Elsevier

Applied Animal Behaviour Science

Volume 173, December 2015, Pages 60-67
Applied Animal Behaviour Science

The influence of body region, handler familiarity and order of region handled on the domestic cat's response to being stroked

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2014.11.002Get rights and content

Highlights

  • Cats stroked in the caudal region show greatest negative behavioural responses.

  • Stroking by owners led to higher negative behavioural responses than stroking by strangers.

  • Order of cat body area touched does not influence behavioural response exhibited.

Abstract

The domestic cat is now one of the most common pet species in the Western world. As part of its role as a pet, cats are expected to not only tolerate but enjoy being touched. This study consisted of two experiments, with the first investigating the influence of body region touched and handler familiarity on the domestic cat's behavioural response to being stroked. The second experiment extended this work by investigating the influence of order of body region touched on behavioural responses. Both handler familiarity and body region stroked significantly influenced negative behavioural responses. Familiar handling, in comparison to unfamiliar handling, led to significantly higher negative behavioural scores displayed by the cats (score of 8.5 versus 5.0 respectively, p = 0.001). When considering the different body regions investigated, the caudal region produced the highest negative scores both when handled by the unfamiliar person (Experiment 1: score of 2.0 in comparison to scores of 0.0–1.0 for other studied body regions, p = 0.046) and by the familiar person (Experiment 2: score of 2.0 in comparison to a score of 1.0 for each other studied body region, p = 0.002). Order of body region touched had no significant bearing on behavioural responses exhibited. Results suggest that handling of cats should avoid the caudal region and highlight the need for further investigation into the owner–cat relationship.

Introduction

The domestic cat's (Felis silvestris catus) role in western society has changed over time from that of rodent catcher to predominantly one of social companion (Bradshaw et al., 2012), thus causing greater human desire for feline physical interaction (Bernstein, 2007). Such interaction has been reported to have several human-related health, psychological and social benefits, including reduced minor health problems such as headaches, colds and flu (Serpell, 1991), improved mood (Turner and Riger, 2001, Turner et al., 2003) and increased facilitation of social interactions (Bernstein et al., 2000). While we have come to expect cats to not only tolerate, but also enjoy being touched (Bernstein, 2007), there is little empirical research investigating whether this is actually the case. Stroking, a common form of human–animal interaction, has been shown to have stress-reducing effects for a range of social species, including farm animals (e.g. cows, Waiblinger et al., 2004), companion animals (e.g. shelter dogs, Hennessy et al., 1998) and laboratory animals (e.g. rats, Maruyama et al., 2012). Such results are consistent with reported benefits associated with intra-specific physical interactions, such as allo-grooming in highly social animals (e.g. ring-tailed macaques, Boccia et al., 1989; meerkats, Kutsukake and Clutton-Brock, 2006; horses, VanDirendonck and Spruijt, 2012; cattle, Sato and Tarumizu, 1993).

The domestic cat has only relatively recently in evolutionary terms been considered to have the ability to demonstrate social behaviour, with social grouping in free-ranging individuals generally depending on food distribution and relatedness (Crowell-Davies, 2003, Crowell-Davis et al., 2004). Within such groups positive, physical interactions generally only occur between close affiliates and take two predominant forms: allo-grooming, where one cat licks another; and allo-rubbing, where two cats rub parts of their body against one another (Bradshaw and Cameron-Beaumont, 2000, Crowell-Davis et al., 2004). Both physical interactions commonly take place at body areas rich in scent glands, primarily the peri-oral and temporal areas, although allo-rubbing is also sometimes witnessed in the form of tail wrapping, involving the caudal (base of tail) area (Crowell-Davies, 2003; Verberne and de Boer, 1976).

