FREE SHIPPING over $40
OVER 9000 FIVE-STAR REVIEWS
5% OFF ALL SUBSCRIPTIONS
100% HAPPINESS GUARANTEE
Analyze Diet
0
Home / Equine Research Bank / Behav Sci (Basel) / Trained Quantity Abilities in Horses (Equus caballus): A Pre...
Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland)2014; 4(3); 213-225; doi: 10.3390/bs4030213

Trained Quantity Abilities in Horses (Equus caballus): A Preliminary Investigation.

Abstract: Once believed to be a human prerogative, the capacity to discriminate between quantities now has also been reported in several vertebrates. To date, only two studies investigated numerical abilities in horses (Equus caballus) but reported contrasting data. To assess whether horses can be trained to discriminate between quantities, I have set up a new experimental protocol using operant conditioning. One adult female was trained to discriminate between 1 and 4 (Test 1) in three different conditions: non-controlled continuous variables (numerical and continuous quantities that co-vary with number are simultaneously available), 50% controlled continuous variables (intermediate condition), and 100% controlled continuous variables (only numerical information available). The subject learned the discrimination in all conditions, showing the capacity to process numerical information. When presented with a higher numerical ratio (2 vs. 4, Test 2), the subject still discriminated between the quantities but its performance was statistically significant only in the non-controlled condition, suggesting that the subject used multiple cues in presence of a more difficult discrimination. On the whole, the results here reported encourage the use of this experimental protocol as a valid tool to investigate the capacity to process numerical and continuous quantities in horses in future research.
Get Full Text
Publication Date: 2014-07-25 PubMed ID: 25379278PubMed Central: PMC4219264DOI: 10.3390/bs4030213Google 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.

The research article presents a study investigating the ability of horses to distinguish between quantities. The author uses a specially designed experiment to determine if a female horse can be trained to differentiate between quantities in various conditions.

Objective of the Research

The main aim of the research was to probe the numerical discernment capabilities in horses. Breaking away from traditionally human-associated cognitive skills, the study sought to broaden the understanding of numerical abilities in one of the largest land mammals – horses.

Methodology

  • An adult female horse was subjected to a new experimental protocol using operant conditioning. Operant conditioning is a type of associative learning process through which the behavior of an individual changes due to the consequences of that behavior.
  • The horse was trained to distinguish between 1 and 4 in three different conditions: non-controlled continuous variables, 50% controlled continuous variables, and 100% controlled continuous variables.
  • The non-controlled condition refers to when both numerical and continuous quantities that change with changing number were readily available. In the 50% controlled variable condition, it was an intermediate scenario, while, in the 100% controlled condition, only numerical information was available to the horse.

Results

  • The horse was able to learn the discrimination in all conditions, demonstrating a capability to process numerical information.
  • The animal was also tested on a higher numerical ratio (2 vs. 4), and although the horse was still able to distinguish between the quantities, its performance was statistically significant only in the non-controlled condition. This suggested that the horse used multiple cues when faced with a more complex discrimination task.

Conclusion

The results of this study encourage further use of this experimental protocol. The method has proven to be a valid tool to explore horses’ capacity to process not just numerical, but also continuous quantities. The research paves the way for future exploration of cognitive skills in animals.

Cite This Article

APA
Petrazzini MEM. (2014). Trained Quantity Abilities in Horses (Equus caballus): A Preliminary Investigation. Behav Sci (Basel), 4(3), 213-225. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs4030213

Publication

Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland)
ISSN: 2076-328X
NlmUniqueID: 101576826
Country: Switzerland
Language: English
Volume: 4
Issue: 3
Pages: 213-225

Researcher Affiliations

Petrazzini, Maria Elena Miletto
  • Department of General Psychology, University of Padova, Via Venezia 8, 35131 Padova, Italy.

