|
|
Sighieri, C., Tedeschi, D., De Andreis, C., Petri, L., & Baragli, P. (2003). Behaviour Patterns of Horses Can be Used to Establish a Dominant-Subordinate Relationship Between Man and Horse. Animal Welfare, 12(4), 705–708.
Abstract: This paper describes how man can enter the social hierarchy of the horse by mimicking the behaviour and stance it uses to establish dominance. A herd is organised according to a dominance hierarchy established by means of ritualised conflict. Dominance relationships are formed through these confrontations: one horse gains the dominant role and others identify themselves as subordinates. This study was conducted using five females of the Haflinger breed, totally unaccustomed to human contact, from a free-range breeding farm. The study methods were based on the three elements fundamental to the equilibrium of the herd: flight, herd instinct and hierarchy. The trainer-horse relationship was established in three phases: retreat, approach and association. At the end of the training sessions, all of the horses were able to respond correctly to the trainer. These observations suggest that it is possible to manage unhandled horses without coercion by mimicking their behaviour patterns.
|
|
|
|
Murphy, J., & Arkins, S. (2006). Laterality and visuo-spatial ability in the equine: Functional measures of sport horse selection? BSAP Occasional Publication, 35, 159–170.
Abstract: Laterality in any organism or species can be manifest as morphological, sensory and functional degrees of asymmetry such as hemispheric dominance, handedness or sidedness and other motor functional behaviours and as such is equally important in equitation. The influence of the horses' sex on both the direction and the degree of the laterality was explored within and between 4 experimental procedures in the 1st study. The findings showed that the direction, but not the degree of idiosyncratic motor preference in the horses was strongly sex-related. Male horses exhibited significantly more left lateralized responses and female horses exhibited significantly more right lateralized responses. Visuo-spatial ability is also likely to be important in the performance horse. In many species, moderate to large differences in visuo-spatial ability have been reported between the sexes, with superior visuo-spatial ability being reported in males of all species investigated to date. As no known studies had addressed visuo-spatial ability in the equine, the objective of the 2nd study, was to determine if visuo-spatial ability differed between male and female horses. The results produced the first behavioural demonstration of superior visuo-spatial ability in male horses, similar to that reported in other species. There is evidence to suggest that visuospatial ability and motor laterality are associated with cerebral hemispheric asymmetry and may be intrinsically linked. Brain development and laterality have also been associated with hair patterning, and, in a 3rd study we attempted to identify predictors of lateral bias in motor behaviour in horses. We investigated the relationship between the direction of facial hair whorl rotation and the incidence/direction of laterality in the horse. The findings suggest that direction of facial hair whorl rotation may be a useful indicator of lateralised motor behavioural preferences in the horse. We then attempted to establish if laterality was evident at birth in a 4th study, where we explored if neonatal foals exhibited lateralised patterns during and immediately post the birthing process that were correlated with their facial hair whorl patterns. The results showed a significant association between the sex of the foal and the choice of foreleg presented initially during 2nd stage parturition. Significantly more colt foals led with the left foreleg and significantly more filly foals led with the right foreleg than expected purely by random and the behaviour was correlated with facial hair whorl patterns. The findings also suggest that lateralisation in the horse is determined in utero as has also been shown in humans. Comparisons of wholly intact male and female horses are warranted as they might elucidate additional linkages between motor behaviour, visuo-spatial ability and brain organisation and development in the horse. Further research in this area could lead to more appropriate competition conditions (better fence design/construction on cross-country tracks) and so eliminate unnecessary levels of risk associated with many equestrian sports.
|
|
|
|
Chaplin, S. J., & Gretgrix, L. (2010). Effect of housing conditions on activity and lying behaviour of horses. animal, 4(5), 792–795.
Abstract: Housing conditions for horses impose various levels of confinement, which may compromise welfare. Lying behaviour and activity can be used as welfare indicators for domestic animals and rebound behaviour suggests a build-up of motivation resulting from deprivation. The objective of this study was to determine if activity and lying behaviour of horses are affected by housing conditions and to investigate the occurrence of rebound behaviour after release from confinement. Eight horses were subjected, in pairs, to each of four experimental treatments; paddock (P), fully stabled (FS), partly stabled (PS) and yard (Y). Each horse received 6 days acclimatisation prior to the 24 h recording period. Time spent in lying and activity were electronically recorded using a tilt switch and motion sensor connected to a data logger worn on the horse's left foreleg. Time spent active during the first 5 min of release from stable to paddock in the PS treatment (days 1 and 5) and at the same time of day in the P treatment was used as a measure of rebound behaviour. Effect of housing conditions on total time spent active was highly significant (FS = 123 s, PS = 158 s, Y = 377 s, P = 779 s, P < 0.001). Housing conditions did not significantly affect total time spent lying (P = 0.646). Horses were significantly more active, compared with baseline paddock behaviour, on release from stabling on both days 1 (P = 0.006) and 5 (P = 0.025) of PS treatment. These results suggest that activity patterns of horses, but not lying behaviour, are affected by the housing conditions tested and that rebound activity occurs in horses after a period of confinement.
|
|
|
|
Giraldeau, L. - A., Lefebvre, L., & Morand-Ferron, J. (2007). Can a restrictive definition lead to biases and tautologies? Behav. Brain Sci., 30(4), 411–412.
