Ditch the Dominance

This article is interesting and adds to the debate about dominance based training or even those based on leadership concepts.

Don’t Be So Dominant During Training – The Horse

“The “alpha” concept of showing dominance when training a horse doesn’t coincide with what equitation science research is revealing, scientists say.”
thehorse.com

This is the original research – http://www.j-evs.com/article/S0737-0806(17)30005-9/fulltext

Quote – Highlights

“It is unlikely that horse–horse social status translates to analogues of human–horse interactions.
The concept of leadership as advocated in many training manuals proves to be unreliable in the horse.
Horses’ responses to training are more likely a result of reinforcement rather than a result of humans attaining high social status and a leadership role.
Knowledge of horses’ natural behavior and learning capacities are more reliable in explaining training outcomes than the application of dominance and leadership concepts.”

So it can be seen that we need a good understanding of equine ethology and learning theory as it relates to training horses.

Horsemanship

Horsemanship

The art and skill of a horseman, the ability to ride a horse. These are some of the definitions of the word horsemanship.

So anyone who rides or trains, (we all train horses whether we know it or not, as they learn something from every interaction with humans), is a horseman and practices horsemanship.

We live in an age of rapid communication via social media, emails and the internet. People often want rapid results with their horses but that is not always good for the horses mental and physical well-being.

People can start a young horse in 2 0r 3 weeks, but that does that make it fair and ethical?

I think it is time to stop differentiating between genres of horsemanship. For centuries horses have been trained via the use of pressure and often force. It is a testament to the nature of the horse that they allow us weak humans to train them.

All the horse wants is food, water, safety, equine friends, to be allowed to be a horse in a natural environment. These are things the horse seeks for himself – they are primary reinforcers.

We now have a code for animal welfare – the 5 freedoms which we can apply to horse management and training.

Whips, sticks, spurs and any other man made artefacts are artificial aids.

If we use the natural aids of legs, hands and weight is it better?

It depends how they are taught and how the horse perceives them.

I don’t intend to go in to the pros and cons of various methods as I think there is no need for following one particular genre of horsemanship. All animals learn by associations and consequences.

Horsemanship is both an art and a science. It is up to each practitioner to understand the science so they can practice the art.

If a trainer is happy to use negative reinforcement and then escalate when the horse doesn’t comply then it is an individual decision. No amount of anyone preaching that it is physically and psychological unethical will change peoples opinions. They have to come to the realisation for themselves.

My stance is that if people use negative reinforcement it must be the lightest amount of pressure and an instant release once the behaviour is performed. Plus a very specific command put in place so the horse learns he can avoid the pressure by performing the required behaviour. This is avoidance learning and the foundation of many horsemanship programs – unfortunately people often don’t learn correctly and escalate the pressure to force the horse to comply. Or they nag the horse with legs and whips but never release – often seen in traditional riding.

If the horse doesn’t understand what you have asked you have either not been clear or the horse physically cannot do the behaviour.

If we keep asking with escalating aversive stimuli then we may damage our relationship with the horse – we become part of that aversive stimulus. So often a horse stays when he could physically leave because leaving will be “corrected”. Watch videos and decide why horses perform so well at liberty – is it because the trainer gives them something they want or because there will be aversive consequences for the horse if he leaves.

Change is happening as more people use positive reinforcement, many only for ground work but an increasing number are teaching classical riding using nothing more than a click/bridge signal and an appetitive reinforcer.

Whatever trainers use to motivate the horse it must be applied correctly, the removal of an aversive stimulus or the use of a verbal bridge signal must be at the instant the horse performs the desired behaviour.

Not all pressure/touch is aversive so we can use the minimal touch to guide a horse and add an appetitive reinforcer, the horse decides which is the most salient.

What people need to learn is the correct use of reinforcement, whether negative or positive and the importance of being observant of the horses body language. Unfortunately not all practitioners are good at the timing, both negative and positive reinforcement need good timing, otherwise horses may be reinforced for the incorrect behaviour.

We do the best with the knowledge we have at this moment in time and my aim is to learn as much as possible about how horses learn and how different training affects their emotional state.

Defintiions

Aversive – Causing avoidance of a thing, situation, or behavior by using an unpleasant or punishing stimulus, as in techniques of behavior modification. (http://www.thefreedictionary.com/aversive)

Appetitive – 1. An instinctive physical desire, especially one for food or drink.
2. A strong wish or urge: an appetite for learning. (http://www.thefreedictionary.com/appetitive)

Conditioned Responses

So you have a nice gentle horse who doesn’t respond to your requests.  What do you do?  According to one trainer chase it round with a bag on a stick and then when the horse tries to escape smack him with the whip.
Someone I know has also heard a trainer say “smack him hard and then give his face a rub to tell him you still love him”. Oh and I was once told to “smile” whilst whacking the horse on the chin with the lead rope clip.

