Abstract: Historically, a dichotomy has been drawn between the semantic communication of human language and the apparently emotional calls of animals. Current research paints a more complicated picture. Just as scientists have identified elements of human speech that reflect a speaker's emotions, field experiments have shown that the calls of many animals provide listeners with information about objects and events in the environment. Like human speech, therefore, animal vocalizations simultaneously provide others with information that is both semantic and emotional. In support of this conclusion, we review the results of field experiments on the natural vocalizations of African vervet monkeys, diana monkeys, baboons, and suricates (a South African mongoose). Vervet and diana monkeys give acoustically distinct alarm calls in response to the presence of leopards, eagles, and snakes. Each alarm call type elicits a different, adaptive response from others nearby. Field experiments demonstrate that listeners compare these vocalizations not just according to their acoustic properties but also according to the information they convey. Like monkeys, suricates give acoustically distinct alarm calls in response to different predators. Within each predator class, the calls also differ acoustically according to the signaler's perception of urgency. Like speech, therefore, suricate alarm calls convey both semantic and emotional information. The vocalizations of baboons, like those of many birds and mammals, are individually distinctive. As a result, when one baboon hears a sequence of calls exchanged between two or more individuals, the listener acquires information about social events in its group. Baboons, moreover, are skilled “eavesdroppers:” their response to different call sequences provides evidence of the sophisticated information they acquire from other individuals' vocalizations. Baboon males give loud “wahoo” calls during competitive displays. Like other vocalizations, these highly emotional calls provide listeners with information about the caller's dominance rank, age, and competitive ability. Although animal vocalizations, like human speech, simultaneously encode both semantic and emotional information, they differ from language in at least one fundamental respect. Although listeners acquire rich information from a caller's vocalization, callers do not, in the human sense, intend to provide it. Listeners acquire information as an inadvertent consequence of signaler behavior.

Abstract: Finding the right horse for each rider is a difficult task as it is just as important that the temperament of the horse fits the rider as it is that the horse is of the right size. Even though it is a commonly experienced problem, no objective method of easily measuring the horse“s temperament has yet been developed. If it is possible to test horses and get an objective measure of how reactive (emotional) they are, it could be a big help in finding the right horse for each rider. It would be desirable to have a way of testing the horse”s reaction in an unfamiliar (and potentially frightening) situation. In practice this test should be just as easy as it is getting a judgement of its conformation and gaits.
The aim of the present study was to measure individual variation in HR response to different novel objects in horses of the same age, breed and reared in the same environment. We wanted to see whether certain horses (i.e. more emotional horses) react more to novel stimuli, in general, than other horses (i.e. less emotional), irrespective of the type of stimulus. We also wanted to see if different novel stimuli elicited different responses within individuals. The hypothesis was that individuals will react in a similar way to various stimuli.
Twenty four Danish warmblood horses were included in this study. All horses were 2 year-old stallions, reared under similar environmental conditions. They had received a minimum of handling prior to the experimental period. Three different stimuli were used. They were chosen because they were novel to the horses and would elicit measurable fear-reactions in all horses, but not so much that the horses did not approach the feed within the duration of the test. The visual stimulus consisted of a 1meter high orange traffic cone with reflex stripes, placed 1 m in front of the tub, the olfactory stimulus was eucalyptus oil and the auditory stimulus was a radio tuned to white noise. The control was an empty arena.
The result was that only the HR response to the auditory and visual stimuli differed significantly from the control days. The olfactory stimulus did not seem to alarm the horses the way the other stimuli did. We found a tendency towards a correlation in reaction between the olfactory and auditory stimuli and between the auditory and visual stimuli within individuals. These results indicate that horses do not generalize completely in their reaction between different stimuli.