DECEMBER 2020 THE RIDER /31 Do equestrians know how their horses learn?


By Tanja Bornmann (MSc Equine Science, Academic Equi- tation)


Why is it so important for


equestrians to become educated about learning theory and its practical application? Because, knowingly or not, in each single encounter with horses we use learning theory tools from our training toolbox. Sometimes, equestrians pick the wrong tools from the toolbox, or do not know how to use the selected tool cor- rectly and, due to this, horses may suffer (often silently) and become ‘naughty’, ‘unwilling’, ‘difficult’, or even dangerous to handle. Horses do not ‘test’ you, nor are they being ‘dominant’ and need you to tell them that you are the ‘boss’. Training is all about bringing the right message across in fair and meaningful di- alogue between horse and trainer (yes, horses ‘talk’ to us using their ‘language’), employing the different tools that knowledge of learning theory will equip you with. Often, horses simply do not understand what the trainer wants from them, either because the trainer does not understand how to use cues correctly, or because he/she does not know how to re- ward ‘correct’ horse behaviour timely or predictably so that the desired learning outcomes can be achieved. Traditionally, horse train-


ing has been based on negative reinforcement [1] as the mounted rider communicates with the horse via the ‘rider aids’, which, in traditional training, are solely based on negative reinforcement [2]. Hence, it is very important that all horse handlers and riders understand what negative (and positive – more about this later) reinforcement means, how it can be practically applied, and that its incorrect application can result in a compromised welfare state and, potentially, abuse [3]. We can observe horse


abuse in all equestrian disci- plines, some types of abuse are just more obvious to spot than others. Unfortunately, unlike some other mammals such as dogs, horses very rarely use their voices to indicate that they are in pain. Horses’ reactions to pain or discomfort are often subtle and hard to spot since equids, based on their natural survival instinct, tend not to express pain too openly. You may have witnessed some riders applying strong leg or even spur pressure, the ‘go sig- nal, and rein pressure, the ‘slow down’ signal, at the same time until the horse ‘complies’, i.e. does what the rider wants. This can present a welfare concern due to the simultaneous use of two contradictory cues – acceler- ating and decelerating aids – and may cause discomfort or pain. Some horses may try to escape pain by bucking or rearing, often accompanied with frequent tail swishing and facial expressions indicating pain. Other horses may simply ‘surrender’ to the pain and eventually enter a state of learned helplessness [4] where they have learned that any attempt to es- cape a pain- or stressful situation is not successful. Horses that have entered a state of learned helplessness simply give up try- ing and may become depressed, which can sometimes be ob- served in horses termed ‘bomb- proof’ or in some school horses. Some riders may con-


stantly apply leg pressure to their


horses’ flanks even if the horse already moves forward or main- tains the speed/rhythm (i.e. incor- rect understanding of negative reinforcement: no leg pressure release when the horse responds with ‘forward’). In this example, horses can become habituated to the constant leg pressure and the rider may need to apply even stronger leg pressure to ask for an increase in speed/lengthening of strides in the future. Horses that have habituated to leg pressure are often falsely termed ‘lazy’ and their riders may choose to use spurs or whips in the future, punishing the horse for his rider’s incorrect understanding of learn- ing theory.


What is learning? Learning means behaviour


modification and our behaviour can be influenced by interactions with the environment, including other humans and animals. When training horses to perform for us as riding, driving, or working partners, we can modify their be- haviour by applying the princi- ples of learning theory. Through habituation and (de-)sensitisa- tion, as well as operant and clas- sical conditioning (also known as Pavlovian conditioning), horses can be trained to become reliable and safe companions. Operant conditioning, also known as in- strumental conditioning, is linked to cue (stimulus) – response (‘right’ or ‘wrong’ behaviour) – consequence (reward or punish- ment) relationships [5]. We can reward (i.e. rein-


force) wanted/desired horse be- haviours by giving horses (i.e. adding, +) something pleasant or desirable, such as food, scratches, turnout. These reinforcers are termed primary positive rein- forcers and the process is called positive (+) reinforcement. Pri- mary means that the reinforcers are natural to the horse, in con- trast to secondary (i.e. learned) positive reinforcers such as pats on the neck, the sound of a clicker, which a horse needs to associate or link to a primary


constitutes negative reinforce- ment, would be the most effec- tive


reward, and those


participants considerably more often selected the incorrect defi- nition of negative reinforcement. When the participating riders were asked whether knew how their horses learn certain behav- iours, 95.8% responded with ‘yes, but only 25.9% provided a correct or partly correct example of negative reinforcement and 20.8% confused negative rein- forcement with punishment, pos- sibly due to respondents’ lacking knowledge of the terminology [8].


Why is this the case?


