Figure 6 - uploaded by Angeline Siegel
Content may be subject to copyright.
Source publication
Little is known about the scientist-animal relationship; therefore, the aim of this
study was to learn how moments of intersubjectivity, or “oneness” are created and
experienced by scientists. It is by appreciating the risks and vulnerabilities intrinsic to human-animal relationships that propel the present investigation. The current cultural bias...
Contexts in source publication
Context 1
... were asked to identify from a list of 21 qualities that were derived from the qualitative interviews those that best described their state of awareness when working with their animal participants. The list of qualities reported on included the descriptives relaxed, methodical, nonverbal, smells, and watching with the option of adding more words that would better describe their working awareness state (see Figure 6). Since the first phase interviews suggested a difference in general awareness between those who experienced intersubjectivity with the one participant who did not, this area was further explored. ...
Context 2
... the first phase interviews suggested a difference in general awareness between those who experienced intersubjectivity with the one participant who did not, this area was further explored. Linguistic characteristics from the interviews were used to generate the list of The most commonly reported qualities were awareness of noises and smells, watching, being empathetic, and being present from the entire sample (see Figure 6). This question was posed in order to gain better insight into how experiencing intersubjectivity may influence participant's states of awareness when dealing with their animal participants (see Figure 7). ...
Similar publications
The deposition-based direct indoor 222Rn and 220Rn progeny measurement techniques are mostly affected by the indoor environmental conditions, such as the ventilation, concentration of condensation nuclei, and reactions with the structure and its furnishings. In this study, a theoretical model of a direct 222Rn and 220Rn progeny monitor based on all...
Citations
... Primatologist Barbara Smuts (2001, p. 297), for instance, describes how her experiences did not always match the guidance she was given: B…although ignoring the approach of a baboon may at first sound like a good strategy, those who advised me to do so did not take into account the baboons' insistence on regarding me as a social being.Î n contrast to primatologists, scholars in human-animal relations and science studies have examined the intersubjectivity of habituation (e.g., Candea 2010;Knight 2009;Rees 2006Rees , 2007. Intersubjectivity refers to an unspoken process of awareness, attunement, transformation, and unity between humans and other beings (Dutton 2012;Hurn 2012;Siegel 2015). This interest in intersubjectivity is largely situated in the recent shift in anthropological and sociological studies of humans and animals from seeing animals as symbolic resources toward viewing them as active agents in scientific inquiry (Hurn 2012) and emphasizing the relational nature of the human-animal interface (Candea 2010;Kirksey and Helmreich 2010;Knight 2005). ...
Ethnoprimatology explores the ecological, social, and cultural interconnections between humans and other primates. Since the field’s emergence, researchers have examined overlapping human–primate resource use and conflict, human–primate disease transmission, primate folklore and its influence on conservation status, and primate tourism. One facet of the human–primate interface that remains underexplored from an ethnoprimatological perspective is habituation. Habituation—defined as when wild animals accept a human observer as a neutral element of their environment—has long been considered a critical first step for successful primate fieldwork. Although primatologists have explored how to accomplish habituation, little attention has been paid to habituation as a mutually modifying process that occurs between human observers and their primate study subjects. By drawing on the ethnoprimatological approach and engaging with perspectives from human–animal studies, this manuscript examines habituation as a scientific and intersubjective process. Over seven months, we documented behavioral changes in moor macaques (Macaca maura) and human participants that occur during habituation. We also conducted interviews with researchers and local field assistants to track perceptions of habituation progress. Integrating ethological measures with ethnographic material enabled us to explore how and why quantitative markers of habituation “success” differ from subjective impressions, observe habituation—and primate fieldwork in general—as a bidirectional, intersubjective experience, and come to understand habituation as a dynamic spectrum of tolerance rather than a state to be “achieved.” Collectively, these findings have important implications for future work in ethnoprimatology and habituation methodology, as well as the practice of primate fieldwork.