References

This article includes 55 references
  1. Wilson ML, Britton NF, Franks NR. Chimpanzees and the mathematics of battle.. Proc Biol Sci 2002 Jun 7;269(1496):1107-12.
    doi: 10.1098/rspb.2001.1926pmc: PMC1691006pubmed: 12061952google scholar: lookup
  2. Benson-Amram S, Heinen VK, Dryer SL, Holekamp KE. Numerical assessment and individual call discrimination by wild spotted hyenas, Crocuta crocuta.. Anim. Behav. 2011;82:743–752.
    doi: 10.1016/j.anbehav.2011.07.004google scholar: lookup
  3. Hager MC, Helfman GS. Safety in numbers: Shoal size choice by minnows under predatory threat.. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 1991;29:271–276.
    doi: 10.1007/BF00163984google scholar: lookup
  4. Beran MJ, Evans TA, Harris EH. Perception of Food Amounts by Chimpanzees Based on the Number, Size, Contour Length and Visibility of Items.. Anim Behav 2008 May;75(5):1793-1802.
    doi: 10.1016/j.anbehav.2007.10.035pmc: PMC2493292pubmed: 19412322google scholar: lookup
  5. Irie-Sugimoto N, Kobayashi T, Sato T, Hasegawa T. Relative quantity judgment by Asian elephants (Elephas maximus).. Anim Cogn 2009 Jan;12(1):193-9.
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-008-0185-9pubmed: 18712531google scholar: lookup
  6. Shifferman EM. It's all in your head: the role of quantity estimation in sperm competition.. Proc Biol Sci 2012 Mar 7;279(1730):833-40.
    doi: 10.1098/rspb.2011.2256pmc: PMC3259941pubmed: 22171084google scholar: lookup
  7. Vonk J. Quantity matching by an orangutan (Pongo abelii).. Anim Cogn 2014 Mar;17(2):297-306.
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-013-0662-7pubmed: 23873480google scholar: lookup
  8. Vonk J, Torgerson-White L, McGuire M, Thueme M, Thomas J, Beran MJ. Quantity estimation and comparison in western lowland gorillas (Gorilla gorilla gorilla).. Anim Cogn 2014 May;17(3):755-65.
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-013-0707-ypubmed: 24271957google scholar: lookup
  9. Vonk J, Beran MJ. Bears "Count" Too: Quantity Estimation and Comparison in Black Bears (Ursus Americanus).. Anim Behav 2012 Jul 1;84(1):231-238.
    doi: 10.1016/j.anbehav.2012.05.001pmc: PMC3398692pubmed: 22822244google scholar: lookup
  10. Panteleeva S, Reznikova Z, Vygonyailova O. Quantity judgments in the context of risk/reward decision making in striped field mice: first "count," then hunt.. Front Psychol 2013;4:53.
    doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00053pmc: PMC3570766pubmed: 23407476google scholar: lookup
  11. Pepperberg IM, Carey S. Grey parrot number acquisition: the inference of cardinal value from ordinal position on the numeral list.. Cognition 2012 Nov;125(2):219-32.
    doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2012.07.003pmc: PMC3434310pubmed: 22878117google scholar: lookup
  12. Rugani R, Fontanari L, Simoni E, Regolin L, Vallortigara G. Arithmetic in newborn chicks.. Proc Biol Sci 2009 Jul 7;276(1666):2451-60.
    doi: 10.1098/rspb.2009.0044pmc: PMC2690459pubmed: 19364746google scholar: lookup
  13. Agrillo C, Miletto Petrazzini ME, Bisazza A. Numerical acuity of fish is improved in the presence of moving targets, but only in the subitizing range.. Anim Cogn 2014 Mar;17(2):307-16.
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-013-0663-6pubmed: 23892885google scholar: lookup
  14. Gómez-Laplaza LM, Gerlai R. The role of body surface area in quantity discrimination in angelfish (Pterophyllum scalare).. PLoS One 2013;8(12):e83880.
    doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0083880pmc: PMC3873975pubmed: 24386299google scholar: lookup
  15. Pahl M, Si A, Zhang S. Numerical cognition in bees and other insects.. Front Psychol 2013;4:162.
    doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00162pmc: PMC3629984pubmed: 23616774google scholar: lookup
  16. Gross HJ, Pahl M, Si A, Zhu H, Tautz J, Zhang S. Number-based visual generalisation in the honeybee.. PLoS One 2009;4(1):e4263.
    pmc: PMC2629729pubmed: 19173008doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0004263google scholar: lookup
  17. Reznikova Z, Ryabko B. Numerical competence in animals, with an insight from ants.. Behaviour 2011;148:405–434.
    doi: 10.1163/000579511X568562google scholar: lookup
  18. Agrillo C, Piffer L, Bisazza A. Number versus continuous quantity in numerosity judgments by fish.. Cognition 2011 May;119(2):281-7.
    doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2010.10.022pubmed: 21109238google scholar: lookup
