Abstract: The ability of horses to learn through social observation may ease the implementation of new management systems, because the use of automatic feeders etc. by naive horses could be facilitated by observation of experienced horses. However, previous studies found no documentation for observational learning abilities in horses. This study aimed to investigate the ability of horses to learn an instrumental task from a familiar conspecific when social interaction was allowed during the demonstration. Two similar experiments were performed. In the first experiment, Observer horses (n=11) participated in ten successive demonstrations, where a trained Demonstrator opened an operant device by pushing a sliding lid aside with the muzzle in order to obtain a food reward. Immediately after the demonstrations the Observer horses were given the opportunity to operate the device alone. Control horses (n=11) were aware that the device contained food but were presented to the operant device without demonstration of the task. The learning criterion was at least two openings. Accomplishment of and latency to accomplish the learning criterion, and investigative behaviour towards the operant device were recorded. Five Observers and one Control, out of the eleven horses in each treatment group, accomplished the learning criterion. Even though this presents a high odds ratio (OR) in favour of the Observer treatment (OR=7.6), there was no significant difference between the treatment groups (P=0.15). Analysis of investigative behaviour showed, however, that the demonstrations increased the motivation of the Observer horses to investigate the device. Subsequently, a similar experiment was performed in a practical setting with 44 test horses (mixed age, gender and breed). We used the same operant device and the same number and type of demonstrations, although the horses were held on a loose rope to minimise aggression. In this second experiment, six of 23 Observer horses and five of 21 Control horses learned the instrumental task, representing no influence of the demonstration. Thus, this study did not demonstrate an ability of horses to learn an instrumental task through observation.

Abstract: The millennia-old practices of horse training markedly predate and thus were isolated from the mid-twentieth century revelation of animal learning processes. From this standpoint, the progress made in the application and understanding of learning theory in horse training is reviewed including a discussion of how learning processes are employed or otherwise under-utilised in training. This review describes the process of habituation and the most commonly applied desensitisation techniques (systematic desensitisation, counter-conditioning, overshadowing, response prevention) and propose two additional techniques (approach conditioning and stimulus blending). The salience of different types of cues, the interaction of operant and classical conditioning and the impact of stress are also discussed. This paper also exposes the inflexibility and occasional inadequacy of the terminology of learning theory when translated from the research laboratory situation to the practical setting in horse training. While learning theory provides a rich toolbox for riders and trainers, the training process is subject to the simultaneous use of multiple learning processes. In addition, learning/behavioural outcomes and trained responses are not just the result of simple stimulus-response based interactions but are further shaped by arousal, affective and attachment states. More research is needed in these areas. For the field of equitation science to progress and to improve clarity and use of learning processes, changes in nomenclature are required. In particular, the use of the terms 'positive' and 'negative' as descriptive labels in both reinforcement and punishment modalities are unacceptably misleading for everyday use. These labels inhibit the understanding and recognition of the learning processes that these terms supposedly represent, yet the learning processes they describe are vital for horse riders, handlers and trainers to understand. We therefore propose that these labels should be re-labelled more appropriately as 'addition' or 'subtraction' reinforcement/punishment. This would enlighten trainers on the correct application of learning theory, and safety and welfare benefits for people and horses would follow. Finally it is also proposed that the term 'conflict theory' be taken up in equitation science to facilitate diagnosis of training-related behaviour disorders and thus enable the emergence of improved training practices. The optimal use of learning theory should be established as a fundamental principle in equestrian education.

Abstract: Most horses are trained by negative reinforcement. Currently, however, no standardised test for evaluating horses' negative reinforcement learning ability is available. The aim of this study was to develop an objective test to investigate negative reinforcement learning in horses. Twenty-four Icelandic horses (3 years old) were included in this study. The horses were tested in a pressure-release task on three separate days with 10, 7 and 5 trials on each side, respectively. Each trial consisted of pressure being applied on the hindquarter with an algometer. The force of the pressure was increased until the horse moved laterally away from the point of pressure. There was a significant decrease in required force over trials on the first test day (P<0.001), but not the second and third day. The intercepts on days 2 and 3 differed significantly from day 1 (P<0.001), but not each other. Significantly stronger force was required on the right side compared to the left (P<0.001), but there was no difference between first and second side tested (P=0.56). Individual performance was evaluated by median-force and the change in force over trials on the first test day. These two measures may explain different characteristics of negative reinforcement learning. In conclusion, this study presents a novel, standardised test for evaluating negative reinforcement learning ability in horses.

