The HABRI Central Team continues to monitor emerging research and information about the COVID-19 pandemic. Visit our collection of resources, https://habricentral.org/features/covid-19 close

 
You are here: Home / Journal Articles / A comparison of inferential analysis methods for multilevel studies: Implications for drawing conclusions in animal welfare science / About

A comparison of inferential analysis methods for multilevel studies: Implications for drawing conclusions in animal welfare science

By Kara N. Stevens, Lucy Asher, Kym Griffin, Mary Friel, Niamh O'Connell, Lisa M. Collins

View Resource (HTM)

Licensed under

Category Journal Articles
Abstract

Investigations comparing the behaviour and welfare of animals in different environments have led to mixed and often conflicting results. These could arise from genuine differences in welfare, poor validity of indicators, low statistical power, publication bias, or inappropriate statistical analysis. Our aim was to investigate the effects of using four approaches for inferential analysis of datasets of varying size on model outcomes and potential conclusions. We considered aggression in 864 growing pigs over six weeks as measured by ear and body injury score and relationships with: less and more enriched environments, pig's relative weight, and sex. Pigs were housed in groups of 18 in one of four pens, replicating the experiment 12 times. We applied four inferential models that either used a summary statistic approach, or else fully or partially accounted for complexities in study design. We tested models using both the full dataset (n=864) and also using small sample sizes (n=72). The most appropriate inferential model was a mixed effects, repeated measures model to compare ear and body score. Statistical models that did not account for the correlation between repeated measures and/or the random effects from replications and pens led to spurious associations between environmental factors and indicators of aggression, which were not supported by the initial exploratory analysis. For analyses on smaller datasets (n=72), due to the effect size and number of independent factors, there was insufficient power to determine statistically significant associations. Based on the mixed effects, repeated measures models, higher body injury scores were associated with more enrichment (coef. est.=0.09, p=0.02); weight (coef. est.=0.05, p

Publication Title Applied Animal Behaviour Science
Volume 197
Pages 101-111
ISBN/ISSN 0168-1591
DOI https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2017.08.002
Cite this work

Researchers should cite this work as follows:

Tags
  1. Animal health and hygiene
  2. Animal welfare
  3. models
  4. Pigs
  5. samples