CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 74Animal Behavior and Welfare StudiesPrimate Behavior and EcologyHuman-Animal Interaction Studies

Effects of visual contact with zoo visitors on Black-capped capuchin welfare

Open access
Sherwen, Sally L., Harvey, Trista J., Magrath, Michael J.L., Butler, Kym L., Fanson, Kerry V., Hemsworth, Paul H.·2015·Applied Animal Behaviour Science
DOI 10.1016/j.applanim.2015.03.004
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.applanim.2015.03.004

Cites

54 of 54 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?

  • Camouflage netting and one-way vision screens improved gorilla and black-capped capuchin welfare through reduction of visual contact with visitors and likely by reducing potentially threatening visitor behaviours.

    “This is to some extent supported by previous studies that, while not measuring visitor behaviour specifically, found camouflage netting and one-way vision screens improved gorilla and black-capped capuchin welfare through the reduction of visual contact with visitors but also likely by reducing potentially threatening visitor behaviours as a result of the visual barriers being in place [22,23,24].”

    From Effect of Covering a Visitor Viewing Area Window on the Behaviour of Zoo-Housed Little Penguins (Eudyptula minor) (2020) · cites this paper as [23]

  • Previous studies on little penguins found reductions in visitor numbers when barriers were used to regulate visitor-animal interactions.

    “This contrasts with previous studies on little penguins that had reductions in visitor numbers when barriers were used to regulate visitor-animal interactions [3,23].”

    From Effect of Covering a Visitor Viewing Area Window on the Behaviour of Zoo-Housed Little Penguins (Eudyptula minor) (2020) · cites this paper as [23]

  • Reducing visual contact with visitors by using camouflage netting or one-way vision screens has been found to reduce intragroup aggression and stereotypic behaviours in Western lowland gorilla and Black-capped capuchins.

    “For example, reducing visual contact with visitors by using camouflage netting or one-way vision screens has been found to reduced intragroup aggression and stereotypic behaviours such as repetitive teeth clenching, body rocking, pacing and self-scratching in Western lowland gorilla (Gorilla gorilla gorilla) and Black-capped capuchins (Sapajus apella) [22,23,24].”

    From Effect of Covering a Visitor Viewing Area Window on the Behaviour of Zoo-Housed Little Penguins (Eudyptula minor) (2020) · cites this paper as [23]

  • Sherwen et al. [18] found that reducing the visual contact of capuchins with visitors, by using a one-way visual barrier, reduced visitor numbers.

    “This is consistent with Sherwen, Magrath, Butler, Fanson and Hemsworth [18] who found that reducing the visual contact of capuchins with visitors, by using a one-way visual barrier, reduced visitor numbers.”

    From Effects of Regulating Visitor Viewing Proximity and the Intensity of Visitor Behaviour on Little Penguin (Eudyptula minor) Behaviour and Welfare (2019) · cites this paper as [18]

  • Avoidance of humans as a measure of fear of humans has been validated on the basis of findings of behavioural and physiological correlates of fear in animals.

    “Avoidance of humans as a measure of fear of humans has been validated on the basis of findings of behavioural and physiological correlates of fear in animals [18] and avoidance behaviours have been widely used as an indicator of fear of humans in zoo animals [52,53].”

    From The visitor effect on zoo animals: implications and opportunities for zoo animal welfare (2019) · cites this paper as [52]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 55 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Sherwen, S. L., Harvey, T. J., Magrath, M. J. L., Butler, K. L., Fanson, K. V., & Hemsworth, P. H.
Affiliations
  • The University of Melbourne (AU)
  • Zoos Victoria (AU)
  • Deakin University (AU)
Corresponding author
Sherwen, Sally L.
ORCID
Venue
Applied Animal Behaviour Science
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2015-06
Volume
167
Pages
65-73
ISSN
0168-1591 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.applanim.2015.03.004
OpenAlex
W2033989022
Cited by
74
References
55
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 2
FWCI
6.44
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Applied Animal Behaviour Science (publishedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
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
Cebus apella, zoo animal welfare, eye contact, fecal glucocorticoid metabolites, physiological stress, aggression, abnormal behaviour, sustained attention, visitor experience, captive primates

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