This study examined the relationships between a number of stockperson and cow variables at 66 commercial dairy farms. Variables such as the attitudes and behavior of stockpeople toward their cows and the behavioral response to humans and productivity of cows were studied over one lactation. There were consistent and significant correlations between some of these stockperson and cow variables. For example, a positive attitude by stockpeople toward the behavior of dairy cows was negatively correlated with the number of forceful, negative, tactile interactions used by stock-people in handling cows (r = −0.27, df = 127, P < 0.01). Furthermore, based on farm averages, the number of forceful, negative, tactile interactions used by stockpeople was negatively correlated with the percentage of cows approaching within 1 m of an experimenter in a standard test (r = −0.27, df= 64, P < 0.05). Although not confirming a fear-productivity relationship, a moderate but nonsignificant correlation was found between flight distance of cows to an experimenter in a standard test and milk yield (r = −0.27, df = 33, P > 0.05). Support for the existence of a negative fear-productivity relationship was the finding that the use of negative interactions by stockpeople was significantly and negatively correlated with milk yield, protein, and fat at the farm (r = −0.36, −0.35 and −0.33, respectively, df = 64, P < 0.01) and was significantly and positively correlated with milk cortisol concentrations at the farm (r = 0.34, df= 64, P < 0.01). Furthermore, the percentage of cows approaching within 3 m of an experimenter in a standard test was positively correlated with conception rate to the first insemination (r = 0.38, df = 46, P < 0.01). The significant correlations found in the present study between stockperson attitudes and behavior and cow behavior and productivity, although not evidence of causal relationships, indicate the possibility of targeting these human characteristics to reduce fear responses of dairy cows to humans and improve the cows' productivity.

Domestic animals often seek and enjoy interacting with humans. Positive human–animal relationships can elicit positive emotions and other positive welfare outcomes. Nevertheless, our understanding of the underlying processes that govern the positive perception of humans by animals is incomplete. We cover the potential mechanisms involved in the development and maintenance of positive human–animal relationships from the perspective of the animal. This encompasses habituation, associative learning, and possibly attachment or bonding based on communication and social cognition. We review the indicators from the literature to assess a positive human–animal relationship. We operationally define this positive relationship as the animal showing voluntary approach and spatial proximity (seeking) and signs of anticipation, pleasure, relaxation, or other indicators of a rewarding experience from interacting with the human. For research, we recommend accounting for the baseline human–animal relationship in the animal's everyday life, and incorporating a control treatment rather than only comparing positive to negative interaction treatments. Furthermore, animal characteristics, such as previous experience, genetics, and individual predisposition, as well as contextual characteristics related to the social and physical environment, may modulate the perception of humans by animals. The human–animal relationship is also influenced by human characteristics, such as the person's familiarity to the animal, attitudes, skills, and knowledge. We highlight implications for current practices and suggest simple solutions, such as paying attention to the animal's behavioral response to humans and providing choice and control to the animal in terms of when and how to interact with humans. Practical applications to achieve a positive perception of humans could be better utilized, such as by incorporating training principles, while keeping in mind trust and safety of both partners. Overall, there is growing evidence in the scientific literature that a positive human–animal relationship can bring intrinsic rewards to the animals and thereby benefit animal welfare. Further research is needed on the underlying processes to establish an effective positive human–animal relationship, especially in regard to the type, frequency, and length of human interaction necessary. In particular, the importance of providing animals with a sense of agency over their interactions with humans remains poorly understood.

Achieving and maintaining high standards of animal welfare is critical to the success of a modern zoo. Research has shown that an animal’s welfare is highly dependent on how various individual animal factors (e.g., species traits, genetics, temperament and previous experience) interact with environmental features (e.g., social grouping, enclosure design and sensory environment). One prominent feature of the zoo environment is the presence of visitors. Visitor contact can be unpredictable and intense, particularly in terms of auditory and visual interaction. Depending on an animal’s perception of this interaction, visitors can have either negative, neutral or positive impacts on zoo animal behaviour and welfare. This paper reviews the literature on the implications and potential opportunities of human-zoo animal interactions on animal behaviour and welfare, with the aim of stimulating interest, understanding and exploration of this important subject. The literature to date presents a mixed range of findings on the topic. It is possible this variation in the responses of zoo animals to visitors may be due to species-specific differences, the nature and intensity of the visitor interactions, enclosure design, and individual animal characteristics. Analysing these studies and better understanding animal preferences and motivations can provide insight into what animals find negatively and positively reinforcing in terms of visitor contact in a specific zoo setting. This understanding can then be applied to either safeguard welfare in cases where visitors can have a negative impact, or, conversely, it can be applied to highlight opportunities to encourage animal-visitor interaction in situations where animals experience positive emotions associated with visitor interaction.