Abstract: By definition, ethology is primarily the scientific study of animal behavior, especially as it occurs in a natural environment; applied ethology being the study of animal behavior in the human domain. The terms equine ethology and ethological training are becoming commonplace in the equestrian domain, yet they seem to be used with a conspicuous lack of clarity and with no mention of learning theory. Most of what we do to train horses runs counter to their innate preferences. This article summarizes the ethological challenges encountered by working horses and considers the merits and limitations of ethological solutions. It also questions the use of terms such as “alpha” and “leader” and examines aspects of learning theory, equine cognition, and ethology as applied to horse training and clinical behavior modification. We propose 7 training principles that optimally account for the horse's ethological and learning abilities and maintain maximal responsivity in the trained horse. These principles can be summarized as: (1) use learning theory appropriately; (2) train easy-to-discriminate signals; (3) train and subsequently elicit responses singularly; (4) train only one response per signal; (5) train all responses to be initiated and subsequently completed within a consistent structure; (6) train persistence of current operantly conditioned responses; and (7) avoid and disassociate flight responses. Adherence to these principles and incorporating them into all horse training methodologies should accelerate training success, reduce behavioral wastage of horses, and improve safety for both humans and horses.

Abstract: Sensory lateralization in dogs (n = 74) was investigated in this study using our innovation, the Sensory Jump Test. This required the modification of head halters to create three different ocular treatments (binocular, right, and left monocular vision) for eye preference assessment in a jumping task. Ten jumps were recorded as a jump set for each treatment. Measurements recorded included (i) launch and landing paws, (ii) type of jump, (iii) approach distance, (iv) clearance height of the forepaw, hindpaw, and the lowest part of the body to clear the jump, and (v) whether the jump was successful. Factors significantly associated with these jump outcomes included ocular treatment, jump set number, and replication number. Most notably, in the first jump set, findings indicated a left hemispheric dominance for the initial navigation of the Sensory Jump Test, as left monocular vision (LMV) compromised of jumping more than right monocular (RMV) and binocular vision, with a significantly reduced approach distance and forepaw clearance observed in dogs with LMV. However, by the third jump set, dogs undergoing LMV launched from a greater approach distance and with a higher clearance height, corresponding to an increase in success rate of the jump, in comparison with RMV and binocular vision dogs. A marginally non-significant RMV bias was observed for eye preference based on the laterality indices for approach distance (P = 0.060) and lowest body part clearance height (P = 0.067). A comparison between eye preference and launching or landing paws showed no association between these measures of sensory and motor laterality. To our knowledge, this is the first study to report on sensory lateralization in the dog, and furthermore, to compare both motor and sensory laterality in dogs.

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.