Abstract: To establish a method for assessing equine temperament by use of a questionnaire, we carried out two surveys. The subject animals were all thoroughbreds maintained at the same farm. Respondents were the primary caretaker and two colleagues working with each horse. Factor analysis was performed on the responses to each survey. In both surveys, five factors were extracted and four of them were common between the two surveys. The common factors were [`]Anxiety', [`]Trainability', [`]Affability', and [`]Gate entrance'. There were sufficient internal consistencies in responses about [`]Anxiety', [`]Trainability', and [`]Affability' in the two surveys to indicate the validity of this questionnaire in evaluating these factors in equine temperament.

Abstract: Four methods of ranking horses on reactivity were evaluated and compared: isolation from conspecifics, presentation of a static novel stimulus, traversing a novel stimulus in a runway (isolation, novel stimulus and runway tests, respectively) and assigning subjective emotionality scores. In all tests, horses' heart rates were recorded and behaviour was videotaped. To be considered a valid test of reactivity, at least one heart rate and one behavioural measurement in the test had to change significantly between treatments (tranquilizer administation versus sham tranquilizer administration), and behavioural measures had to be displayed in at least 75% of the trials. Forty horses performed each of the three tests daily on three different days in a switchback design. Horses were assigned randomly to a daily test sequence, which was maintained throughout the study. In the runway test, no significant difference in heart rate values in tranquilized and non-tranquilized horses was found, and no behavioural attribute was displayed in more than 52% of the trials; therefore it was rejected as a valid test of reactivity. Both isolation and novel stimulus tests produced valid measurements. Mean heart rate was the most precise physiological measure for these tests, and walking and defecation frequency were the most precise behavioural measures for novel stimulus and isolation tests, respectively. Mean heart rates on the novel stimulus and isolation tests were correlated (rs = 0.79, P < 0.01) indicating that these tests produced similar rankings based on physiological responses. However, behavioural measures ranked horses differently (rs = 0.27, P < 0.10) on the tests. Rank correlations between mean heart rates and behavioural measures were higher in the novel stimulus (rs = 0.66, P < 0.01) than the isolation test (rs = 0.55, P < 0.01), indicating that the novel stimulus test ranked horses based on either physiological or behavioural responses more similarly than did the isolation test. Therefore, the novel stimulus test was considered the more accurate evaluation of reactivity. Subjective emotionality scores were correlated moderately with mean heart rates (rs > 0.33, P < 0.01) from the novel stimulus and isolation tests and with walking scores (rs = 0.47, P < 0.01) from the novel stimulus test. Assignment of subjective emotionality scores was not as accurate as the novel stimulus or isolation tests in ranking horses for reactivity. Using physiological data alone, combining physiological and behavioural measurements or using more than one behavioural measurement in reactivity tests may reflect the reactivity of the horse better than a single behavioural measurement.

Abstract: The aim of the present study was to compare horses' heart rate (HR), heart rate variability (RMSSD, pNN50) and behaviour in the same temperament test when being ridden, led, and released free. Behavioural measurements included scores and linear measurements for reactivity (R), activity (A), time to calm down (T) and emotionality (E), recorded during the approach (1) and/or during confrontation with the stimulus (2). Sixty-five horses were each confronted 3 times (1 ridden, 1 led, 1 free running in balanced order) with 3 novel and/or sudden stimuli. Mixed model analysis indicated that leading resulted in the lowest (P < 0.05 throughout) reactions as measured by A1, A2, E1, E2, R2, and pNN50 while riding produced the strongest (A1, T2, HR, RMSSD, pNN50) or medium (E1, E2, R2) reactions. Free running resulted either in the strongest (A2, E1, E2, R2) or in the lowest (A1, T2, HR, RMSSD, pNN50) reactions. The repeatability across tests for HR (0.57), but not for RMSSD (0.23) or pNN50 (0.25) was higher than for any behavioural measurement: the latter ranged from values below 0.10 (A1, A2, T2) to values between 0.30 and 0.45 (E1, E2, R2). Overall, the results show that a rider or handler influences, but not completely masks, the horses' intrinsic behaviour in a temperament test, and this influence appeared to be stronger on behavioural variables and heart rate variability than on the horses' heart rates. Taking both practical considerations and repeatabilities into account, reactivity appears to be the most valuable parameter. Emotionality and heart rate can also yield valid results reflecting additional dimensions of temperament although their practical relevance may be less obvious. If a combination of observed variables is chosen with care, a valid assessment of a horse's temperament may be possible in all types of tests. However, in practice, tests that resemble the practical circumstances most closely, i.e. testing riding horses under a rider, should be chosen.

Abstract: Personality ratings of 34 spotted hyenas (Crocuta crocuta) were made by 4 observers who knew the animals well. Analyses suggest that (a) hyena personality traits were rated with generally high reliability; (b) 5 broad dimensions (Assertiveness, Excitability, Human-Directed Agreeableness, Sociability, and Curiosity) captured about 75% of the total variance; (c) this dimensional structure could not be explained in terms of dominance status, sex, age, or appearance; and (d) as expected, female hyenas were more assertive than male hyenas. Comparisons with previous research provide evidence for the cross-species generality of Excitability, Sociability, and especially Assertiveness. Discussion focuses on methodological issues in research on animal personality and on the potential contributions this research can make for understanding the biological and environmental bases of personality.

Abstract: Temperament is an important factor when working with horses. Behavioural tests have already been developed to measure certain dimensions of a horse's temperament (fearfulness, gregariousness, etc.). In order to measure the temperament more precisely, our work aimed to identify a dimension which has already been described in several species but not yet in horses, namely sensory sensitivity. Our study was based on the definition of a temperament dimension as “a behavioural characteristic stable across situations and over time”. We designed several tests for each sense and then determined whether the responses observed were correlated between situations and in time. The principle of the tests was to generate two stimuli of different intensities for each sense (e.g. two different sounds) and to measure the intensity of the horse's response (N = 26). Using Spearman rank correlations, we tested whether the responses to these different stimuli were inter-correlated. We repeated the same tests 5 months later to determine whether the responses were correlated over time. Within each sense, results show that the greater the horses' response to one stimulus, the greater their response to the other. For example, the reaction to the odour of cinnamon (time spent near the source of the odour) was significantly correlated to the reaction to lavender (R = 0.53, p = 0.004). The reactions to two different sounds or to two different tactile stimuli (von Frey filaments, or contact of a brush on the body), were also significantly correlated (R = 0.59, p < 0.0001; R = 0.38, p = 0.029). Finally, the reactions to two different tastes or to two visual stimuli tended to be correlated (R = 0.27, p = 0.09; R = 0.27, p = 0.09). However, there was no significant correlation between the responses to stimuli relating to different senses. Finally, except for the responses to odour, the responses to other sensory stimuli showed stability over a 5-month period (e.g. tactile stimulation: R = 0.71, p < 0.0001). In conclusion, our study revealed characteristics which were stable across situations and over time. The absence of links between the characteristics measured for the different senses suggests that a dimension for each sense exists (e.g. tactile sensitivity) rather than a general sensory sensitivity dimension covering all the senses.