FREE SHIPPING over $40
OVER 9000 FIVE-STAR REVIEWS
5% OFF ALL SUBSCRIPTIONS
100% HAPPINESS GUARANTEE
Analyze Diet
0
Home / Equine Research Bank / Front Psychol / Visual attention, an indicator of human-animal relationships...
Frontiers in psychology2014; 5; 108; doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00108

Visual attention, an indicator of human-animal relationships? A study of domestic horses (Equus caballus).

Abstract: As visual attention is an intrinsic part of social relationships, and because relationships are built on a succession of interactions, their establishment involves learning and attention. The emotional, rewarding or punishing, content can modulate selective attention. In horses, the use of positive/negative reinforcement during training determines short and long-term human-horse relationships. In a recent study in horses, where either food or withers' grooming were used as a reward, it appeared that only the food-rewarded horses learned the task and show better relationship with humans. In the present study, we hypothesized that this differential effect of grooming/food rewards on learning performances could be due to attentional processes. Monitoring, gazes and behaviors directed towards the trainer revealed that the use of a food reward (FR) as positive reinforcement increased horses' selective attention towards their trainer. Conversely, horses trained with grooming reward (GR) expressed more inattentive responses and did not show a decrease of "agitated" behavior. However, individual plotting of attention vs. rate of learning performances revealed a complex pattern. Thus, while all FR horses showed a "window" of attention related to faster learning performances, GR horses' pattern followed an almost normal curve where the extreme animals (i.e., highest and lowest attention) had the slowest learning performances. On the other hand, learning was influenced by attention: at the end of training, the more attentive horses had also better learning performances. This study, based on horses, contributes to the general debate on the place of attentional processes at the interface of emotion and cognition and opens new lines of thought about individual sensitivities (only individuals can tell what an appropriate reward is), attentional processes and learning.
Get Full Text
Publication Date: 2014-02-13 PubMed ID: 24592244PubMed Central: PMC3923161DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00108Google 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 discusses the impact of rewards, specifically food or grooming, on the learning performances and human-animal relationships of horses. It suggests that food-rewarded horses not only learn tasks better, but also have a better relationship with humans, being more attentive to their trainers than those rewarded with grooming.

Research Objectives and Hypothesis

  • The research first sets out to explore the differential impact of food and grooming rewards on the learning performance of horses. The hypothesis is that food rewards as positive reinforcement increase the selective attention of horses towards their trainer, thereby enhancing their learning performances.
  • The research also aims to examine the correlation between the type of rewards and the human-horse relationship. This is based on the premise that selective attention, which is indicative of the horse’s relationship with humans, is modulated by the emotional content of the interactions, in this case, the rewarding or punishing experiences.

Methods

  • The study involved monitoring gazes and behaviors directed towards the trainer as a measure of attention. The behaviors monitored included ‘agitated’ behavior exhibited by the horses.
  • The rewards used in the training were food and grooming. The impact of these rewards on learning performances and attention was studied over a course of time.

Results

  • The study found that horses trained with food rewards showed increased selective attention towards their trainer, and thereby better learning performances. These were the horses that established a better relationship with humans.
  • Conversely, the horses trained with grooming reward expressed inattentive responses, did not show a decrease in ‘agitated’ behavior, and had slower learning performances.
  • A complex pattern revealed that while all food-rewarded horses showed a ‘window’ of attention related to faster learning performances, the grooming-rewarded horses followed a normal curve where the extreme horses (highest and lowest attention) had the slowest learning performances.
  • Additionally, the study found that the more attentive horses at the end of training had better learning performances, confirming that learning was influenced by attention.

Conclusions and Implications

  • The study provides significant contributions to the understanding of attentional processes at the interface of emotion and cognition, particularly in the context of human-animal relationships.
  • It opens new lines of thought about individual sensitivities, suggesting that only individuals can truly evaluate what an appropriate reward is. Thus, for effective training of horses, it is important to recognize and employ the correct rewarding methods.
  • Furthermore, it underscores the importance of attentional processes in learning. Among horses at least, attentiveness towards the trainer, influenced by the type of reward, significantly enhances learning performance.