We can modify a horse’s behaviour by applying the principles of learning theory


positive reinforcer first in order for the secondary positive rein- forcer to become meaningful and positive. We can also reward horses by removing (i.e. subtract- ing, -) a stimulus that they per- ceive unpleasant, e.g. leg or rein pressure, once they have shown a correct or desired response, i.e. we immediately remove the leg pressure when the horse yields. This is termed negative (-) rein- forcement. Contrarily, we can apply punishment to stop horses from showing behaviours we deem ‘bad’ or unwanted/unde- sired [6]. Punishment can also be subdivided into positive punish- ment, i.e. adding something un- pleasant such as pressure/pain, or negative punishment, i.e. remov- ing or withholding something pleasant such as food, which one should never do of course as it


would compromise horse wel- fare.


What do equestrians know about learning theory? A study investigating rid-


ers’ perceptions and understand- ing of learning theory, conducted as part of a MSc dissertation project and involving 1028 par- ticipants, revealed gaps in eques- trians’ theoretical knowledge of the terminology – positive and negative reinforcement and pun- ishment – when participants were asked to select the correct defini- tions or provide practical exam- ples [7]. 85.4% of all survey participants believed that positive reinforcement was the most suc- cessful horse training method. In contrast, 82.5% of all participat- ing equestrians thought that ‘re- leasing the aid/pressure’, which


Equestrians may receive mislead- ing or incorrect information via their coaches as significantly more study participants, who in- dicated that the licensed/qualified coach would be their main knowledge source for training knowledge, selected the wrong definition of negative reinforce- ment. This is not surprising, given that some professional equestrian coaches [9,10] and veterinarians [11] may lack a clear understanding of the princi- ples of learning theory and, there- fore, the correct application of learning theory by some amateur equestrians could be questioned. Today, learning theory and


horse behaviour still do not pres- ent an integral part of some na- tional equestrian federation’s/ governing body’s coaches’ train- ing syllabi. Yet, research findings stress the need for implementing learning theory in equestrian coach training and suggest that equestrians’ competence in cor- rectly applying learning theory could be questioned. However, it seems that, even if some eques- trians may not comprehensively understand the impact of nega- tive reinforcement on horse be- haviour, pressure release was of high importance to the partici- pants of the MSc dissertation study mentioned above. It ap- pears that, to some extent, eques- trians are aware about


the negative impact of constant pres-


The best protection for you and your horse.


CapriCMW is the official insurance partner for Ontario Equestrian and Provincial Equine Associations from coast to coast. We’re Canada’s most trusted insurance provider for equine enthusiasts and equine industry professionals.


Protect your horse with EquiCare, ask us how.


sure (i.e. non-release of pressure after a desired behaviour has been shown) in training on horse behaviour, which is encouraging in terms of horse welfare.


References: [1] Heleski, C., Bauson, L. and Bello, N., 2008. Evaluating the Addition of Positive Reinforcement for Learning a Frightening Task: A Pilot Study With Horses. J Appl Anim Welf Sci, 11, 213-222.


[2] McLean, A.N. and McGreevy, P.D., 2007. Ethical equitation: Capping the price horses pay for human glory. J Vet Behav, 5, 203-209.


[3] Preshaw, L., Kirton, R. and Randle, H., 2017. Application of learning theory in horse rescues in England and Wales. Appl Anim Behav Sci 190, 82–89.


[4] Overmier, J.B. and Seligman, M.E.P., 1967. Effects of inescapable shock on sub- sequent escape and avoidance learning. J Comp Psychol 63, 28-33.


[5] Skinner, B.F., 1953. Science and Human Behaviour. New York, The Free Press.


[6] Mills, D.S., 1998. Applying learning the- ory to the management of the horse: the dif- ference between getting it right and getting it wrong, Equine Vet J Supplement: Equine Clinical Behaviour, 27, 44-48.


[7] Bornmann, T., 2016. Riders’ perceptions, understanding, and theoretical application of learning theory in horse training, Proceed- ings of the International Society for Equi- tation Science Conference. Saumur, France 23-25 June. Saumur, France: International Society for Equitation Science and French Institute for Horses and Riding, Saumur (2016).


[8] Telatin, A., Baragli, P., Green, B., Gard- ner, O., Bienas, A., 2016. Abstract only Test- ing theoretical and empirical knowledge of learning theory by surveying equestrian rid- ers. J Vet Behav: Clinical Applications and Research Vol 15 p.79.


[9] Warren-Smith, A.K. and McGreevy, P.D., 2008. Equestrian Coaches’ Understanding and Application of Learning Theory in Horse Training. Anthrozoös, 21(2), 153-162.


[10] Wentworth-Stanley, C., Randle, H. and Wolframm, I., 2014. Survey of Canadian Certified Coaches’ Understanding and Ap- plication of Learning Theory in Horse Train- ing, Proceedings of the International Society for Equitation Science Conference. Vingsted, Denmark 7-9 August. Tjele, Denmark: Dan- ish Center for Food and Agriculture and Arhus University, Vingsted (2014).


[11] Doherty, O., McGreevy, P.D., Pearson, E., 2017. The importance of learning theory and equitation science to the veterinarian. J Appl Anim Behav Sci, Vol. 190, 111-122.


1 888 394 3330 capricmw.ca/equine


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46