Abstract: Domestic horses are faced with social challenges throughout their lives due to limitations in social contact, space restrictions and frequent changes in social companionship. This is in contrast to natural conditions where horses live in relatively stable harem bands. Currently, little is known about how repeated regrouping affect horse behaviour and welfare, and it is unknown whether horses may adapt to regrouping. In this study, we aimed to investigate the effects of an unstable group structure, caused by weekly regroupings, on behaviour and frequency of injuries in young horses. Forty-five horses were included in the study and were randomly assigned to the treatments; Stable (S; seven groups of three horses) or Unstable (U; eight groups of three horses). The experimental period lasted 7 weeks, during which horses in Stable groups remained in the same group, whereas one horse was exchanged between Unstable groups every week. The groups were kept in 80m×80m grass-covered enclosures and were fed additional roughage on the ground daily. Social interactions were recorded in Unstable groups immediately after each regrouping (30min), and in both Stable and Unstable groups on day 1, 3 and 6 after each regrouping (2×20min/group/day). Injuries were scored by the end of the experimental period. The level of aggression shown by horses in Unstable groups immediately after regrouping was not affected by week (F5,35=0.42, P=0.83), indicating that horses neither habituated, nor sensitized, to repeated regrouping. Compared to horses in Stable groups, more agonistic behaviour was shown by horses in Unstable groups (i.e. non-contact agonistic; F1,65=5.60, P=0.02), whereas there was no treatment effect on other variables. The level of play behaviour appeared, however, to be more variable in Unstable groups. There was a significant effect of week on the level of contact agonistic interactions as well as greeting behaviour, due to a high occurrence in weeks 4-6. Non-contact agonistic interactions constituted the major part of agonistic interactions (66%). Possibly as consequence, no serious injuries were registered and there was no treatment effect (U=184; P=0.11). We conclude that the behaviour of young horses is affected by group management, and that horses appear not to adapt to weekly regroupings.

Abstract: Habituation to frightening stimuli plays an important role in horse training. To investigate the extent to which horses generalise between different visual objects, 2-year-old stallions were habituated to feeding from a container placed inside a test arena and assigned as TEST (n=12) or REFERENCE horses (n=12). In Experiment 1, TEST horses were habituated to six objects (ball, barrel, board, box, cone, cylinder) presented in sequence in a balanced order. The objects were of similar size but different colour. Each object was placed 0.5m in front of the feed container, forcing the horses to pass the object to get to the food. TEST horses received as many 2min exposures to each object as required to meet a habituation criterion. We recorded behavioural reactions to the object, latency to feed, total eating time, and heart rate (HR) during all exposures. There was no significant decrease in initial responses towards a novel object with increasing object number, indicating that habituation was stimulus-specific. REFERENCE horses were exposed to the test arena without objects in the same period, and reactions of TEST and REFERENCE horses were subsequently compared in a fear-test (2m2.5m rubber mat placed under the feed container, forcing the horses to step on the mat to get food). There were no significant differences between the treatment groups, i.e. previous habituation of TEST horses to six visual objects did not reduce responses in a fear-test involving visual and tactile stimulation. Due to the lack of generalisation in Experiment 1, we designed a supplemental experiment (Experiment 2), in which REFERENCE horses were exposed to the same six objects except that object colour was kept constant. We found a significant reduction in response (behaviour and HR) with increasing object number, indicating that horses generalise between similarly coloured objects of varying shape. We conclude that a high degree of object similarity, e.g. identical colouring, appears to be crucial for object generalisation in horses.

