Abstract: Social observational learning is one of learning abilities expected in domestic horses (Equus caballus) because of their ecological and evolutional history. However, a few studies on this type of learning in horses failed to provide clear evidence of observational learning and/or could not distinguished it from other types of learning. We tested interspecific observational learning abilities using the spatial task and a human demonstrator. We hypothesised that 1) horses with possibility of observing a human demonstrator will complete the task in shorter time than control horses without any demonstrator, and 2) horses observing a familiar demonstrator will carry out the task in shorter time than horses with an unfamiliar demonstrator due to established positive human-horse relationship. We randomly allocated 24 riding horses of mixed age and breed to three groups per 8 and started the task either with observing a familiar demonstrator, unfamiliar demonstrator or without demonstrator (control group). Each horse was released individually at the starting point in the experimental paddock and the latency to pass the task was recorded. A horse completed the task once it walked 25 m from the starting point to the squared area (4x4 m) fenced by a tape, went into it through the entrance on the opposite side and touched the bucket with food. Eight people served as demonstrators, each for one familiar and one unfamiliar horse. Horses from groups with a demonstrator, either familiar or unfamiliar, reached the food bucket significantly faster than control horses during the first trial (mean±SE: 29.1±3.13 s with familiar, 28.9±3.13 s unfamiliar and 41.5 ± 3.13 s without demonstrator, P<0.02, GLMM, PROC MIXED, SAS). Horses did not differ in time needed to reach the fence of the squared area, but in “solving time”, i.e. time from reaching the fence of the squared area and touching the bucket (14.6±2.34, 14.3±2.34 and 27.6±2.34 s in horses with familiar, unfamiliar or without demonstrator, P<0.001). Despite our presumption, the horses observing a familiar demonstrator finished the task in comparable time as horses with an unfamiliar demonstrator (P=0.85) which indicated little effect of long lasting positive relationship between a horse and a particular human. We found, however, large individual variability in performance of individual demonstrators. Further, horses did not differ in time needed to pass the same task without a demonstrator repeated either shortly or 7 days after the first test which supported that interspecific observational learning rather than social facilitation occurred. In conclusion, horses with a human demonstrator, regardless familiar or unfamiliar, were able to solve the task in shorter time compared to control horses but they did not differ in performing repeated task if they learned it by individual or social learning process. This indicates that interspecific observational learning does occur in horses. Supported by AWIN, EU FP7 project No. 266213.

Abstract: Equine welfare can be enhanced by applying species specific training. This may incorporate social learning, as horses are highly social and social stimuli are of primary importance. Social learning is comparable to individual learning in its learning mechanisms, differing primarily in the way it is stimulated. Our initial study showed that horses of different breeds (N = 38) follow humans after observing other horses doing so, but only if the observed horse was familiar to and higher ranking than the observer (Fisher's exact test: N = 12, P = 0.003). A second study showed that horses and ponies (N = 25) learned to pull a rope to open a feeding apparatus after observing demonstrations by conspecifics, again, only if the demonstrating horse was older and higher ranking than the observer (Fisher's combination test, N = 3, v2 = 27.71, p = 0.006). Our third approach showed that horses and ponies (N = 24) learned to press a switch to open a feeding apparatus after observing a familiar person (GzLM: N = 24, z = 2.33, P = 0.02). Most recently, we confronted horses and ponies (N = 50) with persons demonstrating different techniques for opening a feeding apparatus. In this study we investigated whether the horses would copy the demonstrators' techniques or apply their own. Here only some horses copied the technique, and most of the successful learners used their mouths irrespective of the demonstrators' postures (Chi Square Test: N = 40, df = 2, &#967;2 = 31.4, p < 0.001). In all the approaches social stimuli elicited learning processes in the test horses, while only a few individuals in the control groups mastered the tasks by individual learning. The following behaviour observed in the initial study may have been facilitated by a social stimuli (social facilitation), and the opening of the feed boxes in the subsequent studies appear to be mostly the result of enhancement (social enhancement). Some horses may have used the social stimuli at first and continued their learning process by individual trial and error. However, the horses were also selective in whom and some in how to copy. This may have been conditioned (socially conditioned) or the result of simple forms of reasoning on the reliability of the particular information provided by demonstrators of certain social ranks or social positions, as high ranking and familiar horses and familiar persons were copied and some imitated exactly.
Lay person message: Traditional riding instructions suggest that horses learn by observing other horses. For example, older, more experienced driving horses are used for initial training of young driving horses. We have shown that horses indeed use learning stimuli provided by other horse, as well as by humans. Horses readily accept stimuli observed in high ranking and familiar horses, and familiar persons. Such stimuli elicit learning processes which are comparable to individual learning. We suggest applying social learning whenever possible, as it is much faster and less stressful than individual learning, where learners experience negative outcomes in trial and error learning.

