The Veterinary Journal xxx (2012) xxxxxx

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

The Veterinary Journal

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/tvjl

Personal View

Training the ridden animal: An ancient hall of mirrors

Andrew N. McLean
Australian Equine Behaviour Centre, Clonbinane, VIC 3658, Australia Faculty of Veterinary Science, University of Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Article history: Accepted 19 October 2012 Available online xxxx Keywords: Horse riding Equitation Animal training Ethology Leanring theory

2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

The scientic ingredients for efcient, safe and ethical training have become progressively available to humanity during the past half-century. Yet surprisingly, when compared with the uptake of technological information, their acceptance in horse- and elephant-training circles is slow indeed (Warren-Smith and McGreevy, 2008). But why are horse trainers in the West and elephant trainers in the East so slow to incorporate the principles of what is now known as learning theory the science of the learning processes? When it comes to excavating the answers, the dual histories of both animal training and behavioural science are revealing. Let us rst consider elephant training. This began in the Indus Valley at least 4000 years ago (Fleischer et al., 2001). Its origins are shrouded in legend but it is fair to say that elephants are as revered in India as horses are in other societies. Even among some non-Hindus, it is believed that Ganesh, god of wisdom and enlightenment, gave the elephant to humankind to serve, so the animal had to be made submissive (Barkath, 1974). It seems likely that human attitudes and behaviour that emerge from this belief form the core of the problem of elephant aggression throughout Asia. As part of their early training, tethered or entrapped elephants are beaten until they succumb to human will (habituation) (Bradshaw, 2009). This recipe for various levels of learned helplessness is believed by some researchers to be responsible for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), which causes affected animals to attack sometime later when triggered by stress or sudden noise (Bradshaw, 2009).

E-mail address: andrewmclean@aebc.com.au 1090-0233/$ - see front matter 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tvjl.2012.10.031

Horse owners in the West are often afuent and many have relatively easy access to scientic information, whereas elephant handlers and riders (mahouts) in Asia are frequently among the least afuent members of their communities. In Nepal, for example, mahouts are uneducated and live on the poverty line, being typically of lower ranking castes. For them, scientic information is not only difcult to access, but there are no role models or precedents to inspire them to do so. Elephant handlers can therefore be forgiven for being slow to adopt learning theory, but at least they will often try new methods - sometimes indeed more readily than many Western horse trainers. It is, of course, fully understandable that cultural and spiritual reasons might inhibit Asians from adopting learning theory, but in the developed world, resistance to scientic explanations of horse training is more surprising. When we consider that winners of horse races, Olympic medals and high-stakes performance competitions stand to benet substantially from a thorough understanding of equine cognition and biomechanics (and particularly from their interaction) it is astonishing that there is still such resistance to engagement. Research shows that, unlike dog trainers, there is a dearth of understanding for learning theory among todays accredited riding coaches (Warren-Smith and McGreevy, 2008). The reasons for this are complex, but exploring the origins and development of equitation is illuminating. Traditional approaches to horse training have evolved over the 5000 years of equine domestication through the tried and tested laboratories of battleeld and crop-eld (Levine, 2005). Indispensable in both war and agriculture, horses gained iconic status, ourishing in European art and architecture (Freeman, 2004). This status facilitated the way in which horses were described. Equine

Please cite this article in press as: McLean, A.N. Training the ridden animal: An ancient hall of mirrors. The Veterinary Journal (2012), http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1016/j.tvjl.2012.10.031

