Abstract: The long-held belief that human dominance and equine submission are key to successful training and that the horse must be taught to [`]respect' the trainer infers that force is often used during training. Many horses respond by trialling unwelcome evasions, resistances and flight responses, which readily become established. When unable to cope with problem behaviours, some handlers in the past might have been encouraged to use harsh methods or devices while others may have called in a so-called [`]good horseman' or [`]horse whisperer' to remediate the horse. Frequently, the approaches such practitioners offer could not be applied by the horse's owner or trainer because of their lack of understanding or inability to apply the techniques. Often it seemed that these [`]horse-people' had magical ways with horses (e.g., they only had to whisper to them) that achieved impressive results although they had little motivation to divulge their techniques. As we begin to appreciate how to communicate with horses sensitively and consistently, misunderstandings and misinterpretations by horse and trainer should become less common. Recent studies have begun to reveal what comprises the simplest, most humane and most effective mechanisms in horse training and these advances are being matched by greater sharing of knowledge among practitioners. Indeed, various practitioners of what is referred to here as [`]natural horsemanship' now use techniques similar to the [`]whisperers' of old, but they are more open about their methods. Reputable horse trainers using natural horsemanship approaches are talented observers of horse behaviour and respond consistently and swiftly to the horse's subtle cues during training. For example, in the roundpen these trainers apply an aversive stimulus to prompt a flight response and then, when the horse slows down, moves toward them, or offers space-reducing affiliative signals, the trainer immediately modifies his/her agonistic signals, thus negatively reinforcing the desired response. Learning theory and equine ethology, the fundamentals of the emerging discipline of equitation science, can be used to explain almost all the behaviour modification that goes on in these contexts and in conventional horsemanship. By measuring and evaluating what works and what does not, equitation science has the potential to have a unifying effect on traditional practices and developing branches of equitation.

Abstract: The degree of lateralization (LI) indicates both the direction and strength of a paw preference. Here, a positive value is indicative of a right paw bias, and a negative value of a left paw bias. Higher numbers on the positive side of the scale and lower numbers on the negative side of the scale indicate a greater strength of that lateralization. The strength of motor lateralization (|LI|) is the absolute value of the LI. The use of absolute value removes directionality (i.e., does not indicate left or right paw bias) and instead indicates only the strength of the paw preference. Both LI and |LI| have been associated with behavioral differences in a range of species. The assessment of motor lateralization in the dog can be conducted by observing the paw used to perform motor tasks. Elevated cortisol concentrations have been associated with fearfulness in many species. Additionally, fearfulness and boldness can be assessed in response to so-called temperament tests. Consequently, in this study we examine the relationship between lateralization, temperament test results, and cortisol concentrations in 43 potential guide dogs, of which 38 were Labrador retrievers and 5 were golden retrievers. Over a 14-month period, the current study assessed motor lateralization and salivary cortisol concentrations 3 times (approximately 6 months of age, 14 months of age, and after the dogs' performance in the guide dog program had been determined) and behavior twice (approximately 6 and 14 months of age). This study is the first to examine the relationship between behavior, lateralization, and cortisol concentrations in dogs. It implemented an objective and quantifiable assessment of behavior that may be of use to a variety of dog-focused stakeholders. Findings show that during the Juvenile testing period (6 months of age), dogs with higher cortisol concentrations were typically less able to rest when exposed to the unfamiliar testing room. Results from both Juvenile and Adult Test (14 months of age) periods showed that a greater |LI| and LI were associated with more confident and relaxed behavior when dogs were exposed to novel stimuli and unfamiliar environments. Significant elevations of cortisol concentrations were found at the completion of guide dog training when compared with results from the 2 prior test periods. This finding may reflect maturation or the effect of the prolonged kenneling which occurred during this period.

Abstract: By definition, punishment makes a response less likely in the future. Because horses are largely trained by negative reinforcement, they are susceptible to inadvertent punishment. Delays in the release of pressure can make desirable responses less likely and thus punish them. This study examines the correct use of negative reinforcement and identifies a continuum between poorly timed negative reinforcement and punishment. It explores some of the problems of non-contingent punishment and the prospect of learned helplessness and experimental neurosis. It concludes by introducing the concept of ethical equitation.

Abstract: Horse trainers often report that lowering the height of a horse's head so the poll is below the height of the withers can induce a calming effect during training. Four groups of horses were used in a 2-part study to investigate the behavioral and physiological effects of head lowering in horses. In Part 1, Group A had no experimental stimuli applied and horses in Group B were trained to lower their heads when presented with a specific stimulus by the handler. The stimulus for head lowering was the application of downward pressure on the headcollar via the lead rope until the horse lowered its head such that its lips were approximately at mid-cannon (third metacarpal) height, whereupon the pressure was released. The stimulus was applied again if the horse raised its head during the 300-second test period. In Part 2, Groups C and D were aroused until their heart rates exceeded 100 beats per minute (bpm). Group C had no further experimental stimuli applied whereas Group D lowered their heads as a response to the above stimulus for a period of 300 seconds. Repeated measures analysis showed that there was no difference between the heart rate of Groups A and B or Groups C and D but that the heart rate of Groups A and B were lower than Groups C and D during the 300-second post-arousal (P < 0.001). The horses in Groups A and B were more likely to contact the handler (P < 0.001), exhibit licking and chewing (P < 0.001), rest a hindleg (P < 0.001), and sniff the ground (P < 0.001) than those in Groups C and D. The number of stimuli required to maintain the head in a lowered position was greatest during the first 30 seconds (P = 0.012 and P < 0.001, Parts 1 and 2, respectively). The current study has shown that head lowering in horses does not influence cardiac responses, even after the horses had been aroused to have their heart rates above 100 bpm. Therefore, it is not a method that will aid in calming an aroused horse in training. Contrary to popular belief, there was no association with licking-and-chewing and head lowering, nor with these behaviors and response acquisition.