|
|
Koba, Y., & Tanida, H. (1999). How do miniature pigs discriminate between people? The effect of exchanging cues between a non-handler and their familiar handler on discrimination. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci., 61(3), 239–252.
Abstract: Behavioural tests using operant conditioning were conducted to examine how miniature pigs discriminate between people. During a 3-week handling period, six 8-week-old pigs were touched and fed raisins as a reward whenever they approached their handler. In subsequent training, the handler and a non-handler wearing dark blue and white coveralls, respectively, and wearing different eau de toilette fragrances sat at each end of a Y-maze. Pigs were rewarded with raisins when they chose the handler. Successful discrimination occurred when the pig chose the handler at least 15 times in 20 trials (P<0.05: by χ2 test). When all pigs exhibited successful discrimination under these standard conditions, they were exposed to Experiments 1 through 4. In Experiment 1, (1) handler and non-handler exchanged colours of coveralls; (2) handler and non-handler exchanged eau de toilette; (3) handler and non-handler exchanged both cues. The non-handler was chosen significantly more often following the exchange of coverall colours and the exchange of both coverall colours and eau de toilette. However, the handler was chosen significantly more frequently following exchange of eau de toilette only. In Experiment 2, when both handler and non-handler wore coveralls of the handler's original colour, the pigs had difficulty discriminating between them. In Experiment 3, both handler and non-handler wore coveralls of new colours. The pigs easily chose the handler wearing red or blue vs. white coveralls. In Experiment 4, (1) two novel people wore coveralls of the original colours of handler and non-handler; (2) the test with the original experimenters was conducted under the original conditions but in a novel place. Between novel people, the one wearing the handler's original colour of coveralls was preferentially chosen by the pigs. The pigs had difficulty discriminating the handler from the non-handler in a novel place. Pigs appear to discriminate between a familiar handler and a non-familiar person based primarily on visual cues, prominent of which is colour of clothing.
|
|
|
|
Nicol, C. J. (2006). How animals learn from each other. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci., 100(1-2), 58–63.
Abstract: This paper explores ways by which animals may learn from one another, using examples drawn mostly from the chicken, an animal for which social learning is likely to be less dangerous than individual learning. In early life, the behaviour of the hen is important in encouraging chicks to peck at edible items. Maternal display not only attracts chicks to profitable food items, but also redirects their attention away from harmful or non-profitable items. Older chicks can enhance their foraging success by observing the behaviour of conspecifics within their own social group. Hens have been trained to perform a novel behaviour (key-pecking for food) by observation of a trained demonstrator bird. Moreover, observers learnt most from watching dominant demonstrators. Thus the ability to learn from others is not `fixed', but depends on the context and the social identity of both the observer and the demonstrator.
|
|
|
|
Watanabe, S. (2007). How animal psychology contributes to animal welfare. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci., 106(4), 193–202.
Abstract: This article explores the contribution of animal psychology to animal welfare. Since animal welfare includes subjective welfare, it is crucial to know the subjective world of animals. Analysis of the concept of anthropomorphism is particularly important because it is a basic idea of animal ethics. The history of animal psychology, focusing on anthropomorphism and behaviourism, is briefly described, and then measurement of the subjective experience of animals in two ways, namely animal cognition and pleasure or reinforcing effects, is reported. Finally, it is suggested that animal welfare is not a permanently fixed idea, but a socially constructed one that can be changed. To gain widespread agreement about a socially constructed idea, it is important to know in which circumstances ordinary people employ metaphorical extension to an understanding of animal behaviour. In other words, a survey of “folk animal psychology” is important in order to establish a consensus about animal welfare.
|
|
|
|
Birke, L., Hockenhull, J., Creighton, E., Pinno, L., Mee, J., & Mills, D. (). Horses' responses to variation in human approach. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci., In Press, Corrected Proof.
Abstract: The behaviour of humans around horses is thought to have a substantial impact on how people are perceived in subsequent interactions and many horse trainers give detailed advice on how handlers should behave when initially approaching a loose horse. Here we report on three studies designed to explore the effect of different human approach styles on the behaviour of naïve and experienced horses. In the first study, the change in flight distance (distance at which horses started to avoid an approaching human) of twelve semi-feral Dartmoor ponies, undergoing training to allow handling, was assessed. Over the 10 handling sessions median flight distance decreased significantly (p < 0.001) from 2.38 m to 0.00 m and there was a significant positive shift in the ponies' behaviour following the appearance of the researcher (p = 0.002). In a second study the effect of a direct (vigorous, swinging a lead rope and with eye contact) versus indirect (relaxed, no rope swinging and without eye contact) approach style was assessed on six adult experienced riding horses. The mean flight distance during a direct approach style (6.87 m) was significantly greater than that which occurred during an indirect approach style (2.32 m). Direction of approach was not found to significantly affect flight distance. In a third study, the effect of the rope was removed and a similar method to the second study applied to a group of naïve, feral ponies. The effect of different components of approach style, speed of approach, handler body posture and direction of gaze, which might contribute to observed differences in behavioural responses, were then examined systematically in this population. This revealed no significant difference in mean flight distance between the two approach styles (2.28 m indirect versus 2.37 m direct approach), but ponies were significantly more likely to move off in trot (p = 0.025) and to travel further (p = 0.001) when a direct approach was used. Speed of approach was the most salient factor, with a fast approach increasing both the tendency to move off in trot (p < 0.001) and distance travelled (p < 0.001). Body posture (relaxed or tense) had no effect, while flight distance was significantly greater when the person was looking away (p = 0.045). These results suggest horses may have an important egocentric spatial barrier, which perhaps relates to personal space and triggering of the flight response. Contrary to popular belief, body posture did not appear to be very important in the contexts examined unless accompanied by extraneous aids, while the speed of approach is particularly significant. These results are of important practical relevance in reducing the risk of injury, and the effective management of horses with minimal stress.