Cite This Article

APA
Rochais C, Henry S, Sankey C, Nassur F, Góracka-Bruzda A, Hausberger M. (2014). Visual attention, an indicator of human-animal relationships? A study of domestic horses (Equus caballus). Front Psychol, 5, 108. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00108

Publication

Frontiers in psychology
ISSN: 1664-1078
NlmUniqueID: 101550902
Country: Switzerland
Language: English
Volume: 5
Pages: 108
PII: 108

Researcher Affiliations

Rochais, C
  • Laboratoire d'Éthologie Animale et Humaine EthoS - UMR CNRS 6552, Université de Rennes 1 Paimpont, France.
Henry, S
  • Laboratoire d'Éthologie Animale et Humaine EthoS - UMR CNRS 6552, Université de Rennes 1 Paimpont, France.
Sankey, C
  • Laboratoire d'Éthologie Animale et Humaine EthoS - UMR CNRS 6552, Université de Rennes 1 Paimpont, France.
Nassur, F
  • Laboratoire d'Éthologie Animale et Humaine EthoS - UMR CNRS 6552, Université de Rennes 1 Rennes, France.
Góracka-Bruzda, A
  • Polish Academy of Sciences, Institute of Genetics and Animal Breeding, Jastrzebiec Magdalenka, Poland.
Hausberger, M
  • Laboratoire d'Éthologie Animale et Humaine EthoS - UMR CNRS 6552, Université de Rennes 1 Paimpont, France ; Laboratoire d'Éthologie Animale et Humaine EthoS - UMR CNRS 6552, Université de Rennes 1 Rennes, France.

