You are here

Results AnCom pt 2

Submitted by cwcasey on Wed, 11/14/2018 - 19:32

While collecting data, intra-personal reliability analysis was conducted as to maintain a high level of accuracy. Similar to the Time budget analysis (Figure 1 and Figure 2) a subset of behaviors was derived from the original list in order to best capture data in as few keystrokes as possible. Between a series of tests, multiple reliability tests were conducted in order to elevate the overall original score of 30 to a high of 50. This means that during the scoring process, we were able to successfully line up the correct timestamp and behavior 32 out of 63 times. When the tests were broken down in order to see the reliability of each behavior; feeding behaviors scored 41, play behaviors scored 44, grooming scored 19, communication scored 21, and locomotive behaviors scored 18.

    Once the reliability scores were assessed, we used the selected behaviors to conduct a time budget analysis (Figure 1). Compared are the proportions of time spent Feeding (53%), Playing (8%), Grooming (16%), Communicating (9%), and Locomoting (13%). Behaviors were analyzed over a 10 minute span and organized in order to gauge which set of behavior is more prevalent over the monitored time span. Such results are indicative of the foals selective behavior when in its homeostatic environment. After the original time budget analysis was conducted, it was important to us to see what the break down of the behaviors were like when the foal was in the presence of its mother, when it was with another foal, and when it was alone (Figure 2). Focusing on the feeding behaviors and communicative behaviors, we observed that feeding took up a larger proportion of time, the foal seldom fed with other foals, and chose to feed more with its mother. Conversely, we observed that the foal primarily decided to communicate with its mother as opposed to other foals or sending signals by itself.



This paragraph is well organized and flows nicely. I think this results nicely allows the reader to follow through the results without giving to much into analysis, which is what a good reults does. 

I like the organization... I would however expand in your conclusion paragraph and provide a bit more detail.