FREE SHIPPING over $40
OVER 10000 FIVE-STAR REVIEWS
5% OFF ALL SUBSCRIPTIONS
100% HAPPINESS GUARANTEE
Analyze Diet
0
Scientific reports2026; 16(1); 12738; doi: 10.1038/s41598-026-48050-z

Exploring the relationship between inhibitory control and coping behaviour in horses.

Abstract: The ability to flexibly adapt to the demands of a stressful situation is a key factor in successful coping. Appropriate coping is of critical importance in artificial environments, which may include novel and potentially stressful situations. Being able to inhibit immediate but counterproductive reactions, and thus exert inhibitory control, might allow to better adapt to the environment. Horses are required to flexibly adapt to various housing conditions and training techniques; however, not all horses successfully cope as evidenced by the prevalence of stereotypical behaviours. We tested 31 mares in an inhibitory control test battery (A-not-B detour test, delay of gratification test, reversal learning test) and assessed their behavioural and stress-physiological reaction during two husbandry conditions (social isolation and food omission). All three inhibition tests revealed behaviours indicative of inhibitory control, which could be well represented by four components resulting from a PCA (inhibition, indecisiveness, learning capacity, flexibility). The variation in coping behaviour could be captured by six components (nervousness, stress, anticipation, reactivity, oral motivation, vigilance). We found that reactivity and vigilance were positively related to inhibition. Reactivity was additionally negatively related to indecisiveness and positively related to flexibility. These findings may suggest that inhibitory control is an underlying mechanism involved in flexible responding, which may ultimately facilitate successful coping.
Get Full Text
Publication Date: 2026-04-18 PubMed ID: 42000815PubMed Central: 7082303DOI: 10.1038/s41598-026-48050-zGoogle 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

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.

This study examined whether horses that can better inhibit impulsive actions also cope more adaptively with stressful husbandry situations. In 31 mares, stronger inhibitory control was linked to more reactive and vigilant coping styles and greater flexibility, suggesting inhibition supports successful adaptation.

What the study asked and why it matters

  • Question: Does inhibitory control help horses cope more effectively with common, potentially stressful husbandry situations?
  • Rationale: Flexible adaptation is central to coping; in artificial environments, failures to cope can manifest as stereotypical behaviors.
  • Hypothesis: Better ability to inhibit immediate but counterproductive reactions underpins flexible responding and more successful coping.

Who and what was tested

  • Subjects: 31 mares.
  • Inhibitory control assessment: A test battery comprising three tasks (A-not-B detour, delay of gratification, reversal learning).
  • Coping assessment: Behavioral and stress-physiological reactions measured during two routine husbandry stressorsโ€”social isolation and food omission.

Inhibitory control tasks used

  • A-not-B detour test: Requires suppressing a previously rewarded approach and detouring to a new location, indexing response inhibition and resistance to a prepotent tendency.
  • Delay of gratification test: Requires waiting or foregoing an immediate option to obtain a better outcome, indexing impulse control/self-control.
  • Reversal learning test: Requires updating a learned association when reward contingencies reverse, indexing cognitive flexibility and interference control.

Husbandry stress conditions and coping measures

  • Stressors:
    • Social isolation: Temporary separation from conspecifics.
    • Food omission: Withholding expected feed.
  • Outcomes recorded:
    • Behavioral indicators that loaded onto components labeled nervousness, stress, anticipation, reactivity, oral motivation, and vigilance.
    • Stress-physiological reactions (specific biomarkers not detailed in the abstract).

How the data were analyzed

  • Dimensionality reduction: Principal component analysis (PCA) summarized complex behavioral task measures into interpretable components.
  • Inhibitory-control components (from the three tasks):
    • Inhibition: Core capacity to suppress impulsive or prepotent responses.
    • Indecisiveness: Hesitation or vacillation during choices.
    • Learning capacity: Efficiency in acquiring task contingencies.
    • Flexibility: Ability to adjust behavior when rules or conditions change.
  • Coping components (from isolation and food-omission contexts):
    • Nervousness, stress, anticipation, reactivity, oral motivation, vigilance.
  • Associations: Relationships tested between inhibition-related components and coping-related components.

