|
Gosling, S. D., & John, O. P. (1999). Personality Dimensions in Nonhuman Animals: A Cross-Species Review. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci., 8(3), 69–75.
Abstract: The evolutionary continuity between humans and other animals suggests that some dimensions of personality may be common across a wide range of species. Unfortunately, there is no unified body of research on animal personality; studies are dispersed across multiple disciplines and diverse journals. To review 19 studies of personality factors in 12 nonhuman species, we used the human Five-Factor Model plus Dominance and Activity as a preliminary framework. Extraversion, Neuroticism, and Agreeableness showed the strongest cross-speciesgenerality, followed by Openness; a separate Conscientiousness dimension appeared only in chimpanzees, humans` closest relatives. Cross-species evidence was modest for a separate Dominance dimension but scant for Activity. The comparative approach taken here offers a fresh perspective on human personality and should facilitate hypothesis-driven research on the social and biological bases of personality.
|
|
|
Lestel, D., & Grundmann, E. (1999). Tools, techniques and animals: the role of mediations of actions in the dynamics of social behaviours. Social Science Information, 38(3), 367–407.
Abstract: The definition of tool proposed by Beck (1980) is still the one referred to in ethology when discussing the question of tool-use in animals, and its pertinence is rarely questioned. However, observations on technical behaviours in animals have multiplied over the last 20 years, and these have profoundly altered our earlier representations. In the present article, we show that Beck's definition is insufficient and that it does not, in fact, work. More generally, we replace a theory of tools with a theory of mediations of actions to account for technical behaviours in animals. We show that a culturally overcharged notion such as that of tool hinders our perception of the diversity and the complexity of tool uses. By speaking of mediations of actions and not of tools, we eliminate the problem of first defining the pertinent object (is it a tool or not?) and are free to concentrate on the means by which the animal externalizes its actions and thus procures greater means of acting on these within a group. In so doing, we prepare the ground for a genuine evolutionary understanding of the dynamics of actions within a given animal population. Whereas, with a few exceptions, ethologists have always separated the question of techniques from that of social behaviour, we emphasize the importance of an ecology of mediations of actions for understanding the structure and dynamics of animal societies, in particular by attempting to rethink such notions as “culture” in the perspective of a general analysis of mediations of actions.
|
|
|
Redbo, I., Redbo-Torstensson, P., Ödberg, F. O., Hedendahl, A., & Holm, J. (1998). Factors affecting behavioural disturbances in race-horses. Animal Science, 66(2), 475–481.
|
|
|
Goodwin, D., McGreevy, P. D., Heleski, C., Randle, H., & Waran, N. (2008). Equitation science: The application of science in equitation. Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science, 11(3), 185–190.
|
|
|
Dey, S. (1995). Trailer accidents. Journal of Equine Veterinary Science, 15(4), 148–149.
|
|
|
Pirasteh, A. (2002). Dr. Strasser's methods not to just save money. Journal of Equine Veterinary Science, 22(3), 102–103.
|
|
|
(1994). Winter horse care. Journal of Equine Veterinary Science, 14(2), 115–117.
|
|
|
Huff, A. N., Meacham, T. N., & Wahlberg, M. L. (1985). Feeds and feeding: A review. Journal of Equine Veterinary Science, 5(2), 96–108.
|
|
|
Huff, A. N. (1988). Winter Manegement. Journal of Equine Veterinary Science, 8(1), 81.
|
|
|
Huff, A. N. (1988). Safety. Journal of Equine Veterinary Science, 8(1), 81.
|
|