|
|
|
|
Lansade, L., & Simon, F. (2010). Horses' learning performances are under the influence of several temperamental dimensions. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci., 125(1-2), 30–37.
Abstract: Learning performances are influenced by many factors, not only breed, age and sex, but also temperament. The purpose of this study was to understand how different temperamental dimensions affect the learning performance of horses, Equus caballus. First, we carried out a series of behavioural tests on 36 Welsh ponies aged 5-7 years to measure five temperamental dimensions: fearfulness (novel area test and surprise test), gregariousness (social isolation test), reactivity to humans (passive human test), tactile sensitivity (von Frey filament test) and activity level (evaluation of locomotor activity during all the tests). We then presented them with two learning tasks (avoidance and backwards-forwards tasks). In the avoidance task they had to learn to jump over a fence when they heard a sound associated with an aversive stimulus (puff of air). In the backwards-forwards task they had to walk forwards or move backwards in response to a tactile or vocal command to obtain a food reward. There was no correlation between performances on the two learning tasks, indicating that learning ability is task-dependent. However, correlations were found between temperamental data and learning performance (Spearman correlations). The ponies that performed the avoidance task best were the most fearful and the most active ones. For instance, the number of trials required to perform 5 consecutive correct responses (learning criterion) was correlated with the variables aimed at measuring fearfulness (way of crossing a novel area: rs = -0.41, P = 0.01 and time to start eating again after a surprise effect: rs = -0.33, P = 0.05) and activity level (frequency of trotting during all the tests: rs = -0.40, P = 0.02). The animals that performed the backwards-forwards task best were the ones that were the least fearful and the most sensitive. For instance, the learning criterion (corresponding to the number of trials taken to achieve five consecutive correct responses) was correlated with the variables aimed at measuring fearfulness (latency to put one foot on the area: rs = 0.43, P = 0.01; way of crossing a novel area: rs = 0.31, P = 0.06; and time to start eating again after a surprise effect: rs = 0.43, P = 0.009) and tactile sensitivity (response to von Frey filaments: rs = -0.44, P = 0.008). This study revealed significant links between temperament and learning abilities that are highly task-dependent.
|
|
|
|
Gabor, V., & Gerken, M. (2010). Horses use procedural learning rather than conceptual learning to solve matching to sample. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci., 126(3-4), 119–124.
Abstract: Research into higher cognitive abilities of the horse may be limited by developing the adequate experimental design. In this study four pony mares between 8 and 19 years old were included. Three of them reached the criterion to be tested in a new design of matching to sample using a black circle and a cross as visual cues attached to an apparatus. The attention was directed to the question of whether the animals are able to concept formation in a given time period or if their decisions depend on other cues or strategies. After familiarization to the testing area and the test procedure, the animals were given 27 sessions of 20 trials each during 14 weeks. While there was no preference for one of the stimuli used, horses showed a significant left sidedness. None of the mares reached the learning criterion of 80% correct answers in one session. However, the ponies showed procedural learning based on correction runs that were given between incorrect decisions, by then selecting the correct stimulus on the other side of the apparatus. This learning type arose in three individuals in session four, six and eleven, respectively. It is concluded that discrimination tasks may be biased by the involvement of unexpected learning strategies, which complicates the interpretation of such tests and may even mask possible conceptualization capabilities.
|
|
|
|
Mejdell, C. M., Buvik, T., Jørgensen, G. H. M., & Bøe, K. E. (2016). Horses can learn to use symbols to communicate their preferences. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci., 184, 66–73.
Abstract: Abstract This paper describes a method in which horses learn to communicate by touching different neutral visual symbols, in order to tell the handler whether they want to have a blanket on or not. Horses were trained for 10–15 min per day, following a training program comprising ten steps in a strategic order. Reward based operant conditioning was used to teach horses to approach and touch a board, and to understand the meaning of three different symbols. Heat and cold challenges were performed to help learning and to check level of understanding. At certain stages, a learning criterion of correct responses for 8–14 successive trials had to be achieved before proceeding. After introducing the free choice situation, on average at training day 11, the horse could choose between a “no change” symbol and the symbol for either “blanket on” or “blanket off” depending on whether the horse already wore a blanket or not. A cut off point for performance or non-performance was set to day 14, and 23/23 horses successfully learned the task within this limit. Horses of warm-blood type needed fewer training days to reach criterion than cold-bloods (P < 0.05). Horses were then tested under differing weather conditions. Results show that choices made, i.e. the symbol touched, was not random but dependent on weather. Horses chose to stay without a blanket in nice weather, and they chose to have a blanket on when the weather was wet, windy and cold (χ2 = 36.67, P < 0.005). This indicates that horses both had an understanding of the consequence of their choice on own thermal comfort, and that they successfully had learned to communicate their preference by using the symbols. The method represents a novel tool for studying preferences in horses.
|
|
|
|
Mejdell, C. M., Buvik, T., Jørgensen, G. H. M., & Bøe, K. E. (2016). Horses can learn to use symbols to communicate their preferences. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci., 184, 66–73.
Abstract: This paper describes a method in which horses learn to communicate by touching different neutral visual symbols, in order to tell the handler whether they want to have a blanket on or not. Horses were trained for 10-15min per day, following a training program comprising ten steps in a strategic order. Reward based operant conditioning was used to teach horses to approach and touch a board, and to understand the meaning of three different symbols. Heat and cold challenges were performed to help learning and to check level of understanding. At certain stages, a learning criterion of correct responses for 8-14 successive trials had to be achieved before proceeding. After introducing the free choice situation, on average at training day 11, the horse could choose between a “no change” symbol and the symbol for either “blanket on” or “blanket off” depending on whether the horse already wore a blanket or not. A cut off point for performance or non-performance was set to day 14, and 23/23 horses successfully learned the task within this limit. Horses of warm-blood type needed fewer training days to reach criterion than cold-bloods (P<0.05). Horses were then tested under differing weather conditions. Results show that choices made, i.e. the symbol touched, was not random but dependent on weather. Horses chose to stay without a blanket in nice weather, and they chose to have a blanket on when the weather was wet, windy and cold (χ2=36.67, P<0.005). This indicates that horses both had an understanding of the consequence of their choice on own thermal comfort, and that they successfully had learned to communicate their preference by using the symbols. The method represents a novel tool for studying preferences in horses.
|
|
|
|
Mejdell, C. M., Buvik, T., Jørgensen, G. H. M., & Bøe, K. E. (2016). Horses can learn to use symbols to communicate their preferences. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci., 184, 66–73.
Abstract: This paper describes a method in which horses learn to communicate by touching different neutral visual symbols, in order to tell the handler whether they want to have a blanket on or not. Horses were trained for 10-15min per day, following a training program comprising ten steps in a strategic order. Reward based operant conditioning was used to teach horses to approach and touch a board, and to understand the meaning of three different symbols. Heat and cold challenges were performed to help learning and to check level of understanding. At certain stages, a learning criterion of correct responses for 8-14 successive trials had to be achieved before proceeding. After introducing the free choice situation, on average at training day 11, the horse could choose between a “no change” symbol and the symbol for either “blanket on” or “blanket off” depending on whether the horse already wore a blanket or not. A cut off point for performance or non-performance was set to day 14, and 23/23 horses successfully learned the task within this limit. Horses of warm-blood type needed fewer training days to reach criterion than cold-bloods (P<0.05). Horses were then tested under differing weather conditions. Results show that choices made, i.e. the symbol touched, was not random but dependent on weather. Horses chose to stay without a blanket in nice weather, and they chose to have a blanket on when the weather was wet, windy and cold (χ2=36.67, P<0.005). This indicates that horses both had an understanding of the consequence of their choice on own thermal comfort, and that they successfully had learned to communicate their preference by using the symbols. The method represents a novel tool for studying preferences in horses.
|
|
|
|
Lloyd, A. S., Martin, J. E., Bornett-Gauci, H. L. I., & Wilkinson, R. G. (2008). Horse personality: Variation between breeds. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci., 112(3-4), 369–383.
Abstract: Anecdotal evidence from horse owners and handlers suggests the existence of breed typical behaviour and personality in horses. This is further supported by current research on heritability of personality characteristics in a range of species. The Horse Personality Questionnaire (HPQ) is a 25-item rating method that has previously been shown to be reliable for the assessment of personality in horses. Principal component analysis on HPQ data has identified six underlying personality components in horses. These are Dominance, Anxiousness, Excitability, Protection, Sociability and Inquisitiveness. Using the HPQ a survey of 1223 horses of eight different breeds was completed. Data were analysed to explore any differences in personality between breeds across the six personality components. Breed differences in personality were identified, and it was noted that variability between breeds varied between personality components. Anxiousness and Excitability showed the most variation between breeds, whilst Dominance and Protection showed the least variance. The results identified breed typical personalities that were comparable to results from previous studies as well as anecdotal evidence provided by the popular equine literature. The results are discussed in terms of the potential selection pressures that may have resulted in these differences.
|
|