Yes we need to smile more whilst with our horses – it helps us relax but it does not make horse feel any better if what we do frightens them.
All those times you smack, tap or kick a horse to go forward you are initiating a startle response – even if you never hit your horse it has the same affect. Is hitting your boot or the sandschool floor or wall to startle the horse forwards any better for the horse?
Eventually you only have to pick up a whip or stick and the horse obeys – it looks like magic but it is a conditioned response.

In classical conditioning the first time the horse sees a whip or carrot stick it is a neutral unconditioned stimulus – it elicits no response. Once the whip or stick has been used as an aversive stimulus to provoke a response it becomes a predictor of the aversive so has been classically conditioned.

So the unconditioned stimulus is the whip when first seen, it is then paired with an aversive action and becomes a conditioned stimulus that elicits a conditioned response.

So the conditioned stimulus (CS) has been associated with the unconditioned stimulus (UCS) to create a new conditioned response (CR).

There are better ways to train horses, do we want our horses to be afraid to ask questions? Afraid to say no I can’t do that? Or do we want to have a horse who is not afraid to express an opinion – OK there will be some times when that opinion is unsafe but we can redirect their behaviour or teach an incompatible one. Positive reinforcement engages the horses SEEKING system and increases motivation. Counter conditioning can change their perception of scary objects or people as we pair them with an appetitive stimulus.

These articles are worth a read – especially the last part of the first article where it gives this example

“Example:  A horse misbehaves with a farrier, and the farrier hits the horse several times with his rasp.  Because this horse is very sensitive, being hit causes him a lot of pain.  In this case, being hit is an unconditioned stimulus and fear is an unconditioned response.  In the future, whenever the farrier arrives the horse feels fearful and trembles.  The farrier is now the conditioned stimulus and the horse trembling is the conditioned response.  The initial event was so traumatic for the horse that it took just one pairing of farrier and pain to create the conditioned response.”

Insert any other person in the place of farrier and you can see how easy it is to create a conditioned fear response. It takes a long time to undo a fear response like this. So it may not be your farrier who caused the problem but the horse will associate any person who looks or smells like a farrier with fear.

This is why I am spending so long counter-conditioning Mojo.

http://www.thewayofhorses.com/03_15_behavior_conditioning.html
http://www.simplypsychology.org/classical-conditioning.html

Behaviour and Emotions

Behaviour is what the animal does, so any observable action the animal takes.
Behaviour is not my horse being a “pratt” or “taking advantage” or any other label humans are so quick to use.

So how do we analyse behaviour? We look at the ABC’s of behaviour as used in behavioural analysis.
A: Antecedent

B: Behaviour

C: Consequences

P: Prediction of future occurrence of behaviour in B.

Antecedentsomething that comes before a behavior, and may trigger the behaviour.
Behaviour – what exactly is the animal doing – in terms of actual behaviour e.g biting, kicking. There may be warning signs before an actual unwanted behaviour e.g tail swishing, pinned ears or a shift in weight before a kick or a bite.
Consequence of the behaviour – is it being punished or reinforced, i.e is the behaviour increasing or decreasing.

We also need to look at the function of the behaviour. Nikolaas Tinbergen’s 4 questions are useful.
Causation/mechanism – the physiology behind the behaviour, hormones, affective neuroscience emotions. How does it contribute to the behaviour?
Function – What is the adaptive value of the behaviour. Why does it happen? Does it help survival?
Development – How does the behaviour develop over the animals lifetime?
Evolution – Why did it evolve, what is the benefit?

Plus any obvious emotions attached to the behaviour – I use Panksepps Emotional Systems, this is obviously a subjective rather than objective observation. It is still useful as we can often miss the very subtle changes in body posture the animal may exhibit.
Jaak Panksepp is a good source of learning about the 7 basic emotional systems of all mammals.

1. SEEKING – can be a positive or a negative emotion depending on whether the horse is seeking something they want or seeking to avoid something they don’t like.

