- Email: [email protected]
Importance of personality traits in horses to breeders and riders
Journal of Veterinary Behavior 8 (2013) 316e325
Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect
Journal of Veterinary Behavior journal homepage: www.journalvetbehavior.com
Research
Importance of personality traits in horses to breeders and riders Patricia Graf*, Uta König von Borstel, Matthias Gauly Department of Animal Sciences, University of Goettingen, Goettingen, Germany
a r t i c l e i n f o
a b s t r a c t
Article history: Received 11 July 2012 Received in revised form 21 January 2013 Accepted 12 May 2013 Available online 21 June 2013
Especially in horses, personality traits play an important role because horses’ behavior influences their quality as a riding partner. In contrast to that, no objective assessment of horses’ personality traits is available at present. Although initial efforts are made in this field, a successful implementation of behavior tests into horse performance tests depends on the acceptance of the riders and breeders. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to assess the importance of personality traits to breeders and riders as well as the degree of riders’ acceptance of a temperament test as a more objective means of assessing equine personality traits. Using a web-based survey consisting of a 41-item questionnaire, a total of 1087 competition riders (49.3%), breeders (39.0%), leisure riders (37.9%), and professional riders (8.6%) of 13 countries were recruited to participate in the survey. When asked to split 1000 Euro among the different traits listed in the breeding goal, respondents clearly assigned more weight to the personality-related character and temperament traits (least squares mean standard error; P < 0.005: V228.7 17.6) and willingness to work (V123.0 9.6) compared with performance traits, such as the quality of trot (V77.7 6.9) or show jumping (V68.0 12.3). Nevertheless, expected differences in relative weighting of traits between the different groups of riders were confirmed (e.g., character and temperament: V209.3 6.1 [leisure riders] vs. V149.7 5.4 [competition riders], P < 0.0001). When asking why personality traits are so important, the simplification of daily work with the horses (47.9%) and relationship between horse and human (44.9%) as well as a more comfortable and safer handling (31.5%) were most commonly listed. As much as 45.6% of all participants see quality problems with the current assessment and suggested the evaluation of all breeding animals (30.1%), followed by a better standardization of assessment procedures (25.5%) and a move to more objective criteria such as the introduction of a temperament test (20.3%) for solving the problems. The present survey revealed that behavior traits are very important to all groups of riders and breeders, although there are diverse opinions about it. According to the participants, there is a need for and a high potential in the move toward more objective assessment methods of horses’ personality traits, and participants would support a restructuring of the current assessment. Ó 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Keywords: survey personality temperament horse rider breeder
Introduction Behavior traits are of increasing importance in animal breeding. In dogs, extensive research is conducted in this area (e.g., Jones and Gosling, 2005; Dowling-Guyer et al., 2011) because behavior tests for shelter dogs are obligatory in different countries. Also with regard to livestock, consumers develop a growing awareness of animal welfare (Harper and Makatouni, 2002), which leads to alternative housing systems, where the social behavior of the
* Address for reprint requests and correspondence: Patricia Graf, Department of Animal Sciences, University of Goettingen, Albrecht-Thaer-Weg 3, 37075 Goettingen, Germany. Tel: þ49-551-39-5612; Fax: þ49-551-39-5587. E-mail address: [email protected] (P. Graf). 1558-7878/$ e see front matter Ó 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jveb.2013.05.006
animals is more important (e.g., group housing of sows). Therefore, measures such as the development and implementation of temperament test into breeding programs (e.g., Hoppe et al., 2010; Tönepöhl et al., 2012) are undertaken to allow for genetic selection of animals better adapted to such environments. Especially in horses, behavior traits play an important role, even if the background is different. Equestrian sports are one of the most popular sports in Germany, with 1.24 million athletes, 7694 riding clubs (FN, 2011), and overall 8.74 million people interested in horses (Ipsos, 2001). However, more than two-third of these horsemen do not participate in competitions but ride for leisure (Ipsos, 2001). These riders often are inexperienced with horses, and therefore, temperament and personality are important characteristics for them. In contrast to this, most breeders want to produce horses for high-performance sport (Tietze, 2004; Couzy and Godet, 2010).