Abstract: Group housing of horses is not widely applied in practice despite the welfare advantages of keeping animals socially rather than individually. In particular, concerns have been raised about the possible increased risk of injury and how to introduce a new horse into an established group. This study investigated two hypotheses: (1) pre-exposure of young horses in neighbouring boxes reduces the frequency of aggressive interactions when the same horses are subsequently put together in a paddock compared to horses without this previous box experience, (2) the occurrence of aggressive behaviour, in particular contact aggression in the paddock can be predicted after observing the horses' social interactions in neighbouring boxes. Danish Warmblood mares (n = 20), 2 years old, were kept in two groups of 10 horses. In total, 60 encounters were arranged whereby each horse was confronted pair-wise with six horses from the other group, three according to each treatment: treatment I--box (B) and subsequent paddock meeting (BP), and treatment II--only paddock meeting (P). Horses met in neighbouring boxes for 5 min and together in the same paddock for 10 min. The frequencies of aggressive and non-aggressive interactions were analysed from video recordings. Total aggression levels between BP and P did not differ, but [`]contact aggression', i.e. bite, kick, strike, push, tended to be lower in BP compared to P (median BP = 1, P = 2; p = 0.083) and there were less bites in BP than P (median BP = 0, P = 1; p = 0.050). Frequencies of [`]non-aggressive' interactions, e.g. friendly approach, nasal sniff, were lower in BP than P (median BP = 2.5, P = 10; p < 0.01). Results further revealed that [`]bite threat' performed in boxes correlated with [`]contact aggression' in the paddock (r = 0.46, p = 0.011). In conclusion, pre-exposure of young horses in neighbouring boxes may reduce [`]contact aggression', especially biting, in the paddock and [`]bite threat' shown in boxes may help to predict contact aggression when horses are later turned out together. The reduced non-aggressive interactions in the paddock in the BP test were probably a consequence of horses having exchanged these behaviours in the preceding B test. Exposing young horses in boxes next to each other may be a helpful tool before mixing them because horses meet in a safe environment that could assist in reducing the type of aggression where horses are most at risk of being injured.

Abstract: Dominance hierarchies in horses primarily influence priority access to limited resources of any kind, resulting in predictable contest outcomes that potentially minimize aggressive encounters and associated risk of injury. Levels of aggression in group-kept horses under domestic conditions have been reported to be higher than in their feral counterparts but can often be attributed to suboptimal management. Horse owners often express concerns about the risk of injuries occurring in group-kept horses, but these concerns have not been substantiated by empirical investigations. What has not yet been sufficiently addressed are human safety aspects related to approaching and handling group-kept horses. Given horse's natural tendency to synchronize activity to promote group cohesion, questions remain about how group dynamics influence human-horse interactions. Group dynamics influence a variety of management scenarios, ranging from taking a horse out of its social group to the prospect of humans mimicking the horse's social system by taking a putative leadership role and seeking after an alpha position in the dominance hierarchy to achieve compliance. Yet, there is considerable debate about whether the roles horses attain in their social group are of any relevance in their reactions to humans. This article reviews the empirical data on social dynamics in horses, focusing on dominance and leadership theories and the merits of incorporating those concepts into the human-horse context. This will provide a constructive framework for informed debate and valuable guidance for owners managing group-kept horses and for optimizing human-horse interactions.

Abstract: The millennia-old practices of horse training markedly predate and thus were isolated from the mid-twentieth century revelation of animal learning processes. From this standpoint, the progress made in the application and understanding of learning theory in horse training is reviewed including a discussion of how learning processes are employed or otherwise under-utilised in training. This review describes the process of habituation and the most commonly applied desensitisation techniques (systematic desensitisation, counter-conditioning, overshadowing, response prevention) and propose two additional techniques (approach conditioning and stimulus blending). The salience of different types of cues, the interaction of operant and classical conditioning and the impact of stress are also discussed. This paper also exposes the inflexibility and occasional inadequacy of the terminology of learning theory when translated from the research laboratory situation to the practical setting in horse training. While learning theory provides a rich toolbox for riders and trainers, the training process is subject to the simultaneous use of multiple learning processes. In addition, learning/behavioural outcomes and trained responses are not just the result of simple stimulus-response based interactions but are further shaped by arousal, affective and attachment states. More research is needed in these areas. For the field of equitation science to progress and to improve clarity and use of learning processes, changes in nomenclature are required. In particular, the use of the terms 'positive' and 'negative' as descriptive labels in both reinforcement and punishment modalities are unacceptably misleading for everyday use. These labels inhibit the understanding and recognition of the learning processes that these terms supposedly represent, yet the learning processes they describe are vital for horse riders, handlers and trainers to understand. We therefore propose that these labels should be re-labelled more appropriately as 'addition' or 'subtraction' reinforcement/punishment. This would enlighten trainers on the correct application of learning theory, and safety and welfare benefits for people and horses would follow. Finally it is also proposed that the term 'conflict theory' be taken up in equitation science to facilitate diagnosis of training-related behaviour disorders and thus enable the emergence of improved training practices. The optimal use of learning theory should be established as a fundamental principle in equestrian education.