  19. Cantlon JF, Brannon EM. How much does number matter to a monkey (Macaca mulatta)?. J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process 2007 Jan;33(1):32-41.
    doi: 10.1037/0097-7403.33.1.32pubmed: 17227193google scholar: lookup
  20. Pisa PE, Agrillo C. Quantity discrimination in felines: A preliminary investigation of the domestic cat (Felis silvestris catus). J. Ethol. 2009;27:289–293.
    doi: 10.1007/s10164-008-0121-0google scholar: lookup
  21. Kilian A, Yaman S, von Fersen L, Güntürkün O. A bottlenose dolphin discriminates visual stimuli differing in numerosity.. Learn Behav 2003 May;31(2):133-42.
    doi: 10.3758/BF03195976pubmed: 12882372google scholar: lookup
  22. Flombaum JI, Junge JA, Hauser MD. Rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta) spontaneously compute addition operations over large numbers.. Cognition 2005 Oct;97(3):315-25.
    doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2004.09.004pubmed: 16260264google scholar: lookup
  23. Cantlon JF, Brannon EM. Shared system for ordering small and large numbers in monkeys and humans.. Psychol Sci 2006 May;17(5):401-6.
    doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01719.xpubmed: 16683927google scholar: lookup
  24. Livingstone MS, Pettine WW, Srihasam K, Moore B, Morocz IA, Lee D. Symbol addition by monkeys provides evidence for normalized quantity coding.. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2014 May 6;111(18):6822-7.
    doi: 10.1073/pnas.1404208111pmc: PMC4020100pubmed: 24753600google scholar: lookup
  25. Jordan KE, Brannon EM. Weber's Law influences numerical representations in rhesus macaques (Macaca mulatta).. Anim Cogn 2006 Jul;9(3):159-72.
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-006-0017-8pubmed: 16575587google scholar: lookup
  26. Emmerton J, Renner JC. Scalar effects in the visual discrimination of numerosity by pigeons.. Learn Behav 2006 May;34(2):176-92.
    doi: 10.3758/BF03193193pubmed: 16933803google scholar: lookup
  27. Scarf D, Hayne H, Colombo M. Pigeons on par with primates in numerical competence.. Science 2011 Dec 23;334(6063):1664.
    doi: 10.1126/science.1213357pubmed: 22194568google scholar: lookup
  28. Irie N, Hasegawa T. Summation by Asian Elephants (Elephas maximus).. Behav Sci (Basel) 2012 Jun;2(2):50-56.
    doi: 10.3390/bs2020050pmc: PMC4217582pubmed: 25379215google scholar: lookup
  29. Perdue BM, Talbot CF, Stone AM, Beran MJ. Putting the elephant back in the herd: elephant relative quantity judgments match those of other species.. Anim Cogn 2012 Sep;15(5):955-61.
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-012-0521-ypubmed: 22692435google scholar: lookup
  30. Davis H. Discrimination of the number three by a raccoon (Procyon lotor). Anim. Learn. Behav. 1984;12:409–413.
    doi: 10.3758/BF03199987google scholar: lookup
  31. Abramson JZ, Hernández-Lloreda V, Call J, Colmenares F. Relative quantity judgments in South American sea lions (Otaria flavescens).. Anim Cogn 2011 Sep;14(5):695-706.
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-011-0404-7pubmed: 21526363google scholar: lookup
  32. Rubenstein DI, Hohmann ME. Parasites and social behavior of island feral horses.. Oikos 1989;55:312–320.
    doi: 10.2307/3565589google scholar: lookup
  33. Feigenson L, Dehaene S, Spelke E. Core systems of number.. Trends Cogn Sci 2004 Jul;8(7):307-14.
    doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2004.05.002pubmed: 15242690google scholar: lookup
  34. Bisazza A, Tagliapietra C, Bertolucci C, Foà A, Agrillo C. Non-visual numerical discrimination in a blind cavefish (Phreatichthys andruzzii).. J Exp Biol 2014 Jun 1;217(Pt 11):1902-9.
    doi: 10.1242/jeb.101683pubmed: 24871921google scholar: lookup
  35. Pfungst O. Clever Hans (The Horse of Mr. vonOsten): A Contribution to Experimental Animal and Human Psychology.. .
  36. Uller C, Lewis J. Horses (Equus caballus) select the greater of two quantities in small numerical contrasts.. Anim Cogn 2009 Sep;12(5):733-8.
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-009-0225-0pubmed: 19387706google scholar: lookup
  37. Henselek Y, Fischer J, Schloegl C. Does the stimulus type influence horses' performance in a quantity discrimination task?. Front Psychol 2012;3:504.
    doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00504pmc: PMC3499915pubmed: 23181043google scholar: lookup