2. PLAY- this is self explanatory and something we can tap into when training.

3 CARE – the mutual grooming and nurturing side of horses.

4. FEAR – can be as little as mild anxiety or a full flight response.

5. RAGE – fear can escalate into aggression or frustration if the horse can’t escape or get what he wants.

6. GRIEF or PANIC – may be seen in separation anxiety.

7. LUST – may be seen in the over arousal of clicker trained horses before impulse control is established, or in the normal behaviour of stallions and mares.

Paul Gilbert 3 Circle Model is another model that may be useful.

In Paul Gilberts 3 Circle Model – we can see that using an aversive stimulus to form a behaviour is in the THREAT circle. Panksepps would be the FEAR system, this does not have to be all out flight but aversive enough for the horse to want to avoid the stimulus.

Positive reinforcement works on the DRIVE or SEEKING system, but we can also get horse stuck in this mode too – so they get frustrated if reinforcement isn’t forthcoming or we are slow with reinforcement.

Of course we need to achieve homeostasis of the emotional systems as soon as possible by removing the aversive stimulus (if we use negative reinforcement) and also by putting the behaviour on a command – so the horse can avoid any escalation. So in any training session the horse can be in the RED zone but we need to get him back in the GREEN zone. Horses stuck in the RED zone can become hypervigilant – if the HPA axis is triggered then cortisol is released and this takes a long time to dissipate, so a little bit of adrenaline keeps them motivated but too much and it tips into distress rather than eustress. Horses in the BLUE zone (when we use positive reinforcement) can also get stuck and become frustrated and over aroused trying to figure out what will get them the appetitive reinforcement.

So for me keeping the horses under their emotional threshold is essential. As emotions and behaviour are linked and we need to look at the whole horse, so environment, husbandry, equine ethology and training all interact. E.G. The Five Freedoms of Animal Welfare.

Classical and operant conditioning are present all the time, even when we aren’t training. So the horse is learning by associations and consequences in all situations. They are not types of training or methods but scientific principles (laws) of how we all learn. There is no one size fits all recipe for training horses, horses all have their individual needs, personalities and experiences and these affect how they react. Some might find a touch with a hand pleasant whilst another may find it aversive and unpleasant.

Know the species you train (ethology) and know the individual as much as possible. This makes it much easier to keep out of the red zone and learn to recognise which zone they are in at any given moment.

Whatever we use whether +R or -R we need to understand what is happening and how we can use them for the good of the horse.

PS
What is the difference between a cue and a command?
A cue is used in +R training to tell the horse reinforcement is coming. In -R we use the word command as the horse rarely has a choice – so often it is a “to it or else” scenario, the horse performs the behaviour to avoid any escalation of an aversive stimulus.

References

James Lange  Theory of Emotions
https://www.psychologynoteshq.com/jameslangetheoryofemotion/

Paul Gilbert

http://apt.rcpsych.org/content/15/3/199


http://psychology.tools/emotional-regulation-system.html

Jaak Panksepp

http://mybrainnotes.com/fear-rage-panic.html

Physiology of Stress

http://www.simplypsychology.org/stress-biology.html

Tinbergen

http://www.reed.edu/biology/courses/BIO342/2015_syllabus/2014_WEBSITES/khsite/tinenbergen.html

Science Quotes

Negative reinforcement = removing a stimulus (first the stimulus has to be applied to form the behaviour then removed as a reinforcement). The stimulus has to be aversive otherwise the horse would enjoy it or it would be neutral and the removal would not be reinforcing.

Positive reinforcement = adding an appetitive after the behaviour has been performed (the behaviour can be formed using target training, capturing the movement or using mild tactile touch, a bridging signal is used to mark the exact time of the wanted behaviour.)

This explains what happens in some natural horsemanship programs – it may seem like magic or a deep connection with the handler but it is the laws of learning being applied – even if the handler is unaware of them.

“Contrary to NH trainers argumentation, it seems that during the “natural” training, the horse does not follow the human because it feels safe and accepts the human as a herd leader, but because the human removes aversive stimuli in response to animal’s gestures that reflect higher submissiveness to the trainer or the relaxation (e.g. lowering of the head – Rietmann et al 2004). The affiliation signals that shorten the distance may be wrongly interpreted by the human [Goodwin 1999], and recent research have shown that horse’s response to humans is context-specific and may be based on negative reinforcements rather than on the social strategy [Kruger 2007, Warren-Smith and McGreevy 2008, McGreevy at al. 2009].”