References

This article includes 83 references
  1. Altmann J. Observational study of behavior: sampling methods.. Behaviour 1974;49(3):227-67.
    doi: 10.1163/156853974X00534pubmed: 4597405google scholar: lookup
  2. Anderson JR. Social stimuli and social rewards in primate learning and cognition.. Behav Processes 1998 Feb;42(2-3):159-75.
    doi: 10.1016/S0376-6357(97)00074-0pubmed: 24897460google scholar: lookup
  3. Armony JL, Dolan RJ. Modulation of spatial attention by fear-conditioned stimuli: an event-related fMRI study.. Neuropsychologia 2002;40(7):817-26.
    doi: 10.1016/S0028-3932(01)00178-6pubmed: 11900732google scholar: lookup
  4. Baragli P, Gazzano A, Marteli F, Sighieri C. How do horses appraise humans' actions? A brief note over a practical way to assess stimulus. J. Equine Vet. Sci. 29, 739–742.
    doi: 10.1016/j.jevs.2009.08.006google scholar: lookup
  5. Baragli P, Mariti C, Petri L, De Giorgio F, Sighieri C. Does attention make the difference? Horses' response to human stimulus after 2 different training strategies. J. Vet. Behav. Clin. Appl. Res. 6, 31–38.
    doi: 10.1016/j.jveb.2010.08.020google scholar: lookup
  6. Basile M, Boivin S, Boutin A, Blois-Heulin C, Hausberger M, Lemasson A. Socially dependent auditory laterality in domestic horses (Equus caballus).. Anim Cogn 2009 Jul;12(4):611-9.
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-009-0220-5pubmed: 19283416google scholar: lookup
  7. Behrmann M, Geng JJ, Shomstein S. Parietal cortex and attention.. Curr Opin Neurobiol 2004 Apr;14(2):212-7.
    doi: 10.1016/j.conb.2004.03.012pubmed: 15082327google scholar: lookup
  8. Bertin A, Hausberger M, Henry L, Richard-Yris MA. Adult and peer influences on starling song development.. Dev Psychobiol 2007 May;49(4):362-74.
    doi: 10.1002/dev.20223pubmed: 17455227google scholar: lookup
  9. Blois-Heulin C. Variability in social visual attention in the red-capped mangabey (Cercocebus torquatus torquatus) and the grey-cheeked mangabey (Cercocebus albigena albigena).. Folia Primatol (Basel) 1999 Sep-Oct;70(5):264-8.
    doi: 10.1159/000021705pubmed: 10567831google scholar: lookup
  10. Boyd L, Carbonaro D, Houpt K. The 24-hour time-budget of Przewalski horses. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 21, 5–17.
    doi: 10.1016/0168-1591(88)90098-6google scholar: lookup
  11. Call J, Bräuer J, Kaminski J, Tomasello M. Domestic dogs (Canis familiaris) are sensitive to the attentional state of humans.. J Comp Psychol 2003 Sep;117(3):257-63.
    doi: 10.1037/0735-7036.117.3.257pubmed: 14498801google scholar: lookup
  12. Chance M R A, Jolly C. Social Groups of Monkeys, Apes and Men. London: Jonathan Cape.
  13. Chance P. The rewards of learning. Phi Delta Kappan 73, 200–207.
  14. Cousillas H, George I, Henry L, Richard JP, Hausberger M. Linking social and vocal brains: could social segregation prevent a proper development of a central auditory area in a female songbird?. PLoS One 2008 May 21;3(5):e2194.
    doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0002194pmc: PMC2386286pubmed: 18493580google scholar: lookup
  15. Cousillas H, George I, Mathelier M, Richard JP, Henry L, Hausberger M. Social experience influences the development of a central auditory area.. Naturwissenschaften 2006 Dec;93(12):588-96.
    doi: 10.1007/s00114-006-0148-4pubmed: 16932952google scholar: lookup
  16. Davids E, Zhang K, Tarazi FI, Baldessarini RJ. Animal models of attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder.. Brain Res Brain Res Rev 2003 Apr;42(1):1-21.
    doi: 10.1016/S0165-0173(02)00274-6pubmed: 12668288google scholar: lookup
  17. Emery NJ. The eyes have it: the neuroethology, function and evolution of social gaze.. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 2000 Aug;24(6):581-604.
    doi: 10.1016/S0149-7634(00)00025-7pubmed: 10940436google scholar: lookup
  18. Feh C. Relationship and communication in socially natural horse herds, in The Domestic Horse, eds Mills D., McDonnell S.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 83–93.
  19. Feh C, De Mazières J. Grooming at a preferred site reduces heart rate in horses. Anim. Behav. 46, 1191–1194.
    doi: 10.1006/anbe.1993.1309google scholar: lookup
  20. Fureix C, Jego P, Sankey C, Hausberger M. How horses (Equus caballus) see the world: humans as significant "objects".. Anim Cogn 2009 Jul;12(4):643-54.
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-009-0223-2pubmed: 19381698google scholar: lookup
  21. Giurfa M. Cognition with few neurons: higher-order learning in insects.. Trends Neurosci 2013 May;36(5):285-94.
