Abstract: The ability to jump over an obstacle depends upon the generation of work across the joints of the propelling limb(s). The total work generated by one hind limb of a horse and the contribution to the total work by four joints of the hind limb were determined for a jump. It was hypothesized that the hip and ankle joints would have extensor moments performing positive work, while the knee would have a flexor moment and perform negative work during the jump. Ground reaction forces and sagittal plane kinematics were simultaneously recorded during each jumping trial. Joint moment, power and work were determined for the metatarsophalangeal (MP), tarsal (ankle), tibiofemoral (knee) and coxofemoral (hip) joints. The hip, knee and ankle all flexed and then extended and the MP extended and then flexed during ground contact. Consistent with our hypothesis, large extensor moments were observed at the hip and ankle joints and large flexor moments at the knee and MP joints throughout ground contact of the hind limb. Peak moments tended to occur earlier in stance in the proximal joints but peak power generation of the hind limb joints occurred at similar times except for the MP joint, with the hip and ankle peaking first followed by the MP joint. During the first portion of ground contact (approximately 40%), the net result of the joint powers was the absorption of power. During the remainder of the contact period, the hind limb generated power. This pattern of power absorption followed by power generation paralleled the power profiles of the hip, ankle and MP joints. The total work performed by one hind limb was 0.71 J kg(-1). Surprisingly, the knee produced 85% of the work (0.60 J kg(-1)) done by the hind limb, and the positive work performed by the knee occurred during the first 40% of the take-off. There is little net work generated by the other three joints over the entire take-off. Velocity of the tuber coxae (a landmark on the pelvis of the animal) was negative (downward) during the first 40% of stance, which perhaps reflects the negative work performed to decrease the potential energy during the first 40% of contact. During the final 60% of contact, the hip, ankle and MP joints generate positive work, which is reflected in the increase of the animal's potential energy.

Abstract: Hawk-dove games have been extensively used to predict the conditions under which group-living animals should defend their resources against potential usurpers. Typically, game-theoretic models on aggression consider that resource defense may entail energetic and injury costs. However, intruders may also take advantage of owners who are busy fighting to sneak access to unguarded resources, imposing thereby an additional cost on the use of the escalated hawk strategy. In this article we modify the two-strategy hawk-dove game into a three-strategy hawk-dove-sneaker game that incorporates a distraction-sneaking tactic, allowing us to explore its consequences on the expected level of aggression within groups. Our model predicts a lower proportion of hawks and hence lower frequencies of aggressive interactions within groups than do previous two-strategy hawk-dove games. The extent to which distraction sneakers decrease the frequency of aggression within groups, however, depends on whether they search only for opportunities to join resources uncovered by other group members or for both unchallenged resources and opportunities to usurp.

Abstract: Clement, Feltus, Kaiser, and Zentall (2000) reported that pigeons prefer discriminative stimuli that require greater effort (more pecks) to obtain over those that require less effort. In the present experiment, we examined two variables associated with this phenomenon. First, we asked whether delay of reinforcement, presumably a relatively aversive event similar to effort, would produce similar effects. Second, we asked whether the stimulus preference produced by a prior relatively aversive event depends on its anticipation. Anticipation of delay was accomplished by signaling its occurrence. Results indicated that delays can produce preferences similar to those produced by increased effort, but only if the delays are signaled.

Abstract: I begin with a rather unpromising dispute that Nozick once had with Ian Hacking in the pages of the London Review of Books, in which both vied with one another in their enthusiasm to repudiate the thesis that some human people or peoples are closer than others to animality. I shall attempt to show that one can build, on the basis of Nozick’s discussion of rationality, a defense of the view that the capacity for language places human rationality out of reach of a comparison with animals. The difference rests, paradoxi–cally, on the human capacity for irrationality. Irrationality depends on the capacity for language, which allows the detachment of explicit thoughts from their underlying dynamic implementation; these, in turn, condition the essential disputability of principles of rationality. That is what places every human potentially—if not actually—on the other side of an unbridge–able gulf that separates us from other animals.