Centre of Biosciences, Institute of Animal Biochemistry and Genetics, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Bratislava, Slovakia.
J Anim Sci. 2020 Aug 18;98(Supplement_1):S63-S79. doi: 10.1093/jas/skaa039.
In human psychology, the link between cognition and emotions is broadly accepted. However, the idea of using the interaction between cognition and emotions as a tool for a better understanding of animal emotions or for welfare assessment is relatively new. The first avian species used in cognitive bias tests was the European starling followed by the domestic chicken and other species. The most frequently used paradigm is the affect-induced judgment bias. There are many variations of the judgment bias tests in birds. The test itself is preceded by discrimination training. Discrimination tasks vary from visual cue discrimination, discrimination of time intervals to spatial location discrimination. During the discrimination training, birds flip or do not flip the lids of the food dishes, and their latency to approach the cues in a straight alley maze, in a two-choice arena, or different locations in spatial judgment task arena are measured. Alternately, the birds fulfill operant tasks in a Skinner box. Before or after the discrimination training phase, birds are subjected to manipulations that are hypothesized to induce positive or negative emotional states. In the last stage, birds are subjected to judgment bias tests. The assumption is that animals in a negative affective state would more likely respond to ambiguous cues, as if they predict the negative event, than animals in a more positive state. However, the results of some avian studies are inconsistent, particularly those studying the effect of environmental enrichment. In starlings, each of the three studies has supplied conflicting results. In poultry, none of the four studies demonstrated a positive effect of environmental enrichment on emotional states. Only the study using unpredictable stressors in combination with environmental complexity showed that animals kept in a more complex environment are more optimistic. Manipulation of the social environment seems to be more effective in judgment bias induction. Conflicting results could be attributable to the design of the tests, the manner of affect induction, or the data analysis. Further optimization and validation of avian cognitive bias tests could help to avoid problems such as the loss of ambiguity. New methods of attention and memory bias testing are promising. However, regardless of the abovementioned complications, a cognitive bias paradigm is a valuable tool, which can help us better understand avian emotions and assess poultry welfare.
在人类心理学中，认知和情感之间的联系是被广泛接受的。然而，将认知和情感的相互作用作为一种更好地理解动物情感或进行福利评估的工具的想法相对较新。第一个被用于认知偏差测试的鸟类物种是欧洲椋鸟，其次是家鸡和其他物种。最常使用的范式是情感诱导的判断偏差。鸟类的判断偏差测试有很多种变体。测试本身之前是有区分训练。区分任务从视觉线索区分、时间间隔区分到空间位置区分不等。在区分训练期间，鸟类会翻转或不翻转食物盘的盖子，并且他们在直道迷宫、二选一竞技场或空间判断任务竞技场的不同位置接近线索的潜伏期会被测量。或者，鸟类在斯金纳箱中完成操作性任务。在区分训练阶段之前或之后，鸟类会接受假设会引起积极或消极情绪状态的操作。在最后阶段，鸟类会接受判断偏差测试。假设是处于消极情绪状态的动物会更有可能对模棱两可的线索做出反应，就好像它们预测到了负面事件，而不是处于更积极状态的动物。然而，一些鸟类研究的结果不一致，特别是那些研究环境丰容影响的研究。在椋鸟中，每项研究都提供了相互矛盾的结果。在家禽中，四项研究都没有证明环境丰容对情绪状态有积极影响。只有使用不可预测的应激源与环境复杂性相结合的研究表明，生活在更复杂环境中的动物更乐观。社会环境的操纵似乎在判断偏差诱导方面更有效。相互矛盾的结果可能归因于测试的设计、情感诱导的方式或数据分析。对鸟类认知偏差测试的进一步优化和验证可以帮助避免模糊性丧失等问题。新的注意力和记忆偏差测试方法很有前途。然而，无论存在上述复杂情况，认知偏差范式都是一种有价值的工具，可以帮助我们更好地理解鸟类的情感并评估家禽的福利。
