| 
Citations
 | 
   web
Jankunis, E. S., & Whishaw, I. Q. (2013). Sucrose Bobs and Quinine Gapes: Horse (Equus caballus) responses to taste support phylogenetic similarity in taste reactivity. Behavioural Brain Research, 256, 284–290.
toggle visibility
Gholib, G., Heistermann, M., Agil, M., Supriatna, I., Purwantara, B., Nugraha, T. P., et al. (2018). Comparison of fecal preservation and extraction methods for steroid hormone metabolite analysis in wild crested macaques. Primates, 59(3), 281–292.
toggle visibility
Ruid, D. B., Paul, W. J., Roell, B. J., Wydeven, A. P., Willging, R. C., Jurewicz, R. L., et al. (2009). Wolf-Human Conflicts and Management in Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Michigan. In A. P. Wydeven, T. R. Van Deelen, & E. J. Heske (Eds.), Recovery of Gray Wolves in the Great Lakes Region of the United States: An Endangered Species Success Story (pp. 279–295). New York, NY: Springer New York.
toggle visibility
Marinsek, N. L., Gazzaniga, M. S., & Miller, M. B. (2016). Chapter 17 – Split-Brain, Split-Mind. In S. Laureys, O. Gosseries, & G. Tononi (Eds.), The Neurology of Conciousness (Second Edition) (pp. 271–279). San Diego: Academic Press.
toggle visibility
Zajonc, R. B. (1965). Social Facilitation. Science, 149(3681), 269–274.
toggle visibility
Esch, L., Wöhr, C., Erhard, M., & Krueger, K. (2019). Horses� (Equus Caballus) Laterality, Stress Hormones, and Task Related Behavior in Innovative Problem-Solving. Animals, 9(5), 265.
toggle visibility
().9(5), 265.
toggle visibility
Lee, P. C. (2003). Innovation as a behavioural response to environmental challenges. In S. M. Reader and K. N. Laland (Ed.), Animal Innovation (pp. 261–279). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
toggle visibility
Hendriksen, P., Elmgreen, K., & Ladewig, J. (2011). Trailer-loading of horses: Is there a difference between positive and negative reinforcement concerning effectiveness and stress-related signs? J. Vet. Behav., 6(5), 261–266.
toggle visibility
Amici, F., Widdig, A., Lehmann, J., & Majolo, B. (2019). A meta-analysis of interindividual differences in innovation. Anim. Behav., 155, 257–268.
toggle visibility