chickens, how inhibitory control associated with affective states. Specifically, we measured inhibitory control with a detour task, and negative and positive affective states with a tonic immobility test and a cognitive judgement bias test, respectively. Cognition and behaviour can differ between ages and sexes. Therefore, we investigated how inhibitory control related to affective states in younger chicks (≈2.5 weeks old), older chicks (≈5 weeks old) and sexually mature adults (≈28 weeks old) of both sexes. In younger chicks, poorer inhibitory control associated with less negative, more positive, affective states. We found no relationship between inhibitory control and affective states in older chicks or adults, nor sex differences regarding how inhibitory control related to affective states. Overall, our results suggest that inhibitory control can link to affective states and that the nature of these links can change over ontogeny.

Judgement bias of group housed gestating sows predicted by behavioral traits, but not physical measures of welfare.

Judgement bias testing has emerged as a potential tool for assessing affective states in animals. Researchers infer an animal's affective state based on an animal's response to an ambiguous stimulus that is intermediate to both the rewarded and punished conditioned stimuli. Animals can be classified as "optimistic" or having a positive affective state if the animal displays behaviors that suggest an increased expectation of reward in the face of ambiguous stimuli. Alternatively, animals can be classified "pessimistic" or having a negative affective state if the animal displays behaviors that suggest an increased expectation of punishment in the face of ambiguous stimuli. Recent reports in multiple species question what factors influence performance in judgement bias testing, and which may allow for erroneous conclusions regarding individual affective state. In order to better understand this concern, 25 female swine were subjected to behavioral assessments at critical rearing stages to determine response variability. These same individuals were then assessed for physical measures of welfare and judgement bias using the "go/no-go" task as breeding adults. Sows which were more aggressive approached the ambiguous, but not the positive, stimulus significantly faster than others. Both optimistic and pessimistic biases were observed despite all sows living in enriched housing, and, sows with more positive physical welfare measures (fewer skin lesions and healthy body condition) did not exhibit more optimistic judgement biases. Our data demonstrate that behavior traits, such as aggressiveness, can affect a sow's performance in a judgement bias test, while measures of physical health did not. We suggest that individual differences in behavior (e.g., bold-aggressive behavioral syndrome, or, proactive coping style) generate different emotional responses and can contribute to the animal's overall affective state more so than physical ailment. Our findings highlight the complexity of how different factors impact an animal's overall affective state and support the need for complementary measures in future JBT studies, including personality assessment.

A promising novel judgement bias test to evaluate affective states in dogs (Canis familiaris).

The judgement bias test represents one of the most applied tools to evaluate animals' optimistic/pessimistic attitude and to infer their emotional and welfare state accordingly. The judgement bias test (JBT) has been used several times with dogs (Canis familiaris), in most cases using a spatial test that evaluates the dog's attitude towards a bowl placed in ambiguous positions (located between two unambiguous trained positions associated with opposite outcomes). Results are contrasting and methodological and statistical caveats emerged: dogs struggled to learn the association between unambiguous positions and their outcomes, they hardly discriminated between adjacent locations and they might be influenced by researchers. Therefore, we propose a novel paradigm, aimed at easing the learning process and at achieving more reliable measures. Improvements of the novel paradigm are the increased difference between payoffs of trained locations, the reduction of the number of trials and of their length and the removal of the potential influence of researchers. Results showed that 98% of dogs reached the learning criterion and that their learning appeared more stable: dogs behaved differently between the two trained stimuli and the variability of responses towards these stimuli was lower than the one towards ambiguous stimuli. Behavioural analyses confirmed that dogs fully learned outcomes associated with trained stimuli and that they were hesitant towards ambiguous stimuli. Furthermore, dogs managed to successfully discriminate between each pair of adjacent locations. These results suggest that this protocol is a promising tool to assess judgement biases in dogs and to evaluate their affective state.