Main results

  • All three inhibition tasks elicited behaviors consistent with inhibitory control, supporting the construct validity of the battery.
  • Reactivity and vigilance in coping contexts were positively related to the inhibition component.
  • Reactivity was negatively related to indecisiveness, indicating more decisive responding in more reactive horses.
  • Reactivity was positively related to flexibility, linking active responding with the ability to adapt to changing conditions.

What the results mean

  • Inhibitory control appears to be an underlying mechanism enabling horses to respond flexibly to stressors rather than defaulting to rigid or counterproductive behaviors.
  • The positive links between inhibition and both reactivity and vigilance suggest that well-inhibited horses may engage with stressors attentively and responsively, rather than passively or impulsively.
  • The negative association between reactivity and indecisiveness implies that adaptive coping involves timely, goal-directed actions rather than hesitation.
  • The positive association between reactivity and flexibility supports the idea that controlled, active engagement goes hand-in-hand with behavioral adaptability.

Practical takeaways for management and training

  • Assessment:
    • Simple inhibition tasks (detour, delay, reversal-like exercises) could help identify individuals who may struggle to cope and benefit from targeted support.
  • Training emphasis:
    • Incorporate exercises that nurture impulse control (e.g., wait cues, controlled approach to rewards) and flexibility (e.g., variable routines, contingency changes).
    • Use gradual exposure to common stressors (brief, predictable social separation or feeding schedule variability) while reinforcing calm, attentive behavior.
  • Environmental enrichment:
    • Provide cognitively engaging activities that channel vigilance and reactivity into constructive exploration and problem solving.

Caveats and limitations

  • Sample characteristics: Only mares (n = 31); findings may not generalize to stallions, geldings, different ages, or breeds without further testing.
  • Measurement scope: Specific physiological measures are not described in the abstract, limiting interpretation of stress biology.
  • Design: Correlational associations do not establish causality between inhibitory control and coping outcomes.
  • Context: Task performance in controlled tests may not capture the full complexity of real-world husbandry environments.

Future research directions

  • Broaden populations to include diverse sexes, ages, and breeds to assess generalizability.
  • Longitudinal or interventional studies to test whether training inhibitory control causally improves coping and reduces stereotypies.
  • Detailed physiological profiling (e.g., standardized autonomic and neuroendocrine indices) to map biological pathways linking inhibition and coping.
  • Field validation to connect component scores with long-term welfare indicators and performance across varied management systems.

Cite This Article

APA
von der Tann M, Palme R, Kรถnig von Borstel U, Brucks D. (2026). Exploring the relationship between inhibitory control and coping behaviour in horses. Sci Rep, 16(1), 12738. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-026-48050-z

Publication

Scientific reports
ISSN: 2045-2322
NlmUniqueID: 101563288
Country: England
Language: English
Volume: 16
Issue: 1
PII: 12738

Researcher Affiliations

von der Tann, Marie
  • Animal Husbandry & Ethology, Albrecht Daniel Thaer-Institute of Agricultural and Horticultural Sciences, Faculty of Life Sciences, Humboldt-Universitรคt zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Palme, Rupert
  • Department of Biological Sciences and Pathobiology, University of Veterinary Medicine Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Kรถnig von Borstel, Uta
  • Department of Animal Breeding and Genetics, University of Giessen, Giessen, Germany.
Brucks, Dรฉsirรฉe
  • Animal Husbandry & Ethology, Albrecht Daniel Thaer-Institute of Agricultural and Horticultural Sciences, Faculty of Life Sciences, Humboldt-Universitรคt zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany. desiree.brucks@me.com.

Conflict of Interest Statement

Declarations. Competing interests: The authors declare no competing interests.

