|
|
Henry, S., Richard-Yris, M. - A., & Hausberger, M. (2006). Influence of various early human-foal interferences on subsequent human-foal relationship. Dev Psychobiol, 48(8), 712–718.
Abstract: Whereas the way animals perceive human contact has been particularly examined in pet animals, a small amount of investigations has been done in domestic ungulates. It was nevertheless assumed that, as pet animals, non-aggressive forms of tactile contact were as well rewarding or positive for these species, even though the features of intraspecific relationships in pet animals and domestic ungulates may be to some extent different.We test here the hypothesis that horses may not consider physical handling by humans as a positive event. When comparing different early human-foal interactions, we found that early exposure to a motionless human enhanced slightly foals reactions to humans whereas forced stroking or handling in early life did not improve later human-foal relation. Foals that were assisted during their first suckling (e.g., brought to the dam's teat) even tended to avoid human approach at 2 weeks, and physical contact at 1 month of age.We argue that interspecies differences may exist in how tactile stimulation is perceived. It may be important for the establishment of a bond that a young animal is active in the process and able, through its behavioral responses, to help define what is positive for it. This way of investigation may have important general implications in how we consider the development of social relations, both within and between species.
|
|
|
|
Okamoto, S., Tomonaga, M., Ishii, K., Kawai, N., Tanaka, M., & Matsuzawa, T. (2002). An infant chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes) follows human gaze. Anim. Cogn., 5(2), 107–114.
Abstract: The ability of non-human primates to follow the gaze of other individuals has recently received much attention in comparative cognition. The aim of the present study was to investigate the emergence of this ability in a chimpanzee infant. The infant was trained to look at one of two objects, which an experimenter indicated by one of four different cue conditions: (1) tapping on the target object with a finger; (2) pointing to the target object with a finger; (3) gazing at the target object with head orientation; or (4) glancing at the target object without head orientation. The subject was given food rewards independently of its responses under the first three conditions, so that its responses to the objects were not influenced by the rewards. The glancing condition was tested occasionally, without any reinforcement. By the age of 13 months, the subject showed reliable following responses to the object that was indicated by the various cues, including glancing alone. Furthermore, additional tests clearly showed that the subject's performance was controlled by the “social” properties of the experimenter-given cues but not by the non-social, local-enhancing peripheral properties.
|
|
|
|
Williams, J. L., Friend, T. H., Collins, M. N., Toscano, M. J., Sisto-Burt, A., & Nevill, C. H. (2003). Effects of imprint training procedure at birth on the reactions of foals at age six months. Equine Vet J, 35(2), 127–132.
Abstract: REASONS FOR PERFORMING STUDY: While imprint training procedures have been promoted in popular magazines, they have received limited scientific investigation. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effects of a neonatal imprint training procedure on 6-month-old foals and to determine if any one session had a greater effect than others. METHODS: Foals (n = 131) were divided into the following treatments: no imprint training, imprint training at birth, 12, 24 and 48 h after birth or imprint training only at birth, 12, 24, 48, or 72 h after birth. Foals then received minimal human handling until they were tested at 6 months. RESULTS: During training, time to complete exposure to the stimulus was significant for only 2 of 6 stimuli. Percentage change in baseline heart rate was significant for only 2 of 10 stimuli. These 4 effects were randomly spread across treatments. CONCLUSIONS: Neither the number of imprint training sessions (0, 1, or 4) nor the timing of imprint training sessions (none, birth, 12, 24, 48, or 72 h after birth) influenced the foal's behaviour at 6 months of age. POTENTIAL CLINICAL RELEVANCE: In this study, imprint training did not result in better behaved, less reactive foals.
|
|
