Figure 5 - uploaded by Reinhard Gupfinger
Content may be subject to copyright.
Context in source publication
Citations
... 12 papers reported evaluating the participants' willingness to engage in the research throughout the research session while one 2019 Pet dogs 2 [5] 2018 Assistance dogs 3 [8] 2019 Pet dogs 2 [9] 2020 Pet dogs 3 [11] 2020 Pet dogs 60 [17] 2019 unspecified dogs 2 [18] 2021 unspecified dogs 1 [26] 2019 unspecified dogs 1 [35] 2022 Pet dogs 2 [38] 2020 Pet dogs 3 [41] 2019 Pet dogs 6 [44] 2021 Assistance dogs 1 [49] 2016 Assistance dogs Not Specified (NS) [52] 2019 Assistance dogs NS [53] 2020 Assistance dogs NS [54] 2017 Assistance dogs NS [64] 2021 Assistance dogs 33 [61] 2022 Pet dogs 12 [62] 2022 Pet dogs and Canine Athletes 17 [65] 2019 Pet dogs 42 [66] 2018 Assistance dogs 3 [67] 2019 Assistance dogs 9 [69] 2021 Pet dogs 27 [75] 2017 Pet dogs and wolves 265 dogs and 20 wolves [76] 2022 Assistance dogs NS 2022 Monk parakeets 2 [12] 2020 Goffin's cockatoo 1 [23] 2017 Elephants 5 [27] 2018 Gorillas 7 [29] 2017 African grey parrots 15 [30] 2019 African grey parrots 15 [31] 2017 Pigs Not Specified (NS) [32] 2017 Cows 10 [58] 2017 Cats 13 [55] 2020 Platypus 1 [72] 2018 Orangutans 6 [80] 2017 Glass catfish 5 [8] owners behav observ throughout study Yes NS [9] researchers, trainers behav observ throughout study Yes NS [11] owners, researcher behav observ, writ cons throughout study Yes Yes [17] NS NS NS NS NS [18] NS NS NS NS NS [26] NS NS NS NS NS [35] researchers behav observ throughout study Yes Yes [38] owners behav observ throughout study Yes Yes [41] NS NS NS NS NS [44] owners, researchers behav observ NS Yes NS [49] trainers behav observ throughout study Yes NS [52] trainers behav observ throughout study Yes NS [53] researchers behav observ throughout study Yes NS [54] trainers behav observ NS Yes NS [64] trainers behav observ NS Yes NS [61] researchers NS NS Yes NS [62] owners written, oral consent before study Yes NS [65] owners NS NS Yes NS [66] trainers NS NS Yes NS [67] researcher, trainers behav observ throughout study Yes NS [69] NS NS NS NS NS [75] owners, researchers behav observ throughout study Yes NS [76] researchers behav observ throughout study Yes NS Legend "NS": Not Specified, "behav observ": behavioral observation, "writ cons": written consent paper stated this was done prior to the start of the study. Thirteen papers did not specify how frequently they evaluated their participants. ...
... " All papers identified their evaluators. [2] researchers behav observ throughout study Yes Yes [12] researcher behav observ throughout study Yes Yes [23] keepers, animal exp behav observ throughout study Yes Yes [27] keepers, researchers behav observ throughout study Yes Yes [29] researchers behav observ throughout study Yes Yes [30] researchers behav observ throughout study Yes Yes [31] veterinarians vets' consent NS Yes NS [32] veterinarians vets' consent throughout study Yes NS [58] cats' carers behav observ throughout study Yes Yes [55] keepers, researchers behav observ throughout study Yes Yes [72] keepers behav observ throughout study Yes Yes [80] researchers behav observ throughout study Yes NS Ten papers explicitly stated that they used some form of behavioral observation and two papers reported relying on "veterinarians' consent" to assess the participants' willingness to engage. ...
How do Animal-Computer Interaction (ACI) researchers working with live animal participants assess the animals’ willingness to participate in their research? In this paper we present the results of a systematic literature review designed to answer this question by examining the Proceedings of the ACM International Animal Computer Interaction Conference. From 2016-2022, these proceedings included 38 full papers that reported results from research with live animal participants. We found 1) only 74% or 28/38 of the papers reported how they assessed animal participants’ willingness to engage during their research, 2) the authors of papers focused on species other than dogs had a much higher rate of providing this information than did the authors of dog-based studies (100% or 12/12 non-dog papers v 62% or 16/26 of dog-based papers), 3) most researchers who addressed the issue of an animal participant’s willingness to engage in the research relied on some form of mediated consent, informed by behavioral observation methods, to do so. However, the researchers focused on non-dog species were much more likely than researchers focused on dogs to include elements of contingent consent in their protocols (75% (9/12) of the non-dog studies v 12% (3/26) of the dog-related studies). We argue that providing each other with more details about our research methods and possibly more fully embracing the principles of contingent consent would further ACI researchers’ existing ethical commitment to our animal participants, increase our adherence to standard scientific research practice, and accelerate the continued development of the field of Animal-Computer Interaction.