References

This article includes 92 references
  1. Dingemanse NJ, Wolf M. Between-individual differences in behavioural plasticity within populations: causes and consequences.. Anim. Behav. 85, 1031โ€“1039 (2013).
    doi: 10.1016/j.anbehav.2012.12.032google scholar: lookup
  2. Mason G. Plastic animals in cages: Behavioural flexibility and responses to captivity.. Anim. Behav. 85, 1113โ€“1126 (2013).
    doi: 10.1016/j.anbehav.2013.02.002google scholar: lookup
  3. Koolhaas JM, de Boer SF, Buwalda B, van Reenen K. Individual variation in coping with stress: A multidimensional approach of ultimate and proximate mechanisms.. Brain Behav. Evol. 6โ€“11 (2007).
    doi: 10.1159/000105485google scholar: lookup
  4. Koolhaas JM, de Boer SF, Coppens CM, Buwalda B. Neuroendocrinology of coping styles: Towards understanding the biology of individual variation.. Front. Neuroendocr. 31, 307โ€“321 (2010).
    doi: 10.1016/j.yfrne.2010.04.001google scholar: lookup
  5. ร˜verli ร˜. Evolutionary background for stress-coping styles: Relationships between physiological, behavioral, and cognitive traits in non-mammalian vertebrates.. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 31, 396โ€“412 (2007).
    pubmed: 17182101doi: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2006.10.006google scholar: lookup
  6. Koolhaas JM. Coping style and immunity in animals: Making sense of individual variation.. Brain. Behav. Immun. 22, 662โ€“667 (2008).
    pubmed: 18395410doi: 10.1016/j.bbi.2007.11.006google scholar: lookup
  7. Wechsler B. Coping and coping strategies: a behavioural view.. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 43, 123โ€“134 (1995).
    doi: 10.1016/0168-1591(95)00557-9google scholar: lookup
  8. Lea SEG, Chow PKY, Leaver LA, McLaren IPL. Behavioral flexibility: A review, a model, and some exploratory tests.. Learn. Behav. 48, 173โ€“187 (2020).
    pubmed: 32043268pmc: 7082303doi: 10.3758/s13420-020-00421-wgoogle scholar: lookup
  9. Coppens CM, Boer SF D, Koolhaas JM, De Boer SF, Koolhaas JM. Coping styles and behavioural flexibility: Towards underlying mechanisms.. Philosophical Trans. Royal Soc. B: Biol. Sci. 365, 4021โ€“4028 (2010).
    doi: 10.1098/rstb.2010.0217google scholar: lookup
  10. Dalley JW, Cardinal RN, Robbins TW. Prefrontal executive and cognitive functions in rodents: Neural and neurochemical substrates.. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 28, 771โ€“784 (2004).
    pubmed: 15555683doi: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2004.09.006google scholar: lookup
  11. Benus RF, Koolhaas JM, Van Oortmerssen A. Aggression and adaptation to the light-dark cycle: role of intrinsic and extrinsic control.. Physiol. Behavior. 43, 131โ€“137 (1988).
    doi: 10.1016/0031-9384(88)90228-4google scholar: lookup
  12. Benus RF, Daas D, Koolhaas S, Van Oortmerssen GA, J M. Routine formation and flexibility in social and non-social behaviour of aggressive and non-aggressive male mice.. Behaviour 112, 176โ€“193 (1990).
    doi: 10.1163/156853990X00185google scholar: lookup
  13. Bolhuis JE, Schouten WGP, de Leeuw JA, Schrama JW, Wiegant VM. Individual coping characteristics, rearing conditions and behavioural flexibility in pigs.. Behav. Brain. Res. 152, 351โ€“360 (2004).
    pubmed: 15196803doi: 10.1016/j.bbr.2003.10.024google scholar: lookup
  14. Sih A, Del Giudice M. Linking behavioural syndromes and cognition: a behavioural ecology perspective.. Philosophical Trans. Royal Soc. B-Biological Sci. 367, 2762โ€“2772 (2012).
    doi: 10.1098/rstb.2012.0216google scholar: lookup
  15. Loyant L, Collins L, Joly M. Inhibitory control tests in non-human animals: validity, reliability, and perspectives.. Biol. Rev. 70055 (2025).