P. Graf et al. / Journal of Veterinary Behavior 8 (2013) 316e325
For this reason, breeders primarily select for performance traits and less on temperament, personality, and health. Therefore, the needs of the leisure riders are hardly taken into account (Gille and Spiller, 2010). However, also from an economic point of view, selection on temperament and personality is profitable. Some studies showed that riders are willing to pay more for a horse that was tested for temperament traits (Graf et al., 2013) and shows balanced temperament (Teegen et al., 2008; Gille and Spiller, 2010). Accordingly, special programs and marketing concepts for horses with tested personality or temperament in particular become more and more popular (Christmann, 2005). To take the wishes of the riders and horse buyers into account, it is necessary to implement more objective assessment methods for personality traits into horse breeding and selection programs. Therefore, initial efforts for developing temperament or personality tests are made in different countries (e.g., Burger et al., 2007; Górecka-Bruzda et al., 2011; König von Borstel et al., 2011). This is necessary because of a lack of objective guidelines of the today’s temperament and personality assessment in riding horses (Pasing et al., 2011). The current assessment takes place during performance tests on station for stallions and mares, where 5% of the horses per birth cohort are tested (FN, 2011). This assessment, however, is characterized by high means and low standard deviations (SDs) (8.2 0.8) in Germany (Pasing and König von Borstel, 2012). On the basis of this information, no efficient selection can be made. To assess how important personality traits for sport riders, leisure riders, and breeders are, this survey was designed. Personality in this case is defined according to Allport (1937). Temperament is considered as one component of personality. Also the acceptance of temperament and personality tests in performance tests of horses as well as the current knowledge about it was queried. This is an important point for a successful implementation of a temperament test, and therefore, it is important for future research projects in this sector.
Table 1 Question number (NR), questions, question type, number of categories (NC), reference to questions (RQ), and additional information (AI) regarding the type of answer categories (ORC ¼ others with respondent-defined categories; MAP ¼ multiple answers; CN ¼ country name) Part NR Questions
Type
A
Predetermined Open field Open field Open field
12 13 B
C
D
Questionnaire design
a leisure rider cannot be a competition rider the same time, competition riders ride a minimum of 1 competition per year, and professional riders can also be competition riders.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Materials and methods
The questionnaire consisted of 6 parts (A-F) with 41 questions (Table 1). A copy of the questionnaire is available on request from the corresponding author. Part A collected general information of the participants and their relationship to horses. Evaluation of riding horses and purchase decisions were required in part B. Part C contained questions about the judgment of nature and behavior of horses. In part D, general information and definitions of the traits of the horses’ personality were requested, whereas part E gathered information about the assessment of these traits. The last part (F) comprised general questions. Question 16 requests the weighting of different traits of the breeding goal and was developed according to Teegen et al. (2008) to allow for a direct comparison of responses between different groups of practitioners. The different traits of the breeding goal used in this question are characterized in Table 2. The survey was available in German and English. Most questions were semiclosed with predetermined categories and an empty field to enter other respondent-defined categories and answers. Answers to the open questions were categorized by terms that the participants answered. The characterization of the different horsemen groups where the participants can give multiple answers was done in the following ways:
317
E
F
Type of involved with horses Horse-show participation Foals per year Number of years working with horses Riding or breeding discipline Ownership of a horse If yes, number of horses If yes, breed of the horse If no, which horses are used Breed of the horses Weekly time spend with horses Frequency of exercises Preferred housing systems
NC RQ AI 4
ORC, MAP
Predetermined 10 Predetermined 2 Open field Open field Predetermined 2 Open field Open field
ORC, MAP Yes or no
Likert scale Predetermined
14 Breeds of different use Open field 15 Importance of breeding goals Ranking 16 Value of breeding goals Ranking
8 6 8 12 10
17 Assessment of horse nature 18 Desired characteristics of leisure horses 19 Desired characteristics of sport horses 20 Trainability of horses’ characteristics
