Animal Cognition

, Volume 19, Issue 3, pp 451–458 | Cite as

Informed horses are influential in group movements, but they may avoid leading

  • Julie Andrieu
  • Séverine Henry
  • Martine Hausberger
  • Bernard Thierry
Original Paper


In species that move in cohesive groups, animals generally reach decisions through socially distributed processes, and individual knowledge is expected to influence collective decision making. Pooling of information should not be considered a general rule, however, since conflicts of interest may occur between group members. When resources are limited or highly attractive, higher-ranking individuals can prevent others from accessing food, and subordinates may have an interest in withholding information about its location. We investigated the role individual knowledge may play in recruitment processes in four groups of horses (Equus caballus). Animals were repeatedly released in a food search situation, in which one individual had been informed about the location of a preferred food, while another was a naïve control subject. Horses that were informed about the location of the feeding site were seen to approach the food source more steadily and were followed by a higher number of group members than their uninformed counterparts. Recruitment processes appeared mostly passive. Among the informed subjects, lower-ranking individuals were overall less followed than the higher-ranking ones. Most lower-ranking horses arrived alone at the feeding site. Non-followed informed subjects spent less time in active walk and used direct paths less frequently than followed animals, and they were joined by fewer partners at the attractive food source and spent more time feeding alone. This indicates that the influence of informed individuals on the behavior of other group members was a mixed process. Some horses brought nutritional benefits to their conspecifics by leading them to food supplies, whereas the behavior of others might be functionally deceptive.


Information Deception Recruitment Collective movement Social cognition Equus caballus 



We would like to thank Louis Menier and l’Élevage Kergane (Saint-Brieuc-de-Mauron) as well as Martine Clerc and Mireille Dumond at the Écurie Terre d’Illich (Mériadec, Plumergat) for their logistical and practical support. We are grateful to Hélène Thieltges for her valuable assistance in experiments. The study benefited from financial support from the Groupement de Recherche d’Ethologie (GDR 2822). The experiments complied with the current French laws governing animal research.