    doi: 10.1111/brv.70055google scholar: lookup
  16. Beran MJ. The comparative science of โ€˜self-controlโ€™: what are we talking about?. Front. Psychol. 6, 51 (2015).
    pubmed: 25688226pmc: 4311604doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00051google scholar: lookup
  17. Johnson-Ulrich L, Holekamp KE. Group size and social rank predict inhibitory control in spotted hyaenas. Anim. Behav. 160, 157โ€“168 (2020).
    doi: 10.1016/j.anbehav.2019.11.020google scholar: lookup
  18. Sheng K, Foris B, Krahn J, Weary DM, Von Keyserlingk MAG. Redefining dominance calculation: Increased competition flattens the dominance hierarchy in dairy cows. J. Dairy Sci. 107, 7286โ€“7298 (2024).
    pubmed: 38825128doi: 10.3168/jds.2023-24587google scholar: lookup
  19. Diamond A. Executive functions. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 64, 135โ€“168 (2013).
    pubmed: 23020641doi: 10.1146/annurev-psych-113011-143750google scholar: lookup
  20. Moffitt TE et al. A gradient of childhood self-control predicts health, wealth, and public safety. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 108, 2693โ€“2698 (2011).
    pubmed: 21262822pmc: 3041102doi: 10.1073/pnas.1010076108google scholar: lookup
  21. Robson DA, Allen MS, Howard SJ. Self-regulation in childhood as a predictor of future outcomes: A meta-analytic review. Psychol. Bull. 146, 324โ€“354 (2020).
    pubmed: 31904248doi: 10.1037/bul0000227google scholar: lookup
  22. Watts TW, Duncan GJ, Quan H. Revisiting the marshmallow test: A conceptual replication investigating links between early delay of gratification and later outcomes. Psychol. Sci. 29, 1159โ€“1177 (2018).
    pubmed: 29799765pmc: 6050075doi: 10.1177/0956797618761661google scholar: lookup
  23. Beran MJ, Hopkins WD. Self-control in chimpanzees relates to general intelligence. Curr. Biol. 28, 1โ€“6 (2018).
    doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2017.12.043google scholar: lookup
  24. Cervantes MC, Delville Y. Individual differences in offensive aggression in golden hamsters: A model of reactive and impulsive aggression?. Neuroscience 150, 511โ€“521 (2007).
    pubmed: 17964736doi: 10.1016/j.neuroscience.2007.09.034google scholar: lookup
  25. Benus RF, Koolhaas JM, Van Oortmerssen GA. Individual differences in behavioural reaction to a changing environment in mice and rats. Behav 100, 105โ€“121 (1987).
    doi: 10.1163/156853987X00099google scholar: lookup
  26. Coppens CM, de Boer SF, Buwalda B, Koolhaas JM. Aggression and aspects of impulsivity in wild-type rats. Aggressive Behav. 40, 300โ€“308 (2014).
    doi: 10.1002/ab.21527google scholar: lookup
  27. Gobbo E, Zupan ล emrov M. Dogs exhibiting high levels of aggressive reactivity show impaired self-control abilities. Front. Veterinary Sci. 9, 1โ€“10 (2022).
    doi: 10.3389/fvets.2022.869068google scholar: lookup
  28. Overduin-de Vries AM, Vermande MM, Hessen DJ, Sterck EHM. The ability to inhibit impulses is related to social behavior in long-tailed macaques. Am. J. Primatol. .
    doi: 10.1002/ajp.23587pubmed: 38145328google scholar: lookup
  29. Garnham LC, Clarke C, Lรธvlie H. How inhibitory control relates to positive and negative affective states in red junglefowl. Front. Veterinary Sci. 9, 1โ€“11 (2022).
    doi: 10.3389/fvets.2022.872487google scholar: lookup
  30. Garner JP, Mason GJ. Evidence for a relationship between cage stereotypies and behavioural disinhibition in laboratory rodents. Behav. Brain. Res. 136, 83โ€“92 (2002).
    pubmed: 12385793doi: 10.1016/S0166-4328(02)00111-0google scholar: lookup