Likert scale Ranking
12
Ranking
12
21 Familiarity with the term “interieur” 22 Definition of the term “interieur” 23 Degree of agreement with statements 24 Importance of personality 25 Explanation of choice 26 Definition of “character” 27 Definition of “temperament” 28 Definition of “constitution” 29 Definition of “willingness to work”
Predetermined
5-point
MAP V1000 in all 5-point
Likert scale
5-point
3
Open field
MAP
Likert scale
5-point
Likert scale Open field Open field Open field Open field Open field
5-point MAP MAP MAP MAP MAP
30 Temperament assessment in countries 31 If yes, form of assessment 32 Quality problems in assessment 33 Ways to improve quality 34 If no, need for an assessment 35 Suggestion how to assess 36 Heritability of personality 37 Agreement with statements 38 39 40 41
Open field Predetermined 2 Predetermined 12 Open field
Year of birth Gender Educational degree Current profession
6 6 MAP 6 ORC 9 MAP
Predetermined
3
Yes, no, CN
Predetermined Predetermined
3 30 ORC 3 31
Open field Predetermined Predetermined Predetermined Likert scale
32 3 30 4 34 ORC 7 5-point
People from all groups could also be breeders when getting 1 or more foals per year. There were also open, classification, amount, and ranking questions. To assess individual preferences, 5-point Likert scales (Likert, 1932) were also used. Before widespread use, a test survey was given to students (N ¼ 40) of equine and agriculture programs. As a result, a few minor changes were made to enhance clarity of the structure of answers.
318
P. Graf et al. / Journal of Veterinary Behavior 8 (2013) 316e325
Table 2 List of traits included in the breeding goal of German riding horses and their definitions and criteria for assessment according to the official guidelines (BMVEL, 2003) Traits
Definitions and assessment criteria
Quality of gaits, walk, trot, or gallop
Natural movement in the 3 different gaits Assessment includes potential and correctness of movements; impulsion, and elasticity Suitability as a riding horse Assessment includes rhythm of the gait, suppleness, chewing and mouth activity, posture, balance and willingness to stretch, reaction to riders’ aids, comfort of sitting on the horses’ back, and elasticity Agile, degree of ability and of scope Assessment includes quality of gallop, rhythm and balance, pushoff and technique of the legs, degree of rounding neck and back (bascule), willingness to work, and flexibility during the whole show jumping course Physical appearance; overall impression and development Assessment includes head, neck, forehand, chest, saddle position; frame; body (withers, back, and croup), tail, hindquarters, forelegs, and hindlegs Part of physical appearance that is important for suitability as a riding horse Assessment includes head, neck, saddle position, frame, breed, and sex type Part of physical appearance considering the legs and hoofs Assessment includes correctness of hoofs and legs as well as thickness of the bones Breed and sex type Includes traits such as fitness, vulnerability to disease, and condition of the bones Personality trait Assessment includes affability and social interaction with humans, dealing with a familiarization to new surroundings, posture and behavior, and behavior while grooming and tacking up Personality trait Assessment includes even-temperedness, attention, reactivity, and sensitivity to riders’ aids Assessment includes courage, curiosity, willingness to learn, and eagerness Defined as health, stamina, robustness, and mental strength Importance of the ancestors and their individual performance
Rideability
Jumping ability
Conformation
Riding horse characteristics
Feet and legs
Type Health Character
Temperament
Willingness to work Constitution Pedigree
Procedure For the evaluation, an online version of the survey was created with the IBM Lotus Notes 8.5 software (IBM Corporation, New York, USA). Before starting the survey, participants were informed about the purpose and that data are treated anonymously and confidentially. From July 1, 2010 until May 1, 2011, the questionnaire was available online at the homepage of the Equine Science Master Program of the Georg-August-Universität Goettingen. Different media were used to recruit participants: (1) a press release was sent to 40 horse journals in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland; 6 online portals in Germany; and 50 breeding associations at 20 countries all over the world, (2) a note with the link was published in 5 online forums in Germany, (3) the link was published in social networks, (4) 183 students and alumni received the link via e-mail, (5) 500 flyers designed to inform about the survey were spread at equestrian events, horse performance tests in field, and licensing, and (6) a poster with information about the project, link, and some flyers was posted in 4 different stables. Also 3 topic-related articles including a note of the link were published in horse journals over the time.