    doi: 10.1016/j.tins.2012.12.011pubmed: 23375772google scholar: lookup
  22. Hattori Y, Kuroshima H, Fujita K. I know you are not looking at me: capuchin monkeys' (Cebus apella) sensitivity to human attentional states.. Anim Cogn 2007 Apr;10(2):141-8.
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-006-0049-0pubmed: 16944232google scholar: lookup
  23. Hausberger M, Muller C. A brief note on some possible factors involved in the reactions of horses to humans. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 76, 339–344.
    doi: 10.1016/S0168-1591(02)00016-3google scholar: lookup
  24. Hausberger M, Roche H, Henry S, Visser E K. A review of the human–horse relationship. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 109, 1–24.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2007.04.015pubmed: 0google scholar: lookup
  25. Henry S, Hemery D, Richard M-A, Hausberger M. Human–mare relationships and behaviour of foals toward humans. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 93, 341–362.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2005.01.008google scholar: lookup
  26. Henry S, Richard-Yris MA, Hausberger M. Influence of various early human-foal interferences on subsequent human-foal relationship.. Dev Psychobiol 2006 Dec;48(8):712-8.
    doi: 10.1002/dev.20189pubmed: 17111402google scholar: lookup
  27. Henry S, Richard-Yris MA, Tordjman S, Hausberger M. Neonatal handling affects durably bonding and social development.. PLoS One 2009;4(4):e5216.
    doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0005216pmc: PMC2662428pubmed: 19352503google scholar: lookup
  28. Hinde R A. Towards Understanding Relationships. London: Academic Press.
  29. Horn L, Virányi Z, Miklósi A, Huber L, Range F. Domestic dogs (Canis familiaris) flexibly adjust their human-directed behavior to the actions of their human partners in a problem situation.. Anim Cogn 2012 Jan;15(1):57-71.
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-011-0432-3pubmed: 21739136google scholar: lookup
  30. Jezierski T, Jaworski Z, Górecka A. Effects of handling on behaviour and heart rate in Konik horses: comparison of stable and forest reared youngstock. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 62, 1–11.
    doi: 10.1016/S0168-1591(98)00209-3google scholar: lookup
  31. Kaminski J, Call J, Tomasello M. Body orientation and face orientation: two factors controlling apes' behavior from humans.. Anim Cogn 2004 Oct;7(4):216-23.
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-004-0214-2pubmed: 15034765google scholar: lookup
  32. Keeling LJ, Jonare L, Lanneborn L. Investigating horse-human interactions: the effect of a nervous human.. Vet J 2009 Jul;181(1):70-1.
    doi: 10.1016/j.tvjl.2009.03.013pubmed: 19394879google scholar: lookup
  33. Kirkden R D, Pajor E A. Using preference, motivation and aversion tests to ask scientific questions about animals' feelings. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 100, 29–47.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2006.04.009google scholar: lookup
  34. Knight RT, Grabowecky MF, Scabini D. Role of human prefrontal cortex in attention control.. Adv Neurol 1995;66:21-34; discussion 34-6.
    pubmed: 7771302
  35. Krapp A. Interest, motivation and learning: an educational-psychological perspective. Eur. J. Psychol. Educ. 14, 23–40.
    doi: 10.1007/BF03173109google scholar: lookup
  36. Krueger K, Flauger B, Farmer K, Maros K. Horses (Equus caballus) use human local enhancement cues and adjust to human attention.. Anim Cogn 2011 Mar;14(2):187-201.
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-010-0352-7pubmed: 20845052google scholar: lookup
  37. Kruschke J K. Attention in Learning. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 12, 171–175.
    doi: 10.1111/1467-8721.01254google scholar: lookup
  38. Lampe JF, Andre J. Cross-modal recognition of human individuals in domestic horses (Equus caballus).. Anim Cogn 2012 Jul;15(4):623-30.
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-012-0490-1pubmed: 22526687google scholar: lookup
  39. Lemasson A, Boutin A, Boivin S, Blois-Heulin C, Hausberger M. Horse (Equus caballus) whinnies: a source of social information.. Anim Cogn 2009 Sep;12(5):693-704.
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-009-0229-9pubmed: 19449192google scholar: lookup
  40. Lesimple C, Sankey C, Richard MA, Hausberger M. Do horses expect humans to solve their problems?. Front Psychol 2012;3:306.
    doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00306pmc: PMC3426792pubmed: 22936923google scholar: lookup