  31. Garner JP, Mason GJ, Smith RS. Stereotypic route-tracing in experimentally caged songbirds correlates with general behavioural disinhibition.. Anim. Behav. 66, 711โ€“727 (2003).
    doi: 10.1006/anbe.2002.2254google scholar: lookup
  32. Brucks D, Marshall-Pescini S, Wallis LJ, Huber L, Range F. Measures of dogsโ€™ inhibitory control abilities do not correlate across tasks.. Front. Psychol. 8, 849 (2017).
    pubmed: 28596749pmc: 5443147doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00849google scholar: lookup
  33. Loyant L, Waller BM, Micheletta J, Joly M. Validation of a battery of inhibitory control tasks reveals a multifaceted structure in non-human primates.. PeerJ 10, e12863 (2022).
    pubmed: 35186469pmc: 8840138doi: 10.7717/peerj.12863google scholar: lookup
  34. Vรถlter CJ, Tinklenberg B, Call J, Seed AM. Comparative psychometrics: Establishing what differs is central to understanding what evolves.. Philosophical Trans. Royal Soc. B: Biol. Sciences 373, (2018).
  35. Ruet A. Housing horses in individual boxes is a challenge with regard to welfare.. Animals 9, 1โ€“19 (2019).
    doi: 10.3390/ani9090621google scholar: lookup
  36. Sarrafchi A, Blokhuis HJ. Equine stereotypic behaviors: Causation, occurrence, and prevention.. J. Veterinary Behavior: Clin. Appl. Res. 8, 386โ€“394 (2013).
    doi: 10.1016/j.jveb.2013.04.068google scholar: lookup
  37. Lesimple C. Indicators of Horse Welfare: State-of-the-Art.. Animals 10, 294 (2020).
    pubmed: 32069888pmc: 7070675doi: 10.3390/ani10020294google scholar: lookup
  38. McBride SD, Mills DS. Psychological factors affecting equine performance.. BMC Veterinary Research 8, (2012).
  39. Rankins EM, Wickens CL. A systematic review of equine personality.. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 231, 105076 (2020).
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2020.105076google scholar: lookup
  40. Budzyล„ska M. Stress Reactivity and Coping in Horse Adaptation to Environment.. J. Equine Veterinary Sci. 34, 935โ€“941 (2014).
    doi: 10.1016/j.jevs.2014.05.010google scholar: lookup
  41. Nagy K, Bodรณ G, Bรกrdos G, Bรกnszky N, Kabai P. Differences in temperament traits between crib-biting and control horses.. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 122, 41โ€“47 (2010).
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2009.11.005google scholar: lookup
  42. Fureix C. Plasma cortisol and faecal cortisol metabolites concentrations in stereotypic and non-stereotypic horses: do stereotypic horses cope better with poor environmental conditions ?. (2013).
  43. Bachmann I, Bernasconi P, Herrmann R, Weishaupt MA, Stauffacher M. Behavioural and physiological responses to an acute stressor in crib-biting and control horses.. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 82, 297โ€“311 (2003).
    doi: 10.1016/S0168-1591(03)00086-8google scholar: lookup
  44. Briefer Freymond S. Stereotypic horses (Equus caballus) are not cognitively impaired.. Anim. Cogn. 22, 17โ€“33 (2019).
    pubmed: 30328528doi: 10.1007/s10071-018-1217-8google scholar: lookup
  45. Budzyล„ska M, Kamieniak J, Marciniak B, Soล‚tys L. Relationships between thoroughbredsโ€™ contribution in the pedigree and the level of fearfulness and performance in warmblood stallions.. Acta Vet. 68, 288โ€“300 (2018).
    doi: 10.2478/acve-2018-0025google scholar: lookup
  46. Hausberger M, Richard-Yris M A, Ricard A. Interplay between environmental and genetic factors in the behaviour of horses. in Horse behaviour and welfare (Wagening Academic, The Netherlands, (2007).
    doi: 10.3920/978-90-8686-614-4google scholar: lookup
  47. Osthaus B, Proops L, Hocking I, Burden F. Spatial cognition and perseveration by horses, donkeys and mules in a simple A-not-B detour task. Anim. Cogn. 16, 301โ€“305 (2013).
