|
Bökönyi, S. (1984). Horse. In Manson (Ed.), Evolution of domesticated animals (Vol. 18, pp. 162–173). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
|
|
HAFEZ, E. S. E., WILLIAMS, M., & WIERZBOWSKI, S. (1962). The Behaviour of Horses..
|
|
Fragaszy, D., & Visalberghi, E. (1996). Primates “primacy” reconsidered. In C. Heyes, & B. G. Galef (Eds.), Social learning in animals: the roots of culture (pp. 65–84). Academic Press, Inc.
|
|
Breummer, F. (1967). The wild horses of Sable Island. Animals, 10, 14–17.
|
|
Wingfield, J. C.,, & Ramenofsky, M. (1999). Hormones and the behavioral ecology of stress. In P. H. M. Balm (Ed.), Stress physiology in animals. (pp. 1–51). Sheffield, United Kingdom: Sheffield Academic Press.
|
|
Laland, K. N., Richerson, P. J., & Boyd, R. (1996). Developing a theory of animal social learning. In C. M. Heyes, & B. G. J. Galef (Eds.), Social learning in animals: the roots of culture. (pp. 129–154). San Diego, California: Academic Press.
|
|
Tomasello, M., & Call, J. (2006). Do chimpanzees know what others see ? or only what they are looking at? In M. Nudds, & S. Hurley (Eds.), Rational Animals? (pp. 371–384). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
|
|
Russell, L. A. (2003). Decoding Equine Emotions. Society and Animals, 11(3), 265–266.
|
Brandt, K. (2004). A Language of Their Own: An Interactionist Approach to Human-Horse Communication. Society and Animals, 12(4), 299–316.
Abstract: This paper explores the process of human-horse communication using ethnographic data of in-depth interviews and participant observation. Guided by symbolic interactionism, the paper argues that humans and horses co-create a language system by way of the body to facilitate the creation of shared meaning. This research challenges the privileged status of verbal language and suggests that non-verbal communication and language systems of the body have their own unique complexities. This investigation of humanhorse communication offers new possibilities to understand the subjective and intersubjective world of non-verbal language using beings-human and nonhuman alike.
|
Lloyd, N., & Mulcock, J. (2007). Human-animal studies in Australia: Current directions. Society and Animals, 15(1), 1–5.
Abstract: In 2004, Natalie Lloyd and Jane Mulcock initiated the Australian Animals & Society Study Group, a network of social science, humanities and arts scholars that quickly grew to include more than 100 participants. In July 2005, about 50 participants attended the group“s 4-day inaugural conference at the University of Western Australia, Perth. Papers in this issue emerged from the conference. They exemplify the Australian academy”s work in the fields of History, Population Health, Sociology, Geography, and English and address strong themes: human-equine relationships; management of native and introduced animals; and relationships with other domestic, nonhuman animals-from cats and dogs to cattle. Human-Animal Studies is an expanding field in Australia. However, many scholars, due to funding and teaching concerns, focus their primary research in different domains. All authors in this issue-excepting one-are new scholars in their respective fields. The papers represent the diversity and innovation of recent Australian research on human-animal interactions. The authors look at both past and present, then anticipate future challenges in building an effective network to expand this field of study in Australia.
|