  41. Della Libera C, Chelazzi L. Visual selective attention and the effects of monetary rewards.. Psychol Sci 2006 Mar;17(3):222-7.
    doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01689.xpubmed: 16507062google scholar: lookup
  42. Maille A, Engelhart L, Bourjade M, Blois-Heulin C. To beg, or not to beg? That is the question: mangabeys modify their production of requesting gestures in response to human's attentional states.. PLoS One 2012;7(7):e41197.
    doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0041197pmc: PMC3399851pubmed: 22815969google scholar: lookup
  43. Marler P. Communication in monkeys and apes, in Primate Behavior, ed DeVore I.. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston; 544–584.
  44. Maros K, Gácsi M, Miklósi A. Comprehension of human pointing gestures in horses (Equus caballus).. Anim Cogn 2008 Jul;11(3):457-66.
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-008-0136-5pubmed: 18247069google scholar: lookup
  45. Maxime H. RVAideMemoire: Diverse Basic Statistical and Graphical Functions. R Package Version 0.9-27. Available online at: http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=RVAideMemoire.
  46. McDonnell S M. How to rehabilitate horses with injection shyness (or any procedure non-compliance). AEEP Proc. 46, 168–172.
  47. McGreevy P D, McLean A N. Equitation Science. John Wiley & Sons.
  48. Proops L, McComb K. Attributing attention: the use of human-given cues by domestic horses (Equus caballus).. Anim Cogn 2010 Mar;13(2):197-205.
    doi: 10.1007/s100710050046pubmed: 19588176google scholar: lookup
  49. Micheletta J, Waller B M. Friendship affects gaze following in a tolerant species of macaque, Macaca nigra. Anim. Behav. 83, 459–467.
    doi: 10.1016/j.anbehav.2011.11.018google scholar: lookup
  50. Miklósi A, Soproni K. A comparative analysis of animals' understanding of the human pointing gesture.. Anim Cogn 2006 Apr;9(2):81-93.
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-005-0008-1pubmed: 16235075google scholar: lookup
  51. Mills D S, McDonnell S M. The Domestic Horse: The Origins, Development and Management of its Behaviour. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  52. Nebel K, Wiese H, Stude P, de Greiff A, Diener HC, Keidel M. On the neural basis of focused and divided attention.. Brain Res Cogn Brain Res 2005 Dec;25(3):760-76.
    doi: 10.1016/j.cogbrainres.2005.09.011pubmed: 16337110google scholar: lookup
  53. Oades RD, Sartory G. The problems of inattention: methods and interpretations.. Behav Brain Res 1997 Oct;88(1):3-10.
    doi: 10.1016/S0166-4328(97)02303-6pubmed: 9401703google scholar: lookup
  54. Posner MI, Cohen Y, Rafal RD. Neural systems control of spatial orienting.. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 1982 Jun 25;298(1089):187-98.
    doi: 10.1098/rstb.1982.0081pubmed: 6125970google scholar: lookup
  55. Posner MI, Snyder CR, Davidson BJ. Attention and the detection of signals.. J Exp Psychol 1980 Jun;109(2):160-74.
    doi: 10.1037/0096-3445.109.2.160pubmed: 7381367google scholar: lookup
  56. Proops L, McComb K. Attributing attention: the use of human-given cues by domestic horses (Equus caballus).. Anim Cogn 2010 Mar;13(2):197-205.
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-009-0257-5pubmed: 19588176google scholar: lookup
  57. Proops L, McComb K. Cross-modal individual recognition in domestic horses (Equus caballus) extends to familiar humans.. Proc Biol Sci 2012 Aug 22;279(1741):3131-8.
    doi: 10.1098/rspb.2012.0626pmc: PMC3385734pubmed: 22593108google scholar: lookup
  58. Proops L, McComb K, Reby D. Cross-modal individual recognition in domestic horses (Equus caballus).. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2009 Jan 20;106(3):947-51.
    doi: 10.1073/pnas.0809127105pmc: PMC2630083pubmed: 19075246google scholar: lookup
  59. Quay HC. Inhibition and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder.. J Abnorm Child Psychol 1997 Feb;25(1):7-13.
    doi: 10.1023/A:1025799122529pubmed: 9093895google scholar: lookup
  60. Range F, Horn L, Bugnyar T, Gajdon GK, Huber L. Social attention in keas, dogs, and human children.. Anim Cogn 2009 Jan;12(1):181-92.
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-008-0181-0pmc: PMC4415148pubmed: 18716802google scholar: lookup
  61. Range F, Huber L. Attention in common marmosets: implications for social-learning experiments. Anim. Behav. 73, 1033–1041.
    doi: 10.1016/j.anbehav.2006.07.015google scholar: lookup
  62. Raymond J. Interactions of attention, emotion and motivation.. Prog Brain Res 2009;176:293-308.
    pubmed: 19733764doi: 10.1016/s0079-6123(09)17617-3google scholar: lookup
