Related Experiment Video
Updated: Dec 3, 2025

Assessment of Mouse Judgment Bias through an Olfactory Digging Task
Published on: March 4, 2022
Using judgment bias test in pet and shelter dogs (Canis familiaris): Methodological and statistical caveats
Carlotta Burani1,2, Shanis Barnard3, Deborah Wells3
1Dipartimento di Medicina e Chirurgia, Università degli Studi di Parma, Parma, Italia.
Abstract:
It is now widely agreed that a positive affective state is a crucial component of animal well-being. The judgment bias test represents a widespread tool used to assess animals' optimistic/pessimistic attitude and to evaluate their emotional state and welfare. Judgment bias tests have been used several times with dogs (Canis familiaris), in most cases using a spatial test with a bowl placed in ambiguous positions located between a relatively positive trained location (P) which contains a baited bowl and a relatively negative trained location (N) which contains an empty bowl. The latency to approach the bowl in the ambiguous locations is an indicator of the dog's expectation of a positive/negative outcome. However, results from such tests are often inconclusive. For the present study, the judgment bias test performance of 51 shelter dogs and 40 pet dogs was thoroughly analysed. A pattern emerged with shelter dogs behaving in a more pessimistic-like way than pet dogs. However, this difference between the two populations was detected only when analysing the raw latencies to reach the locations and not the more commonly applied adjusted score (i.e. average latency values). Furthermore, several methodological caveats were found. First of all, a non-negligible percentage of dogs did not pass the training phase, possibly due to the experimental paradigm not being fully suited for this species. Second, results showed a high intra-dog variability in response to the trained locations, i.e. the dogs' responses were not consistent throughout the test, suggesting that animals may not have fully learned the association between locations and their outcomes. Third, dogs did not always behave differently towards adjacent locations, raising doubts about the animals' ability to discriminate between locations. Finally, a potential influence of the researcher's presence on dogs' performance emerged from analyses. The implications of these findings and potential solutions are discussed.
Related Concept Videos
Bias
In statistics, a sampling bias is created when a sample is collected from a population, and some members of the population are not as likely to be chosen as others (remember, each member...
Sign Test for Nominal Data
For example, consider a...
Bias in Epidemiological Studies
Accuracy and Errors in Hypothesis Testing
In hypothesis testing, the probability of making a Type I error, denoted as α, is commonly set at 0.05. This significance level indicates a 5%...
Statistical Inference Techniques in Hypothesis Testing: Parametric Versus Nonparametric Data
Parametric statistics, as the name suggests, assumes that data follow a specific distribution, often a normal distribution. This assumption enables robust hypothesis testing and estimation. Parametric methods, like the Student's t-test or Goodness-of-fit test, are frequently employed in biostatistics due to their robustness. For instance,...
Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors
Sampling errors originate from improper sampling methods or the wrong sample population. These errors can be minimized by refining the sampling strategy. Defective instruments or faulty calibrations are the sources of instrumental...