    pubmed: 23271641doi: 10.1007/s10071-012-0589-4google scholar: lookup
  48. Brucks D, Hรคrterich A, Kรถnig von Borstel U. Horses wait for more and better rewards in a delay of gratification paradigm. Front. Psychol. 954472 (2022).
    doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.954472google scholar: lookup
  49. Rรธrvang M V, Nielsen B L, McLean A N. Sensory abilities of horses and their importance for equitation science. Front. Veterinary Sci. 7, 1โ€“17 (2020).
    doi: 10.3389/fvets.2020.00633google scholar: lookup
  50. Brucks D. Intra โ€“ and interspecific variation in self โ€“ control capacities of parrots in a delay of gratification task. Anim. Cogn. .
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-021-01565-6pubmed: 34671864pmc: 8940755google scholar: lookup
  51. Alessandroni N, Miller R, Altschul D. Flexible behavior or flexible methods? A cross-taxon review of experimental designs in reversal learning. Preprint .
    doi: 10.31234/osf.io/mvche_v2google scholar: lookup
  52. Safryghin A, Hebesberger D V, Wascher C A F. Testing for behavioral and physiological responses of domestic horses (Equus caballus) across different contexts - consistency over time and effects of context. Front. Psychol. 10, 1โ€“12 (2019).
    doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00849google scholar: lookup
  53. Young T, Creighton E, Smith T, Hosie C A. A novel scale of behavioural indicators of stress for use with domestic horses. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 140, 33โ€“43 (2012).
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2012.05.008google scholar: lookup
  54. Peeters M, Sulon J, Beckers J F, Ledoux D, Vandenheede M. Comparison between blood serum and salivary cortisol concentrations in horses using an adrenocorticotropic hormone challenge. Equine Vet. J. 43, 487โ€“493 (2011).
    pubmed: 21496072doi: 10.1111/j.2042-3306.2010.00294.xgoogle scholar: lookup
  55. Contreras-Aguilar M D. Effect of food contamination and collection material in the measurement of biomarkers in saliva of horses. Res. Vet. Sci. 129, 90โ€“95 (2020).
    pubmed: 31954319doi: 10.1016/j.rvsc.2020.01.006google scholar: lookup
  56. Vincent A. Evaluation of a modified bit device to obtain saliva samples from horses. Veterinary Sciences 8, (2021).
  57. Palme R, Mรถstl E. Measurement of cortisol metabolites in faeces of sheep as a parameter of cortisol concentration in blood. Z Saugetierkd โ€“ Int J. Mammal Biol. 62, 192โ€“197 (1997). Suppl. 2.
  58. Schmidt A. Cortisol release and heart rate variability in horses during road transport. Horm. Behav. 57, 209โ€“215 (2010).
    pubmed: 19944105doi: 10.1016/j.yhbeh.2009.11.003google scholar: lookup
  59. ASAB Ethical Committee/ABS Animal Care Committee. Guidelines for the ethical treatment of nonhuman animals in behavioural research and teaching. Anim. Behav. 195, Iโ€“XI (2023).
    doi: 10.1016/j.anbehav.2022.09.006google scholar: lookup
  60. Percie D. The ARRIVE guidelines 2.0: Updated guidelines for reporting animal research. PLoS Biol. 18, e3000410 (2020).
    doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.3000410google scholar: lookup
  61. R Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria (2021).
  62. Gamer M, Lemon J, Fellows I, Singh P. Various Coefficients of Interrater Reliability and Agreement. (2019).
  63. Koo T K, Li M Y. A Guideline of selecting and reporting intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research. J. Chiropr. Med. 15, 155โ€“163 (2016).
    pubmed: 27330520pmc: 4913118doi: 10.1016/j.jcm.2016.02.012google scholar: lookup