A.N. McLean / The Veterinary Journal xxx (2012) xxxxxx

cognition is traditionally interpreted (understandably if unscientifically) in anthropocentric words, such as benevolence, malevolence, understanding, knowledge, projection, retrospection, guilt, remorse, willingness, laziness and stubbornness. In addition, horses are inevitably credited with human personality disorders and may be described with adjectives such as crazy, erratic, dgety, psychotic, pushy, chicken-hearted or mean. As a result of their war service, they are similarly credited, like human war heroes, with descriptors such as loyal, brave, bold and resilient. Traditional explanations of fearful behaviour that focus on a horses character rather than on its behaviour also abound. A horse might be described as hating certain places (e.g. sheds, stables and trailers), environmental objects/features, aerosols, clippers, veterinarians, farriers, even other horses when ridden (horse-shyness). Some notion of dominance is also characteristic of traditional horsemanship and this has led to the belief that horses must be submissive to the will of humans (McGreevy and McLean, 2010; German National Equestrian Federation, 1997). In the last century, the discoveries of Lorenz, Leyhausen and Tinbergen provided more pragmatic explanations for animal behaviour (Hothersall, 2004), but the greatest prize to animal training was the revelation of social hierarchies in social animals, famously yet perhaps too simplistically described by SchelderupEbbe in 1921 (Sparks, 1982; Hothersall, 2004). Animal hierarchies were to some extent portrayed as gments of the human ideal of organized society expressed in the military, the Church, the workplace, the home, the hospital and the school. These institutions reinforced the notion of rigid hierarchies, sometimes even maintained by ritualized aggression, where individuals were relegated to their rightful places. In these human hierarchies, rank meant respect and submission in all interactions. In animal hierarchies, this is not the case. In wolves, and later on in horses, the rigidity and simplicity of the human notion of hierarchy were to be heavily scrutinized (Packard, 2003). However, horse and dog trainers enthusiastically embraced this early humanistic view of ethology to justify and explain their interactions with their animals. Notions of submission, dominance and respect, and later leadership, were nourished and applied to horses and dogs. New-Age horse whisperers ran with this neat, yet erroneous construction. Horse learning and cognition were universally described in terms of social hierarchies (Parelli, 1995; German National Equestrian Federation, 1997; Hinnemann and van Baalen, 2003). Novel character descriptors ourished and horses were described as being an alpha dominant, submissive, respectful, disrespectful, and before long, the idea of the horse as leader came into parlance (Roberts, 2000). The horse as leader arose from an erroneous analogy to its wild counterpart where it was believed that the rst horse to go to water, or to run away, or to make herd decisions was the permanent leader of the herd rather than a resource motivated animal again a very human view. The belief was that effective horse training required the horse to perceive the human as a leader, and thus, once the horse recognized the postural and behavioural signs of the human as leader, he was rendered submissive and willing to do what was asked of him. In this way the focus shifted from the horses character to the trainers character and failed to acknowledge the more parsimonious view that the humans role in training is simply to consistently reinforce desirable behaviours. The tools developed in New-Age training styles were somewhat sophisticated, although all prioritised submission of the horse. In this way horse-training became a mirror of the development of elephant training, possibly indicating a human motivation by hierarchy. As more understanding of ethology emerged, learning theory was simultaneously and independently developed in the USA. Behaviourists such as Thorndike, Watson, and later Skinner

(Sparks, 1982), showed that inherited ethograms could be modied and that behaviours were the product of reinforcement (Hothersall, 2004). They claimed that the use of learning theory could turn a peasant into a lawyer and so, using this new behavioural technology, zoos, aquaria and other animal collections ourished. Positive reinforcement was further elaborated into secondary positive reinforcement where whistles and clickers were used so that animals could receive delayed food rewards during training. Negative reinforcement explained the efcacy of the use of the reins and the riders legs as well as leadrein pressures, while classical conditioning revealed the acquisition of voice signals and signals from the riders seat. Punishment, both positive and negative, explained why animals would cease behaviours when trainers added (positive) unpleasant stimuli or removed (negative) pleasant ones. Finally, the concept of shaping gave a clear blueprint for progressively building behaviours by adding and consolidating just one behavioural component at time (Skinner, 1971). The development of learning theory provided a theoretical framework for behaviour modication in animals and humans. Skinner (1971) saw this as a paradigm shift where behaviour modication was not simply the art of the good teacher, but a technology that could be learned. While zoos were quick to utilize this new approach (Sparks, 1982), the equestrian world saw horse training as being somehow different. Horses, it seemed, occupied a deeper place in the human psyche, perhaps reecting tradition, iconic status, mythology or simply humanitys love for the horse. The notion of the benevolent willing horse that sought to repay the human for his love, work and husbandry remained an intransigent obstacle. Horsemen were stuck with traditional descriptors and a transformational view of hierarchy that apparently informed the horsehuman dyad (McGreevy et al., 2009). They needed more time to see advantages in the efciency and safety offered by behaviourism, but time was running out. After World War II, science enjoyed spectacular success, riding a wave of unforeseen and exponential consumerism. Chemical and pharmaceutical companies experienced unparalleled experimentation and invention. Medical and technological advances seemed likely to solve mankinds ills and gained the condence of the Western world. Regrettably, instead of riding sciences wave of success, behaviourism took a premature tumble from grace. For many reasons (not least for a lack of scientic method) it was disparaged and ultimately shelved. On the scientic front, behaviourists were perceived as making outlandish claims that virtually any behaviour could be trained in any animal or person, irrespective of species-specic behaviours or other constraints (Hothersall, 2004). But the impetus for a more general decline in popular regard for science possibly ran deeper. In the 1960s the Western worlds condence in science was severely shaken. With the Cuban missile crisis and similar events, people suddenly faced the spectre of mass destruction as an indirect result of the lauded splitting of the atom. Women innocently taking thalidomide for morning sickness gave birth to children with developmental blood vessel inhibition and consequent limb abnormalities. Many parts of Asia, USA, Africa and Australia were heavily sprayed with dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane (DDT) to eliminate mosquitoes and other vector-carrying arthropods, until the deleterious and cumulative effects of organochlorine compounds on food webs were revealed (Carson, 1962). The decline of behaviourism was dramatic. By the mid-1970s, US research and research funding turned away from behaviourism and the notion that behaviours could be explained by reinforcement and the prevailing StimulusResponse model (Hothersall, 2004). Cognitive psychology was embraced with its less rigorous yet more holistic and populist terms of reference where behaviours

