Cited by 27Animal Behavior and Welfare StudiesPrimate Behavior and EcologyMuseums and Cultural Heritage

Benefits of naturalistic free-ranging primate displays and implications for increased human–primate interactions

Chih Mun, John Sha, Kabilan, Bhavani, Alagappasamy, Sam, Guha, Biswajit·2013·Anthrozoös

Abstract

We evaluated three forms of primate free-ranging displays at Singapore Zoo, each with varying restrictions on ranging area and freedom for the primates, as well as visitor proximity. The cotton-top tamarin (Saguinus oedipus), the white-faced saki (Pithecia pithecia), and the orangutan (Pongo pygmaeus) displays illustrated differences in primate visibility to visitors, visitor–primate proximity, frequency of visitor–primate interactions, visitor crowd size, and responses. Amongst the three free-ranging displays, the cotton-top tamarins offered the highest visibility, closest proximity between visitors and primates, highest interaction levels, and attracted the largest crowds. However, undesirable interactions occurred most between the cotton-top tamarins and visitors. We found consistently positive visitor perceptions (total n = 464) of all three primate displays in terms of visitor enjoyment (> 95%); naturalistic zoo experience (> 95%); learning experience (> 90%); and the promotion of good welfare (> 90%). Increasingly naturalistic displays of animals in zoos through the free-ranging of animals can have considerable benefits for both zoo visitors as well as animals, and is a display concept that deserves implementation on a wider scale. Design and implementation of such displays should, however, achieve a balance to maximise display value and animal welfare while curtailing the effects of undesirable human–primate interactions through the restriction of visitor–primate proxi…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2752/175303713x13534238631353

Cites

2 of 2 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Chih Mun, J. S., Kabilan, B., Alagappasamy, S., & Guha, B.
Affiliations
  • Conservation and Research Department, Wildlife Reserves Singapore, Singapore
  • Temasek Polytechnic (SG)
  • Zoology Department, Singapore Zoo, Singapore
  • Mandai Wildlife Group (SG)
Venue
Anthrozoös
Published
2013-03
Volume
26
Issue
1
Pages
13-26
ISSN
  • 0892-7936 (ISSN-L)
  • 1753-0377
OpenAlex
W2022114491
Cited by
27
References
2
Citations by year
2025: 4 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 1
FWCI
0.94
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Anthrozoös (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Veterinary › Small Animals › Animal Behavior and Welfare Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Primate Behavior and Ecology
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Museology › Museums and Cultural Heritage
Keywords
zoo animal welfare, human-primate interactions, cotton-top tamarin, orangutans

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