  1. Albers P (2001) Elo-rating as a tool in the sequential estimation of dominance strengths. Anim Behav 61:489–495CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baragli P, Vitale V, Paoletti E, Sighieri C, Reddon AR (2011) Detour behaviour in horses (Equus caballus). J Ethol 29:227–234CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Benjamini Y, Hochberg Y (1995) Controlling the false discovery rate: a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. J Roy Stat Soc B 57:289–300Google Scholar
  4. Biro D, Sumpter DJT, Meade J, Guilford T (2006) From compromise to leadership in pigeon homing. Curr Biol 16:2123–2128CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Bourjade M, Thierry B, Maumy M, Petit O (2009) Decision-making in Przewalski horses (Equus ferus przewalskii) is driven by the ecological contexts of collective movements. Ethology 115:321–330CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bourjade M, Thierry B, Hausberger M, Petit O (2015) Is leadership a reliable concept in animals? An empirical study in the horse. PLoS ONE 10:e0126344CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. Briard L, Dorn C, Petit O (2015) Personality and affinities play a key role in the organisation of collective movements in a group of domestic horses. Ethology 121:888–902CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chauvin C, Thierry B (2005) Tonkean macaques orient their food search from olfactory cues conveyed by group mates. Ethology 111:1–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Conradt L, Roper TJ (2005) Consensus decision-making in animals. Trends Ecol Evol 20:449–456CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Coussi-Korbel S (1994) Learning to outwit a competitor in mangabeys (Cercocebus torquatus torquatus). J Comp Psychol 108:164–171CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Couzin ID, Krause J (2003) Self-organization and collective behavior in vertebrates. Adv Stud Behav 32:1–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Couzin ID, Krause J, Franks NR, Levin SA (2005) Effective leadership and decision-making in animal groups on the move. Nature 433:513–516CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Ducoing AM, Thierry B (2003) Withholding information in semifree-ranging Tonkean macaques (Macaca tonkeana). J Comp Psychol 117:67–75CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Ducoing AM, Thierry B (2004) Following and joining the informed individual in semifree-ranging Tonkean macaques (Macaca tonkeana). J Comp Psychol 118:413–420CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Elo AE (1978) The rating of chess players, past and present. Arco Pub, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  16. Feh C (2005) Relationships and communication in socially natural horse herds. In: Mills DS, McDonnell SM (eds) The domestic horse: the origins, development and management of its behavior. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 83–91Google Scholar
  17. Feist JD, McCullough DR (1976) Behavior patterns and communication in feral horses. Z Tierpsychol 41:337–341CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Fischoff IR, Sundaresan SR, Cordingley J, Larkin HM, Sellier MJ, Rubenstein DI (2007) Social relationship and reproductive state influence leadership roles in movements of plain zebra Equus burchellii. Anim Behav 73:825–831CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Flack A, Pettit B, Freeman R, Guilford T, Biro D (2012) What are leaders made of? The role of individual experience in determining leaderfollower relations in homing pigeons. Anim Behav 83:703–709CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Fureix C, Bourjade M, Henry C, Sankey C, Hausberger M (2012) Exploring aggression regulation in managed groups of horses Equus caballus. Appl Anim Behav Sci 138:216–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gabor G, Gerken M (2014) Shetland ponies (Equus caballus) show quantity discrimination in a matching-to-sample design. Anim Cogn 17:1233–1243CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Galef BG, Giraldeau LA (2001) Social influences on foraging in vertebrates: causal mechanisms and adaptive functions. Anim Behav 61:3–15CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Galef BG, Stein M (1985) Demonstrator influence on observer diet preference: analyses of critical social interactions and olfactory signals. Anim Learn Behav 13:31–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hare B, Call J, Tomasello M (2001) Do chimpanzees know what conspecifics know? Anim Behav 61:139–151CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Held S, Mendl M, Devereux C, Byrne RW (2000) Social tactics of pigs in a competitive foraging task: the ‘informed forager’ paradigm. Anim Behav 59:569–576CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Krueger K, Flauger B (2011) Olfactory recognition of individual competitors by means of faeces in horse (Equus caballus). Anim Cogn 14:245–257CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Krueger K, Flauger K, Farmer K, Hemelrijk CK (2014) Movement initiation in groups of feral horses. Behav Proc 103:91–101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kummer H (1968) Social organization of hamadryas baboons. Karger, BaselGoogle Scholar
  29. Lemasson A, Boutin A, Boivin S, Blois-Heulin C, Hausberger M (2009) Horse (Equus caballus) whinnies: a source of social information. Anim Cogn 12:693–704CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Menzel EW (1974) A group of young chimpanzees in a one-acre field. In: Schrier AM, Stollnitz F (eds) Behavior of non-human primates, vol 5. Academic Press, New York, pp 83–153Google Scholar
  31. Meunier H, Deneubourg JL, Petit JL (2008) How many for dinner? Recruitment and monitoring by glances in capuchins. Primates 49:26–31CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Miklósi A, Soproni K (2006) A comparative analysis of animals’ understanding of the human pointing gesture. Anim Cogn 9:81–93CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Neumann C, Duboscq J, Dubuc C, Ginting A, Irwan AM, Agil M, Widdig A, Engelhardt A (2011) Assessing dominance hierarchies: validation and advantages of progressive evaluation with Elo-rating. Anim Behav 82:911–921CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 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
  35. Petit O, Bon R (2010) Decision-making processes: the case of collective movements. Behav Proc 84:635–647CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Pillot MH, Gautrais J, Gouello J, Michelena P, Sibbald A, Bon R (2010) Moving together: incidental leaders and naïve followers. Behav Proc 83:235–241CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Proops L, McComb K (2010) Attributing attention: the use of human-given cues by domestic horses (Equus caballus). Anim Cogn 13:197–205CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Reebs SG (2000) Can a minority of informed leaders determine the foraging movements of a fish shoal? Anim Behav 59:403–409CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Schneider G, Krueger K (2012) Third-party interventions keep social partners from exchanging affiliative interactions with others. Anim Behav 83:377–387CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Shrader AM, Kerley GIH, Kotler BP, Brown JS (2007) Social information, social feeding, and competition in group-living goats (Capra hircus). Behav Ecol 18:103–107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Sueur C, Petit O (2008) Shared or unshared consensus decision in macaques? Behav Proc 78:84–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Taylor DB, Price IR, Brown WY, Hinch GN (2011) Effects of Merino flock size, paddocks complexity and time of day on response to trained leaders. Small Rumin Res 97:35–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Townsend SW, Manser MB (2012) Functionally referential communication in mammals: the past, present and the future. Ethology 118:1–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. VanDierendonck MC, de Vries H, Schilder MBH, Colenbrander B, Þorhallsdóttir AG, Sigurjónsdóttir H (2009) Interventions in social behaviour in a herd of mares and geldings. Appl Anim Behav Sci 116:67e73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Waring GH (2003) Horse behavior. Noyes Publishing, NorwichGoogle Scholar
  46. Wathan J, McComb K (2014) The eyes and ears are visual indicators of attention in domestic horses. Curr Biol 24:R677–R679CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  47. Whiten A, Byrne RW (1988) Tactical deception in primates. Behav Brain Sci 11:233–273CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Wilkinson GS (1992) Information transfer at evening bat colonies. Anim Behav 44:501–518CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Wolff A, Hausberger M (1996) Learning and memorisation of two different tasks in horses: the effects of age, sex and sire. Appl Anim Behav Sci 46:137–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Wolter N, Pantel N, Stefanski V, Möstl E, Krueger K (2014) The role of an alpha animal in changing environmental conditions. Physiol Behav 133:236–243CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Julie Andrieu
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
  • Séverine Henry
    • 3
  • Martine Hausberger
    • 3
  • Bernard Thierry
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Centre National de la Recherche ScientifiqueDépartement Ecologie, Physiologie et EthologieStrasbourgFrance
  2. 2.Université de Strasbourg, Institut Pluridisciplinaire Hubert CurienStrasbourgFrance
  3. 3.Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Université de Rennes 1Ethologie Animale et Humaine, UMR 6552RennesFrance
  4. 4.University of Neuchâtel, Institute of BiologyNeuchâtelSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations