Cited by 8Animal Behavior and Welfare StudiesPrimate Behavior and EcologyHuman-Animal Interaction Studies

The Relevance of Operant Behavior in Conceptualizing the Psychological Well-Being of Captive Animals

Open access
Rasmussen, Erin B., Newland, M. Christopher, Hemmelman, Ethan·2020·Perspectives on Behavior Science

Abstract

The term "psychological well-being" is used in reference to husbandry with animals in human care settings such as research, agriculture, and zoos. This article seeks to clarify and conceptualize the term based upon two approaches that draw from several bodies of literature: the experimental analysis of behavior, experimental psychology, animal welfare and husbandry, farm animal behavior, zoo husbandry, and ethology. One approach focuses on the presence of problem behavior such as stereotypies, depressive-like behavior, and aggression, and emphasizes the conditions under which aberrant behavior in animals under human care occurs. The second approach examines what might be considered wellness by emphasizing opportunities to engage with its environment, or the absence of such opportunities, even if problematic behavior is not exhibited. Here, access to an interactive environment is relatively limited so opportunities for operant (voluntary) behavior could be considered. Designing for operant behavior provides opportunities for variability in both behavior and outcomes. Operant behavior also provides control over the environment, a characteristic that has been a core assumption of well-being. The importance of interactions with one's environment is especially evident in observations that animals prefer opportunities to work for items necessary for sustenance, such as food, over having them delivered freely. These considerations raise the importance of operant behavior to psychological well-being, especially as benefits to animals under human care.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s40614-020-00259-7

Cites

10 of 10 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

  • Restrictive conditions severely restrict the expression of natural behaviours and contribute to chronic stress, frustration, and learned helplessness.

    “Such conditions severely restrict the expression of natural behaviours and contribute to chronic stress, frustration, and the development of learned helplessness [79].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Rasmussen, E. B., Newland, M. C., & Hemmelman, E.
Affiliations
  • Idaho State University (US)
  • Auburn University (US)
Corresponding author
Rasmussen, Erin B.
Venue
Perspectives on Behavior Science
Published
2020-08-10
Volume
43
Issue
3
Pages
617-654
ISSN
  • 2520-8969 (ISSN-L)
  • 2520-8977
OpenAlex
W3048896016
Cited by
8
References
10
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2
FWCI
0.72
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Perspectives on Behavior Science (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Veterinary › Small Animals › Animal Behavior and Welfare Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Primate Behavior and Ecology
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Human-Animal Interaction Studies
Keywords
psychological well-being, captive animals, operant behavior, animal welfare, behavioral problems, stereotypy, depression-like behavior, aggression, zoo animal husbandry, animal husbandry, environmental enrichment, voluntary behavior

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