Abstract: To achieve optimal performance in equine sports as well as in leisure not only the physical abilities of the horse should be considered, but also the horse's personality. Besides temperamental aspects, like emotionality, or the horse's reactivity towards humans in handling situations, the learning ability of the horse is another relevant personality trait. To study whether differences in learning performance are consistent over time and whether individual learning performance differs between learning tests or is affected by emotionality, 39 young horses (Dutch Warmblood) were tested repeatedly in two learning tests. An aversive stimulus (AS) was used in one learning test (the avoidance learning test) and a reward was used in the other learning test (the reward learning test). During both learning tests behaviour as well as heart rate were measured. Each test was executed four times, twice when horses were 1 year of age, and twice when they were 2 years of age. Half of the horses received additional physical training from 6 months onwards. In both tests horses could be classified as either performers, i.e. completing the daily session, or as non-performers, i.e. returning to the home environment without having completed the daily session. There were some indications that emotionality might have caused non-performing behaviour, but these indications are not convincing enough to exclude other causes. Furthermore, there seem to be no simple relationships between measures of heart rate, behavioural responses putatively related to emotionality and learning performance. Horses revealed consistent individual learning performances within years in both tests, and in the avoidance learning test also between years. There was no significant correlation between learning performances in the avoidance learning test and the learning performances in the reward learning test. It is concluded that individual learning abilities are consistent over a short time interval for an avoidance learning test and a reward learning test and over a longer time for the avoidance learning test. Furthermore, results indicate that some horses perform better when they have to learn to avoid an aversive stimulus while others perform better when they are rewarded after a correct response. It is suggested that these differences may be relevant to design optimal individual training programmes and methods.

Abstract: We examined whether very young dairy calves are able to discriminate between two people, and whether they use the colour of clothing or other indices to do so. During the familiarisation phase, one person (the familiar rewarder), who always wore the same colour clothes, gave milk, spoke gently and patted the calves in their individual pen for 6 days each week. During the test phase, the calf had to make a choice in an Y-maze placed in front of the gate of its stall. When the calves chose the familiar rewarder, they received 200 ml of milk as reinforcement. When they made the incorrect choice, they received nothing and were returned to their stall. On each test day, the calves made eight choices. The criterion of success was that the calf made at least six correct choices in eight trials on each of two consecutive test days (P<0.021 by the binomial law). The first experiment was carried out with fourteen 1-week-old male and female Holstein calves to see if calves could approach a person, who changed position in the maze, in order to obtain a feed reward. The familiar rewarder wore the same clothes as during the period of familiarisation and was in one arm of the Y-maze. The other arm was empty and the position of the familiar rewarder in the maze was randomised. Eleven of the 14 calves reached the criterion for success, after only three tests. The second experiment, carried out with five 2-week-old calves, examined whether the calves can differentiate the familiar rewarder (wearing the same clothing as during the period of familiarisation) from another person (the non-rewarder) wearing clothes of a different colour. The criterion of success was reached by all five calves. The third experiment was carried out with seven 2-week-old calves. It examined whether the calves can differentiate the familiar rewarder and the non-rewarder, when the two people are wearing clothes of the same colour (i.e. the same colour worn by the familiar rewarder during the phase of familiarisation). None of the calves were able to reach the criterion of success within a limited number of four test days. Often, calves would always choose the same arm of the maze. The fourth experiment was carried out on six 1-month-old calves. It was similar to experiment 3 with the difference that the familiar rewarder and the non-rewarder both wore the same colour clothes, but which were not the same colour as worn during the phase of familiarisation. Only one calf achieved the criterion of success within two test days. Results demonstrated that colour cues help very young calves to discriminate between two people, when these people wear different colour clothing. Some calves may be able to use other indicators than the colour of clothing. The Y-maze method is an promising way of examining calves' abilities to recognise people.

Abstract: During the evolution of cooperation it may have become critical for individuals to compare their own efforts and pay-offs with those of others. Negative reactions may occur when expectations are violated. One theory proposes that aversion to inequity can explain human cooperation within the bounds of the rational choice model, and may in fact be more inclusive than previous explanations. Although there exists substantial cultural variation in its particulars, this 'sense of fairness' is probably a human universal that has been shown to prevail in a wide variety of circumstances. However, we are not the only cooperative animals, hence inequity aversion may not be uniquely human. Many highly cooperative nonhuman species seem guided by a set of expectations about the outcome of cooperation and the division of resources. Here we demonstrate that a nonhuman primate, the brown capuchin monkey (Cebus apella), responds negatively to unequal reward distribution in exchanges with a human experimenter. Monkeys refused to participate if they witnessed a conspecific obtain a more attractive reward for equal effort, an effect amplified if the partner received such a reward without any effort at all. These reactions support an early evolutionary origin of inequity aversion.

Abstract: In a previous study, Kuroshima and colleagues demonstrated that capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella) learned to discriminate between a “knower” who inspected a box for food, and a “guesser” who did not. The aim of the present study was to specify whether the subjects learned a simple conditional discrimination or a causal relationship that seeing leads to knowing. In experiment 1, we introduced five types of novel containers to two subjects. Each container was of different shape and color. The subjects gradually learned to reach toward the container the knower suggested. In experiment 2, we diversified the behavior of the knower and the guesser. In experiment 3, in order to eliminate the possibility of discrimination based on differences in the magnitude and the complexity of two trainers, we equated their behaviors. One subject adapted to the novel behaviors of the knower and the guesser, successfully discriminating the two trainers. Thus this monkey clearly learned to use the inspecting action of the knower and the non-inspecting action of the guesser as a discriminative cue to recognize the baited container. This result suggests that one capuchin monkey learned to recognize the relationship between seeing and knowing.