Cited by 94Animal Behavior and Welfare StudiesHuman-Animal Interaction StudiesPrimate Behavior and Ecology

A comparative approach to the study of Keeper–Animal Relationships in the zoo

Carlstead, Kathy·2009·Zoo Biology

Abstract

Research on intensively farmed animals over the past 25 years has shown that human-animal interactions, by affecting the animal's fear of humans, can markedly limit the productivity and welfare of farm animals. This article begins to explore some of the factors that need to be considered to investigate Keeper-Animal Relationships (KARs) in the zoo. In the mid-1990s, a large body of multi-institutional data on zookeepers and animals was collected from 46 Zoos. Using standardized questionnaires, 82 keepers rated how they behaved towards animals, their husbandry routine, how the animal responds to them and to other people, and provided information about themselves. These data include 219 individuals of four endangered species: black rhinoceros, cheetah, maned wolf, and great hornbill. At each zoo, keepers were also videotaped calling to their animals in order to directly observe animal responses to keeper behaviors. Principle Components Analysis reduced eight animal variables to three components and ten keeper variables to five components. Scores for animals and for keepers were calculated on these components and compared, according to five predictions based on models of human-animal interactions in the literature. Animal responses to keepers varied along three dimensions: Affinity to Keeper, Fear of People, and Sociable/Curious. Animal scores of Fear of People were significantly and positively correlated with independent measures of poor welfare from two later studies: fecal co…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/zoo.20289

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Research on keeper-animal interactions in zoos has received very little attention, with only a few studies attempting to evaluate this relationship.

    “In comparison to the research that has been conducted in the domestic animal industries, research on keeper–animal interactions in zoos has received very little attention [34], with only a few studies attempting to evaluate this relationship [35,36,37,38,39,40].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Carlstead, K.
Corresponding author
Carlstead, Kathy
Venue
Zoo Biology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2009-11
Volume
28
Issue
6
Pages
589-608
ISSN
  • 0733-3188 (ISSN-L)
  • 1098-2361
OpenAlex
W2064639220
Cited by
94
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 3
FWCI
2.59
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Zoo Biology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Veterinary › Small Animals › Animal Behavior and Welfare Studies
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Human-Animal Interaction Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Primate Behavior and Ecology
Keywords
zookeepers, human-animal interaction, fear of people, animal welfare, black rhinoceros, cheetah, maned wolf, great hornbill, feeding frequency, zoo animals, threatened species
MeSH terms
Analysis of Variance, Animals, Animal Husbandry, Animals, Zoo, Attitude of Health Personnel, Human-Animal Bond, Fear, Humans, Surveys and Questionnaires, Species Specificity, Video Recording, Principal Component Analysis

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review