Abstract: The use of secondary reinforcement is widely accepted to support operant learning in animals. In farm animals, however, the efficacy of secondary reinforcement has up to now been studied systematically only in horses (“clicker training”), and the results are controversial. We investigated the impact of acoustical secondary reinforcement on voluntary, self-controlled visual discrimination learning of two-dimensional shapes in group-housed dwarf goats (Capra hircus). Learning tests were conducted applying a computer-controlled learning device that was integrated in the animals' home pen. Shapes were presented on a TFT-screen using a four-choice design. Drinking water was used as primary reinforcement. In the control group (Gcontrol, n = 5) animals received only primary reinforcement, whereas in the sound group (Gsound, n = 6) animals got additional acoustical secondary reinforcement. Testing recall of shapes which had been successfully learned by the goats 6 weeks earlier (T1), we found a weak impact of secondary reinforcement on daily learning success (P = 0.07), but not on the number of trials the animals needed to reach the learning criterion (trials to criterion, n.s.). Results in T1 indicated that dwarf goats did not instantly recall previously learned shapes, but, re-learned within 250-450 trials. When learning a set of new shapes (T2), there was a strong influence of secondary reinforcement on daily learning success and on trials to criterion. Animals in Gsound reached the learning criterion earlier (P < 0.05) and needed fewer trials (1320 versus 3700; P < 0.01), compared to animals in Gcontrol. Results suggest that acoustical secondary reinforcement supports visual discrimination learning of dwarf goats, especially when the task is new and the salience of S+ is low.

Abstract: Veterinary and management procedures often are aversive to the animals, resulting in physiological and behavioural stress reactions, which increase the risk of accidents and might lower performance. We investigated the effects of previous positive handling and of gentle interactions during the procedure on behaviour and heart rate in dairy cows during rectal palpation with sham insemination. Twenty cows were allocated randomly into two groups of 10 animals: handling, received additional positive handling over a period of four weeks by one person (handler); control, only routine handling by different caretakers. The week after the handling period, tests lasting 9 min, including 4 min rectal palpation, were carried out with each animal on four successive days in four situations in a balanced order: cow is alone during the test, with the handler, with an usual caretaker, or with an unknown person. Behaviour and heart rate were recorded. Previously handled animals had lower heart rate during tests (P<=0.05, n=19), kicked less when alone (P<=0.05, n=19) and tended to show less restless behaviour (P<=0.1, n=19). Cows were further calmed by gentle interactions during the test, but people differed remarkably. Cows showed less restless behaviour when gentled by the handler, both in the 4 min of rectal palpation and in the 9 min test period (each: P<=0.001, n=19). No significant stress reducing effect was found for the other two persons. In conclusion, stress reactions of cows during rectal palpation/insemination can be reduced by previous positive handling as well as by a person providing positive, gentle interactions during the procedure. The results underline the importance of positive, gentle interactions with the animals to enhance animal welfare and reduce the risk of accidents. They also show that people differ in the success to calm down the animals in aversive situations and indicate the need to investigate the characteristics responsible for the differences and identify the preconditions for a stress reducing effect in future research.

Abstract: From observations of intra-specific social grooming in cattle and studies on human stroking in other species, we hypothesised that cows' reactions to human stroking differ depending on the body regions being stroked. Moreover, we tested, whether cows `reactions to stroking change with the animals' experience of stroking. Sixty dairy cows were stroked in three different body regions, i.e. the withers, W, neck ventral, NV (both licked often in social grooming) and the lateral chest, LC (licked rarely), in a balanced order during 10-min sessions. Behavioural reactions and heart rate during stroking as well as reactions to the human just after stroking were recorded. Two test sessions were carried out with 3 weeks of treatment in-between. During this period, the cows were randomly allocated to four treatment groups: three groups received 5 min of daily stroking in either W, NV or LC and the last one (control group) was exposed to simple human presence. During stroking W and NV, cows showed longer neck stretching and ear hanging than during stroking LC (P < 0.001). Moreover, ear hanging was shown longer when W was stroked as compared to NV (P < 0.001), but neck stretching was observed longer during stroking NV as compared to W only after the treatment period (P < 0.01). In the first test session, more animals showed head shaking and head throwing during stroking W and NV than LC (P < 0.01), whereas in the second test session these behaviours were observed only in few animals. In the first test session heart rate was higher during stroking W than the other body regions (P <= 0.01). In the second test session, the lowest heart rate was found during stroking NV (P < 0.05). Finally, contact with the experimenter following stroking differed for the three body regions stroked in both test sessions (first: P = 0.06, second: P < 0.01); contact was shortest for LC. When comparing both test sessions, stretching the neck and ear hanging increased (P < 0.001), while head shaking and head throwing decreased (P < 0.05); there was no difference for heart rate and contact with the experimenter. The four treatments had no influence on reactions to stroking. To conclude, stroking of body regions often licked during social grooming led to more responses than stroking the one licked rarely. Some reactions, such as stretching the neck, are also observed during social licking. This suggests that cows may in part perceive human stroking of body regions often licked similarly to social licking. This knowledge could be of interest for an improvement in quality of human-cattle interactions.

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: Forty weanling Quarter Horses, from the Pitchfork Ranch, Dickens, Texas, were randomly assigned to one of five groups based on the amount of handling they would receive. The five groups were: (1) limited handling; (2) 1 week of handling; (3) 2 weeks of handling; (4) 3 weeks of handling; (5) continuous handling for 18 months. As 2-year-olds, the horses were tested in a simple place-learning T-maze after being preconditioned. A maximum of 30 daily trials were conducted for 20 consecutive days, with feed location alternating between sides on successive days. If a horse met the criterion of 11 out of 12 correct responses with 8 correct responses being consecutive, it was retired without completing the 30 trials. Group 1 made fewer correct responses during the 20 days than any other group except Group 3. All groups achieved learning by Day 10, but the most-handled group reached a consistently higher percentage of correct responses earlier than the less-handled groups. Group 5, the group receiving the most handling, was the least emotional, as determined by the animals' reactivity to a novel stimulus, and received the highest scores for trainability after being ridden. Preconditioning trainability scores, or estimates of the horses' ability to learn prior to conditioning and testing, tended to predict maze-learning ability. These scores were also significantly correlated with post-maze training scores.