“Many papers show unambiguously that positive reinforcement is the most effective training tool [e.g. Lieberman 1993, Sankey et al. 2010, Waran 2003], although application of such stimuli only in horses are impractical [McGreevy 2007]. The positive impact of rewarding has been widely discussed and reported in scientific literature; yet, this kind of reinforcement is still unwillingly applied in equine practice based on the conviction of its negative effect on equine behaviour which undoubtedly reveals the partial ignorance of documented scientific research. It has been shown that in the process of young horse training rewarding evoked positive responses of horses to humans, which persisted during subsequent months [Sankey et al.2010]. Additionally, enhanced interest in training and improved memorisation ability were observed.
The use of positive reinforcements motivates horses to confront challenges and undertake learning, and ensures perception of training as positive interactions [Sankey et al. 2010]. This is related to activation of neurophysiological processes associated with the dopaminergic system [Jay 2003].
Moreover, expecting a reward itself produces the same effect, which is not the case when aversive stimuli are employed [Schulz et al 1997]”

Ethics

  1. 1.
    moral principles that govern a person’s behaviour or the conducting of an activity.
    synonyms: moral code, morals, morality, moral stand, moral principles, moral values, rights and wrongs, principles, ideals, creed, credo, ethos, rules of conduct, standards (of behaviour), virtues, dictates of conscience

    “the ethics of journalism”
     So what is ethical horsemanship?
    It is different for each of us, for one person it may be following a natural horsemanship program, for another it may be only training using positive reinforcement. For others it may be a combined approach – so using all quadrants of operant conditioning.
    All we can do is share what we do and not try to change other people – they will change when they are ready.
    However we do need the science behind how each quadrant works and how this impacts on equine welfare.This is a useful article – https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0168159117300710 

    Especially useful is the section on Response Prevention (Flooding).
    “Another cause of concern is that, if an animal is being restrained and exposed to uncontrollable aversion, learned helplessness may result. In this case, the animal will be apathetic and may superficially appear to tolerate the aversive stimulus, but its welfare is seriously compromised.”

    So much of what we see in main stream and even natural horsemanship circles is actually flooding, the horse on a longline being “desensitised“ to a scary object. The horse in a round pen can also be experiencing flooding – there is no escape and the only option the horse feels he has is to give in and submit to the handler. This can happen accidentally – e.g trying to clip a horse by restraint and continuing until the horse appears to be OK with the procedure. I know I have done this in the past without realising the consequences.

    So for me personally to be ethical in my horsemanship is to cause no harm to the animal, to be very aware of the emotional impact any training has. Watching for frustration, anxiety and any indicators that tell me the horse is over his emotional threshold.
    The use of positive reinforcement as much as possible at any moment in time, I may have to use negative reinforcement in situations where I have not trained a satisfactory response. So some unforeseen veterinary procedures may need the horse to be restrained – however I can counter condition this to make it easier for the horse. Other people handling the horse may use negative reinforcement e.g pressure and release, so the horse does need to know how to respond appropriately.

    So following Friedman and Fritziers Humane Hierarchy.

    image of the hierarchy of humane training

Respect

We hear a lot about “respect” in the horse training world. Especially in natural horsemanship, but what does it mean?
It is a human concept that usually dictates what behaviours we don’t want our horses to perform. So if the horse wont standstill it is deemed disrespectful etc. What happens then is that the horse is “corrected” (euphemism for punishment). This does nothing to tell the horse what to do instead.

Respect

1. a feeling of deep admiration for someone or something elicited by their qualities or achievements.
2. due regard for the feelings, wishes or rights of others.

How do these definitions fit with the view of horses needing to respect their humans? Can horses have “due regard for the feelings wishes and rights of others”?
Do they have the cognitive abilities needed to have respect?

For me it is the we humans who need to respect the horse, we can have due regard for how our horses feel when we train them.

https://www.parelli.com/resources/horse-balking.html

This link is revealing as they say if the horse doesn’t go forward we use increasing aversive stimuli, spanking first yourself and then the horse. So the horse learns to go forward to avoid the aversive stimuli – how does this instil respect?
How does that fit in with definition number 2? Do horses have no rights in our relationship? Is it “do as I say or else” suffer the consequences?

We all need to decide for ourselves what we are happy doing to our horses and often people do things to the horse rather than it being a partnership.

Does your horse have choice? Is your horse staying with you at liberty because he fears what will happen if he leaves? What happens if he doesn’t obey?

Only you can answer these questions but they do need asking.

We also need to look at the various emotional responses affected using negative and positive reinforcement.

In negative reinforcement there is always the underlying threat of an aversive, this triggers the FEAR system. It may be only mild anxiety but the emotions and accompanying neurotransmitters and hormones of fear are present. Fear does not have to be the full blown flight response – the other signs of the FEAR system are freeze, fight and fidgeting.  There are also appeasement behaviours and other signs that a horse is having problems.

