Advertisement

Animal Cognition

, Volume 21, Issue 3, pp 441–446 | Cite as

Domestic horses (Equus ferus caballus) fail to intuitively reason about object properties like solidity and weight

  • Sarah Haemmerli
  • Corinne Thill
  • Federica Amici
  • Trix Cacchione
Short Communication

Abstract

From early infancy, humans reason about the external world in terms of identifiable, solid, cohesive objects persisting in space and time. This is one of the most fundamental human skills, which may be part of our innate conception of object properties. Although object permanence has been extensively studied across a variety of taxa, little is known about how non-human animals reason about other object properties. In this study, we therefore tested how domestic horses (Equus ferus caballus) intuitively reason about object properties like solidity and height, to locate hidden food. Horses were allowed to look for a food reward behind two opaque screens, only one of which had either the proper height or inclination to hide food rewards. Our results suggest that horses could not intuitively reason about physical object properties, but rather learned to select the screen with the proper height or inclination from the second set of 5 trials.

Keywords

Object properties Animal cognition Object permanence Solidity Core knowledge 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All applicable international, national and/or institutional guidelines for the care and use of animals were followed.

Supplementary material

10071_2018_1177_MOESM1_ESM.docx (32 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 32 kb)
10071_2018_1177_MOESM2_ESM.wmv (12.4 mb)
Supplementary material 2 (WMV 12694 kb)

References

  1. Aguiar A, Baillargeon R (1999) Perseveration and problem solving in infancy. Adv Child Dev Behav 27:135–180CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Aguiar ACA, Baillargeon R (2002) Developments in young infants’ reasoning about occluded objects. Cogn Psychol 45:267–336CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. Albiach-Serrano A, Bräuer J, Cacchione T, Zickert N, Amici F (2012) The effect of domestication and ontogeny in swine cognition (Sus scrofa scrofa and S. s. domestica). Appl Anim Behav Sci 141:25–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baillargeon R (1987) Object permanence in 3½- and 4½-month-old infants. Dev Psychol 23:655–664CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Baillargeon R (1995) Physical reasoning in infancy. In: Gazzaniga MS (ed) The cognitive neurosciences. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 181–204Google Scholar
  6. Baillargeon R, Devos J (1991) Object permanence in young infants: further evidence. Child Dev 62:1227–1246CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Baillargeon R, Spelke ES, Wasserman S (1985) Object permanence in five-month-old infants. Cognition 20:191–208CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Baragli P, Vitale V, Paoletti E, Mengoli M, Sighieri C (2011) Encoding the object position for assessment of short term spatial memory in horses (Equus caballus). Int J Comp Psychol 24:284–291Google Scholar
  9. Brubaker L, Udell MA (2016) Cognition and learning in horses (Equus caballus): what we know and why we should ask more. Behav Process 126:121–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cacchione T, Call J (2010) Do gorillas (Gorilla gorilla) and orangutans (Pongo pygmaeus) fail to represent objects in the context of cohesion violations? Cognition 116:193–203CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Cacchione T, Rakoczy H (2017) Comparative metaphysics: thinking about objects in space and time. In: Call J (ed) Handbook of comparative psychology. American Psychological Association, Washington, pp 579–599Google Scholar
  12. Call J (2007) Apes know that hidden objects can affect the orientation of other objects. Cognition 105:1–25CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Chiandetti C, Vallortigara G (2011) Intuitive physical reasoning about occluded objects by inexperienced chicks. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 278:2621–2627CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hanggi EB (2003) Discrimination learning based on relative size concepts in horses (Equus caballus). Appl Anim Behav Sci 83:201–213CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hanggi EB, Ingersoll JF (2009) Long-term memory for categories and concepts in horses (Equus caballus). Anim Cogn 12:451–462CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Hespos S, Baillargeon R (2006) Décalage in infants’ knowledge about occlusion and containment events: converging evidence from action tasks. Cognition 99:31–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kellman PJ, Spelke ES (1983) Perception of partly occluded objects in infancy. Cogn Psychol 15:483–524CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Kundey SMA, Reyes ADL, Taglang C, Baruch A, German R (2010) Domesticated dogs’ (Canis familiaris) use of the solidity principle. Anim Cogn 13:497–505CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Mclean AN (2004) Short-term spatial memory in the domestic horse. Appl Anim Behav Sci 85:93–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Murphy J, Arkins S (2007) Equine learning behaviour. Behav Process 76:1–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Osthaus B, Proops L, Hocking I, Burden F (2013) Spatial cognition and perseveration by horses, donkeys and mules in a simple A-not-B detour task. Anim Cogn 16:301–305CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Pattison KF, Miller HC, Rayburn-Reeves R, Zentall T (2010) The case of the disappearing bone: dogs’ understanding of the physical properties of objects. Behav Process 85:278–282CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. R Core Team (2016) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, AustriaGoogle Scholar
  24. Rakoczy H (2015) Comparative metaphysics: the development of representing natural and normative regularities in human and non-human primates. Phenomenol Cogn Sci 14:683–697CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Rochais C, Fureix C, Lesimple C, Hausberger M (2016) Lower attention to daily environment: a novel cue for detecting chronic horses’ back pain? Sci Rep 6:20117CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  26. Santos LR, Hauser MD (2002) A non-human primate’s understanding of solidity: dissociations between seeing and acting. Dev Sci 5:1–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Spelke ES (1990) Principles of object perception. Cogn Sci 14:29–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Spelke ES, Breinlinger K, Macomber J, Jacobson K (1992) Origins of knowledge. Psychol Rev 99:605–632CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Wilcox T, Nadel L, Rosser R (1996) Location memory in healthy preterm and full-term infants. Infant Behav Dev 19:309–323CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Developmental and Comparative Psychology, Institute of PsychologyUniversity of BernBernSwitzerland
  2. 2.Junior Research Group “Primate Kin Selection”, Department of PrimatologyMax Planck Institute for Evolutionary AnthropologyLeipzigGermany
  3. 3.Institute of Biology, Faculty of Life ScienceUniversity of LeipzigLeipzigGermany
  4. 4.Pädagogische HochschuleUniversity of Applied Sciences Northwestern SwitzerlandWindischSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations