Abstract: Horses constantly modify their behaviour as a result of experience. This involves the creation of an association between events or stimuli. The influence of people on the modification and generation of certain behaviour patterns extends beyond the intentional training of the horse. The impact of any action depends on how it is perceived by the horse, rather than the motive of the handler. Negative and positive reinforcement increase the probability of specific behaviours recurring i.e. strengthen the association between events, whereas punishment reduces the probable recurrence of a behaviour without providing specific information about the desired alternative. In this paper the term 'punishers' is used to refer to the physical aids, such as a whip or crop, which may be used to bring about the process of punishment. However, if their application ceases when a specific behaviour occurs they may negatively reinforce that action. Intended 'punishers' may also be rewarding (e.g. for attention seeking behaviour). Therefore, contingency factors (which define the relationship between stimuli, such as the level of reinforcement), contiguity factors (which describe the proximity of events in space or time) and choice of reinforcing stimuli are critical in determining the rate of learning. The many problems associated with the application of punishment in practice lead to confusion by both horse and handler and, possibly, abuse of the former. Most behaviour problems relate to handling and management of the horse and can be avoided or treated with a proper analysis of the factors influencing the behaviour.

Abstract: REASONS FOR PERFORMING STUDY: Studies on the prevalence of behavioural disorders in horses and on associated risk factors have revealed inconsistent results. There are many studies on the neuropharmacological, surgical or mechanical therapy of stereotypies, but little is known about their causation. OBJECTIVES: To explore risk factors associated with the occurrence of behavioural disorders in horses. METHODS: A sample of horse owners, selected randomly and representative for Switzerland, was contacted in a postal survey. Answers were provided for 622 stables (response rate 35.2%). Individual data of 2,341 horses were examined with path analysis (multivariable linear and logistic regression), and adjustment made for possible confounding effects due to age and breed. RESULTS: Out of 60 possible risk factors, 11 were associated with the outcome at the univariable level (null-hypothesis path model) and 3 factors remained after the backward logistic regression procedure. Mature Warmbloods and Thoroughbreds, assessed by the owners to be reactive, fed 4 times a day and without daily pasture, had increased odds of displaying crib-biting, weaving and box-walking. Furthermore, indirect associations of 5 factors with the outcome were identified. CONCLUSIONS: The final logistic regression model of risk factors leads to the hypotheses that causal prevention of stereotypic behaviours should be based upon housing and management conditions which allow tactile contact with other horses (e.g. mutual grooming), daily free movement (paddock or pasture), as well as the provision of high amounts of roughage but of little or no concentrates. POTENTIAL CLINICAL RELEVANCE: It is one of the aims of population medicine to prevent the development of behavioural disorders. Further research is needed to test the concluding hypotheses in experimental studies or to verify them in the context of similar observational studies.

Abstract: The restricted access to pasture experienced by many competition horses has been linked to the exhibition of stereotypic and redirected behaviour patterns. It has been suggested that racehorses provided with more than one source of forage are less likely to perform these patterns; however, the reasons for this are currently unclear. To investigate this in 4 replicated trials, up to 12 horses were introduced into each of 2 identical stables containing a single forage, or 6 forages for 5 min. To detect novelty effects, in the first and third trials the single forage was hay. In the second and fourth, it was the preferred forage from the preceding trial. Trials were videotaped and 12 mutually exclusive behaviour patterns compared. When hay was presented as the single forage (Trials 1 and 3), all recorded behaviour patterns were significantly different between stables; e.g. during Trial 3 in the 'Single' stable, horses looked over the stable door more frequently (P<0.001), moved for longer (P<0.001), foraged on straw bedding longer (P<0.001), and exhibited behaviour indicative of motivation to search for alternative resources (P<0.001) more frequently. When a previously preferred forage was presented as the single forage (Trials 2 and 4) behaviour was also significantly different between stables, e.g in Trial 4 horses looked out over the stable door more frequently (P<0.005) and foraged for longer in their straw bedding (P<0.005). Further study is required to determine whether these effects persist over longer periods. However, these trials indicate that enrichment of the stable environment through provision of multiple forages may have welfare benefits for horses, in reducing straw consumption and facilitating the expression of highly motivated foraging behaviour.