Horse Behavior towards Familiar and Unfamiliar Humans: Implications for Equine-Assisted Services.
Authors: Brubaker Lauren, Schroeder Katy, Sherwood Dawn, Stroud Daniel, Udell Monique A R
Journal: Animals : an open access journal from MDPI
Summary
# Editorial Summary Equine-assisted services (EAS) programmes are expanding across therapeutic settings, yet selection criteria for suitable horses remain largely intuitive rather than evidence-based. Brubaker and colleagues conducted standardised behavioural assessments on three groups of horses—those with EAS experience, those without such experience, and horses prospectively selected for EAS work—using sociability tests (human approach and interaction) and temperament evaluations (novel object, sudden noise, brushing). Surprisingly, experienced EAS horses showed no meaningful differences in sociability or most temperament measures compared with non-EAS horses, though non-experienced horses demonstrated significantly greater affiliative behaviours during brushing with both familiar handlers and unfamiliar persons. When comparing selected versus non-selected candidates, differences in temperament tests were negligible, but non-selected horses displayed notably more affiliative responses to familiar people during sociability testing—the opposite of what might be expected if current selection practices were targeting heightened human-directed sociability. The research highlights a critical gap: current EAS selection decisions appear driven by subjective assessor impressions rather than validated behavioural predictors, and horses ultimately excluded from or not progressing in EAS programmes may possess equally—or even more—desirable social characteristics. For equine professionals involved in EAS assessment or referral, these findings suggest the need for more objective, standardised evaluation frameworks and challenge assumptions that "typical" horses lack the behavioural prerequisites for therapeutic work. Whether current selection practices inadvertently favour compliance over genuine sociability warrants further investigation.
Read the full abstract on PubMed
Practical Takeaways
- •Current EAS selection practices may not be based on objectively measurable behavioral traits—consider implementing standardized behavioral testing protocols to identify suitable therapy candidates
- •Horses showing greater affiliative responses to humans were not selected for EAS work, suggesting selection criteria may inadvertently favor horses with lower social responsiveness; reassess whether current selection methods align with therapeutic program goals
- •Behavioral assessment alone does not reliably differentiate horses suitable for EAS from general riding horses; additional criteria beyond temperament testing should inform selection decisions
Key Findings
- •No significant differences found between experienced and non-experienced EAS horses in sociability measures or most temperament tests
- •Non-experienced horses showed significantly more affiliative behaviors during brushing tests with familiar and unfamiliar handlers compared to experienced horses
- •Non-selected horses demonstrated significantly more affiliative responses to familiar persons than horses selected for EAS work
- •EAS horse selection appears to rely on subjective impressions of fit rather than measurable behavioral or temperament differences from non-selected horses