|
Records |
Links |
|
Author |
Ahrendt, L.P.; Labouriau, R.; Malmkvist, J.; Nicol, C.J.; Christensen, J.W. |
![goto web page (via DOI) doi](img/doi.gif)
|
|
Title |
Development of a standard test to assess negative reinforcement learning in horses |
Type |
Journal Article |
|
Year |
2015 |
Publication |
Applied Animal Behaviour Science |
Abbreviated Journal |
Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. |
|
|
Volume |
169 |
Issue |
|
Pages |
38-42 |
|
|
Keywords |
Algometry; Horse behaviour; Learning performance; Operant conditioning; Pressure-release; Horse training |
|
|
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. |
|
|
Address |
|
|
|
Corporate Author |
|
Thesis |
|
|
|
Publisher |
|
Place of Publication |
|
Editor |
|
|
|
Language ![sorted by Language field, descending order (down)](img/sort_desc.gif) |
|
Summary Language |
|
Original Title |
|
|
|
Series Editor |
|
Series Title |
|
Abbreviated Series Title |
|
|
|
Series Volume |
|
Series Issue |
|
Edition |
|
|
|
ISSN |
0168-1591 |
ISBN |
|
Medium |
|
|
|
Area |
|
Expedition |
|
Conference |
|
|
|
Notes |
|
Approved |
no |
|
|
Call Number |
Equine Behaviour @ team @ |
Serial |
6650 |
|
Permanent link to this record |
|
|
|
|
Author |
Abeyesinghe, S.M.; Nicol, C.J.; Hartnell, S.J.; Wathes, C.M. |
![find record details (via OpenURL) openurl](img/xref.gif)
|
|
Title |
Can domestic fowl, Gallus gallus domesticus, show self-control? |
Type |
Journal Article |
|
Year |
2005 |
Publication |
Animal Behaviour. |
Abbreviated Journal |
Anim. Behav. |
|
|
Volume |
70 |
Issue |
1 |
Pages |
1-11 |
|
|
Keywords |
|
|
|
Abstract |
An important aspect of cognition is whether animals live exclusively in the present or can anticipate the future. Defined as self-control, the ability to choose a large, remote reinforcer over a small, proximate reinforcer available at the same frequency has been examined in a number of species, often proving difficult to demonstrate. We investigated self-control for food in domestic fowl using a standard two-key operant task and an equivalent two-choice return maze (TCRM) task. When hens chose between a 2-s delay to a 3-s feed access (impulsive) and a 6-s delay to a 7-s feed access (self-control), they appeared unable to discriminate in the TCRM but were impulsive in the operant task. We explored reasons for not choosing self-control in the operant task, first by examining the relation between feed access time and actual feed intake. A second operant experiment examined whether failure to show self-control could be attributed to an inability to combine the delay and access (quantity) reward information associated with choices to reach overall predictions of value. New hens chose between a 2-s delay to a 3-s feed access (impulsive) and either a 22-s delay to a 22-s feed access (standard self-control) or a 6-s delay to a 22-s feed access (jackpot self-control). While hens were impulsive in the standard condition, they showed significant and pronounced self-control in the jackpot condition, eliminating the possibility of an absolute cognitive constraint. Impulsive behaviour can instead be explained by temporal discounting: perceived depreciation of reward value as a function of the uncertainty associated with delay. Implications for welfare are discussed. |
|
|
Address |
|
|
|
Corporate Author |
|
Thesis |
|
|
|
Publisher |
|
Place of Publication |
|
Editor |
|
|
|
Language ![sorted by Language field, descending order (down)](img/sort_desc.gif) |
|
Summary Language |
|
Original Title |
|
|
|
Series Editor |
|
Series Title |
|
Abbreviated Series Title |
|
|
|
Series Volume |
|
Series Issue |
|
Edition |
|
|
|
ISSN |
|
ISBN |
|
Medium |
|
|
|
Area |
|
Expedition |
|
Conference |
|
|
|
Notes |
|
Approved |
no |
|
|
Call Number |
Equine Behaviour @ team @ |
Serial |
2897 |
|
Permanent link to this record |