By May 2011, 1221 participants took part in the survey. Data of participants who did not complete the survey or who gave nonsensical answers were deleted. After that clearance, data of 1087 persons of 13 countries were available for analysis. Data analysis Statistical analysis was conducted using the Statistical Analysis System SAS, version 9.2 (SAS Institute, Inc., Cary, NC) (SAS Institute, Inc., 2009). Descriptive statistics were used as they best describe the information obtained via a survey. In addition, a mixed model (PROC MIXED) was applied to assess the influence of respondents’ characteristics on their valuing of different traits or specific aspects of personality. The group of horsemen (leisure riders, breeders, etc.), disciplines (dressage, show jumping, etc.), and respondents’ gender were considered as categorical variables. The linear variables, including age and the years of experiences with horses, were tested for significance but removed if they were not significant (P > 0.05). Results Sociodemographic and general information The gender ratio of the participants in this survey was 84.2% females (N ¼ 915) and 15.8% males (N ¼ 172) with an average age (SD) of 35.4 12.3 years. More than 43% of the participants had an academic degree (10.5% bachelor, 26.2% master, and 6.4% PhD), followed by 19.8% with professional education and 37.1% with school graduation. Overall, 49.3% of the participants were competition riders with 10.2 6.7 competitions per year, 37.9% were leisure riders, and 8.6% were professional riders. Of the participants, 39% were horse breeders with an average of 3.5 7 foals per year. All the respondents stated that they perform 1 or more of the common horse disciplines (multiple answers were possible): 30.2% focus on dressage (N ¼ 462), 18.8% on show jumping (N ¼ 742), 9.0% on eventing (N ¼ 221), 5.1% on driving (N ¼ 124), 4.2% on gaited horse riding (N ¼ 102), 3.9% on western riding (N ¼ 96), 2.3% on endurance (N ¼ 57), 2.2% on baroque riding (N ¼ 53), and 3.4% on other disciplines, such as vaulting (N ¼ 2), horse racing (N ¼ 9), and horseback hunting (N ¼ 2). Additionally, 515 participants specify that they ride just for leisure and have no favorite discipline but follow the common English disciplines. Participants stated that they have experience with horses for 21.6 10.2 years. Most of those questioned (90.2%) own 1 to a maximum of 96 horses, resulting in an average of 5.8 10.9 horses per participant. The remaining participants (9.8%) do not own a horse but participate in riding (63.3%), ride a horse from the riding school (10.0%), or train horses for others (26.7%). The weekly time effort for the horse of the participants is on average 23.6 15.5 hours. Most of the questioned persons (88.9%) are spending more than 10 hours per week with horses. The home countries of the participants however had no significant influence on their answers. Preferences to different traits of the breeding goal Detailed results regarding the participants’ weighting of the personality and performance traits listed in the breeding goal (Table 2) are shown in Table 3. Both the monetary and ranking questions show a similar distribution of the importance of the different traits. Clearly, the character, rideability, willingness to work, and temperament traits are the most important ones. In both questions, jumping ability is the least important one. Significant differences between the groups of horsemen for the traits could also be shown (Figure 1). Compared with competition riders, leisure
