Virtual farm tours-Virtual reality glasses and tablets are suitable tools to provide insights into pig husbandry

How might the public contribute to the discussion on cattle welfare? Perspectives of veterinarians and animal scientists

Veterinarians and animal scientists can provide leadership on issues relevant to farm animal welfare, but perceptions of these stakeholders regarding societal expectations for welfare are underexplored. This study involved five focus groups of veterinarians and animal scientists (n = 50 in total), recruited at a European meeting focused on cattle welfare. Participants were invited to discuss topics related to cattle welfare and were prompted with questions to elicit their perspectives of public concerns and how the participants felt public input should be included when developing solutions. Discussions were moderated by trained facilitators, audio-recorded and transcribed, and transcripts analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. Ultimately, four primary themes were developed: (1) The public as concerned; (2) The public as ignorant; (3) The public as needing education; and (4) The public as helper or hindrance. Groups identified specific farming practices viewed as concerning to the public, including lack of pasture access, behavioural restriction, and painful procedures. Discussions about these concerns and the role of the public were often framed around the assumption that the public was ignorant about farming, and that this ignorance needed to be rectified through education. Participants were generally ambivalent in their beliefs regarding public contributions to solutions for farm animal welfare but suggested that consumers should pay more for products to help shoulder any costs of welfare improvements.

Why it is good to communicate the bad: understanding the influence of message framing in persuasive communication on consumer decision-making processes

Introduction

One approach to bridging the gap between consumer intentions and behavior is persuasive communication to reinforce their intentions and thereby support their behavior change. Message framing has proven to be a useful, persuasive communication tool. However, message framing is considered more complicated than other types of framing because, in addition to concept-specific elements, it is also strongly influenced by and, in turn, influences emotions. Therefore, it is almost impossible for consumers to verbally express their attitudes, so the challenge is to explain and measure its impact. This research aims to help in this regard by suggesting a theoretical model to understand how message framing is processed from a consumer neuroscience perspective. More precisely, the factors that constitute message framing are systematized and built on a reflective-impulsive model and a neural emotion-cognition framework interpreted to explain the persuasive effects of message framing.

Method

A functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) experiment is used to examine the effects of message framing for four different frame types that are hypothesized to affect consumer information processing differently.

Result

The results suggest that communication strategies should take into account the valence of the objects and the frame used. The behavioral results partially confirm the assumption that two types of information processing could take place, as suggested by the reflective-impulsive model. At the neural level, using the network perspective, the results show that certain brain regions primarily associated with emotional and cognitive interaction processes are active during processing, depending on the framing of the message.

Discussion

In cases of indirect avoidance value-consistent framing, it may be good to communicate the bad in the appropriate frame to influence information processing.

Systematically analysing the acceptability of pig farming systems with different animal welfare levels when considering intra-sustainability trade-offs: Are citizens willing to compromise?

In recent years, intensive pig husbandry has been subject to increasing public criticism, including a clear demand for more animal-friendly housing systems in many countries. However, such systems are associated with trade-offs at the expense of other sustainability domains, which challenges implementation and makes prioritization necessary. Overall, research is scarce that systematically analyses citizens' evaluation of different pig housing systems and associated trade-offs. Given the ongoing transformation process of future livestock systems that meet social demands, it is crucial to include public attitudes. We therefore assessed how citizens evaluate different pig housing systems and whether they are willing to compromise animal welfare in trade-off situations. We conducted an online survey with 1,038 German citizens using quota and split sampling in a picture-based survey design. Participants were asked to evaluate several housing systems with different animal welfare levels and associated trade-offs based on an either positive ('free-range' in split 1) or negative ('indoor housing with fully slatted floors' in split 2) reference system. Initial acceptability was highest for the 'free-range' system, followed by 'indoor housing with straw bedding and outdoor access', 'indoor housing with straw bedding', and 'indoor housing with fully slatted floors', with only the latter being clearly not acceptable for many. Overall acceptability was higher with a positive rather than a negative reference system. When confronted with several trade-off situations, participants became uncertain and temporarily adjusted their evaluations. Thereby participants were most likely to trade off housing conditions against animal or human health rather than against climate protection or a lower product price. Nevertheless, a final evaluation demonstrated that participants did not fundamentally change their initial attitudes. Our findings provide evidence that citizens' desire for good housing conditions is relatively stable, but they are willing to compromise at the expense of animal welfare up to a moderate level.

State of the Art and Future Prospects of Virtual and Augmented Reality in Veterinary Medicine: A Systematic Review

Virtual reality and augmented reality are new but rapidly expanding topics in medicine. In virtual reality, users are immersed in a three-dimensional environment, whereas in augmented reality, computer-generated images are superimposed on the real world. Despite advances in human medicine, the number of published articles in veterinary medicine is low. These cutting-edge technologies can be used in combination with existing methods in veterinary medicine to achieve diagnostic/therapeutic and educational goals. The purpose of our review was to evaluate studies for their use of virtual reality and augmented reality in veterinary medicine, as well as human medicine with animal trials, to report results and the state of the art. We collected all of the articles we included in our review by screening the Scopus, PubMed, and Web of Science databases. Of the 24 included studies, 11 and 13 articles belonged to virtual reality and augmented reality, respectively. Based on these articles, we determined that using these technologies has a positive impact on the scientific output of students and residents, can reduce training costs, and can be used in training/educational programs. Furthermore, using these tools can promote ethical standards. We reported the absence of standard operation protocols and equipment costs as study limitations.

Student Perceptions of the Introduction of Pig Production, Management, and Health Teaching into the Veterinary Curriculum of a Muslim-Majority Country: A Case Study in Jordan

Previously, pig production was not covered in the Jordan University of Science and Technology's (JUST) veterinary curriculum due to Jordan being a predominantly Muslim country, with few graduates practicing outside the Middle East. However, pig production, management, and health (PPMH) education is increasingly recognized as needed to meet the requirements to obtain European Association of Establishments for Veterinary Education (EAEVE) accreditation. This study assessed the introduction of pig-related teaching into JUST's veterinary curriculum and student perceptions of this content. A teaching intervention consisted of lectures, group sessions, and a virtual reality (VR) tour of a pig production (PP) unit. To ascertain participants' level of understanding of PPMH, perceptions of different teaching styles, and changes in perception and understanding of the topics, they answered a survey before and after the intervention. Students' knowledge of PP, husbandry, and perceived importance of PP awareness increased significantly, with 90% (n = 17) agreeing that the intervention improved comprehension of the areas mentioned. Participants' interest in PPMH learning increased, with 75% (n = 14) stating they would want to learn more about the topic. VR was significantly ranked the most useful in terms of learning (p = .029), and all participants stated the VR tour had a positive impact on their learning experience. Based on the findings, the focus of pig-related teaching in settings with limited awareness because of sociocultural reasons should be directed toward student-led exercises, group work, and use of technology such as VR. As a result of this intervention, blended PP has now been introduced to the JUST Veterinary curriculum.