Abstract: Abstract Stress is a generic concept describing the body's reaction to external stimuli, including both physiological and psychological factors. Therefore, by definition, the assessment of psychological stress in the exercising horse encompasses the problem of teasing apart the psychological and physiological factors both of which result in stress responses. The present study reviews the existing literature on various measures of stress taken specifically in the context of equitation science. Particular attention has been paid to short-term effects, and commonly used measurements of short-term stress include heart rate, a number of heart rate variability parameters, blood or saliva cortisol levels, eye temperature, and various behaviour parameters including in particular behaviour patterns presumably indicative of conflict with the rider's/trainer's aids. Inspection of the individual studies' results revealed that disagreement between these different measures of stress is commonplace. For physiological parameters, the largest proportion of agreement (i.e. both parameters simultaneously indicated either higher, insignificant or lower stress compared to a control treatment) was found for heart rate and heart rate variability parameters, while generally limited agreement was found for cortisol. It appears that cortisol levels may not be particularly useful for assessing/assessment of the valence of a situation in the exercising horse as cortisol levels are predominantly linked to activation and exercise levels. Although heart rate variability parameters reflect in theory more closely sympathovagal balance compared to cortisol levels, great care has to be taken regarding the use of appropriate time-frames, appropriate raw data correction methods as well as the use of appropriate equipment. In spite of its wide-spread and apparently successful use, popular equipment may in fact not be accurate enough under field conditions. Eye temperature is another promising parameter for assessment of psychological stress, but the technique is likewise susceptible to application errors. Given the high susceptibility of physiological parameters to errors at various experimental stages, behavioural rather than physiological parameters may in fact provide more accurate measures of valence when conducting experiments in the exercising horse. Behavioural parameters that appear to be particularly practical in assessing stress in ridden horses' behaviour are associated with frequencies of behaviour indicative of conflict. However, while increased frequencies of are a good indicator of stress, the absence of conflict behaviour does not provide proof of the absence of stress due to the possible occurrence of conditions such as Learned Helplessness. In future studies, the above issues should be taken into consideration when designing experiments to assess psychological stress in ridden horses.

Abstract: The effects of hyperflexion on the welfare of dressage horses have been debated. This study aimed to investigate acute stress responses of dressage horses ridden in three different Head-and-Neck-positions (HNPs). Fifteen dressage horses were ridden by their usual rider in a standardised 10-min dressage programme in either the competition frame (CF), hyperflexion (“Low-Deep-and-Round”; LDR) or a looser frame (LF) in a balanced order on three separate test days. Heart rate (HR), heart rate variability parameters (HRV), behaviour and rein tension were recorded during the test. Salivary cortisol concentrations were measured 60min before and 0, 5, 15 and 30min after the test. Rein tension was significantly lower in LF and did not differ between CF and LDR; however approx. 15% of recordings in CF and LDR were above the sensor detection limit of 5kg. The horses had significantly higher cortisol concentrations directly after LDR compared to LF. In addition, the horses showed more distinctive head movements, including head waving, during LDR. There were no significant treatment effects on HR and HRV. In conclusion, the results indicate that LDR may be more stressful to these horses during riding.

Abstract: Behavioural innovations have become central to our thinking about how animals adjust to changing environments. It is now well established that animals vary in their ability to innovate, but understanding why remains a challenge. This is because innovations are rare, so studying innovation requires alternative experimental assays that create opportunities for animals to express their ability to invent new behaviours, or use pre-existing ones in new contexts. Problem solving of extractive foraging tasks has been put forward as a suitable experimental assay. We review the rapidly expanding literature on problem solving of extractive foraging tasks in order to better understand to what extent the processes underpinning problem solving, and the factors influencing problem solving, are in line with those predicted, and found, to underpin and influence innovation in the wild. Our aim is to determine whether problem solving can be used as an experimental proxy of innovation. We find that in most respects, problem solving is determined by the same underpinning mechanisms, and is influenced by the same factors, as those predicted to underpin, and to influence, innovation. We conclude that problem solving is a valid experimental assay for studying innovation, propose a conceptual model of problem solving in which motor diversity plays a more central role than has been considered to date, and provide recommendations for future research using problem solving to investigate innovation. This article is part of a Special Issue entitled: Cognition in the wild.

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: Domestic horses are faced with social challenges throughout their lives due to limitations in social contact, space restrictions and frequent changes in social companionship. This is in contrast to natural conditions where horses live in relatively stable harem bands. Currently, little is known about how repeated regrouping affect horse behaviour and welfare, and it is unknown whether horses may adapt to regrouping. In this study, we aimed to investigate the effects of an unstable group structure, caused by weekly regroupings, on behaviour and frequency of injuries in young horses. Forty-five horses were included in the study and were randomly assigned to the treatments; Stable (S; seven groups of three horses) or Unstable (U; eight groups of three horses). The experimental period lasted 7 weeks, during which horses in Stable groups remained in the same group, whereas one horse was exchanged between Unstable groups every week. The groups were kept in 80m×80m grass-covered enclosures and were fed additional roughage on the ground daily. Social interactions were recorded in Unstable groups immediately after each regrouping (30min), and in both Stable and Unstable groups on day 1, 3 and 6 after each regrouping (2×20min/group/day). Injuries were scored by the end of the experimental period. The level of aggression shown by horses in Unstable groups immediately after regrouping was not affected by week (F5,35=0.42, P=0.83), indicating that horses neither habituated, nor sensitized, to repeated regrouping. Compared to horses in Stable groups, more agonistic behaviour was shown by horses in Unstable groups (i.e. non-contact agonistic; F1,65=5.60, P=0.02), whereas there was no treatment effect on other variables. The level of play behaviour appeared, however, to be more variable in Unstable groups. There was a significant effect of week on the level of contact agonistic interactions as well as greeting behaviour, due to a high occurrence in weeks 4-6. Non-contact agonistic interactions constituted the major part of agonistic interactions (66%). Possibly as consequence, no serious injuries were registered and there was no treatment effect (U=184; P=0.11). We conclude that the behaviour of young horses is affected by group management, and that horses appear not to adapt to weekly regroupings.