P. Graf et al. / Journal of Veterinary Behavior 8 (2013) 316e325
319
Table 3 Means (SE) and the effect of participants’ age (SE) (per additional year of age), their experiences with horses (SE) (per additional year of experiences), and their gender (SE) (differences between women and men) for the different traits weighted by scores (1 ¼ very unimportant and 12 ¼ very important) and by the economic weighting in Euro Traits of the breeding goal
Mean
Effects Age
Weighting with a scale
Health Character Willingness to work Rideability Quality of gaits Temperament Conformation Feet and legs Constitution Riding horse characteristics Jumping ability Pedigree
Weighting in Euro
Character and temperament Willingness to work Rideability Riding horse characteristics Quality of gallop Quality of trot Feet and legs Quality of walk Type Jumping ability
9.52 9.51 8.73 8.05 7.91 7.49 6.87 6.86 6.52 6.33 5.02 4.89
0.6 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.6 0.6
228.67 122.98 105.65 92.42 88.51 77.69 75.57 72.16 68.76 67.97
17.6 9.6 10.9 7.5 6.9 6.9 7.8 8.4 7.0 9.3
Experience
Gender
0.22 0.13 0.27 0.21 0.14 0.02 0.12 0.07 0.1 0.07 0.22 0.20
0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1
NS NS ** ** NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS
0.02 0.03 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.03
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS
0.05 0.30 0.09 0.18 0.13 0.48 0.04 0.36 0.02 0.01 1.27 0.14
0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3
NS * NS NS NS ** NS NS NS NS *** NS
7.34 4.28 5.73 1.91 3.27 1.70 2.53 8.61 0.80 16.25
4.2 2.3 2.6 1.6 1.7 1.6 1.9 2.0 1.7 2.9
* ** * NS * NS NS *** NS ***
0.95 0.37 0.31 0.72 0.37 0.02 0.03 0.30 0.09 1.12
0.5 0.3 0.3 1.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3
* NS NS NS ** NS NS NS NS ***
43.97 4.07 0.12 14.85 7.02 1.28 8.86 4.35 8.35 51.6
9.3 5.0 5.6 3.7 3.6 3.6 4.0 4.4 3.6 6.3
*** NS NS *** * NS * NS * ***
SE, standard error; NS, not significant. P > 0.05, **P > 0.005, and ***P > 0.0005; for definitions of the traits, see Table 2.
*
riders assigned more value (standard error) to the character/ temperament (t test: N ¼ 939, V149.72 5.43 vs. V209.30 6.09; P < 0.0001) trait. Nevertheless, the character/temperament trait was also the most important trait for the competition riders. Both, the participants’ age, their experience with horses, and the gender significantly affected their willingness to pay and the weighting by scale for individual traits (Table 3). For example, the older the participants were, the more value they assigned to the character/ temperament (t test: N ¼ 939, V6.83 4.06 per year elder; P ¼ 0.0492) trait, whereas female participants valued that trait higher compared with male participants (t test: N ¼ 939, V173.97 3.53 vs. V129.99 8.57; P < 0.0001). Differences in value assigned to the various traits also appear between the classical English disciplines, special disciplines, and those that have no favorite discipline, on the other hand (Table 4). The character/temperament trait is valued less by show jumping riders than by western riders (t test: N ¼ 939, V154.69 5.80 vs. V213.50 12.69; P ¼ 0.0016), for example. In case of willingness to work, type, rideability, and conformation of extremities, no significant differences could be found.
