Please note that papers should be submitted to ScholarOne via this link.

Format-neutral submission

Animal Welfare has introduced format-neutral submissions for original submissions only. This means that authors do not need to format their article to journal style at this stage, and figures and tables can be kept in their original locations in the text. We do ask, however, that your original submission:

1. is in an easily readable layout
2. is continuously line-numbered
3. contains information on ethical considerations associated with the study/work
4. contains a section on Animal Welfare Implications of the study/work

This will aid our Editors and Reviewers in reviewing your paper. Please note that revised manuscripts will be subject to full formatting requirements of the journal, which can be found below.

Article types

Animal Welfare publishes the following article types:

Research Article

Article based on original research, scientific studies, or well-conducted surveys.

Technical Contribution

Articles, suitable for a scientific journal, on practical methods of assessing or improving animal welfare, and on aspects of research methodology or technology.

Review Papers

A good review article should be theory- and evidence-based, and advance knowledge and original thinking. It should be accurate, comprehensive, and rigorous, stimulate debate and provide recommendations for future enquiry. 

Review papers can be one of the following:

• Scoping Review. The purpose of a scoping review is to identify knowledge gaps, scope a body of literature, clarify concepts, or to investigate research conduct. For further guidance, please refer to Munn et al., 2018.
•  Systematic Review. A systematic review answers a defined research question by collecting and summarizing all empirical evidence that fits pre-specified eligibility criteria. Please make use of PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) whenever applicable.
• Meta-Analysis. A meta-analysis is the use of statistical methods to summarize the results of studies included in a systematic review. Please make use of PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) whenever applicable.

Horizon Topic

A Horizon Topic is a discussion paper that presents new ways of considering a research topic, area, or method. Like a review article, it should stimulate debate and provide recommendations for future enquiry. The article should make reference to the established literature.

Opinion Paper

An Opinion Paper is a discussion paper that reflects critically on a research topic, area, or method. Like a review article, it should stimulate debate and provide recommendations for future enquiry. The article should make reference to the established literature.

Article Commentary

An item whose subject or focus is another article or articles; this article comments on the other article(s). 

Letter to the Editor

Letter to the journal, typically commenting upon a published item. If the item includes original research or substantial analysis, please consider submitting as Opinion Paper or Horizon Topic.

The journal also publishes Editorials written by staff or Editors of the journal; and Book Reviews, which are by invitation only.

General information / Structuring your manuscript

Manuscripts must be written in the (British) English language, except for quotations and references when they differ from this standard. The manuscript should not exceed 10,000 words.

We encourage the use of first names in the author list (e.g. Rosalind E. Franklin), but initials may be used if preferred by the authors

The title should be as short as possible whilst reflecting the content of the article to the greatest extend. Please include the name of the species studied where appropriate.

The manuscript (except Horizon and Opinion Papers) should usually be organised into the following sections:

1. Abstract (followed by keywords)
2. Introduction
3. Materials and Methods (including statistical analyses)
4. Results
5. Discussion
6. Conclusion
7. Animal welfare implications (obligatory)
8. Competing Interests
9. Acknowledgements
10. References

Horizon and Opinion Papers often do not fit the above format, and they can therefore have a different organisation, with section headings that are appropriate for the subject being presented and discussed. They should, however, always include an Abstract, Keywords, and References, and preferably a section on Animal Welfare Implications. Whenever relevant, Ethical Considerations and Competing Interests should also be included.

Abstract & Keywords preparation

The abstract can be up to 250 words long and should outline clearly and concisely the main findings of the study, ending in a brief statement on the conclusions and animal welfare implications of the work. The abstract should not contain references nor details of statistical analyses, such as P-values. A minimum of 4 and a maximum of 6 keywords should be included in alphabetical order. Please populate the keywords as far as possible with terms that are NOT in the title or abstract.

Material and Methods

The description of the methods should be sufficiently detailed to allow replication of the work. In studies involving animals, please provide details of numbers used and of species, strain, age, sex, source, and other relevant characters. If the animals were kept in captivity, provide relevant details of housing, feeding and management, including type of housing and environment, diet and feeding regime, group size and composition, and acclimation and routine management procedures.

In preparation of manuscripts describing work on live animals, authors should use the ARRIVE and PREPARE guidelines as checklists. In addition, the STRANGE framework may be taken into consideration.

Full details should be given of experimental design, procedures, and testing or observational regimes. 