Results from studies in other species indicate that human instigated tactile interactions are most positive when they occur at regions normally involved in positive intra-specific contact (e.g. horses, Feh and de Mazieres, 1993, McBride et al., 2004; and dairy cattle, Schemied et al., 2008). Initial work by Soennichsen and Chamove (2002) has investigated whether this is the case for the domestic cat. They examined the behavioural response of cats to human stroking in four different body areas, three of which were gland sites (peri-oral, temporal and caudal), concluding that cats showed a clear preference for stroking in the temporal region, with the caudal region being rated as the most negative, although the latter was a non-significant tendency. However, there were a number of methodological limitations in their study, including a very small sample size (n = 9), pseudo-replication and several variables inadequately controlled, for example, a lack of consistency of familiarity of handler, handling of different non-gland areas for different cats and recording of data for some cats by untrained individuals. This may have confounded the results.

The aim of this study was therefore to address the methodological issues of Soennichsen and Chamove (2002) by re-investigating whether the body area of the cat handled has an influence on the behavioural responses it exhibits, extending the previous work to eight body regions (identified as commonly handled by owners in pilot data). In addition, this study also aimed to examine the influence of handler familiarity on behavioural responses, since studies on other species have demonstrated that animals are more likely to find handling by a familiar handler positive when compared with handling by someone unfamiliar (e.g. cattle, Boivin et al., 1998; rats, Davis et al., 1997). Furthermore, while Soennichsen and Chamove (2002) randomised the order of body areas touched, examination of feline rubbing has revealed that cats rub against objects and other individuals in a set order starting at the head and facial region and, in the case of allo-rubbing, often finishing at the tail (Crowell-Davies, 2003, Feldman, 1994). It is unknown whether such an order is important in human–cat interactions. Thus, a second experiment was carried out which examined the influence of sequence of body areas handled, by a familiar individual (their owner) on the behavioural responses exhibited by the cats.

Section snippets

Method

The School of Life Sciences Ethics Committee at the University of Lincoln approved all experimental procedures used in Experiments 1 and 2 of this study.

Discussion

This study sought to determine the influence of handler familiarity, body region and sequence of body region handled on behaviour exhibited in response to handling in the domestic cat. Handler familiarity and body region stroked were both found to influence the behavioural responses exhibited by cats during handling. Conversely, sequence of areas touched had no influence over such behavioural responses.

Conclusions

Overall, the results from this study suggest that while sequence of handling different body areas had no apparent effect on behavioural responses exhibited by domestic cats, handling of the caudal region, regardless of handler, produced the greatest number of negative behavioural responses. In addition, when handling by a familiar person and an unfamiliar person were compared, the greatest number of negative behavioural responses was elicited during handling by the familiar person. Learnt

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the owners of the cats for allowing their cats to take part in the study. H. Thompson was awarded funding from the University of Lincoln's UROS (Undergraduate Research Opportunities Scheme) to carry out Experiment 2 under the supervision of S Ellis and H Zulch.

References (43)

  • N. Kutsukake et al.

    Social functions of allo-grooming in coooperatively breeding meerkats

    Anim. Behav.

    (2006)
  • S.D. McBride et al.

    A preliminary study on the effect of massage to reduce stress in the horse

    J. Equine. Vet. Sci.

    (2004)
  • P. Mongillo et al.

    Selective attention to humans in companion dogs, Canis familiaris

    Anim. Behav.

    (2010)
  • I. Rodan

    Understanding feline behaviour and application for appropriate handling and management

    Top. Companion Anim. Med.

    (2010)
  • I. Rodan et al.

    AAFP and ISFM feline-friendly handling guidelines

    J. Feline Med. Surg.

    (2011)
  • M. Bamberger et al.

    Signalment factors, comorbidity, and trends in behaviour diagnoses in cats: 736 cases (1991-2001)

    JAVMA

    (2006)
  • B.V. Beaver

    Feline Behaviour: A Guide for Veterinarians

    (1992)
  • P.L. Bernstein

    Chapter 3. The human-cat relationship

  • P.L. Bernstein et al.

    Animal-assisted therapy enhances resident social interaction and initiation in long-term care facilities

    Anthrozoös

    (2000)
  • J. Bradshaw et al.

    The signalling repetoire of the domestic cat and its undomesticated relatives

  • J.W.S. Bradshaw et al.

    Chapter 1. The cat: Domestication and biology

    The Behaviour of the Domestic Cat

    (2012)
  • Cited by (0)

    View full text