A comparative approach to the study of Keeper–Animal Relationships in the zoo
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
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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].”
From The visitor effect on zoo animals: implications and opportunities for zoo animal welfare (2019) · cites this paper as [34]
Cites
Assessment of positive emotions in animals to improve their welfare
Boissy, A., Manteuffel, G., Jensen, M. B., Moe, R. O., Spruijt, B., Keeling, L. J., Winckler, C., Forkman, B., Dimitrov, I., Langbein, J., et al. (2007) · Physiology & Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.physbeh.2007.02.003 · Cited by 1,486 · see citing works
Wielebnowski, N. C., Fletchall, N., Carlstead, K., Busso, J. M., & Brown, J. L. (2002) · Zoo Biology · doi:10.1002/zoo.10005 · Cited by 344 · see citing works
Self-citationHennessy, M. B., T. Williams, M., Miller, D. D., Douglas, C. W., & Voith, V. L. (1998) · Applied Animal Behaviour Science · doi:10.1016/s0168-1591(98)00179-8 · Cited by 295 · see citing works
A preliminary model of human-animal relationships in the zoo
Hosey, G. (2008) · Applied Animal Behaviour Science · doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2007.04.013 · Cited by 197 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
New directions for zoo animal welfare science
Whitham, J. C., & Wielebnowski, N. (2013) · Applied Animal Behaviour Science · doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2013.02.004 · Cited by 273 · see citing works
The visitor effect on zoo animals: implications and opportunities for zoo animal welfare
Sherwen, S. L., & Hemsworth, P. H. (2019) · Animals · doi:10.3390/ani9060366 · Cited by 267 · see citing works
“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 [35–40].”
ResultAssessment of welfare in zoo animals: towards optimum quality of life
Wolfensohn, S., Shotton, J., Bowley, H., Davies, S., Thompson, S., & Justice, W. S. M. (2018) · Animals · doi:10.3390/ani8070110 · Cited by 197 · see citing works
Brown, J. L., Paris, S., Prado-Oviedo, N. A., Meehan, C. L., Hogan, J. N., Morfeld, K. A., & Carlstead, K. (2016) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0145673 · Cited by 83 · see citing works
Meehan, C. L., Mench, J. A., Carlstead, K., & Hogan, J. N. (2016) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0158124 · Cited by 82 · see citing works
Self-citationEffects of visual contact with zoo visitors on Black-capped capuchin welfare
Sherwen, S. L., Harvey, T. J., Magrath, M. J. L., Butler, K. L., Fanson, K. V., & Hemsworth, P. H. (2015) · Applied Animal Behaviour Science · doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2015.03.004 · Cited by 74 · see citing works
Behaviour-based husbandry—a holistic approach to the management of abnormal repetitive behaviors
Bacon, H. (2018) · Animals · doi:10.3390/ani8070103 · Cited by 57 · see citing works
Hosey, G., & Melfi, V. (2015) · Zoo Biology · doi:10.1002/zoo.21182 · Cited by 58 · see citing works
Identification of major welfare issues for captive elephant husbandry by stakeholders
Gurusamy, V, Tribe, A., & Phillips, C. (2014) · Animal Welfare · doi:10.7120/09627286.23.1.011 · Cited by 15 · see citing works
- 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