111 Ability to interpret and apply animal behavior and welfare terminology by adults within the horse industry

Abstract

Interpretations of horse behavior are diverse among equestrians and may be influenced by a misunderstanding of animal behavior and welfare terminology. This study explored how horse industry adults interpret and understand fundamental animal behavior, welfare, and operant conditioning (OC) concepts as applied to horses. A sample of 1145 adults completed an online survey containing horse-related psychographic questions, horse-human interaction videos with and without heart rate (HR) data, terminology questions related to specific behavioral and welfare states in horses, and scenarios related to animal learning. Data were analyzed with frequency counts (SPSS ver. 25), and when appropriate, correlations, cross-tabulations, or mixed model ANOVA (SAS ver. 9.4). Most participants identified as female (94%), white (94%), and live in the United States (63%). Most (96%) previously owned a horse, 86% currently owned a horse, and 4% had never owned a horse. Few participants provided complete definitions for fear (14%), stress (34%), or reactivity (1%), but some provided partial definitions for these terms (63% for fear, 43% for stress, and 29% for reactivity). Most (80%) correctly identified the normal resting HR for an adult horse. When viewing horse-human interaction videos, 83% of participants did not change their interpretation of the horse's behavior in the videos after the HR was revealed, suggesting a lack of understanding of the potential impacts of fear, stress, and reactivity on horse HR. Few participants were able to correctly define terms used in OC such as negative reinforcement (7%), negative punishment (8%), positive reinforcement (9%), and positive punishment (12%). When selecting the OC principle for horse-human interaction scenarios, more participants (42%; P = 0.001) correctly identified positive reinforcement compared with negative punishment (16%), negative reinforcement (23%), and positive punishment (19%). No differences ( P > 0.14) were found between participants’ abilities to correctly define fear, stress, reactivity, or any of the OC principles, based on gender, race, age, horse ownership, or ability to correctly identify resting HR. Compared with US participants, those living outside the US were more likely ( P < 0.006) to correctly understand negative reinforcement, positive punishment, and negative punishment. These findings suggest that education in these areas is needed for all individuals who interact with horses, regardless of gender, race, age, or horse ownership. Improved understanding of behavioral terminology and OC principles for horses may positively impact horse welfare.