Abstract: The biological diversity of a species gives rise to individual differences in behavioural tendency. Traditionally, this variation has been considered to be of little scientific importance or value, but the description and quantification of the fundamental basis of this variability is relevant to many aspects of equine science. The reliable identification of these features may allow the development of more accurate diagnostic and prognostic indicators for a range of clinical diseases. Biologically based traits also provide a more rational basis for selective management and breeding programmes in which specific behavioural tendencies are sought. Individual differences in behaviour also reflect the range of subjective feelings experienced by animals and therefore need to be understood by those concerned with animal welfare. Psychometric techniques concerned with the assessment of personality may provide a suitable basis for scientific study in this field. Potentially methodologies include: behavioural tests, objective behaviour measures or the quantification of reports from those familiar with the subjects. The assessment of the validity and reliability of the variables measured in these tests is an integral part of their development. Interobserver correlation in an experiment based on the subjective rating of 20 horses with respect to 14 familiar terms used to describe horse personality was generally low. This suggests that, with the exception of the terms 'flighty' and 'sharp', the empirical terminology commonly used to describe horse personality is unreliable.

Abstract: To achieve optimal performance in equine sports as well as in leisure not only the physical abilities of the horse should be considered, but also the horse's personality. Besides temperamental aspects, like emotionality, or the horse's reactivity towards humans in handling situations, the learning ability of the horse is another relevant personality trait. To study whether differences in learning performance are consistent over time and whether individual learning performance differs between learning tests or is affected by emotionality, 39 young horses (Dutch Warmblood) were tested repeatedly in two learning tests. An aversive stimulus (AS) was used in one learning test (the avoidance learning test) and a reward was used in the other learning test (the reward learning test). During both learning tests behaviour as well as heart rate were measured. Each test was executed four times, twice when horses were 1 year of age, and twice when they were 2 years of age. Half of the horses received additional physical training from 6 months onwards. In both tests horses could be classified as either performers, i.e. completing the daily session, or as non-performers, i.e. returning to the home environment without having completed the daily session. There were some indications that emotionality might have caused non-performing behaviour, but these indications are not convincing enough to exclude other causes. Furthermore, there seem to be no simple relationships between measures of heart rate, behavioural responses putatively related to emotionality and learning performance. Horses revealed consistent individual learning performances within years in both tests, and in the avoidance learning test also between years. There was no significant correlation between learning performances in the avoidance learning test and the learning performances in the reward learning test. It is concluded that individual learning abilities are consistent over a short time interval for an avoidance learning test and a reward learning test and over a longer time for the avoidance learning test. Furthermore, results indicate that some horses perform better when they have to learn to avoid an aversive stimulus while others perform better when they are rewarded after a correct response. It is suggested that these differences may be relevant to design optimal individual training programmes and methods.