  63. R Development Core Team. R: A Language And Environment For Statistical Computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing; Available online at: http://www.R-project.org/.
  64. Sankey C, Henry S, André N, Richard-Yris MA, Hausberger M. Do horses have a concept of person?. PLoS One 2011 Mar 30;6(3):e18331.
    doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0018331pmc: PMC3068175pubmed: 21479184google scholar: lookup
  65. Sankey C, Henry S, Górecka-Bruzda A, Richard-Yris MA, Hausberger M. The way to a man's heart is through his stomach: what about horses?. PLoS One 2010 Nov 15;5(11):e15446.
    doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0015446pmc: PMC2981555pubmed: 21085576google scholar: lookup
  66. Sankey C, Richard-Yris M-A, Leroy H, Henry S, Hausberger M. Positive interactions lead to lasting positive memories in horses, Equus caballus. Anim. Behav. 79, 869–875.
    doi: 10.1016/j.anbehav.2009.12.037google scholar: lookup
  67. Sankey C, Richard-Yris MA, Henry S, Fureix C, Nassur F, Hausberger M. Reinforcement as a mediator of the perception of humans by horses (Equus caballus).. Anim Cogn 2010 Sep;13(5):753-64.
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-010-0326-9pubmed: 20490592google scholar: lookup
  68. Schultz W. Neural coding of basic reward terms of animal learning theory, game theory, microeconomics and behavioural ecology.. Curr Opin Neurobiol 2004 Apr;14(2):139-47.
    doi: 10.1016/j.conb.2004.03.017pubmed: 15082317google scholar: lookup
  69. Schwab C, Huber L. Obey or not obey? Dogs (Canis familiaris) behave differently in response to attentional states of their owners.. J Comp Psychol 2006 Aug;120(3):169-75.
    doi: 10.1037/0735-7036.120.3.169pubmed: 16893253google scholar: lookup
  70. Siegel S, Castellan N. Non Parametric Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences, 2nd Edn. Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill; 399.
  71. Spaethe J, Tautz J, Chittka L. Do honeybees detect colour targets using serial or parallel visual search?. J Exp Biol 2006 Mar;209(Pt 6):987-93.
    doi: 10.1242/jeb.02124pubmed: 16513924google scholar: lookup
  72. Stormark KM, Hugdahl K. Conditioned emotional cueing of spatial attentional shifts in a go/no-go RT task.. Int J Psychophysiol 1997 Dec;27(3):241-8.
    doi: 10.1016/S0167-8760(97)00065-2pubmed: 9451582google scholar: lookup
  73. Taylor JG, Fragopanagos NF. The interaction of attention and emotion.. Neural Netw 2005 May;18(4):353-69.
    doi: 10.1016/j.neunet.2005.03.005pubmed: 15921888google scholar: lookup
  74. Toates F. Motivational Systems. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  75. Topál J, Miklósi A, Csányi V. Dog-human relationship affects problem-solving behavior in the dog. Anthrozoos 10, 214–224.
    doi: 10.2752/089279397787000987google scholar: lookup
  76. Treisman AM. Strategies and models of selective attention.. Psychol Rev 1969 May;76(3):282-99.
    doi: 10.1037/h0027242pubmed: 4893203google scholar: lookup
  77. van Swinderen B, Greenspan RJ. Salience modulates 20-30 Hz brain activity in Drosophila.. Nat Neurosci 2003 Jun;6(6):579-86.
    doi: 10.1038/nn1054pubmed: 12717438google scholar: lookup
  78. von Borstel U U, Heatly Duncan I J, Shoveller A K, Merkies K, Keeling L J, Millman S T. Impact of riding in a coercively obtained Rollkur posture on welfare and fear of performance horses. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 116, 228–236.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2008.10.001google scholar: lookup
  79. Waiblinger S, Boivin X, Pedersen V, Tosi M-V, Janczak A M, Visser E K. Assessing the human–animal relationship in farmed species: a critical review. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 101, 185–242.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2006.02.001google scholar: lookup
  80. Waring G. Horse Behavior, 2nd Edn. Norwich, NY: Noyes Publications/William Andrew Publishing; 442.
  81. Weigel R M. The facial expression of the brown capuchin monkey (Cebus apella). Behavior 68, 250–276.
    doi: 10.1163/156853979X00331google scholar: lookup
  82. Xitco MJ Jr, Gory JD, Kuczaj SA 2nd. Dolphin pointing is linked to the attentional behavior of a receiver.. Anim Cogn 2004 Oct;7(4):231-8.
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-004-0217-zpubmed: 15088149google scholar: lookup
  83. Xitco M J, Gory J D, Kuczaj S A. Spontaneous pointing by bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus). Anim. Cogn. 4, 115–123.
    doi: 10.1007/s100710100107pubmed: 0google scholar: lookup