Please cite this article in press as: McLean, A.N. Training the ridden animal: An ancient hall of mirrors. The Veterinary Journal (2012), http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1016/j.tvjl.2012.10.031

A.N. McLean / The Veterinary Journal xxx (2012) xxxxxx

were considered to be motivated by less measurable variables, such as thoughts and feelings (Hothersall, 2004). The rigours of behaviourism had previously placed it solidly in the sciences, but psychology was increasingly (and uncomfortably) re-homed in the humanities. Behaviourisms demise meant that New-Age horse trainers in the 1970s looked to ethology for explanations and justication of their practices. The rejection of behaviourism was apparent in early texts on horse behaviour, which were heavily inuenced by ethology. Despite the great benets to horse management, the training and effective handling of the ridden animal beneted little from the purely ethological discourse (McGreevy and McLean, 2007). Nevertheless, following a cautious start in the 1980s, behaviourism was gradually resurrected. In humans, evidencebased behaviourist therapies, such as Cognitive Behaviour Therapy, began once again to attract scientic interest and government funding. Equitation science also offered an evidence-based learning-theory approach to horse training and has been shown to be sustainable and ethical as it is centred on extant learning abilities in animals (McGreevy, 2007). The uptake of equitation science has been enthusiastic among a few scientists and veterinarians. Annual conferences of the International Society for Equitation Science have now produced over 600 abstracts that are posted online.1 Unfortunately, horse owners and trainers, coaches and national equestrian federations, and equine veterinarians have been slower and sometimes resistant to change and the intertwined traditional and New-Age legacy still prevails strongly. The solution is education, and veterinary scientists have a major role to play here. Veterinarians should avoid the trappings of traditional descriptors and empirical treatments, and look beyond the limiting and narrow effects of social dominance models to see horse behaviour for what it is, rather than what traditionalists may believe or think it is. It is necessary to focus on the horses behaviour signs and symptoms rather than on subjective interpretations of the horses character, since subjective notions leave the clinician empty-handed, with imprecise tools or, worse, with no tools, for changing the behaviour. When confronted with a particular behavioural challenge, the clinician will ask, What has reinforced this behaviour? and, What part of the equid ethogram does this behaviour stem from? For example, a horse that is afraid of injections is not only displaying its ethological ight response (which can be well entrenched in just one trial) but will be moving (or attempting to move) his legs hyper-reactively. The veterinarian can choose from a number of behavioural treatment options (given adequate time). For example, he may help the owner to (1) systematically desensitize the horse to the injection, and/or (2) immobilize the horses legs through in-hand training of acceleration and deceleration responses, and/or (3) overshadow the ight response by training the horse to step forward and back from light cues while the injection is presented at sub-ooding thresholds and then gradually close the distance between the horse and injection, and/or (4) counter-condition the veterinarian as a stimulus that precedes a reward (e.g. food) (McGreevy and McLean, 2010). The stakes are high. If race trainers could be persuaded to reinforce appropriately and consolidate acceleration responses, race times would be optimized for all horses. If trainers became acquainted with the relative variables of stride length and stride speed in acceleration and race performance, race results would be optimized and whips would become obsolete and be seen, more accurately, as deleterious. If high-performance sport horses were trained using the total array of associative and non-associative

