Research on the psychological and physiological well-being of captive animals has focused on investigating different types of social and structural enrichment. Consequently, cognitive enrichment has been understudied, despite the promising external validity, comparability, and applicability. As we aim to fill this gap, we developed an interactive, multiple-choice interface for cage-mounted touchscreen devices that rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta) can freely interact with, from within their home enclosure at the Cognitive Neuroscience Laboratory of the German Primate Center. The multiple-choice interface offers interchangeable activities that animals can choose and switch between. We found that all 16 captive rhesus macaques tested consistently engaged with the multiple-choice interface across 6 weekly sessions, with 11 of them exhibiting clear task preferences, and displaying proficiency in performing the selected tasks. Our approach does not require social separation or dietary restriction and is intended to increase animals’ sense of competence and agency by providing them with more control over their environment. Thanks to the high level of automation, our multiple-choice interface can be easily incorporated as a standard cognitive enrichment practice across different facilities and institutes working with captive animals, particularly non-human primates. We believe that the multiple-choice interface is a sustainable, scalable, and pragmatic protocol for enhancing cognitive well-being and animal welfare in captivity.

Understanding the impact routine research and laboratory procedures have on animals is crucial to improving their well-being and to the success and reproducibility of the research they are involved in. Cognitive measures of welfare offer insight into animals’ internal psychological state, but require validation. Attention bias – the tendency to attend to one type of information over another – is a cognitive phenomenon documented in humans and animals that is known to be modulated by affective state (i.e., emotions). Hence, changes in attention bias may offer researchers a deeper perspective of their animals’ psychological well-being. The dot-probe task is an established method for quantifying attention bias in humans (by measuring reaction time to a dot-probe replacing pairs of stimuli), but has yet to be validated in animals. We developed a dot-probe task for long-tailed macaques (Macaca fascicularis) to determine if the task can detect changes in attention bias following anesthesia, a context known to modulate attention and trigger physiological arousal in macaques. Our task included the following features: stimulus pairs of threatening and neutral facial expressions of conspecifics and their scrambled counterparts, two stimuli durations (100 and 1,000 ms), and counterbalancing of the dot-probe’s position on the touchscreen (left and right) and location relative to the threatening stimulus. We tested 8 group-housed adult females on different days relative to being anesthetized (baseline and 1-, 3-, 7-, and 14-days after). At baseline, monkeys were vigilant to threatening content when stimulus pairs were presented for 100 ms, but not 1,000 ms. On the day immediately following anesthesia, we found evidence that attention bias changed to an avoidance of threatening content. Attention bias returned to threat vigilance by the third day postanesthesia and remained so up to the last day of testing (14-days after anesthesia). We also found that attention bias was independent of the type of stimuli pair (i.e., whole face vs. scrambled counterparts), suggesting that the scrambled stimuli retained aspects of the original stimuli. Nevertheless, whole faces were more salient to the monkeys as responses to these trials were generally slower than to scrambled stimulus pairs. Overall, our study suggests it is feasible to detect changes in attention bias following anesthesia using the dot-probe task in nonhuman primates. Our results also reveal important aspects of stimulus preparation and experimental design.

Preference tests help to determine how highly individuals value different options to choose from. During preference testing, two or more options are presented simultaneously, and options are ranked based on the choices made. Presented options, however, influence each other, where the amount of influence increases with the number of options. Multiple binary choice tests can reduce this degree of influence, but conventional analysis methods do not reveal the relative strengths of preference, i.e., the preference difference between options. Here, we demonstrate that multiple binary comparisons can be used not only to rank but also to scale preferences among many options (i.e., their worth value). We analyzed human image preference data with known valence scores to develop and validate our approach to determine how known valence ranges (high vs. low) converge on a scaled representation of preference data. Our approach allowed us to assess the valence of ranked options in mice and rhesus macaques. By conducting simulations, we developed an approach to incorporate additional option choices into existing rank orders without the need to conduct binary choice tests with all original options, thus reducing the number of animal experiments needed. Two quality measures, consensus error and intransitivity ratio, allow for assessing the achieved confidence of the scaled ranking and better tailoring of measurements required to improve it further. The software is available as an R package (“simsalRbim”). Our approach optimizes preference testing, e.g., in welfare assessment, and allows us to efficiently and quantitatively assess the relative value of options presented to animals.