0.9), while loading on a trailer (2.7 0.9), and when free jumping (3.0 0.9). Additionally, the participants were asked about their opinion regarding differences between sport horses and leisure horses during daily situations. Also the importance of 6 characteristics of temperament and character in leisure and sport horses should be ranked on a scale from 1 (least important) to 12 (most important). In both leisure horses and sport horses, the behavior while riding is the most important aspect for the participants. However, leisure horses’ behavior during grooming, in the box, and toward other horses seems to be more important than for sport horses. For the willingness to work, sensitivity, intelligence, and behavior traits while loading, the ranking is reversed. Especially for leisure riders, the behavior of leisure horses in the box is more important (Figure 2) than for competition riders (t test: N ¼ 1044, 6.18 0.18 vs. 5.44 0.16; P ¼ 0.0208). The intelligence trait seems to be more important to competition riders than to leisure riders in competition horses (t test: N ¼ 1056, 9.31 0.38 vs. 5.04 0.18; P ¼ 0.0104). Personality and temperament (interieur) in horses
Assessment of the personality and behavior of horses The assessment of the personality and behavior of horses is inevitable for all those who work with horses and ensues during various situations throughout the daily lives. Therefore, we asked the respondent to rank everyday situations regarding their suitability for assessing personality and behavior on a scale from very good (1) to very bad (5). In the opinion of the respondents, assessment could be done best while riding (1.6 0.7) and worst while being in the box (3.1 1.0). Other situations ranked as follows in descending order: while walking with the horse (2.0 0.8), when grooming (2.1 0.7), during a calmness test (2.1 0.7), when driving (2.2 0.9), while tacking up (2.3 0.9), on the pasture (2.4 1.1), during the handling by the farrier or the veterinarian (2.6
Altogether 97.4% of the participants knew the word “interieur” (the specific term for personality), whereas just 0.9% were not familiar with the term and 1.7% were unsure about the meaning. When asked to define the term, most of the respondents (63.2%) have the opinion that the term character describes it the best way, followed by inner values (38.5%), the characteristics of the creatures (29.2%), behavior (22.7%), willingness to work (18.4%), temperament (17.8%), and character attributes (11.5%) like courage or sensitivity. Other mentioned attributes were psyche (8.7%), handling of the horse (6.8%), intelligence (5.7%), constitution (see Table 2 for definition) (3.7%), willingness to learn (3.1%), and reaction to the environment (2.1%). A total of 11.2% have the opinion that the horses’ personality is innate. Asked to their opinion how innate
320
P. Graf et al. / Journal of Veterinary Behavior 8 (2013) 316e325
Figure 1. Means of the amounts from splitting V1000 to 10 single traits of the breeding goal (N ¼ 939). a, b denote significant differences within each trait at P < 0.05.
personality in horses is, the participants assume a heritability of 66.1% 19.0% in average. To know why character, temperament, willingness to work, and constitution are so important to riders, breeders and other horsemen were asked to name the reasons. The simplification of the daily work with the horses (47.9%), the relationship between horse and human, as well as fun and pleasure with them (44.9%) were the Table 4 Means (standard error) and differences between the weighting in Euro of the character and temperament (personality traits), quality of gallop (potential and correctness of movements), body (part of physical appearance), and 4jumping ability (agile as well as fullness of ability and scope) traits and different disciplines (J ¼ show jumping, D ¼ dressage, E ¼ eventing, DR ¼ driving, W ¼ western, EN ¼ endurance, B ¼ baroque riding, G ¼ gaited horse riding, ND ¼ no specific discipline)
most essential causes. Also the more comfortable and safer handling was an important reason (31.5%), followed by sporting aspects in combination with success (22.2%). Nevertheless, 15.3% mentioned that these traits are important for a good leisure partner, good horse for children, and inexperienced riders. It was also noted that health risks for horses and humans could be decreased (13.3%) and thereby welfare could be increased (7.6%). The statement “The importance of the horses’ personality in sport and leisure horses is underestimated with regard to breeding, training, and marketing” is agreed (41.2%) or totally agreed (33.2%) by most of the participants, whereas a partial agreement is confirmed by 22.5%. Only 2.7% disagree with this sentence, and 0.3% totally disagrees with it. Evaluation of personality and temperament in horses
Disciplines Traits Character and temperament J D E DR W EN B G ND
154.69 158.87 162.94 185.87 213.50 190.66 229.28 196.84 299.92
5.80a 4.52a 8.41a 11.28a,b 12.69b 16.91a,b 16.70b 12.71a,b 5.55b
Quality of gallop 94.16 98.08 92.11 84.62 87.33 81.26 70.56 79.07 84.17
Riding horse characteristics
2.14a 73.70 2.48a 1.67a 75.15 1.93a 3.10a,b 77.36 3.59a 4.16a,b 86.54 4.82a,b 4.68a,b 103.36 5.42b 6.24a,b 89.49 7.23a,b 6.16b 99.38 7.14a,b 4.69b 85.62 5.43a,b 2.05b 86.67 2.37b
Jumping ability 97.34 54.40 82.96 47.72 26.00 27.52 22.29 15.02 40.21
a, b, and c denote significant differences within each trait at P < 0.05.
