Abstract: Both humans and group-living animals associate and behave affiliatively more with some individuals than others. Human friendship has long been acknowledged, and recently scientists studying animal behaviour have started using the term friendship for close social associates in animals. Yet, while biologists describe friends as social tools to enhance fitness, social scientists describe human friendship as unconditional. We investigate whether these different descriptions reflect true differences in human friendship and animal close social associations or are a by-product of different research approaches: namely social scientists focussing on proximate and biologists on ultimate explanations. We first stress the importance of similar measures to determine close social associations, thereafter examine their ultimate benefits and proximate motivations, and discuss the latest findings on the central-neural regulation of social bonds. We conclude that both human friendship and animal close social associations are ultimately beneficial. On the proximate level, motivations for friendship in humans and for close social associations in animals are not necessarily based on benefits and are often unconditional. Moreover, humans share with many animals a similar physiological basis of sociality. Therefore, biologists and social scientist describe the same phenomenon, and the use of the term friendship for animals seems justified.

Abstract: Observation of behaviour, especially social behaviour, and experimental studies of learning and brain function give us information about the complexity of concepts that animals have. In order to learn to obtain a resource or carry out an action, domestic animals may: relate stimuli such as human words to the reward, perform sequences of actions including navigation or detours, discriminate amongst other individuals, copy the actions of other individuals, distinguish between individuals who do or do not have information, or communicate so as to cause humans or other animals to carry out actions. Some parrots, that are accustomed to humans but not domesticated, can use words to have specific meanings. In some cases, stimuli, individuals or actions are remembered for days, weeks or years. Events likely to occur in the future may be predicted and changes over time taken into account. Scientific evidence for the needs of animals depends, in part, on studies assessing motivational strength whose methodology depends on the cognitive ability of the animals. Recognition and learning may be associated with changes in physiology, behaviour and positive or negative feelings. Learning and other complex behaviour can result in affect and affect can alter cognition. The demonstration of cognitive bias gives indications about affect and welfare but should be interpreted in the light of other information. All of the information mentioned so far helps to provide evidence about sentience and the level of awareness. The term sentience implies a range of abilities, not just the capacity to have some feelings. The reluctance of scientists to attribute complex abilities and feelings to non-humans has slowed the development of this area of science. Most people consider that they have obligations to some animals. However, they might protect animals because they consider that an animal has an intrinsic value, or because of their concern for its welfare. In social species, there has been selection promoting moral systems that might result in behaviours such as attempts to avoid harm to others, collaboration and other altruistic behaviour. An evaluation of such behaviour may provide one of the criteria for decisions about whether or not to protect animals of a particular species. Other criteria may be: whether or not the animal is known as an individual, similarity to humans, level of awareness, extent of feelings, being large, being rare, being useful or having aesthetic quality for humans. Cognitive ability should also be considered when designing methods of enriching the environments of captive animals.

Abstract: Besides focusing on the adaptive significance of collective movements, it is crucial to study the mechanisms and dynamics of decision-making processes at the individual level underlying the higher-scale collective movements. It is now commonly admitted that collective decisions emerge from interactions between individuals, but how individual decisions are taken, i.e. how far they are modulated by the behaviour of other group members, is an under-investigated question. Classically, collective movements are viewed as the outcome of one individual's initiation (the leader) for departure, by which all or some of the other group members abide. Individuals assuming leadership have often been considered to hold a specific social status. This hierarchical or centralized control model has been challenged by recent theoretical and experimental findings, suggesting that leadership can be more distributed. Moreover, self-organized processes can account for collective movements in many different species, even in those that are characterized by high cognitive complexity. In this review, we point out that decision-making for moving collectively can be reached by a combination of different rules, i.e. individualized (based on inter-individual differences in physiology, energetic state, social status, etc.) and self-organized (based on simple response) ones for any species, context and group size.

Abstract: Feral horses are social animals, which have to rely on survival strategies centered on the formation of cohesive social bonds within their bands. Many problems in the husbandry of social animals such as horses, are due to the fact that the limits of their adaptive abilities are exceeded. Evidence suggests that the fundamental social characteristics of domestic horses have remained relatively unchanged. The social structure, social strategies and social interactions were investigated (3 non-consecutive years, 24 hr per day for several weeks) in long term established groups of domestic horses (mares and geldings of all ages) and a few small introduced groups, kept in (semi)natural environments. The general aim was to investigate the social needs of domestic horses. The social life of domestic horses was characterised by long lasting bonds with preferred partners which were established and maintained by allogrooming, play, proximity and dominance behaviours. Bonding partners were mainly found within the same sex-age group, but adult geldings also bonded with sub-adult mares and geldings. Adult mares were clustered in a group, while the other animals formed a second group. Among the adult mares, subgroups according to reproductive state were formed. Individuals regulated their social network by interfering with interactions between other members of the herd, which in itself is complex. An intervention is a behavioural action of one animal that actively interferes with an ongoing interaction between a dyad with the apparent aim of altering that interaction. This was verified by post-hoc analyses of disturbed and undisturbed interactions. Interventions in allogrooming or play were performed significantly more often when at least one member of the initial dyad was a preferred partner of, or familiar to (within the small introduced bands) the intervener. The stronger the preferred association in allogrooming between the intervener and member(s) of the initial dyad, the higher the probability the intervener would displace one initial member and continue allogrooming with the other. Just five behaviours were extracted which reliably reflected the dominance relations among horses. Aggression with the hind quarters was used both offensively and defensively and therefore not suitable as a reliable parameter. Individual dominance relationships were related to social experience. The implications of these findings for horse husbandry were assessed. It is argued that the execution of affiliative behaviours may be rewarding in itself, and therefore always will be a highly motivated behaviour. It is shown that social positive physical interactions (allogrooming, play) with other horses is an ethological need and therefore indispensable in modern husbandry systems. Ethological needs are so important for the animal that husbandry systems that lack the possibilities to execute such behaviours will cause chronic stress. It is concluded that all horses need physical social contact, and that horses, which lack appropriate social learning experiences during ontogeny, may be hampered in their social functioning later in life. Solutions for problems, including dominance problems, in individual social housing and group housing are presented.