Next Article in Journal
Canine Smell Preferences—Do Dogs Have Their Favorite Scents?
Next Article in Special Issue
Reply to Semin et al. Can Humans Discriminate Horse ‘Fear’ Chemosignals from Control Chemosignals? Comment on “Sabiniewicz et al. A Preliminary Investigation of Interspecific Chemosensory Communication of Emotions: Can Humans (Homo sapiens) Recognise Fear- and Non-Fear Body Odour from Horses (Equus ferus caballus). Animals 2021, 11, 3499”
Previous Article in Journal
What Kinds of Dogs Are Used in Clinical and Experimental Research?
Previous Article in Special Issue
Working like a Dog: Exploring the Role of a Therapy Dog in Clinical Exercise Physiology Practice
 
 
Comment
Peer-Review Record

Can Humans Discriminate Horse ‘Fear’ Chemosignals from Control Chemosignals? Comment on Sabiniewicz et al. A Preliminary Investigation of Interspecific Chemosensory Communication of Emotions: Can Humans (Homo sapiens) Recognise Fear- and Non-Fear Body Odour from Horses (Equus ferus caballus). Animals 2021, 11, 3499

Animals 2022, 12(12), 1489; https://doi.org/10.3390/ani12121489
by Gün R. Semin 1,2,*, Nuno Gomes 1, Biagio D’Aniello 3 and Agnieszka Sabiniewicz 4
Reviewer 1:
Animals 2022, 12(12), 1489; https://doi.org/10.3390/ani12121489
Submission received: 17 March 2022 / Revised: 1 June 2022 / Accepted: 6 June 2022 / Published: 8 June 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Human-Animal Communication)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

I very much like this constructive and clear comment-paper. It elegantly adresses several methodological concerns and ends graciously with a suggestion for an alternative approach: Line 116: "A continuous measure of intensity, instead of a binary choice, would help quantify the extension of the confound introduced here by this variable." It would be interesting to complete this conclusion by briefly summarising & adressing all the previously discussed weaknesses (need for clear definitions & validation) in a similar way by suggesting concrete possible alternative approaches. 

Author Response

We appreciate the reviewer's kind comments and understand the need to conclude with 'concrete possible alternative approaches'. The revised version of the submission contains precisely that.

 

See attached revised paper.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Back to TopTop