Bias and Misrepresentation of Science Undermines Productive Discourse on Animal Welfare Policy: A Case Study

Kelly Jaakkola; Jason Bruck; Richard Connor; Stephen H Montgomery; Stephanie L King

doi:10.3390/ani10071118

Bias and Misrepresentation of Science Undermines Productive Discourse on Animal Welfare Policy: A Case Study

Kelly Jaakkola^*, Jason Bruck, Richard Connor, Stephen H Montgomery, Stephanie L King

^*Corresponding author for this work

School of Biological Sciences

Research output: Contribution to journal › Review article (Academic Journal) › peer-review

4 Citations (Scopus)

91 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Creating good animal welfare-related laws, regulations, and policies depends on accurate knowledge. To that end, scientific reviews that explain and contextualize the relevant research can be powerful tools for informing decision-makers, assuming these reviews represent the state of the scientific knowledge accurately and objectively. In this commentary, we examine the major flaws, biases, and misrepresentations of the scientific literature in one such recent review regarding the welfare and care of captive killer whales. Such pervasive problems, in this or any review, make it impossible to determine the true state of knowledge of the relevant issues, and can ultimately result in misinformed, arbitrary, or even harmful decisions about animals and their care.

Original language	English
Article number	1118
Number of pages	17
Journal	Animals
Volume	10
Issue number	7
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.3390/ani10071118
Publication status	Published - 29 Jun 2020

Keywords

animal welfare
misrepresentation
orca
killer whale
captivity
brain size
legislation
policy
management
bias

Access to Document

10.3390/ani10071118

Full-text PDF (final published version)
This is the final published version of the article (version of record). It first appeared online via MDPI at https://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/10/7/1118 . Please refer to any applicable terms of use of the publisher.
Final published version, 569 KBLicence: CC BY

Handle.net

Persistent link

Cite this

@article{314a3bed57db4ebba32565fb0ee80702,

title = "Bias and Misrepresentation of Science Undermines Productive Discourse on Animal Welfare Policy: A Case Study",

abstract = "Creating good animal welfare-related laws, regulations, and policies depends on accurate knowledge. To that end, scientific reviews that explain and contextualize the relevant research can be powerful tools for informing decision-makers, assuming these reviews represent the state of the scientific knowledge accurately and objectively. In this commentary, we examine the major flaws, biases, and misrepresentations of the scientific literature in one such recent review regarding the welfare and care of captive killer whales. Such pervasive problems, in this or any review, make it impossible to determine the true state of knowledge of the relevant issues, and can ultimately result in misinformed, arbitrary, or even harmful decisions about animals and their care.",

keywords = "animal welfare, misrepresentation, orca, killer whale, captivity, brain size, legislation, policy, management, bias",

author = "Kelly Jaakkola and Jason Bruck and Richard Connor and Montgomery, {Stephen H} and King, {Stephanie L}",

year = "2020",

month = jun,

day = "29",

doi = "10.3390/ani10071118",

language = "English",

volume = "10",

journal = "Animals",

issn = "2076-2615",

publisher = "MDPI AG",

number = "7",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Bias and Misrepresentation of Science Undermines Productive Discourse on Animal Welfare Policy

T2 - A Case Study

AU - Jaakkola, Kelly

AU - Bruck, Jason

AU - Connor, Richard

AU - Montgomery, Stephen H

AU - King, Stephanie L

PY - 2020/6/29

Y1 - 2020/6/29

N2 - Creating good animal welfare-related laws, regulations, and policies depends on accurate knowledge. To that end, scientific reviews that explain and contextualize the relevant research can be powerful tools for informing decision-makers, assuming these reviews represent the state of the scientific knowledge accurately and objectively. In this commentary, we examine the major flaws, biases, and misrepresentations of the scientific literature in one such recent review regarding the welfare and care of captive killer whales. Such pervasive problems, in this or any review, make it impossible to determine the true state of knowledge of the relevant issues, and can ultimately result in misinformed, arbitrary, or even harmful decisions about animals and their care.

AB - Creating good animal welfare-related laws, regulations, and policies depends on accurate knowledge. To that end, scientific reviews that explain and contextualize the relevant research can be powerful tools for informing decision-makers, assuming these reviews represent the state of the scientific knowledge accurately and objectively. In this commentary, we examine the major flaws, biases, and misrepresentations of the scientific literature in one such recent review regarding the welfare and care of captive killer whales. Such pervasive problems, in this or any review, make it impossible to determine the true state of knowledge of the relevant issues, and can ultimately result in misinformed, arbitrary, or even harmful decisions about animals and their care.

KW - animal welfare

KW - misrepresentation

KW - orca

KW - killer whale

KW - captivity

KW - brain size

KW - legislation

KW - policy

KW - management

KW - bias

UR - https://research-information.bris.ac.uk/en/publications/314a3bed-57db-4ebb-a325-65fb0ee80702

U2 - 10.3390/ani10071118

DO - 10.3390/ani10071118

M3 - Review article (Academic Journal)

C2 - 32610674

SN - 2076-2615

VL - 10

JO - Animals

JF - Animals

IS - 7

M1 - 1118

ER -

Bias and Misrepresentation of Science Undermines Productive Discourse on Animal Welfare Policy: A Case Study

Abstract

Keywords

Access to Document

Handle.net

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this