An analysis of equine round pen training videos posted online: Differences between amateur and professional trainers

Abstract

Natural Horsemanship is popular among many amateur and professional trainers and as such, has been the subject of recent scientific enquiry. One method commonly adopted by Natural Horsemanship (NH) trainers is that of round pen training (RPT). RPT sessions are usually split into a series of bouts; each including two phases: chasing/flight and chasing offset/flight offset. However, NH training styles are heterogeneous. This study investigated online videos of RPT to explore the characteristics of RPT sessions and test for differences in techniques and outcomes between amateurs and professionals (the latter being defined as those with accompanying online materials that promote clinics, merchandise or a service to the public). From more than 300 candidate videos, we selected sample files for individual amateur (n = 24) and professional (n = 21) trainers. Inclusion criteria were: training at liberty in a Round Pen; more than one bout and good quality video. Sessions or portions of sessions were excluded if the trainer attached equipment, such as a lunge line, directly to the horse or the horse was saddled, mounted or ridden. The number of bouts and duration of each chasing and non-chasing phase were recorded, and the duration of each RPT session was calculated. General weighted regression analysis revealed that, when compared with amateurs, professionals showed fewer arm movements per bout (p<0.05). Poisson regression analysis showed that professionals spent more time looking up at their horses, when transitioning between gaits, than amateurs did (p<0.05). The probability of horses following the trainer was not significantly associated with amount of chasing, regardless of category. Given that, according to some practitioners, the following response is a goal of RPT, this result may prompt caution in those inclined to give chase. The horses handled by professionals showed fewer conflict behaviours (e.g. kicking, biting, stomping, head-tossing, defecating, bucking and attempting to escape), and fewer oral and head movements (e.g. head-lowering, licking and chewing) than those horses handled by amateurs Overall, these findings highlight the need for selectivity when using the internet as an educational source and the importance of trainer skill and excellent timing when using negative reinforcement in horse training.

The effect of stress and exercise on the learning performance of horses

“…In the context of this study, the stress treatment may have sensitised to the horse to the aversive characteristics of the learning task stimuli further increasing activity in the defensive neural network 95 , slowing their acquisition of the learning task. Kydd et al, 96 reported wide variability in the way this type of method is employed and that amateur trainers elicit more stress-like behaviours than professionals. The HRs reported here align with those reported in studies of professional trainers using this method 97 , 98 .…”

The Winner Takes it All: Risk Factors and Bayesian Modelling of the Probability of Success in Escaping from Big Cat Predation

“…The methodology used in this work is based on the work of Kydd et al [ 50 ], who extracted animal research data from videos available on the YouTube digital platform, as an attempt to promote research from pre-existing resources.…”

Moving toward Fear-Free Husbandry and Veterinary Care for Horses

“…Even though humans have a lengthy and close history with horses, there are frequent gaps in the owner’s/trainer’s/caregiver’s understanding of ethology, horse behaviour, and indicators of welfare [ 7 , 8 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 ]. The science behind how animals learn, how they perceive the world around them, and the way they respond to that information, is poorly understood by many amateurs and professionals who work with horses [ 8 , 12 , 16 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 ]. In instances where an owner/trainer/caregiver does have appropriate theoretical knowledge, it still does not always translate into practical application [ 8 , 11 ].…”

“…Whilst owners, riders, trainers, and caregivers frequently describe how important the relationship is between a horse and their human, the human–animal interactions (HAIs) provided are often negative experiences for the horse, with many common handling and training techniques focusing on achieving the human’s goal at the time, with limited consideration of the horse’s emotional experience [ 22 , 23 ]. Negative reinforcement and punishment-based approaches are common in horse training and handling, with the goal being to generate behaviours that the human desires, with little true choice to the horse, and limited reward for participation other than the relief from, or avoidance of, an aversive stimulus [ 11 , 12 ].…”