Abstract: Abstract In recent years, behavioral ecologists have embraced social network analysis (SNA) in order to explore the structure of animal societies and the functional consequences of that structure. We provide a conceptual introduction to the field that focuses on historical developments, as well as on novel insights generated by recent work. First, we discuss major advances in the analysis of nonhuman societies, culminating in the use of SNA by behavioral ecologists. Next, we discuss how network-based approaches have enhanced our understanding of social structure and behavior over the past decade, focusing on: (1) information transmission, (2) collective behaviors, (3) animal personality, and (4) cooperation. These behaviors and phenomena possess several features—e.g., indirect effects, emergent properties—that network analysis is well equipped to handle. Finally, we highlight recent developments in SNA that are allowing behavioral ecologists to address increasingly sophisticated questions regarding the structure and function of animal sociality.

Abstract: Learning through the observation of others allows the transfer of information without the costs incurred during individual trial and error learning. Horses (Equus caballus) are a highly social species, which might be expected to be capable of learning from others, but experimental findings are inconsistent, and potentially confounded by social facilitation effects not related directly to the learning of the task. We refined the methods used in previous equine social learning studies, to examine and distinguish specific social influences on learning of a task: we used predefined group leaders rather than agonistically dominant individuals to demonstrate a detour task to familiar conspecific observers; in addition we had two control groups: a non-observer (true control) and a group with the demonstrator simply present at the goal (social facilitation control). 44 socially kept horses were allocated to one of the three test conditions and took part in five trials each. Success rate, latency and detour direction were recorded. There was no significant difference between the three groups in the likelihood of them succeeding in the task nor latency to succeed; however there was a significant difference in the route chosen by the groups, with the true control choosing the side with the entrance gate significantly more than either the observer group or social facilitation group. Both of the latter two groups chose to go in the same direction relative to themselves, regardless of which side the gate was. Seven out of nine horses in the observer group chose the same direction as their demonstrator every time. Our results show a significant role of social facilitation on detour behaviour and highlight the importance of including adequate controls for simpler cognitive influences on behaviour before claims can be made about the specific learning of motor actions or goal directed behaviour. Social cues may be important to horses if the task is sufficiently challenging and motivationally important, so future work should consider more demanding, but ecologically relevant situations, in order to maximise the potential revelation of social learning effects which do not depend on simple local or stimulus enhancement effects.

Abstract: Two experiments on the role of neophobia in poison-induced aversions to exteroceptive stimuli are reported. In Experiment 1, rats were given either 10 or 25 days of habituation to the test situation prior to conditioning. Those animals with the longer habituation period avoided a complex of novel exteroceptive stimuli while those with the shorter habituation period did not. In Experiment 2 rats initially avoided the more novel of two containers, but gradually came to eat equal amounts from both. A single pairing of toxicosis with consumption from either the novel or the familiar container reinstated the avoidance of the novel container in both cases. The results were discussed in terms of an interaction between habituation and conditioning procedures. It was suggested that previously reported differences between interoceptive and exteroceptive conditioning effects may have been influenced by the differential novelty of the two classes of stimuli in the test situation. It was further suggested that non-contingently poisoned control groups should routinely be included in poison avoidance conditioning studies.