Abstract: Personality ratings of 34 spotted hyenas (Crocuta crocuta) were made by 4 observers who knew the animals well. Analyses suggest that (a) hyena personality traits were rated with generally high reliability; (b) 5 broad dimensions (Assertiveness, Excitability, Human-Directed Agreeableness, Sociability, and Curiosity) captured about 75% of the total variance; (c) this dimensional structure could not be explained in terms of dominance status, sex, age, or appearance; and (d) as expected, female hyenas were more assertive than male hyenas. Comparisons with previous research provide evidence for the cross-species generality of Excitability, Sociability, and especially Assertiveness. Discussion focuses on methodological issues in research on animal personality and on the potential contributions this research can make for understanding the biological and environmental bases of personality.

Abstract: Abstract Especially in horses, personality traits play an important role because horses' behavior influences their quality as a riding partner. In contrast to that, no objective assessment of horses' personality traits is available at present. Although initial efforts are made in this field, a successful implementation of behavior tests into horse performance tests depends on the acceptance of the riders and breeders. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to assess the importance of personality traits to breeders and riders as well as the degree of riders' acceptance of a temperament test as a more objective means of assessing equine personality traits. Using a web-based survey consisting of a 41-item questionnaire, a total of 1087 competition riders (49.3%), breeders (39.0%), leisure riders (37.9%), and professional riders (8.6%) of 13 countries were recruited to participate in the survey. When asked to split 1000 Euro among the different traits listed in the breeding goal, respondents clearly assigned more weight to the personality-related character and temperament traits (least squares mean ± standard error; P < 0.005: €228.7 ± 17.6) and willingness to work (€123.0 ± 9.6) compared with performance traits, such as the quality of trot (€77.7 ± 6.9) or show jumping (€68.0 ± 12.3). Nevertheless, expected differences in relative weighting of traits between the different groups of riders were confirmed (e.g., character and temperament: €209.3 ± 6.1 [leisure riders] vs. €149.7 ± 5.4 [competition riders], P < 0.0001). When asking why personality traits are so important, the simplification of daily work with the horses (47.9%) and relationship between horse and human (44.9%) as well as a more comfortable and safer handling (31.5%) were most commonly listed. As much as 45.6% of all participants see quality problems with the current assessment and suggested the evaluation of all breeding animals (30.1%), followed by a better standardization of assessment procedures (25.5%) and a move to more objective criteria such as the introduction of a temperament test (20.3%) for solving the problems. The present survey revealed that behavior traits are very important to all groups of riders and breeders, although there are diverse opinions about it. According to the participants, there is a need for and a high potential in the move toward more objective assessment methods of horses' personality traits, and participants would support a restructuring of the current assessment.

Abstract: In recent years evidence has been accumulating that personalities are not only found in humans but also in a wide range of other animal species. Individuals differ consistently in their behavioural tendencies and the behaviour in one context is correlated with the behaviour in multiple other contexts. From an adaptive perspective, the evolution of animal personalities is still a mystery, because a more flexible structure of behaviour should provide a selective advantage. Accordingly, many researchers view personalities as resulting from constraints imposed by the architecture of behaviour (but see ref. 12). In contrast, we show here that animal personalities can be given an adaptive explanation. Our argument is based on the insight that the trade-off between current and future reproduction often results in polymorphic populations in which some individuals put more emphasis on future fitness returns than others. Life-history theory predicts that such differences in fitness expectations should result in systematic differences in risk-taking behaviour. Individuals with high future expectations (who have much to lose) should be more risk-averse than individuals with low expectations. This applies to all kinds of risky situations, so individuals should consistently differ in their behaviour. By means of an evolutionary model we demonstrate that this basic principle results in the evolution of animal personalities. It simultaneously explains the coexistence of behavioural types, the consistency of behaviour through time and the structure of behavioural correlations across contexts. Moreover, it explains the common finding that explorative behaviour and risk-related traits like boldness and aggressiveness are common characteristics of animal personalities.

Abstract: We collected data from 248 horses of different breeds, age, sex and use, forming four groups: 74 trotters, 70 gallop horses, 60 horseback archery horses and 44 police horses. All horses were trained and ridden/driven in a regular base. Caretakers or owners who were familiar with the target animals were asked to assess their horses’ temperament. The temperament scores were obtained with the 7-point scale questionnaire according to the Horse Personality Questionnaire which has 25 items and has previously been shown to be reliable for the assessment of personality in horses. It measures six personality components in horses: Dominance, Anxiousness, Excitability, Protection, Sociability and Inquisitiveness.
Component scores were calculated according to Lloyd, A.S., Martin, J.E., Bornett-Gauci, H.L.I., Wilkinson, R.G. (2008) Horse personality: Variation between breeds. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 112. 369–383. The component scores were compared across the four examined groups using the Kruskal–Wallis test. Post hoc multiple comparisons tests were then carried out to explore specific breed differences on each component. The value of alpha was set at 0.05 for all statistical tests.
Groups differed significantly regarding Anxiousness and Excitability, but no significant differences were found regarding Dominance, Protection, Sociability or Inquisitiveness among groups. This finding is in line with the findings of Lloyd et al. (2008) who showed that Anxiousness and Excitability components have the highest level of variation between breeds.In our study, gallop horses had the highest rank regarding Excitability and they differed significantly from police horses which had the lowest rank for this personality component. Interestingly gallop horses had the lowest rank regarding Anxiousness, and trotters got the highest rank in in this component.
According to our results gallop horses are the most extreme in their personality. It is conceivable that being excitable is a more favourable trait for a race horse than for a working police horse. However, it is interesting that trotters are more anxious than gallop horses since they also have a high thoroughbred ancestry. The effect of work and training on these horses needs further surveys.

Abstract: Personality ratings of 196 cats were made by their owners using a 5-point Likert scale anchored by 1: not at all and 5: a great deal with 12 items: timid, friendly, curious, sociable, obedient, clever, protective, active, independent, aggressive, bad-tempered, and emotional. A principal components analysis with varimax rotation identified three intepretable components. Component I had high loadings by active, clever, curious, and sociable. Component II had high loadings by emotional, friendly, and protective, Component III by aggressive and bad-tempered, and Component IV by timid. Sex was not associated with any component, but age showed a weak negative correlation with Component I. Older animals were rated less social and curious than younger animals.