... The first step validates the feasability of using off-the-shelf tablets to enable birds to video call each other is to assess parrots' biological and physiological abilities to perceive and make sense of screen-based stimuli. Although parrot vision varies significantly from humans as well as within parrot species, there is strong evidence that parrots can perceive and make sense of screen-based stimuli [28]. ...
... Some interactive systems have been shown to provide animals with agency in shaping their social or physical surroundings, which may yield substantial well-being benefits, including reduced stereotypies and improvements in behavior [26,61,64]. For example, researchers have developed choice-based technology for environmental control such as dogs choosing to call their caretakers [36], dolphins choosing food and toys [66], as well as a selection of music enrichment [28,34,44]. While the definition of "choice" is debatable [54], the perception of self-agency can be beneficial to animals [64]. ...
... The general aspects of non-speciesist, animalcentred ethics in relation to ACI have been tackled by Clara Mancini (2011Mancini ( , 2017. In addition, ACI has already produced initial developments in sonic interaction design (Gupfinger and Kaltenbrunner 2019). A critical assessment of ethical challenges as well as aesthetical potentials of artistically driven ACI could (and from our point of view should) be a next step in these developments. ...
This article sketches a theoretical framework that allows the conceptual inclusion of non-human animals and artificial intelligences in human sonic collaborations. Post-humanist concepts that question the categorical divide between nature and culture, following Donna Haraway and Bruno Latour, converge with contemporary, non-adaptationist evolutionary aesthetics. Therefore, the anthropocentric 'othering' of non-humans gives way to a concept of a more-than-human sociality of sound. We offer some theoretical propositions for the extension of socially engaged sound practices to collaborations between humans and non-human animals and between humans and artificial intelligences, and then exemplify such multispecies sonic collaborations by analysing some existing projects from the fields of sound art and musical performance. After drawing some more general conclusions from these analyses, we hint at potential aesthetical and ethical parallels between animal and AI creative agency. Finally, we point out a few questions we see as important for future advanced settings of such collaborations, especially when it comes to assemblages of different AI technologies and to future concepts of animal-computer interaction that might enable non-human animals and artificial intelligence to cooperate creatively.
... This section describes the process and the methodology used to design musical instruments and interfaces aimed at providing auditory enrichment for grey parrots living in captivity. Based on the cognitive, physiological and auditory abilities of grey parrots, and their intrinsic interest in acoustic and physical interactions, we have developed and tested various interactive instrument prototypes from an animal-centered design perspective [39]. In the previous section, we analyzed the physical and musical skills of a group of grey parrots, and here we present the design results for auditory enrichment in the context of ACI and artistic research. ...
... We presented our efforts in designing musical instruments and interfaces for grey parrots in captivity. The project was divided into three main phases: a project review and classification [19], sonic experiments at the parrot shelter [36] and the design of musical instruments in the context of auditory enrichment for grey parrots [39]. ...
One particular approach in the context of Animal Computer Interaction (ACI) is auditory enrichment for captive wild animals. Here we describe our research and the methodology used to design musical instruments and interfaces aimed at providing auditory enrichment for grey parrots living in captivity. The paper is divided into three main phases: a project review and classification, sonic experiments at the parrot shelter and the design of musical instruments. The overview of recent projects that involve animals in the interaction and music-generation process highlights the costs and benefits of projects of this kind and provides insights into current technologies in this field and the musical talents of animals. Furthermore, we document a series of sonic experiments conducted at a parrot shelter to develop acoustically enriched environments through the use of musical instruments. These investigations were intended to provide a better understanding of how grey parrots communicate through sound, perceive and respond to auditory stimuli and possibly generate sound and music through the usage of technological devices. Based on the cognitive, physiological, and auditory abilities of grey parrots, and their intrinsic interest in sonic and physical interactions, we finally developed and tested various interactive instrument prototypes and here we present our design results for auditory enrichment in the context of ACI and artistic research.