  38. Agrillo C, Bisazza A. Spontaneous versus trained numerical abilities. A comparison between the two main tools to study numerical competence in non-human animals.. J Neurosci Methods 2014 Aug 30;234:82-91.
    doi: 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2014.04.027pubmed: 24793399google scholar: lookup
  39. Agrillo C, Miletto Petrazzini ME. The importance of replication in comparative psychology: the lesson of elephant quantity judgments.. Front Psychol 2012;3:181.
    doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00181pmc: PMC3365653pubmed: 22675317google scholar: lookup
  40. Agrillo C, Dadda M. Discrimination of the larger shoal in the poeciliid fish Girardinus falcatus.. Ethol. Ecol. Evol. 2007;19:145–157.
    doi: 10.1080/08927014.2007.9522574google scholar: lookup
  41. Pepperberg IM, Brezinsky MV. Acquisition of a relative class concept by an African gray parrot (Psittacus erithacus): discriminations based on relative size.. J Comp Psychol 1991 Sep;105(3):286-94.
    doi: 10.1037/0735-7036.105.3.286pubmed: 1935007google scholar: lookup
  42. Agrillo C, Piffer L. Musicians outperform nonmusicians in magnitude estimation: evidence of a common processing mechanism for time, space and numbers.. Q J Exp Psychol (Hove) 2012;65(12):2321-32.
    doi: 10.1080/17470218.2012.680895pubmed: 22559141google scholar: lookup
  43. Agrillo C, Miletto Petrazzini ME, Tagliapietra C, Bisazza A. Inter-specific differences in numerical abilities among teleost fish.. Front Psychol 2012;3:483.
    doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00483pmc: PMC3498878pubmed: 23162517google scholar: lookup
  44. Brannon EM, Terrace HS. Ordering of the numerosities 1 to 9 by monkeys.. Science 1998 Oct 23;282(5389):746-9.
    doi: 10.1126/science.282.5389.746pubmed: 9784133google scholar: lookup
  45. Gebuis T, Reynvoet B. The role of visual information in numerosity estimation.. PLoS One 2012;7(5):e37426.
    doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0037426pmc: PMC3355123pubmed: 22616007google scholar: lookup
  46. Feigenson L, Carey S, Hauser M. The representations underlying infants' choice of more: object files versus analog magnitudes.. Psychol Sci 2002 Mar;13(2):150-6.
    doi: 10.1111/1467-9280.00427pubmed: 11933999google scholar: lookup
  47. Stevens JR, Wood JN, Hauser MD. When quantity trumps number: discrimination experiments in cotton-top tamarins (Saguinus oedipus) and common marmosets (Callithrix jacchus).. Anim Cogn 2007 Oct;10(4):429-37.
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-007-0081-8pubmed: 17354004google scholar: lookup
  48. Agrillo C. Numerical and arithmetic abilities in non-primate species.. .
    doi: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199642342.013.002google scholar: lookup
  49. Biro D, Matsuzawa T. Use of numerical symbols by the chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes): Cardinals, ordinals, and the introduction of zero.. Anim Cogn 2001 Nov;4(3-4):193-9.
    doi: 10.1007/s100710100086pubmed: 24777509google scholar: lookup
  50. Beran MJ, Perdue BM, Bramlett JL, Menzel CR, Evans TA. Prospective Memory in a Language-Trained Chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes).. Learn Motiv 2012 Nov 1;43(4):192-199.
    doi: 10.1016/j.lmot.2012.05.002pmc: PMC3489496pubmed: 23139433google scholar: lookup
  51. Patel AD, Iversen JR, Bregman MR, Schulz I. Experimental evidence for synchronization to a musical beat in a nonhuman animal.. Curr Biol 2009 May 26;19(10):827-30.
    doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2009.03.038pubmed: 19409790google scholar: lookup
  52. Corkin S. What's new with the amnesic patient H.M.?. Nat Rev Neurosci 2002 Feb;3(2):153-60.
    doi: 10.1038/nrn726pubmed: 11836523google scholar: lookup
  53. Crawford JR, Garthwaite PH. Single-case research in neuropsychology: a comparison of five forms of t-test for comparing a case to controls.. Cortex 2012 Sep;48(8):1009-16.
    doi: 10.1016/j.cortex.2011.06.021pubmed: 21843884google scholar: lookup
  54. Miklósi A, Kubinyi E, Topál J, Gácsi M, Virányi Z, Csányi V. A simple reason for a big difference: wolves do not look back at humans, but dogs do.. Curr Biol 2003 Apr 29;13(9):763-6.
    doi: 10.1016/S0960-9822(03)00263-Xpubmed: 12725735google scholar: lookup
  55. Udell MA, Dorey NR, Wynne CD. Wolves outperform dogs in following human social cues.. Anim. Behav. 2008;76:1767–1773.
    doi: 10.1016/j.anbehav.2008.07.028google scholar: lookup

