FREE SHIPPING over $40
OVER 9000 FIVE-STAR REVIEWS
5% OFF ALL SUBSCRIPTIONS
100% HAPPINESS GUARANTEE
Analyze Diet
0
Home / Equine Research Bank / Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A / Cross-modal individual recognition in domestic horses (Equus...
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2008; 106(3); 947-951; doi: 10.1073/pnas.0809127105

Cross-modal individual recognition in domestic horses (Equus caballus).

Abstract: Individual recognition is considered a complex process and, although it is believed to be widespread across animal taxa, the cognitive mechanisms underlying this ability are poorly understood. An essential feature of individual recognition in humans is that it is cross-modal, allowing the matching of current sensory cues to identity with stored information about that specific individual from other modalities. Here, we use a cross-modal expectancy violation paradigm to provide a clear and systematic demonstration of cross-modal individual recognition in a nonhuman animal: the domestic horse. Subjects watched a herd member being led past them before the individual went of view, and a call from that or a different associate was played from a loudspeaker positioned close to the point of disappearance. When horses were shown one associate and then the call of a different associate was played, they responded more quickly and looked significantly longer in the direction of the call than when the call matched the herd member just seen, an indication that the incongruent combination violated their expectations. Thus, horses appear to possess a cross-modal representation of known individuals containing unique auditory and visual/olfactory information. Our paradigm could provide a powerful way to study individual recognition across a wide range of species.
Get Full Text
Publication Date: 2008-12-15 PubMed ID: 19075246PubMed Central: PMC2630083DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0809127105Google Scholar: Lookup
The Equine Research Bank provides access to a large database of publicly available scientific literature. Inclusion in the Research Bank does not imply endorsement of study methods or findings by Mad Barn.
LinkedInCopy
  • Journal Article
  • Research Support
  • Non-U.S. Gov't

Summary

This research summary has been generated with artificial intelligence and may contain errors and omissions. Refer to the original study to confirm details provided. Submit correction.

The research article explores the concept of cross-modal individual recognition in domestic horses (Equus caballus), demonstrating that these animals have the cognitive ability to match sensory cues to a specific individual across different modalities, similar to humans.

Overview of the Research

  • The study delves into understanding the cognitive mechanisms underpinning individual recognition across different species, though it particularly explores this process in domestic horses.
  • The researchers used a cross-modal expectancy violation paradigm as a systematic method to examine cross-modal individual recognition, a process that, in humans, lets us match current sensory cues with stored information about a specific individual from other sensory channels.

Methodology

  • Horses were shown a member of their herd being led past them until the individual was out of view. After this, a call from that same individual or a different one was played from a loudspeaker near the point of disappearance.
  • The reactions of the horses to the auditory stimulus were then recorded and analyzed. More specifically, the research team observed how quickly and how long the horses responded after hearing the call.

Findings

  • When the auditory stimulus (the call played over the loudspeaker) did not match the visual stimulus (the individual horse recently seen), the subject horses responded more quickly and looked significantly longer in the direction of the sound.
  • The authors interpret this behavior as an indication that the mismatched combination violated the horses’ expectations, thus pointing towards a capability for cross-modal individual recognition.

Implication of the Study

  • This research suggests that, similar to humans, horses have a “cross-modal representation” of familiar individuals, containing unique auditory and visual/olfactory information.
  • This study’s paradigm might also offer a valuable method for studying individual recognition across a diverse range of species, contributing significantly to cognitive ethology and animal behavior research.

Cite This Article

APA
Proops L, McComb K, Reby D. (2008). Cross-modal individual recognition in domestic horses (Equus caballus). Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 106(3), 947-951. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0809127105

Publication

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
ISSN: 1091-6490
NlmUniqueID: 7505876
Country: United States
Language: English
Volume: 106
Issue: 3
Pages: 947-951

Researcher Affiliations

Proops, Leanne
  • Centre for Mammal Vocal Communication Research, Department of Psychology, School of Life Sciences, University of Sussex, Brighton BN1 9QH, United Kingdom. l.c.proops@sussex.ac.uk
McComb, Karen
    Reby, David

      MeSH Terms

      • Animals
      • Horses / psychology
      • Recognition, Psychology
      • Social Behavior
      • Time Factors
      • Vocalization, Animal

      Grant Funding

      • Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council

      Conflict of Interest Statement

      The authors declare no conflict of interest.

