COMPASS Guidelines for Conducting Welfare-Focused Research into Behaviour Modification of Animals
Researchers are increasingly engaged in studies to determine and correct negative welfare consequences of animal husbandry and behaviour modification procedures, not least in response to industries' growing need to maintain their social licence through demonstrable welfare standards that address public expectations. To ensure that welfare recommendations are scientifically credible, the studies must be rigorously designed and conducted, and the data produced must be interpreted with full regard to conceptual, methodological, and experimental design limitations. This commentary provides guidance on these matters. In addition to, and complementary with, the ARRIVE guidelines that deal with animal studies in general, there is a need for additional specific advice on the design of studies directed at procedures that alter behaviour, whether through training, handling, or restraint. The COMPASS Guidelines offer clear direction for conducting welfare-focused behaviour modification research. They stand for the following: Controls and Calibration, emphasising rigorous design, baseline measures, equipment calibration, and replicability; Objectivity and Open data, ensuring transparency, validated tools, and data accessibility; Motivation and Methods, with a focus on learning theory, behavioural science, and evidence-based application of positive reinforcers and aversive stimuli; Precautions and Protocols, embedding the precautionary principle, minimising welfare harms, listing stop criteria, and using real-time monitoring; Animal-centred Assessment, with multimodal welfare evaluation, using physiological, behavioural, functional, and objective indicators; Study ethics and Standards, noting the 3Rs (replacement, reduction, and refinement), welfare endpoints, long-term effects, industry independence, and risk-benefit analysis; and Species-relevance and Scientific rigour, facilitating cross-species applicability with real-world relevance and robust methodology. To describe these guidelines, the current article is organised into seven major sections that outline detailed, point-by-point considerations for ethical and scientifically rigorous design. It concludes with a call for continuous improvement and collaboration. A major purpose is to assist animal ethics committees when considering the design of experiments. It is also anticipated that these Guidelines will assist reviewers and editorial teams in triaging manuscripts that report studies in this context.
Authors
- Amanda K. Warren-Smith (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7080-2912)
- Colleen Brady (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3828-9917)
- Cristina Wilkins (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0006-4222-1727)
- Andrew N. McLean (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6971-7961)
- Melissa Starling (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2394-3234)
- Orla Doherty
- Cathrynne Henshall (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0279-8805)
- Kate Fenner (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0649-3278)
- Katrina Merkies (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9462-4150)
- Ella Bradshaw-Wiley
- Paul McGreevy (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7220-8378)
- Caleigh Copelin
- Jeppe H. Christensen
- Bidda Jones
- Barbara Padalino
- Lisa Ashton (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0005-8713-518X)
- Mette Uldahl
- Rimini Quinn
- Rafael Freire
- Claire O’ Brien
- Amy Lykins
- David J. Mellor
Institutions
- University College Dublin (IE)
- The University of Sydney (AU)
- Charles Sturt University (AU)
- Aberystwyth University (GB)
- The University of Queensland (AU)
- Aarhus University (DK)
- Purdue University West Lafayette (US)
- Vejle Sygehus (DK)
- Hartpury University (GB)
- Energy International (United States) (US)
- Paddington Cat Hospital (AU)
- Institute of Biological, Environmental and Rural Sciences (GB)
- Massey University (NZ)
- Southern Cross University (AU)
- University of Guelph (CA)
- Foster-Miller (United States) (US)
- University of New England (AU)
- University of Bologna (IT)
Publication Details
- Journal
- Animals
- Published
- 2026-01-09
- DOI
- https://doi.org/10.3390/ani16020206
- Citations
- 2
- Primary Topic
- Animal Behavior and Welfare Studies
- Type
- article
- Field-Weighted Citation Impact
- 91.84