Abstract: We argue that the operational definition proposed by Ramsey et al. does not represent a significant improvement for students of innovation, because it is so restrictive that it might actually prevent the testing of hypotheses on the relationships between innovation, ecology, evolution, culture, and intelligence. To avoid tautological thinking, we need to use an operational definition that is taxonomically unbiased and neutral with respect to the hypotheses to be tested.
|
|
|
|
Heydebreck, K. von. (1928). Reitlehrer und Reiter in Uniform und Zivil eine Anleitung nach den Grundsätzen der deutschen Reitvorschrift (2., neubearb. Aufl ed.). Berlin: Mittler.
|
|
|
|
Zentall, T. R. (2006). Imitation: definitions, evidence, and mechanisms. Anim. Cogn., 9(4), 335–353.
Abstract: Imitation can be defined as the copying of behavior. To a biologist, interest in imitation is focused on its adaptive value for the survival of the organism, but to a psychologist, the mechanisms responsible for imitation are the most interesting. For psychologists, the most important cases of imitation are those that involve demonstrated behavior that the imitator cannot see when it performs the behavior (e.g., scratching one's head). Such examples of imitation are sometimes referred to as opaque imitation because they are difficult to account for without positing cognitive mechanisms, such as perspective taking, that most animals have not been acknowledged to have. The present review first identifies various forms of social influence and social learning that do not qualify as opaque imitation, including species-typical mechanisms (e.g., mimicry and contagion), motivational mechanisms (e.g., social facilitation, incentive motivation, transfer of fear), attentional mechanisms (e.g., local enhancement, stimulus enhancement), imprinting, following, observational conditioning, and learning how the environment works (affordance learning). It then presents evidence for different forms of opaque imitation in animals, and identifies characteristics of human imitation that have been proposed to distinguish it from animal imitation. Finally, it examines the role played in opaque imitation by demonstrator reinforcement and observer motivation. Although accounts of imitation have been proposed that vary in their level of analysis from neural to cognitive, at present no theory of imitation appears to be adequate to account for the varied results that have been found.
|
|
|
|
Heyes, C. M. (1994). Social learning in animals: categories and mechanisms. Biol. Rev., 69(2), 207–231.
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)
|
|
|
|
Tyler, S. J. (1972). The behaviour and social organisation of the new Forest ponies. Anim. Behav. Monogr., 5(2), 85–196.
|
|
|
|
Whiten, A., Horner, V., Litchfield, C. A., & Marshall-Pescini, S. (2004). How do apes ape? Learn. Behav., 32(1), 36–52.
Abstract: In the wake of telling critiques of the foundations on which earlier conclusions were based, the last 15 years have witnessed a renaissance in the study of social learning in apes. As a result, we are able to review 31 experimental studies from this period in which social learning in chimpanzees, gorillas, and orangutans has been investigated. The principal question framed at the beginning of this era, Do apes ape? has been answered in the affirmative, at least in certain conditions. The more interesting question now is, thus, How do apes ape? Answering this question has engendered richer taxonomies of the range of social-learning processes at work and new methodologies to uncover them. Together, these studies suggest that apes ape by employing a portfolio of alternative social-learning processes in flexibly adaptive ways, in conjunction with nonsocial learning. We conclude by sketching the kind of decision tree that appears to underlie the deployment of these alternatives.
|
|
|
|
Caldwell, C. A., & Whiten, A. (2004). Testing for social learning and imitation in common marmosets, Callithrix jacchus, using an artificial fruit. Anim. Cogn., 7(2), 77–85.
Abstract: We tested for social learning and imitation in common marmosets using an artificial foraging task and trained conspecific demonstrators. We trained a demonstrator marmoset to open an artificial fruit, providing a full demonstration of the task to be learned. Another marmoset provided a partial demonstration, controlling for stimulus enhancement effects, by eating food from the outside of the apparatus. We thus compared three observer groups, each consisting of four animals: those that received the full demonstration, those that received the partial demonstration, and a control group that saw no demonstration prior to testing. Although none of the observer marmosets succeeded in opening the artificial fruit during the test periods, there were clear effects of demonstration type. Those that saw the full demonstration manipulated the apparatus more overall, whereas those from the control group manipulated it the least of the three groups. Those from the full-demonstration group also contacted the particular parts of the artificial fruit that they had seen touched (localised stimulus enhancement) to a greater extent than the other two groups. There was also an interaction between the number of hand and mouth touches made to the artificial fruit for the full- and partial-demonstration groups. Whether or not these data represent evidence for imitation is discussed. We also propose that the clear differences between the groups suggest that social learning mechanisms provide real benefits to these animals in terms of developing novel food-processing skills analogous to the one presented here.
|
|
