Rating vs. coding in animal personality research

Highfill, Lauren; Hanbury, David B.; Kristiansen, Rachel E.; Kuczaj, Stan A.; Watson, Sheree L.

doi:10.1002/zoo.20279

Cited by 59 publications

(42 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…As demonstrated by this case study and as seen in other studies, reliability analyses of caretaker ratings often result in low reliability scores. This results in certain portions of the survey, entire animals, or entire observers being removed from the analysis (Highfill et al, 2010;Phillips & Peck, 2007;Powell & Svoke, 2008;Wielebnowski, 1999).…”

Section: Rating Methodology and Behavioral Plasticitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These ratings are quantifiable and can then be analyzed to extract personality axes. Limitations of this method include sensitivity to the nature of the rater's relationship with the individual animals and a failure to capture behavioral plasticity (Highfill, Hanbury, Kristiansen, Kuczaj, & Watson, 2010;Réale & Dingemanse, 2012). The coding method utilizes behavioral data collection techniques to observe the frequency or duration of a pre-determined list of behaviors in the animals in order to create behavioral time budgets.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Rating Methodology, Personality Axes, and Behavioral Plasticity: A Case Study in African Lions

Torgerson-White¹,

Bennett²

2014

ABC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

-Animal personality refers to individual differences in behavior that are consistent across time and across contexts. As it plays an ecological and evolutionary role for many animals by affecting fitness, it is likely to play a role in how both species and individuals fare in captivity. Assessment of animal personality by caretaker ratings has been validated using behavioral coding methods in a number of species and has thus become the most common method for assessing personality of captive animals. Whereas the reliability of rating methodology is arguable, the reality of working in a captive setting makes assessment of animal personality by caretaker ratings an easy and practical way to investigate questions related to personality. We used a case study in African lions to investigate the use of rating methodology to uncover personality traits. We then related dimensionality of those traits to fecal glucocorticoid metabolite values taken before, during, and after habitat renovation. The end goal was to devise a method by which individual welfare can be considered and improved by considering personality traits. Interobserver reliability scores revealed that only 11 out of 18 traits and four out of six lions were reliably rated. From those traits, we uncovered a sociability-neuroticism axis, whereby lions that were more social and less neurotic had lower glucocorticoid metabolite levels (GCM). In addition, we found that more vocal animals had higher GCM levels and more active animals had lower GCM levels, findings that suggest that vocalizing and activity level may be part of the way these individuals cope with stressors. These results suggest that a better understanding of a lion's sociability and neuroticism may inform management decisions during stressful times. Further investigation into the two lions who did not pass reliability testing, revealed that they had the lowest number of extreme trait ratings which suggests that they may have been the most behaviorally plastic, a characteristic that was not expressly measured by the surveys. The inability of rating methodology to measure plasticity and the role of the human-animal relationship in contributing to low reliability scores are discussed. We suggest that the most widely used personality surveys may work well for animals who exhibit low levels of plasticity and whose behavior falls closer to the extremes of a continuum, but may be less helpful for more plastic animals whose personality traits fall in the mid-range.

show abstract

Section: Rating Methodology and Behavioral Plasticitymentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Rating Methodology, Personality Axes, and Behavioral Plasticity: A Case Study in African Lions

Torgerson-White¹,

Bennett²

2014

ABC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This can be problematic for long-term ecological studies where there is high turnover in personnel. Additionally, a potential consequence of using well-acquainted observers is the potential for confirmation bias due to preconceptions that raters may have of animal subjects (Highfill et al, 2010). Surprisingly, we do not yet fully understand how acquaintance with subjects may influence ratings in either captive or wild studies.…”

mentioning

confidence: 95%

“…However, our results suggest that just two raters can reliably score certain adjectives. Studies that use acquainted raters typically rely on one to five raters (Martau et al, 1985;Highfill et al, 2010;Barnard et al, 2012). Moreover, this experiment is part of an ongoing ecological study where high personnel turnover is common.…”

Section: Reliability Of Personality Measurementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A critical evaluation of subjective ratings: Unacquainted observers can reliably assess certain personality traits

Petelle

Blumstein

2014

Current Zoology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Methods to measure consistent individual differences in behavior (i.e. animal personality) fall into two categories, subjective ratings and behavioral codings. Ratings are seldom used despite being potentially more efficient than codings. One potential limitation for the use of ratings is that it is assumed that long-term observers or experts in the field are required to score individuals. This can be problematic in many cases, especially for long-term ecological studies where there is high turnover in personnel. We tested whether raters who were unacquainted with subjects could produce reliable and valid personality assessments of yellow-bellied marmots Marmota flaviventris. Two raters, previously unacquainted with individuals and marmot behavior, scored 130 subjects on fifteen different adjectives in both open-field (OF) and mirror image stimulation (MIS) trials. Eight OF and nine MIS adjectives were reliable as indicated by both a high degree of intra-observer and inter-observer reliability. Additionally, some ratings were externally valid, correlating with behavioral codings. Our data suggest that activity/exploration and sociability can be a reliable and valid measurement of personality traits in studies where raters were unacquainted with subjects. These traits are observable with the personality tests we used; otherwise researchers using unacquainted raters should be cautious in the tests they employ [Current Zoology 60 (2): [162][163][164][165][166][167][168][169] 2014].

show abstract

“…Observer ratings have been used widely across personality research, since it consists of having those who know the animals most (i.e., keepers) score an animal's behavioral tendencies based on a provided list of traits or descriptions (Highfill, Hanbury, Kristiansen, Kuczaj, & Watson, 2010). Observer ratings are a valuable tool for measuring individual behaviors, and can be beneficial once they produce…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Multifaceted Approach to Personality Assessment in Cheetahs (Acinonyx jubatus)

Razal¹,

Pisacane²,

Miller³

2016

AB&C

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

-The purpose of this study was to assess the personality of 17 South African cheetahs at the San Diego Zoo Safari Park. A multifaceted approach of observer ratings (rating method), behavioral data (coding method) and hormone monitoring was used to examine individual differences. Knowledge of these individual differences, i.e., personality, is essential to better husbandry and management in a zoological facility. Principal Components Analysis yielded five personality components: Insecure, Aggressive, Interactive, Active, and Unsociable. Comparing the personality components with gender, reproductive success, and hand-rearing history of the individuals revealed significant associations. The components Aggressive and Interactive had a positive correlation with behavioral diversity, and the component Unsociable had a positive correlation with self-maintenance. There was a significant gender difference, with males scoring higher on Aggressive and Interactive. Individuals who scored higher on these components also had higher levels of behavioral diversity, and males displayed higher levels of behavioral diversity than females. In addition, individuals that were reproductively successful scored higher on the component Unsociable, as well as displayed higher FGM levels. This study demonstrates the value of using a multifaceted approach to further understand and assess animal personality. Information gained from this study can ultimately help zoological facilities manage and assist with reproductive efforts in populations that are not currently self-sustaining, such as the cheetah.

show abstract

Rating vs. coding in animal personality research

Cited by 59 publications

References 11 publications

Rating Methodology, Personality Axes, and Behavioral Plasticity: A Case Study in African Lions

Rating Methodology, Personality Axes, and Behavioral Plasticity: A Case Study in African Lions

A critical evaluation of subjective ratings: Unacquainted observers can reliably assess certain personality traits

Multifaceted Approach to Personality Assessment in Cheetahs (Acinonyx jubatus)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About