  64. Nagy K, Bodรณ G, Bรกrdos G, Harnos A, Kabai P. The effect of a feeding stress-test on the behaviour and heart rate variability of control and crib-biting horses (with or without inhibition). Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 121, 140โ€“147 (2009).
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2009.09.008google scholar: lookup
  65. Visser E K, Ellis A D, Van Reenen C G. The effect of two different housing conditions on the welfare of young horses stabled for the first time. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 114, 521โ€“533 (2008).
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2008.03.003google scholar: lookup
  66. Bates D, Maechler M, Bolker B, Walker S. Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. J. Stat. Softw. 67, 1โ€“48 (2015).
    doi: 10.18637/jss.v067.i01google scholar: lookup
  67. Hartig F. DHARMa Residual Diagnostics for hierarchical (Multi-Level / Mixed) Regression Models. R package version 0.3.3.0 (2020).
  68. Baayen R. Analyzing Linguistic Data: A Practical Introduction to Statistics Using R. Cambridge University Press, 2008.
  69. Roche D G, Careau V, Binning S A. Demystifying animal โ€˜personalityโ€™ (or not): why individual variation matters to experimental biologists. J. Experiment. Biol. 146712 (2016).
    doi: 10.1242/jeb.146712google scholar: lookup
  70. Raoult C M C, Osthaus B, Hildebrand A C G, McElligott A G, Nawroth C. Goats show higher behavioural flexibility than sheep in a spatial detour task. Royal Soc. Open. Sci. 8, (2021).
  71. Brucks D, Marshall-Pescini S, Range F. Dogs and wolves do not differ in their inhibitory control abilities in a non-social test battery. Anim. Cogn. 22, 1โ€“15 (2018).
    pubmed: 30284077pmc: 6326967doi: 10.1007/s10071-018-1216-9google scholar: lookup
  72. van Horik J O et al. Do detour tasks provide accurate assays of inhibitory control?. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 285, (2018).
  73. Vernouillet A A A, Stiles L R, McCausland J A, Kelly D M. Individual performance across motoric self-regulation tasks are not correlated for pet dogs. Learning Behavior 46, 522โ€“536 (2018).
    pubmed: 30251102doi: 10.3758/s13420-018-0354-xgoogle scholar: lookup
  74. Boogert N J, Anderson R C, Peters S, Searcy W, Nowicki S. Song repertoire size in male song sparrows correlates with detour reaching, but not with other cognitive measures. Anim. Behav. 81, 1209โ€“1216 (2011).
    doi: 10.1016/j.anbehav.2011.03.004google scholar: lookup
  75. Ducatez S, Audet J N, Lefebvre L. Speedโ€“accuracy trade-off, detour reaching and response to PHA in Carib grackles. Anim. Cogn. 22, 625โ€“633 (2019).
    pubmed: 30929104doi: 10.1007/s10071-019-01258-1google scholar: lookup
  76. Baragli P, Vitale V, Banti L, Sighieri C. Effect of aging on behavioural and physiological responses to a stressful stimulus in horses (Equus caballus). Behav 151, 1513โ€“1533 (2014).
    doi: 10.1163/1568539X-00003197google scholar: lookup
  77. Finy MS, Bresin K, Korol DL, Verona E. Impulsivity, risk taking, and cortisol reactivity as a function of psychosocial stress and personality in adolescents. Dev. Psychopathol. 26, 1093โ€“1111 (2014).
    pubmed: 24713465doi: 10.1017/S0954579414000212google scholar: lookup
  78. Lyons DM, Lopez JM, Yang C, Schatzberg AF. Stress-level cortisol treatment impairs inhibitory control of behavior in monkeys. J. neuroscience: official J. Soc. Neurosci. 20, 7816โ€“7821 (2000).
    doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.20-20-07816.2000google scholar: lookup
  79. van Horik JO, Madden JR. A problem with problem solving: Motivational traits, but not cognition, predict success on novel operant foraging tasks. Anim. Behav. 114, 189โ€“198 (2016).
