Table 6.

Variable loading of PCA describing pig-stimulus behavioral proximity.

	Human proximity score (HproxPC1)	Object proximity score (OproxPC1)
	Percentage on axis
Cumulative inertia (%)	63.075	46.988
Latency to approach stimulus zone	1.304	0.031
Number of times in stimulus zone	1.859	0.204
Mean duration in stimulus zone	13.311	26.097
Total time in stimulus zone	18.363	31.575
Total time all contacts (human)	16.822	–
Total number of all contacts (human)	16.191	–
Total time of initiated contacts toward stimulus	15.834	30.142
Total number of initiated contacts toward stimulus	16.318	11.951
	Relative cumulative values
Latency to approach stimulus zone	6.578	0.087
Number of times in stimulus zone	−9.378	−0.575
Mean duration in stimulus zone	−67.165	−73.574
Total time in stimulus zone	−92.657	−89.020
Total time all contacts	−84.882	–
Total number of all contacts	−81.699	–
Total time of initiated contacts toward stimulus	−79.899	−84.978
Total number of initiated contacts toward stimulus	−82.342	−33.693

Only the first Principal component was kept to create a score to be used as an explanatory continuous variable. The first line of the table indicates the cumulative inertia explained by the selected PC, the percentage of (above) as well as the relative cumulative value (below) of a given parameter is indicated. Parameters having a percentage above the uniform distribution can be considered as explanatory parameters for the PC. Behavioral parameters used to build these scores were extracted from the first Choice test. For statistics, the behavioral proximity score toward each stimulus was matched according to the type of reunion the pig was experiencing (Human vs. Object): when reunited with the human, the behavioral proximity score toward the human (HproxPC1) was used, whereas when reunited with the object, the behavioral proximity score toward the object (OproxPC1) was used.