|
Krueger, K. (2014). “Pferdehaltung und Ethologie der Pferde” im Bachelorstudiengang Pferdewirtschaft. In : S. Lepp und C. Niederdrenk-Felgner (Ed.), Forschendes Lernen initiieren, umsetzen und reflektieren (pp. 54–81). Bielefeld: UniversitätsVerlag Webler.
|
|
Virányi, Z., Range, F., & Huber, L. (2008). Attentiveness toward others and social learning in domestic dogs. In L. S. Röska-hardy, & E. Neumann-held (Eds.), Learning from Animals?: Examining the Nature of Human Uniqueness (pp. 141–154). New York, NY: Psychology Press.
|
Pack, A. A., & Herman, L. M. (2004). Bottlenosed Dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) Comprehend the Referent of Both Static and Dynamic Human Gazing and Pointing in an Object-Choice Task. J. Comp. Psychol., 118(2), 160–171.
Abstract: The authors tested 2 bottlenosed dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) for their understanding of human-directed gazing or pointing in a 2-alternative object-choice task. A dolphin watched a human informant either gazing at or pointing toward 1 of 2 laterally placed objects and was required to perform a previously indicated action to that object. Both static and dynamic gaze, as well as static and dynamic direct points and cross-body points, yielded errorless or nearly errorless performance. Gaze with the informant's torso obscured (only the head was shown) produced no performance decrement, but gaze with eyes only resulted in chance performance. The results revealed spontaneous understanding of human gaze accomplished through head orientation, with or without the human informant's eyes obscured, and demonstrated that gaze-directed cues were as effective as point-directed cues in the object-choice task. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2009 APA, all rights reserved)
|
Proops, L., & McComb, K. (2010). Attributing attention: the use of human-given cues by domestic horses (Equus caballus). Anim. Cogn., 13(2), 197–205.
Abstract: Abstract Recent research has shown that domestic dogs are particularly good at determining the focus of human attention, often outperforming chimpanzees and hand-reared wolves. It has been suggested that the close evolutionary relationship between humans and dogs has led to the development of this ability; however, very few other domestic species have been studied. We tested the ability of 36 domestic horses to discriminate between an attentive and inattentive person in determining whom to approach for food. The cues provided were body orientation, head orientation or whether the experimenters’ eyes were open or closed. A fourth, mixed condition was included where the attentive person stood with their body facing away from the subjects but their head turned towards the subject while the inattentive person stood with their body facing the subject but their head turned away. Horses chose the attentive person significantly more often using the body cue, head cue, and eye cue but not the mixed cue. This result suggests that domestic horses are highly sensitive to human attentional cues, including gaze. The possible role of evolutionary and environmental factors in the development of this ability is discussed.
|
|
Croft, D. P., James, R., & Krause, J. (Eds.). (2008). Exploring Animal Social Networks. Princton: Princton University Press.
|
|
Whiten A., & Byrne, R. W. (Eds.). (1997). Machiavellian Intelligence II – Extensions and Evaluations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
|
|
Parrish, J. K., & Viscido, S. V. (2005). Traffic rules of fish schools: A review of agent-based approaches. In C. K. Hemelrijk (Ed.), Self-organisation and the evolution of social behaviour. (pp. 50–80). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
|
|
Krueger, K. (2014). Die Bedeutung der Schiefe, Händigkeit und sensorische Lateralität der Pferde. In Pferdetage Baden-Württemberg 2014. Stuttgart: Matthaes Medien.
|
|
Krueger, K. (2010). “Erfasst” das Pferd die menschliche Psyche". In M. Dettling, C. Opgen-Rhein, & M. Kläschen (Eds.), Pferdegestützte Therapie bei psychischen Erkrankungen (pp. 40–51). Stuttgart: Schattauer Verlag.
|
Clutton-Brock, T. H., & Harvey, P. H. (1980). Primates, brains and ecology. J. Zool. Lond., 190(3), 309–323.
Abstract: The paper examines systematic relationships among primates between brain size (relative to body size) and differences in ecology and social system. Marked differences in relative brain size exist between families. These are correlated with inter-family differences in body size and home range size. Variation in comparative brain size within families is related to diet (folivores have comparatively smaller brains than frugivores), home range size and possibly also to breeding system. The adaptive significance of these relationships is discussed.
|