    pubmed: 27122637pmc: 4833691doi: 10.1016/j.anbehav.2016.02.006google scholar: lookup
  80. Velรกzquez-Sรกnchez C et al. High Trait impulsivity predicts food addiction-like behavior in the rat. Neuropsychopharmacol 39, 2463โ€“2472 (2014).
    doi: 10.1038/npp.2014.98google scholar: lookup
  81. Shaw RC. Testing cognition in the wild: factors affecting performance and individual consistency in two measures of avian cognition. Behav. Process. 134, 31โ€“36 (2017).
    doi: 10.1016/j.beproc.2016.06.004google scholar: lookup
  82. van Horik JO et al. Unpredictable environments enhance inhibitory control in pheasants. Anim. Cogn. 22, 1105โ€“1114 (2019).
    pubmed: 31471781pmc: 6834925doi: 10.1007/s10071-019-01302-0google scholar: lookup
  83. Phelipon R et al. Characterisation of facial expressions and behaviours of horses in response to positive and negative emotional anticipation using network analysis. Preprint .
    doi: 10.1101/2025.02.02.636153google scholar: lookup
  84. Ricci-Bonot C, Mills DS. Recognising the facial expression of frustration in the horse during feeding period. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 265, 105966 (2023).
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2023.105966google scholar: lookup
  85. Cooper JJ, Mcall N, Johnson S, Davidson HPB. The short-term effects of increasing meal frequency on stereotypic behaviour of stabled horses. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 90, 351โ€“364 (2005).
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2004.08.005google scholar: lookup
  86. Bebus SE, Small TW, Jones BC, Elderbrock EK, Schoech SJ. Associative learning is inversely related to reversal learning and varies with nestling corticosterone exposure. Anim. Behav. 111, 251โ€“260 (2016).
    doi: 10.1016/j.anbehav.2015.10.027google scholar: lookup
  87. Ruiz-Gomez MDL, Huntingford FA, ร˜verli ร˜, Thรถrnqvist PO, Hรถglund E. Response to environmental change in rainbow trout selected for divergent stress coping styles. Physiol. Behav. 102, 317โ€“322 (2011).
    pubmed: 21130105doi: 10.1016/j.physbeh.2010.11.023google scholar: lookup
  88. McBride SD, Hemmings A. Altered mesoaccumbens and nigro-striatal dopamine physiology is associated with stereotypy development in a non-rodent species. Behav. Brain. Res. 159, 113โ€“118 (2005).
    pubmed: 15795004doi: 10.1016/j.bbr.2004.10.014google scholar: lookup
  89. McBride SD, Roberts K, Hemmings AJ, Ninomiya S, Parker MO. The impulsive horse: Comparing genetic, physiological and behavioral indicators to those of human addiction. Physiol. Behav. 254, 113896 (2022).
    pubmed: 35777460doi: 10.1016/j.physbeh.2022.113896google scholar: lookup
  90. Parker M, Redhead ES, Goodwin D, McBride SD. Impaired instrumental choice in crib-biting horses (Equus caballus). Behav. Brain. Res. 191, 137โ€“140 (2008).
    pubmed: 18430476doi: 10.1016/j.bbr.2008.03.009google scholar: lookup
  91. Smith T, Panfil K, Bailey C, Kirkpatrick K. Cognitive and behavioral training interventions to promote self-control. J. Experimental Psychology: Anim. Learn. Cognition 45, 259โ€“279 (2019).
  92. Friedman NP. Individual differences in executive functions are almost entirely genetic in origin. J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. 137, 201โ€“225 (2008).
    pubmed: 18473654pmc: 2762790doi: 10.1037/0096-3445.137.2.201google scholar: lookup

Citations

This article has been cited 0 times.
Subscribe to our newsletter
Join 106,732 horse owners like you who receive our email updates on horse health and nutrition.
OmegaPrime+ Extra-Strength Omega-3 Oil - Mad Barn
NEW PRODUCT
OmegaPrime+
Extra-Strength Omega-3 Oil
Shop Now
ร—