learning and reinforcement tools, performances in those domains would also be optimized. If problem behaviours in horses (often referred to as vices, resistances or evasions) were seen as dysfunctions negative reinforcement, and the implications of conicting stimuli were to be subsequently recognized, positive welfare outcomes for leisure and sport horses would follow. In addition, high wastage rates of horses (as well as human deaths and injuries) would fall (McGreevy and McLean, 2010). If learning theory were to be systematically incorporated into elephant training there should be a corresponding decrease in the death rates of mahouts (currently there is at least one death per month in the Kerala region of India alone) (V. Menon, Wildlife Trust of India, personal communication). Work in Nepal and India has shown that elephants trained by the correct use of associative and non-associative learning become reliable and safe in their various jobs (which include National Park surveillance2). The Nepalese government has voted for an implementation of scientic training across Nepal. It is commendable that one of the poorest countries in the world is pioneering a government initiative to promote ethical animal training. A systematic application of learning theory offers the possibility of signicant improvements in welfare and dramatic increases in rider and handler safety (McGreevy and McLean, 2010). The emerging discipline of equitation science has the potential to lead animal training from the anthropocentric hall of mirrors that it currently occupies and into a golden age for the training of riding animals.

Acknowledgements I am grateful to Professor Paul McGreevy and Ms. Lynn Cole for their help with the manuscript.

References
Barkath, S., 1974. Hastividya rnava. Treatise Compiled by the Publication Board of Assam, pp. 08. Bradshaw, G., 2009. Inside looking out: Neuroethological compromise effects of elephants in captivity. In: Forthman, D.L., Kane, L.F., Hancocks, D., Waldau, P.F. (Eds.), An Elephant in the Room. Tufts Centre for Animal Policy, Massachusetts, p. 58. Carson, R., 1962. Silent Spring. Harcourt, Houghton Mifin, pp. 225275. Fleischer, R.C., Perry, E.A., Muralidharan, K., Stevens, E.E., Wemmer, C.M., 2001. Phylogeography of the Asian elephant (Elephas maximus) based on mitochondrial DNA. Evolution 55, 18821892. Freeman, C., 2004. The Horses of St Marks. Little Brown, London, p. 12. German National Equestrian Federation, 1997. The Principles of Riding The Ofcial Instruction Handbook of the German National Equestrian Federation. Kenilworth, UK, p. 11. Hinnemann, J., van Baalen, C., 2003. The Simplicity of Dressage. J.A. Allen and Co. Ltd., London, p. 29. Hothersall, D., 2004. History of Psychology, Fourth Ed. McGraw-Hill, New York, pp. 512513. Levine, M.A., 2005. Domestication and early history of the horse. In: Mills, D.S., McDonnell, S.M. (Eds.), The Domestic Horse. The Origins, Development, and Management of its Behavior. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, pp. 522. McGreevy, P.D., 2007. The advent of equitation science. The Veterinary Journal 174, 492500. McGreevy, P.D., McLean, A.N., 2007. The roles of learning theory and ethology in equitation. Journal of Veterinary Behavior: Clinical Applications and Research 2, 108118. McGreevy, P.D., McLean, A., 2010. Ethical equitation. Ethical equitation: Capping the price horses pay for human glory. Journal of Veterinary Behavior 5, 203 209. McGreevy, P.D., Oddie, C., Burton, F.L., McLean, A.N., 2009. The horsehuman dyad: Can we align horse training and handling activities with the equid social ethogram? The Veterinary Journal 181, 1218. Packard, J.M., 2003. Wolf behavior: Reproductive, social, and intelligent. In: Mech, D., Boitani, L. (Eds.), Wolves: Behavior, Ecology, and Conservation. University of Chicago Press, pp. 3565.
2

See www.equitationscience.com. Accessed 21 September 2012.

See http://www.h-elp.org/. Accessed 10 October, 2012.

Please cite this article in press as: McLean, A.N. Training the ridden animal: An ancient hall of mirrors. The Veterinary Journal (2012), http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1016/j.tvjl.2012.10.031

A.N. McLean / The Veterinary Journal xxx (2012) xxxxxx Sparks, J., 1982. The Discovery of Animal Behaviour. Collins, London, UK, pp. 150 166, 226230. Warren-Smith, A.K., McGreevy, P.D., 2008. Equestrian coaches understanding and application of learning theory in horse training. Anthrozos 21, 153162.

Parelli, P., 1995. Natural Horsemanship. Western Horseman, Colorado Springs, USA, pp. 24. Roberts, M., 2000. Join-Up: Horse Sense for People. Harper Collins, London, p. 63. Skinner, B.F., 1971. Beyond Freedom and Dignity. Hackett Publishing, Indianapolis, USA, pp. 1743, 145183.

Please cite this article in press as: McLean, A.N. Training the ridden animal: An ancient hall of mirrors. The Veterinary Journal (2012), http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1016/j.tvjl.2012.10.031