This chapter explores the potential of immersive technologies, including adaptive extended reality, avatars, digital twins, and wearable devices, in transforming the visitor experience and engagement with cultural heritage institutions. It aims to demonstrate how these cutting-edge technologies can be harnessed to create more accessible, inclusive, and engaging heritage experiences for diverse audiences. The discussion begins with an overview of adaptive extended reality, highlighting its ability to create immersive, interactive, and customizable environments that cater to each visitor’s unique needs. Case studies of adaptive extended reality projects in heritage contexts showcase its transformative potential. The chapter then explores the use of avatars in heritage contexts, discussing the design and implementation of avatar-based experiences that enable visitors to interact with virtual characters representing historical figures or guides. Through case studies, the chapter emphasizes the engagement and learning potential of avatars in cultural heritage. It further delves into digital twin technology, explaining how virtual replicas of physical assets or environments enhance heritage experiences by providing immersive and manipulable simulations. Examples of digital twin projects in heritage contexts illustrate the technology’s potential to create engaging and accessible experiences. Lastly, the chapter examines wearable technology in heritage contexts, covering the design and implementation of wearable device-based experiences that enhance the visitor journey through augmented reality, navigation assistance, or sensory feedback. Case studies highlight the immersive, accessible, and engaging nature of wearable device-based heritage projects. By leveraging these immersive technologies, cultural heritage institutions can create transformative experiences that captivate and engage diverse audiences.
Simple Summary
I trained an American black bear in human care to choose different response buttons when presented with an image of either a highly preferred or a less preferred food item. The bear learned to choose the appropriate response button when presented with the preferred food item at above chance levels and differentiated between the use of the buttons appropriately. However, she did not reach a high level of performance with the less preferred food item even after over 1000 trials, suggesting that performing a conditional discrimination on the basis of preferences may be challenging for black bears. However, the work presented here represents the first attempt to train a bear to indicate her relative preferences using something like a Likert scale commonly used with humans to indicate their preferences and could be a valuable welfare tool for animals in human care. Similar work with gorillas suggests that bears are as capable as great apes in learning such tasks and would also benefit from this type of technical enrichment.
Abstract
A preference scale for use by nonhuman animals would allow them to communicate their degree of liking for individual items rather than just relative preferences between pairs of items. It would also allow animals to report liking for images of objects that would be difficult to directly interact with (e.g., potential mates and habitat modifications). Such scales can easily be presented using touchscreen technology. Few zoos have used touchscreen technology for species other than nonhuman primates. I present a description of efforts taken to create such a scale for use with a single zoo-housed American black bear (Ursus americanus). Although the bear did not reach a high level of proficiency with assigning preferred and non-preferred food items to categorical responses of “like” and “dislike,” she was able to learn how to use the like and dislike buttons differentially for a single preferred and less preferred food item and she selected the correct response button for the preferred item at above chance levels. These data contribute to our limited understanding of black bear cognition and suggest that conditional discriminations may be difficult for black bears. This finding can inform continued efforts to create a simpler tool for nonhumans to communicate their preferences to human caregivers in a more nuanced way than is currently possible. More generally, the current study contributes to the growing body of work supporting the use of touchscreen technology for providing enrichment to less studied species like bears.
Ob Hund oder Amöbe, Algorithmus oder künstliches Haustier, ob virtuell oder materialisiert, ob wahrnehmbar oder im Hintergrund – der Mensch ist nicht allein. Er teilt die Welt mit Entitäten und Wesenheiten auf eine Weise, die in ihrer Vielfältigkeit kaum abzusehen ist. Nur eines ist dabei schon jetzt klar: Die Modalitäten des Zusammenlebens in multispecies societies fügen sich nicht mehr den gewohnten Vorstellungen von Subjekt und Objekt, von innen und außen, von Herr- und Knechtschaft, von Rationalität und Gefühl. Vielmehr bricht sich die Erkenntnis Bahn, dass der Mensch auf andere Arten angewiesen ist. Und er tut gut daran, neue Formen der Verwandtschaftsverhältnisse einzugehen, ohne bloß den Träumen von Enhancement zu verfallen. Allein durch Gesten der Reduktion, wie Stefan Rieger zeigt, wird eine umfassendere Teilhabe ermöglicht. Und nur in Form veränderter Kooperationen und Kollaborationen, in Anerkennung anderer Handlungsmächte und einer Ethik, die nicht ausschließlich den Menschen im Blick hat, ist eine angemessene Reaktion auf die neue Welt von Menschen und Nicht-Menschen zu finden.