Citations

This article has been cited 5 times.
  1. Brucks D, Härterich A, König von Borstel U. Horses wait for more and better rewards in a delay of gratification paradigm. Front Psychol 2022;13:954472.
    doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.954472pubmed: 35936272google scholar: lookup
  2. Cappellato A, Miletto Petrazzini ME, Bisazza A, Dadda M, Agrillo C. Susceptibility to Size Visual Illusions in a Non-Primate Mammal (Equus caballus). Animals (Basel) 2020 Sep 17;10(9).
    doi: 10.3390/ani10091673pubmed: 32957449google scholar: lookup
  3. Nawroth C, Langbein J, Coulon M, Gabor V, Oesterwind S, Benz-Schwarzburg J, von Borell E. Farm Animal Cognition-Linking Behavior, Welfare and Ethics. Front Vet Sci 2019;6:24.
    doi: 10.3389/fvets.2019.00024pubmed: 30838218google scholar: lookup
  4. Vonk J. Advances in Animal Cognition. Behav Sci (Basel) 2016 Nov 30;6(4).
    doi: 10.3390/bs6040027pubmed: 27916874google scholar: lookup
  5. Petrazzini ME, Lucon-Xiccato T, Agrillo C, Bisazza A. Use of ordinal information by fish. Sci Rep 2015 Oct 26;5:15497.
    doi: 10.1038/srep15497pubmed: 26499450google scholar: lookup
Subscribe to our newsletter
Join 99,357 horse owners like you who receive our email updates on horse health and nutrition.