3.37a 2.62b 4.88a 6.54b,c 7.36c 9.81b,c 9.69b,c 7.37c 3.22b,c
A total of 55.6% were aware about the existence of an official assessment in their home country, whereas 36.1% are not sure if there is one. As much as 7.3% said that there is no official evaluation of these traits. Those who do not have an evaluation in their country mentioned the importance and a necessity (83.3%). Only 5.0% think that personality assessment is not necessary at all. The current assessment of personality and temperament is judged in a positive way by just 16.9%. A problem in the quality of the assessment is seen by 45.6%, whereas 37.6% are not sure if there is a problem. To solve the quality problems, a better standardization and a move to more objective criteria followed by an evaluation of
P. Graf et al. / Journal of Veterinary Behavior 8 (2013) 316e325
321
Figure 2. Participants’ ranking (mean standard error) of the importance of 6 characteristics of temperament and character and 6 daily situations when considering leisure horses (left side; N ¼ 1044) or competition horses (right side; N ¼ 1056) according to the participant’s affiliations (dark gray ¼ professional riders; gray ¼ breeders; light gray ¼ leisure riders; and black ¼ competition riders). a, b denote significant differences within each trait at P < 0.05.
all, rather than just a few breeding animals, were mentioned. The answers are shown in detail in Figure 3. The last question we asked was to what extent the participants agree with 15 statements (Figure 4). In Table 5, the means and the influence of the fixed effects regarding the different groups of horsemen are shown. Especially, riders who have no specific discipline consider primarily personality features, when buying a horse, compared with show jumping riders (t test: N ¼ 1062, 2.3 0.04 vs. 2.6 0.04; P < 0.0001), dressage riders (t test: N ¼ 1062, 2.3 0.04 vs. 2.6 0.03; P < 0.0001), or eventing riders (t test: N ¼ 1062, 2.3 0.04 vs. 2.7 0.06; P < 0.0001). The statement “horses in competitive sports need a difficult personality” is rejected or totally rejected by participants of all disciplines. But riders of the show jumping (4.3 0.04), dressage (4.4 0.03), and
eventing (4.3 0.05) disciplines reject the statement less than western riders (4.7 0.08), baroque riders (4.7 0.1), gaited horse riders (4.7 0.08), or riders who prefer no specific discipline (4.6 0.03). Discussion Method and procedure The advantage of an online survey is the wide range, the time saving in the return, data management (Llieva et al., 2002), and the very low costs for both the researcher and the participants (Witmer et al., 1999). It would have been impossible to have the same participation extent, for example, with a face-to-face survey. On the
322
P. Graf et al. / Journal of Veterinary Behavior 8 (2013) 316e325
Figure 3. Quality improvement of the current personality and temperament assessment named by the participants of the questionnaire (open-field question; N ¼ 507).
other hand, the anonymity could lead to a response distortion and implausible answers (Wright, 2005). To counter this point, the data were sighted and incomplete as well as nonsensical answers were deleted. Sociodemographic and general information The distribution of the participants according to the groups of horsemen and the disciplines as well as their experience with horses shows that we had a representative sample of horse experts (Brade et al., 2011). The gender ratio is also typical for the horse sector in Germany, where a representative survey (Ipsos, 2001) revealed a distribution of 84% female and 16% male horse enthusiasts. The lower average age in our study compared with the standard of riders in Germany (46.4 19.2) (Ipsos, 2001) is reasoned by the distribution within the university and thereby the high percentage of participating students. Both gender ratio and age very closely matched the demographics (84.6% female/15.4% male; average age: 34.2 13.5 years) of a Dutch population of horse enthusiasts participating in an online survey (Visser and Van Wijk-Jansen, 2012). Preferences to different traits of the breeding goal Two similar questions concerning the participants’ preference between the traits of the breeding goal were asked. The intention was to find out if the participants ranked the traits similar, both using scores and the economic weighting. This was the case in 96% of the answers.
