Abstract: In this paper, we show that differences in dominance and spatial centrality of individuals in a group may arise through self-organisation. Our instrument is a model, called DomWorld, that represents two traits that are often found in animals, namely grouping and competing. In this model individual differences grow under the following conditions: (1) when the intensity of aggression increases and grouping becomes denser, (2) when the degree of sexual dimorphism in fighting power increases. In this case the differences among females compared to males grow too, (3) when, upon encountering another individual, the tendency to attack is 'obligate' and not conditional, namely 'sensitive to risks'. Results resemble phenomena described for societies of primates, mice, birds and pigs.

Abstract: Whereas the way animals perceive human contact has been particularly examined in pet animals, a small amount of investigations has been done in domestic ungulates. It was nevertheless assumed that, as pet animals, non-aggressive forms of tactile contact were as well rewarding or positive for these species, even though the features of intraspecific relationships in pet animals and domestic ungulates may be to some extent different.We test here the hypothesis that horses may not consider physical handling by humans as a positive event. When comparing different early human-foal interactions, we found that early exposure to a motionless human enhanced slightly foals reactions to humans whereas forced stroking or handling in early life did not improve later human-foal relation. Foals that were assisted during their first suckling (e.g., brought to the dam's teat) even tended to avoid human approach at 2 weeks, and physical contact at 1 month of age.We argue that interspecies differences may exist in how tactile stimulation is perceived. It may be important for the establishment of a bond that a young animal is active in the process and able, through its behavioral responses, to help define what is positive for it. This way of investigation may have important general implications in how we consider the development of social relations, both within and between species.

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: Erratum in:
Vet J. 2005 May;169(3):321.
Corrected and republished in:
Vet J. 2005 May;169(3):322-5.
Oral administration of altrenogest for oestrus suppression in competition horses is believed to be widespread in some equestrian disciplines, and can be administered continuously for several months during a competition season. To examine whether altrenogest has any anabolic or other potential performance enhancing properties that may give a horse an unfair advantage, we examined the effect of oral altrenogest (0.044 mg/kg), given daily for a period of eight weeks, on social hierarchy, activity budget, body-mass and body condition score of 12 sedentary mares. We concluded that prolonged oral administration of altrenogest at recommended dose rates to sedentary mares resulted in no effect on dominance hierarchies, body mass or condition score.