For review articles, information should be provided on search terms and databases used, restrictions imposed, criteria for inclusion or rejection, and any other details to allow replication of the work. Please make use of PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) whenever applicable.

Ethical considerations

Where ethical considerations arise (e.g. if procedures compromise animal welfare or give rise to other ethical concerns, such as when human subjects are involved), these must be addressed in the methods section. Any ethical implications and justifications of the experimental design or procedures should be described; details should be provided of licences or other permissions required for the work from ethical review bodies. If ethical approval was not required to carry out the study, this should be made explicit, and a detailed justification given in the methods section. Measures undertaken to minimise the adverse welfare impact on animals involved, including choice of sample size, use of pilot tests and predetermined rules for intervention, should be described. The fate of all animals used in the study should be detailed. Steps taken to enhance the welfare of animals involved (e.g. through environmental enrichment) should also be outlined. See also Research Ethics: Animal research under Publishing Ethics. 

Data analyses

Description of the statistical analyses should also be included as a subdivision of the methods section. Data should be subjected to appropriate statistical analyses, with the chosen methods clearly described. Relevant references or details of software packages should be cited.

Results

When expressing statistical probabilities, the exact P-value with at least two significant digits should be indicated, e.g. P = 0.29, P = 0.036. For P-values less than 0.001, the use of P < 0.001 is preferred (capital, italic P, single space either side of < or = sign). Please use the following style: n = 7; ns (to indicate not significant);  F_5,25 = 2.61; (or, where appropriate, indicate the number of degrees of freedom (as df = 3).

All P-values above 0.05 should be reported as non-significant, including when below 0.10 unless strong reasons can be given to present them as tendencies. In that case, these should be clearly described as such and not confounded with statistically significant results. 

Figures and Tables

Please make sure that all headings for Figures and Tables are comprehensible in isolation, i.e. without the need to read the text of the article. The headings should describe what the Table or Figure contains if seen as a stand-alone item. Please include species common name and n-values where relevant and explain any abbreviations. Also make sure that any colours used are distinguishable if printed in grey-scale or if the reader is colour-blind.

Animal welfare implications

This is a stand-alone section, describing the implications of the results on animal welfare. It can be set out at the end of the text, or as a subdivision of the discussion or conclusion.

Competing interests

Competing interests can be financial or non-financial, professional, or personal, and can arise in relationship to an institution, organization, or another person. For all authors, please provide details of all known financial, professional, and personal relationships that could bias the work. Please also clarify whether the funder of the work played any role in the study design; collection, analysis, and interpretation of data; writing of the paper; and/or decision to submit to Animal Welfare.

If there are no competing interests, please write ‘None’ in this section.

Acknowledgements

As well as acknowledging individuals that provided help and advice, please provide information on the sources of financial support.

References

List references at the end of the text in alphabetical and chronological order of authors. Book and journal titles should be quoted in full, with the original spelling and punctuation. Please include DOI numbers for all references that have one assigned.

Please use the following standard for formatting references (example below). 

Luna D, Vásquez R, Yáñez J and Tadich T 2018 The relationship between working horse welfare state and their owners’ empathy level and perception of equine pain. Animal Welfare 27: 115–123. https://doi.org/10.7120/09627286.27.2.115 

Please use short URLs for references to webpages and indicate the date when they were last accessed.

If you are using referencing software, please use the 'Cambridge University Press, Cambridge A (author-date)' style. This will ensure that your references are formatted correctly.

In-text citations should be listed as follows:

• One author: (Rutledge 2009); Rutledge (2009)
• Two authors: (de Jong & Nikolik 2021); De Jong and Nikolik (2021)
• Three and more authors: (Velde et al. 2002); Velde et al. (2002)

References in chronological order should be separated by semicolon e.g. (Velde et al. 2002; Bock & van Huik 2007)

Supplementary materials

Material that is not essential to understanding or supporting a manuscript, but which may nonetheless be relevant or interesting to readers, may be submitted as supplementary material. Supplementary material will be published online alongside your article, but will not be published in the pages of the journal. Types of supplementary material may include, but are not limited to, appendices, additional tables or figures, datasets, videos, and sound files.

Supplementary materials will not be typeset or copyedited, so should be supplied exactly as they are to appear online. Please see our general guidance on supplementary materials for further information.

Where relevant we encourage authors to publish additional qualitative or quantitative research outputs in an appropriate repository, and cite these in manuscripts.