      References

      This article includes 40 references
      1. Cheney DL, Seyfarth RM. Recognition of individuals within and between groups of free-ranging vervet monkeys.. Am Zool 1982;22(3):519–529.
      2. Hamilton WD. The evolution of altruistic behavior.. Am Nat 1963;97:354–356.
      3. Trivers RL. Parent-offspring conflict.. Am Zool 1974;14(1):249–264.
      4. Sayigh LS, Tyack PL, Wells RS, Solow AR, Scott MD, Irvine AB. Individual recognition in wild bottlenose dolphins: a field test using playback experiments.. Anim Behav 1999 Jan;57(1):41-50.
        pubmed: 10053070doi: 10.1006/anbe.1998.0961google scholar: lookup
      5. Tibbetts EA, Dale J. Individual recognition: it is good to be different.. Trends Ecol Evol 2007 Oct;22(10):529-37.
        pubmed: 17904686doi: 10.1016/j.tree.2007.09.001google scholar: lookup
      6. Janik VM, Sayigh LS, Wells RS. Signature whistle shape conveys identity information to bottlenose dolphins.. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2006 May 23;103(21):8293-7.
        pmc: PMC1472465pubmed: 16698937doi: 10.1073/pnas.0509918103google scholar: lookup
      7. McComb K, Moss C, Durant SM, Baker L, Sayialel S. Matriarchs as repositories of social knowledge in African elephants.. Science 2001 Apr 20;292(5516):491-4.
        pubmed: 11313492doi: 10.1126/science.1057895google scholar: lookup
      8. Rendall D, Rodman PS, Emond RE. Vocal recognition of individuals and kin in free-ranging rhesus monkeys.. Anim Behav 1996;51:1007–1015.
      9. Seyfarth RM, Cheney DL, Bergman TJ. Primate social cognition and the origins of language.. Trends Cogn Sci 2005 Jun;9(6):264-6.
        pubmed: 15925802doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2005.04.001google scholar: lookup
      10. Husak JF, Fox SF. Adult male collared lizards, Crotaphytus collaris, increase aggression toward displaced neighbours.. Anim Behav 2003;65:391–396.
      11. Peake TM, Terry AM, McGregor PK, Dabelsteen T. Male great tits eavesdrop on simulated male-to-male vocal interactions.. Proc Biol Sci 2001 Jun 7;268(1472):1183-7.
        pmc: PMC1088725pubmed: 11375107doi: 10.1098/rspb.2001.1648google scholar: lookup
      12. Stoddard PK. Vocal recognition of neighbours by territorial passerines.. In: Kroodsma DE, Miller EH, editors. Ecology and Evolution (Lawrence, Kans) of Acoustic Communication in Birds. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press; 1996. pp. 356–374.
      13. Spelke ES. Preferential looking methods as tools for the study of cognition in infancy.. In: Gottleib G, Krasnegor N, editors. Measurement of Audition and Vision in the First Year of Postnatal Life. Norwood, NJ: Ablex; 1985. pp. 323–363.
      14. Ettlinger G. Analysis of cross-modal effects and their relationship to language.. In: Darley FL, editor. Brain Mechanisms Underlying Speech. New York: Grune & Stratton; 1967. pp. 53–60.
      15. Ghazanfar AA, Chandrasekaran C, Logothetis NK. Interactions between the superior temporal sulcus and auditory cortex mediate dynamic face/voice integration in rhesus monkeys.. J Neurosci 2008 Apr 23;28(17):4457-69.
        pmc: PMC2663804pubmed: 18434524doi: 10.1523/jneurosci.0541-08.2008google scholar: lookup
      16. Gil-da-Costa R, Braun A, Lopes M, Hauser MD, Carson RE, Herscovitch P, Martin A. Toward an evolutionary perspective on conceptual representation: species-specific calls activate visual and affective processing systems in the macaque.. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2004 Dec 14;101(50):17516-21.
        pmc: PMC536037pubmed: 15583132doi: 10.1073/pnas.0408077101google scholar: lookup
      17. Sugihara T, Diltz MD, Averbeck BB, Romanski LM. Integration of auditory and visual communication information in the primate ventrolateral prefrontal cortex.. J Neurosci 2006 Oct 25;26(43):11138-47.
        pmc: PMC2767253pubmed: 17065454doi: 10.1523/jneurosci.3550-06.2006google scholar: lookup
      18. Campanella S, Belin P. Integrating face and voice in person perception.. Trends Cogn Sci 2007 Dec;11(12):535-43.
        pubmed: 17997124doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2007.10.001google scholar: lookup
      19. Ghazanfar AA, Schroeder CE. Is neocortex essentially multisensory?. Trends Cogn Sci 2006 Jun;10(6):278-85.
        pubmed: 16713325doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2006.04.008google scholar: lookup
      20. Ghazanfar AA, Turesson HK, Maier JX, van Dinther R, Patterson RD, Logothetis NK. Vocal-tract resonances as indexical cues in rhesus monkeys.. Curr Biol 2007 Mar 6;17(5):425-30.
