Abstract: Using horses, we investigated the control of operant behavior by a tactile stimulus (the training stimulus) and the generalization of behavior to six other similar test stimuli. In a stall, the experimenters mounted a response panel in the doorway. Located on this panel were a response lever and a grain dispenser. The experimenters secured a tactile-stimulus belt to the horse's back. The stimulus belt was constructed by mounting seven solenoids along a piece of burlap in a manner that allowed each to provide the delivery of a tactile stimulus, a repetitive light tapping, at different locations (spaced 10.0 cm apart) along the horse's back. Two preliminary steps were necessary before generalization testing: training a measurable response (lip pressing) and training on several reinforcement schedules in the presence of a training stimulus (tapping by one of the solenoids). We then gave each horse two generalization test sessions. Results indicated that the horses' behavior was effectively controlled by the training stimulus. Horses made the greatest number of responses to the training stimulus, and the tendency to respond to the other test stimuli diminished as the stimuli became farther away from the training stimulus. These findings are discussed in the context of behavioral principles and their relevance to the training of horses.

Abstract: Intergroup affiliation among female rhesus macaques, Macaca mulatta, was examined in the captive free-ranging colony of Morgan Island, S.C., USA. The provisioned colony has many social groups (35) and is maintained at a relatively high population density (21 animals/ha) with a relatively low adult male to female ratio (1:8.8). Focal and ad libitum samples were collected on 32 adults (3 males and 29 females) from two groups. Although infrequent, grooming was observed between adult females from different groups, and alpha females were the main participants in these interactions. Colony records indicated that none of the intergroup grooms was between females formerly from a common group. Relations between familiar neighboring groups may be maintained by a combination of both affiliative and aggressive behavior.

Abstract: There has been relatively little research on the psychological mechanisms of social learning. This may be due, in part, to the practice of distinguishing categories of social learning in relation to ill-defined mechanisms (Davis, 1973; Galef, 1988). This practice both makes it difficult to identify empirically examples of different types of social learning, and gives the false impression that the mechanisms responsible for social learning are clearly understood. It has been proposed that social learning phenomena be subsumed within the categorization scheme currently used by investigators of asocial learning. This scheme distinguishes categories of learning according to observable conditions, namely, the type of experience that gives rise to a change in an animal (single stimulus vs. stimulus-stimulus relationship vs. response-reinforcer relationship), and the type of behaviour in which this change is detected (response evocation vs. learnability) (Rescorla, 1988). Specifically, three alignments have been proposed: (i) stimulus enhancement with single stimulus learning, (ii) observational conditioning with stimulus-stimulus learning, or Pavlovian conditioning, and (iii) observational learning with response-reinforcer learning, or instrumental conditioning. If, as the proposed alignments suggest, the conditions of social and asocial learning are the same, there is some reason to believe that the mechanisms underlying the two sets of phenomena are also the same. This is so if one makes the relatively uncontroversial assumption that phenomena which occur under similar conditions tend to be controlled by similar mechanisms. However, the proposed alignments are intended to be a set of hypotheses, rather than conclusions, about the mechanisms of social learning; as a basis for further research in which animal learning theory is applied to social learning. A concerted attempt to apply animal learning theory to social learning, to find out whether the same mechanisms are responsible for social and asocial learning, could lead both to refinements of the general theory, and to a better understanding of the mechanisms of social learning. There are precedents for these positive developments in research applying animal learning theory to food aversion learning (e.g. Domjan, 1983; Rozin & Schull, 1988) and imprinting (e.g. Bolhuis, de Vox & Kruit, 1990; Hollis, ten Cate & Bateson, 1991). Like social learning, these phenomena almost certainly play distinctive roles in the antogeny of adaptive behaviour, and they are customarily regarded as 'special kinds' of learning (Shettleworth, 1993).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

Abstract: The behaviour of horses competing in different disciplines was studied and the relationship between the time they spent out of the stable and the prevalence of abnormal behaviour was examined. The owners of dressage, eventing and endurance horses were sent a questionnaire and a total of 1101 responses were received, giving data on 1750 horses. The behaviours studied were wood-chewing, weaving, crib-biting/wind-sucking and box-walking. The reported percentage prevalences of abnormal behaviour for the dressage, eventing and endurance horses were 32.5, 30.8 and 19.5, respectively. The relationship between the time spent in the stable and the prevalence of abnormal behaviour was examined by chi 2 tests which showed that there were significant linear trends for the eventing group (P < 0.001) and the dressage group (P < 0.05). It is concluded that the time a horse spends out of the stable is related to the discipline for which it is being trained and in dressage and eventing horses the time spent in a stable is correlated with an increased risk of abnormal behaviour.