Abstract: The ability and ease of horses to habituate to frightening stimuli greatly increases safety in the horse-human relationship. Several different techniques have been suggested for habituation training of horses and under certain conditions, preventing animals from avoidance reactions during exposure to frightening stimuli is believed to facilitate habituation. Response prevention does, however, lead to a loss of control, which is a known stress inducer in both animals and humans. This experiment investigated whether horses show increased stress responses when negatively reinforced to approach a mildly frightening stimulus, compared to horses allowed to voluntarily explore the same stimulus. We further investigated whether the prevention of avoidance responses in horses that are negatively reinforced to approach the stimulus, facilitates habituation to the stimulus. Twenty-two 2-3 years old Danish warmblood geldings were included in the study. Half of the horses (NR group) were negatively reinforced (through halter and rope pressure) by a familiar human handler to approach a collection of frightening objects (six open and colourful umbrellas) placed in a semi-circle in a familiar test arena. The other half of the horses were released in the arena and were free to avoid or explore the objects (VOL group). On the next day, all horses were exposed to the objects again without a human to investigate the rate of habituation. Behavioural and heart rate responses were recorded on both days. Data were analysed in a two way repeated measures ANOVA and post hoc analysed via the Holm-Sidak method. In the VOL group, all horses initially chose to avoid the unknown objects, whereas the handler managed to get all horses in the NR group to approach and stand next to the objects within the first 2-min session. As expected, horses in the NR group had a significantly longer duration of alertness (sec, mean ± se: NR: 23 ± 4.1 vs. VOL: 16 ± 4.7, P=0.026) and a higher max HR in the first session (bpm, mean ± se: NR: 106 ± 5.2 vs. VOL: 88 ± 4.4, P=0.004). On the next day, however, the NR horses spent significantly less time investigating the objects (sec, mean ± se: NR: 13 ± 4.1 vs. VOL: 24 ± 6.0, P=0.005) and had a shorter latency to approach a feed container, placed next to the objects (sec, mean ± se: NR: 25 ± 3.9 vs. VOL: 47 ± 16.2, P=0.031), indicating increased habituation. In conclusion, negatively reinforced approach to mildly frightening objects appears to increase stress responses during the initial exposure, but also to facilitate habituation in young horses.

Abstract: The ability of horses to learn and remember new tasks is fundamentally important for their use by humans. Fearfulness may, however, interfere with learning, because stimuli in the environment can overshadow signals from the rider or handler. In addition, prolonged high levels of stress hormones can affect neurons within the hippocampus; a brain region central to learning and memory. In a series of experiments, we aimed to investigate the link between performance in two learning tests, the baseline level of stress hormones, measured as faecal cortisol metabolites (FCM), fearfulness, and social rank. Twenty-five geldings (2 or 3 years old) pastured in one group were included in the study. The learning tests were performed by professional trainers and included a number of predefined stages during which the horses were gradually trained to perform exercises, using either negative (NR) or positive reinforcement (PR). Each of the learning tests lasted 3 days; 7min/horse/day. The NR test was repeated in a novel environment. Performance, measured as final stage in the training programme, and heart rate (HR) were recorded. Faeces were collected on four separate days where the horses had been undisturbed at pasture for 48h. Social rank was determined through observations of social interactions during feeding. The fear test was a novel object test during which behaviour and HR were recorded. Performance in the NR and PR learning tests did not correlate. In the NR test, there was a significant, negative correlation between performance and HR in the novel environment (rS=-0.66, P<0.001, i.e. nervous horses had reduced performance), whereas there was no such correlation in the home environment (both NR and PR). Behavioural reactions in the fear test correlated significantly with performance in the NR test in the novel environment (e.g. object alertness and final stage: rS=-0.43, P=0.04), suggesting that performance under unfamiliar, stressful conditions may be predicted by behavioural responses in a fear test. There was a negative correlation between social rank and baseline stress hormones (rS=-0.43, P=0.04), i.e. high rank corresponded to low FCM concentrations, whereas neither rank nor FCM correlated with fearfulness or learning performance. We conclude that performance under stressful conditions is affected by activation of the sympathetic nervous system during training and related to behavioural responses in a standardised fear test. Learning performance in the home environment, however, appears unrelated to fearfulness, social rank and baseline FCM levels.

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.