        pmc: PMC2361420pubmed: 17320389doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2007.01.029google scholar: lookup
      21. Jordan KE, Brannon EM, Logothetis NK, Ghazanfar AA. Monkeys match the number of voices they hear to the number of faces they see.. Curr Biol 2005 Jun 7;15(11):1034-8.
        pubmed: 15936274doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2005.04.056google scholar: lookup
      22. Jordan KE, Maclean EL, Brannon EM. Monkeys match and tally quantities across senses.. Cognition 2008 Sep;108(3):617-25.
        pmc: PMC3641156pubmed: 18571636doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2008.05.006google scholar: lookup
      23. Ghazanfar AA, Logothetis NK. Neuroperception: facial expressions linked to monkey calls.. Nature 2003 Jun 26;423(6943):937-8.
        pubmed: 12827188doi: 10.1038/423937agoogle scholar: lookup
      24. Evans TA, Howell S, Westergaard GC. Auditory--visual cross-modal perception of communicative stimuli in tufted capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella).. J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process 2005 Oct;31(4):399-406.
        pubmed: 16248726doi: 10.1037/0097-7403.31.4.399google scholar: lookup
      25. Parr LA. Perceptual biases for multimodal cues in chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes) affect recognition.. Anim Cogn 2004 Jul;7(3):171-8.
        pubmed: 14997361doi: 10.1007/s10071-004-0207-1google scholar: lookup
      26. Johnston RE, Peng A. Memory for individuals: hamsters (Mesocricetus auratus) require contact to develop multicomponent representations (concepts) of others.. J Comp Psychol 2008 May;122(2):121-31.
        pubmed: 18489228doi: 10.1037/0735-7036.122.2.121google scholar: lookup
      27. Kojima S, Izumi A, Ceugniet M. Identification of vocalizers by pant hoots, pant grunts and screams in a chimpanzee.. Primates 2003 Jul;44(3):225-30.
        pubmed: 12884113doi: 10.1007/s10329-002-0014-8google scholar: lookup
      28. Bauer HR, Philip MM. Facial and vocal individual recognition in the common chimpanzee.. Psychol Rec 1983;33:161–170.
      29. Izumi A, Kojima S. Matching vocalizations to vocalizing faces in a chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes).. Anim Cogn 2004 Jul;7(3):179-84.
        pubmed: 15015035doi: 10.1007/s10071-004-0212-4google scholar: lookup
      30. Adachi I, Fujita K. Cross-modal representation of human caretakers in squirrel monkeys.. Behav Processes 2007 Jan 10;74(1):27-32.
        pubmed: 17046173doi: 10.1016/j.beproc.2006.09.004google scholar: lookup
      31. Adachi I, Kuwahata H, Fujita K. Dogs recall their owner's face upon hearing the owner's voice.. Anim Cogn 2007 Jan;10(1):17-21.
        pubmed: 16802145doi: 10.1007/s10071-006-0025-8google scholar: lookup
      32. Bates LA, Sayialel KN, Njiraini NW, Poole JH, Moss CJ, Byrne RW. African elephants have expectations about the locations of out-of-sight family members.. Biol Lett 2008 Feb 23;4(1):34-6.
        pmc: PMC2412944pubmed: 18055407doi: 10.1098/rsbl.2007.0529google scholar: lookup
      33. Cheney DL, Seyfarth RM. Reconciliatory grunts by dominant female baboons influence victims' behaviour.. Anim Behav 1997 Aug;54(2):409-18.
        pubmed: 9268473doi: 10.1006/anbe.1996.0438google scholar: lookup
      34. Cheney DL, Seyfarth RM. Vocal recognition in free-ranging vervet monkeys.. Anim Behav 1980 May;28:362–367.
      35. Tyler SJ. The behaviour and social organisation of the New Forest ponies.. Anim Behav Monogr 1972;5:85–196.
      36. Kiley M. The vocalizations of ungulates, their causation and function.. Z Tierpsychol 1972 Aug;31(2):171-222.
        pubmed: 4674022doi: 10.1111/j.1439-0310.1972.tb01764.xgoogle scholar: lookup
      37. Feist JD, McCullough DR. Behavior patterns and communication in feral horses.. Z Tierpsychol 1976 Aug;41(4):337-71.
        pubmed: 983427doi: 10.1111/j.1439-0310.1976.tb00947.xgoogle scholar: lookup
      38. Kroodsma DE. Suggested experimental-designs for song playbacks.. Anim Behav 1989;37:600–609.
      39. McLean AN. Short-term spatial memory in the domestic horse.. Appl Anim Behav Sci 2004;85(1–2):93–105.
      40. Sportstec. NSW, Australia: GamebreakerWarriewood; p. 5.1.

      Citations

      This article has been cited 104 times.
      Subscribe to our newsletter
      Join 99,357 horse owners like you who receive our email updates on horse health and nutrition.