Abstract: The aim of the present study was to compare horses' heart rate (HR), heart rate variability (RMSSD, pNN50) and behaviour in the same temperament test when being ridden, led, and released free. Behavioural measurements included scores and linear measurements for reactivity (R), activity (A), time to calm down (T) and emotionality (E), recorded during the approach (1) and/or during confrontation with the stimulus (2). Sixty-five horses were each confronted 3 times (1 ridden, 1 led, 1 free running in balanced order) with 3 novel and/or sudden stimuli. Mixed model analysis indicated that leading resulted in the lowest (P < 0.05 throughout) reactions as measured by A1, A2, E1, E2, R2, and pNN50 while riding produced the strongest (A1, T2, HR, RMSSD, pNN50) or medium (E1, E2, R2) reactions. Free running resulted either in the strongest (A2, E1, E2, R2) or in the lowest (A1, T2, HR, RMSSD, pNN50) reactions. The repeatability across tests for HR (0.57), but not for RMSSD (0.23) or pNN50 (0.25) was higher than for any behavioural measurement: the latter ranged from values below 0.10 (A1, A2, T2) to values between 0.30 and 0.45 (E1, E2, R2). Overall, the results show that a rider or handler influences, but not completely masks, the horses' intrinsic behaviour in a temperament test, and this influence appeared to be stronger on behavioural variables and heart rate variability than on the horses' heart rates. Taking both practical considerations and repeatabilities into account, reactivity appears to be the most valuable parameter. Emotionality and heart rate can also yield valid results reflecting additional dimensions of temperament although their practical relevance may be less obvious. If a combination of observed variables is chosen with care, a valid assessment of a horse's temperament may be possible in all types of tests. However, in practice, tests that resemble the practical circumstances most closely, i.e. testing riding horses under a rider, should be chosen.

Abstract: Observational field studies were conducted on two remote populations of feral horses in Australia to determine whether lateralization is a characteristic of Equus caballus as a species or results from handling by humans. Group 1 had been feral for two to five generations and Group 2 for 10–20 generations. In both groups, left-side biases were present during agonistic interactions and in reactivity and vigilance. Therefore, as in other vertebrates, the right hemisphere appears to be specialized to control agonistic behaviour and responses to potential threats. The leftwards bias was stronger in measures of behaviour involving more aggression and reactivity. Preferences to place one forelimb in front of the other during grazing were also determined. No population bias of forelimb preference was found, suggesting that such limb preferences present in domestic horses may be entrained. Since stronger individual limb preferences were found in immature than in adult feral horses, limb preference may be modified by maturation or experience in the natural habitat. Stronger limb preference was associated significantly with elevated attention to the environment but only in younger feral horses. No sex differences in lateralization were found. The findings are evidence that horses show visual lateralization, as in other vertebrates, not dependent on handling by humans. Limb preference during grazing, by contrast, does appear to depend on experience.

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.

Abstract: Summary Since the therapeutic use of horse riding has been realised, several research studies investigating the physical and psychosocial effect of therapeutic riding have been conducted. A summary is given of therapeutic riding research studies where formal statistical tests were used to analyse the data as well as a summary of studies where different techniques were used to process the data. These summaries give an overview of the variables measured in previously conducted therapeutic riding studies. The general problems experienced by therapeutic riding researchers are given after the summaries. Possible explanations are discussed for some of these problems. In conclusion a few suggestions are given for future research, not only for therapeutic riding studies, but for any study where the effect of a therapeutic intervention is investigated.

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.