In positive reinforcement we trigger the positive emotions, CARE, PLAY although done badly it can trigger RAGE in the form of frustration.

So respect is a human construct and really comes down to training what we want our horses to do.
They do what they have been reinforced for doing, so it your horses isn’t doing what you want then it is a training issue not a lack of respect. Training takes places every time we are interacting with our horses – whether grooming or feeding or walking them to and from the fields.

When using reward based training we can teach the horse what to do as an alternative behaviour, so we can teach him to station on a mat or stand at a stationary target. Once reliably performed a verbal cue “stand” or “wait” can be added. The more reinforcement history a behaviour has the stronger that behaviour becomes.
So instead to saying the horse is disrespectful think of him as being insufficiently trained.
What we wanted is a horse with good impulse control so we feel safe. Horses are large animals and can be dangerous if we don’t understand them.
They don’t instinctively know what we want them to do so we have to train for safety but without suppressing their natural curiosity.

Please ditch the term respect when talking about the horses relationship with humans as they don’t have the cognitive ability to know what “respect” is.
Instead describe what the horse is doing that you don’t like or don’t want him to do and then retrain with +R a behaviour you do want. Also remember all interactions with our horses is training – not just the formal sessions in the school.

Negative Reinforcement

Negative Reinforcement

It may well be that – at this moment in time – it is not possible to use only positive reinforcement in equine training.
If people wish to compete in mainstream equestrian events then they will need to use -R unless they retrain or train from scratch everything with +R. There may well be a time when the horse world catches up with other animal trainers in the use of +R.
It isn’t something that many positive reinforcement trainers talk about and talking about -R on some Facebooks groups gets you banned. However we must know how -R works and how it can affect the horse.
If we work on the LIMA principles of using the Least Intrusive, Minimally Aversive stimuli to train behaviour and apply behaviour modification programs then I think we are doing well.

Negative is just a mathematical notation – so subtracting something to reinforce a behaviour. Of course if we remove something the horse likes and wants that can be construed as negative punishment if the behaviour decreases, as it may well do if the horse can’t get what he wants.
 So to be reinforcing the stimuli removed must be something the horse wishes to avoid, so an aversive stimuli. The removal of the stimuli is felt as a relief to the horse and can be very light leg and rein and weight aids. So the leg is conditioned to mean forward and is reinforced by the removal of the aid.
Negative reinforcement does trigger different neurotransmitters and hormones than those triggered in positive reinforcement. Using Jaak Panksepps 7 emotional systems, that all mammals share, we can see which system is at work in any quadrant. 
So with +R we see the SEEKING system in action in a positive way – horse learn to solve problems, they are empowered to share in their learning. The PLAY system is important too as horses learn through PLAY just as other mammals do e.g human children.
So what system is -R using?
 If we use another behavioural model – Paul Gilberts 3 Circle Model – we can see that using an aversive stimulus to form a behaviour is in the THREAT circle. Panksepp would be the FEAR system, this does not have to be all out flight but aversive enough for the horse to want to avoid the stimulus.

diagram of the 3 circle model of emotional regulation

Of course we need to achieve homeostasis of the emotional systems as soon as possible by removing the aversive stimulus and also by putting the behaviour on a command – so the horse can avoid any escalation. So in any training session the horse can be in the RED zone but we need to get him back in the GREEN zone. Horse stuck in the RED zone can become hypervigilant – if the HPA axis is triggered then cortisol is released and this takes a long time to dissipate, so a little bit of adrenaline keeps them motivated but too much and it tips into distress rather than eustress.

Positive reinforcement works on the DRIVE or SEEKING system, but we can also get horse stuck in this mode too – so they get frustrated if reinforcement isn’t forthcoming or we are slow with reinforcement.
 Whatever we use whether +R or -R we need to understand what is happening and how we can use them for the good of the horse.

Difference between a cue and a command?
A cue is used in +R training to tell the horse reinforcement is coming. In -R we use the word command as the horse rarely has a choice – so often it is a “to it or else” scenario, the horse performs the behaviour to avoid any escalation of an aversive stimulus.

References.
Paul Gilbert  http://mi-psych.com.au/your-brains-3-emotion-regulation-systems/



Jaak Panksepp http://mybrainnotes.com/fear-rage-panic.html

HPA axis      https://www.integrativepro.com/Resources/Integrative-Blog/2016/The-HPA-Axis