Citations

This article has been cited 12 times.
  1. Tomberg C, Petagna M, de Selliers de Moranville LA. Horses (Equus caballus) facial micro-expressions: insight into discreet social information.. Sci Rep 2023 May 27;13(1):8625.
    doi: 10.1038/s41598-023-35807-zpubmed: 37244937google scholar: lookup
  2. Liehrmann O, Cosnard C, Riihonen V, Viitanen A, Alander E, Jardat P, Koski SE, Lummaa V, Lansade L. What drives horse success at following human-given cues? An investigation of handler familiarity and living conditions.. Anim Cogn 2023 Jul;26(4):1283-1294.
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-023-01775-0pubmed: 37072511google scholar: lookup
  3. Rochais C, Lerch N, Gueguen L, Schmidlin M, Bonamy O, Grandgeorge M, Hausberger M. Horses' Tactile Reactivity Differs According to the Type of Work: The Example of Equine-Assisted Intervention.. Vet Sci 2023 Feb 7;10(2).
    doi: 10.3390/vetsci10020130pubmed: 36851434google scholar: lookup
  4. Rochais C, Stomp M, Sébilleau M, Houdebine M, Henry S, Hausberger M. Horses' attentional characteristics differ according to the type of work.. PLoS One 2022;17(7):e0269974.
    doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0269974pubmed: 35877616google scholar: lookup
  5. Pougnault L, Cousillas H, Heyraud C, Huber L, Hausberger M, Henry L. Experimental Tests for Measuring Individual Attentional Characteristics in Songbirds.. Animals (Basel) 2021 Jul 29;11(8).
    doi: 10.3390/ani11082233pubmed: 34438691google scholar: lookup
  6. Marcet-Rius M, Pageat P, Bienboire-Frosini C, Teruel E, Monneret P, Leclercq J, Cozzi A. The provision of toys to pigs can improve the human-animal relationship.. Porcine Health Manag 2020 Nov 10;6(1):29.
    doi: 10.1186/s40813-020-00167-xpubmed: 33292637google scholar: lookup
  7. d'Ingeo S, Quaranta A, Siniscalchi M, Stomp M, Coste C, Bagnard C, Hausberger M, Cousillas H. Horses associate individual human voices with the valence of past interactions: a behavioural and electrophysiological study.. Sci Rep 2019 Aug 9;9(1):11568.
    doi: 10.1038/s41598-019-47960-5pubmed: 31399629google scholar: lookup
  8. Grandgeorge M, Dubois E, Alavi Z, Bourreau Y, Hausberger M. Do Animals Perceive Human Developmental Disabilities? Guinea Pigs' Behaviour with Children with Autism Spectrum Disorders and Children with Typical Development. A Pilot Study.. Animals (Basel) 2019 Aug 2;9(8).
    doi: 10.3390/ani9080522pubmed: 31382429google scholar: lookup
  9. Rochais C, Henry S, Hausberger M. Spontaneous attention-capture by auditory distractors as predictor of distractibility: a study of domestic horses (Equus caballus).. Sci Rep 2017 Nov 10;7(1):15283.
    doi: 10.1038/s41598-017-15654-5pubmed: 29127367google scholar: lookup
  10. Rochais C, Sébilleau M, Houdebine M, Bec P, Hausberger M, Henry S. A novel test for evaluating horses' spontaneous visual attention is predictive of attention in operant learning tasks.. Naturwissenschaften 2017 Aug;104(7-8):61.
    doi: 10.1007/s00114-017-1480-6pubmed: 28681089google scholar: lookup
  11. Vasconcellos Ada S, Virányi Z, Range F, Ades C, Scheidegger JK, Möstl E, Kotrschal K. Training Reduces Stress in Human-Socialised Wolves to the Same Degree as in Dogs.. PLoS One 2016;11(9):e0162389.
    doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0162389pubmed: 27611784google scholar: lookup
  12. Borgi M, Cogliati-Dezza I, Brelsford V, Meints K, Cirulli F. Baby schema in human and animal faces induces cuteness perception and gaze allocation in children.. Front Psychol 2014;5:411.
    doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00411pubmed: 24847305google scholar: lookup
Subscribe to our newsletter
Join 99,344 horse owners like you who receive our email updates on horse health and nutrition.