Abstract: REASONS FOR PERFORMING STUDY: Responses of horses in frightening situations are important for both equine and human safety. Considerable scientific interest has been shown in development of reactivity tests, but little effort has been dedicated to the development of appropriate training methods for reducing fearfulness. OBJECTIVES: To investigate which of 3 different training methods (habituation, desensitisation and counter-conditioning) was most effective in teaching horses to react calmly in a potentially frightening situation. HYPOTHESES: 1) Horses are able to generalise about the test stimulus such that, once familiar with the test stimulus in one situation, it appears less frightening and elicits a reduced response even when the stimulus intensity is increased or the stimulus is presented differently; and 2) alternative methods such as desensitisation and counter-conditioning would be more efficient than a classic habituation approach. METHODS: Twenty-seven naive 2-year-old Danish Warmblood stallions were trained according to 3 different methods, based on classical learning theory: 1) horses (n = 9) were exposed to the full stimulus (a moving, white nylon bag, 1.2 x 0.75 m) in 5 daily training sessions until they met a predefined habituation criterion (habituation); 2) horses (n = 9) were introduced gradually to the stimulus and habituated to each step before the full stimulus was applied (desensitisation); 3) horses (n = 9) were trained to associate the stimulus with a positive reward before being exposed to the full stimulus (counter-conditioning). Each horse received 5 training sessions of 3 min per day. Heart rate and behavioural responses were recorded. RESULTS: Horses trained with the desensitisation method showed fewer flight responses in total and needed fewer training sessions to learn to react calmly to test stimuli. Variations in heart rate persisted even when behavioural responses had ceased. In addition, all horses on the desensitisation method eventually habituated to the test stimulus whereas some horses on the other methods did not. CONCLUSIONS AND POTENTIAL RELEVANCE: Desensitisation appeared to be the most effective training method for horses in frightening situations. Further research is needed in order to investigate the role of positive reinforcement, such as offering food, in the training of horses.

Abstract: Prima facie, the acquisition of novel behaviors in animals through observation of conspecifics seems straightforward. There are, however, various mechanisms through which the behavior of animals can be altered from observing others. These mechanisms range from simple hard-wired contagious processes to genuine learning by observation, which differ fundamentally in cognitive complexity. They range from social facilitation and local enhancement to true social learning. The different learning mechanisms are the subject of this review, largely because research on learning by observation can be confounded by difficulties in interpretation owing to the looming possibility of associative learning infecting experimental results. While it is often assumed that horses are capable of acquiring new behavior through intra-species observation, research on social learning in horses includes a variety of studies some of which may overestimate the possession of higher mental abilities. Assuming such abilities in their absence can have welfare implications, e.g. isolating stereotypical horses on the assumption that these behaviors can be learned though observation by neighboring horses. This review summarizes the definitions and criteria for the various types of social transmission and social learning and reviews the current documentation for each type in horses with the aim of clarifying whether horses possess the ability to learn through true social learning. As social ungulates, horses evolved in open landscapes, exposed to predators and grazing most of the day. Being in close proximity to conspecifics may theoretically offer an opportunity to learn socially, however anti-predator vigilance and locating forage may not require the neural complexity of social learning. Given the significant energetic expense of brain tissue, it is likely that social facilitation and local enhancement may have been sufficient in the adaptation of equids to their niche. As a consequence, social learning abilities may be maladaptive in horses. Collectively, the review proposes a novel differentiation between social transmission (social facilitation, local and stimulus enhancement) and social learning (goal emulation, imitation). Horses are undoubtedly sensitive to intra-species transfer of information but this transfer does not appear to satisfy the criteria for social learning, and thus there is no solid evidence for true social learning in horses.