The preferences of the participants regarding the traits of the breeding goal are very clear. Both in the weighting with a scale and in the economic weighting, the character, willingness to work, rideability, and temperament traits are more important than the gaits or traits related to conformation or health. The same ranking of traits was found by Teegen et al. (2008) for Trakehner sport horse breeders. Also other authors (Gille and Spiller, 2010; Rumpf, 2011) found similar results, but all of them had lower numbers of participants. The possibility of a bias toward the personality traits because of survey topic and the preceding questions seems therefore unlikely. As a consequence of the importance, many claims about a better implementation of these parameters into breeding programs are arising (Kaufmann and Bruns, 2005; Burger et al., 2007; Graf et al., 2010). The weightings in Euro of the breeding goal traits split by the category of horsemen and the disciplines show clear preferences in case of character/temperament. Competition riders, professional riders, and breeders have weighted this trait significantly lower than leisure riders. Also Gille and Spiller (2010) and Rumpf (2011) found that character and temperament traits are more important for leisure riders. Differences in weighting of the character/ temperament trait according to age and experience with horses could be because of the fact that the older the people are, the more they want to have a more safety handling and riding. The differences between men and women show that women place more importance on personality traits and maybe also take them more into consideration. Rideability seems to be an important trait for each rider or breeder because of missing differences. A horse with a high rideability is easier to ride, educate, and sell. Willingness to work indeed is more important for competition riders than to
P. Graf et al. / Journal of Veterinary Behavior 8 (2013) 316e325
323
Figure 4. Means and standard error of the rating (1 ¼ I strongly agree and 5 ¼ I strongly disagree) of 15 different questions around behavior of horses by group of horsemen (N ¼ 1062). a, b, and c denote significant differences within each trait at P < 0.05.
leisure riders. Competition riders, especially eventing riders, rely on the willingness of the horse for having higher training success and better competition results. The reason of the lower valuing of the jumping ability trait by leisure riders could be the orientation of the leisure riders: most of them did not participate in one of the English disciplines or have any specific discipline at all. As expected, especially show jumping riders and eventing riders valued jumping ability higher, compared with disciplines, such as baroque riding, gaited horse riding, or endurance, where jumping ability plays no role. Assessment of the personality and behavior of horses According to the survey, all the participants assess the personality and behavior of their horses during the daily lives. The low SD showed a rather uniform answer concerning the assessment of behavior. Also, the importance assigned to different
behavior traits is very uniform throughout the participants, categories of horsemen, and disciplines. Therefore, it can be concluded that most of the riders and breeders assess the behavior of their horses consciously or unconsciously during riding and handling. Leisure riders and horse owners in general are more and more inexperienced with horses because of the changes in the structure of agriculture and to the expansion of the horse sport to all social classes (Tietze, 2004). Therefore, it is very important that the horses behave in a way that the inexperienced people can deal with. Furthermore, research suggests that some personality traits of riders and their horses covary and that a higher agreement results in a higher contentment with the horseerider relationship (Wolframm and Meulenbroek, 2012). Therefore, an accurate assessment of behavior traits can lead to improved horseerider pair matches. However, the situation is different in sport horses because professional or experienced riders seem to know how to react to
324
P. Graf et al. / Journal of Veterinary Behavior 8 (2013) 316e325
Table 5 Means (SE), the effect of participants’ age (SE) (per year elder), their experiences with horses (SE) (per year of more experiences), and their gender (SE) (differences between women and men) on the agreement with the statements related to personality in horses (1 ¼ strong agreement to 5 ¼ strong disagreement) Statement
Mean
Aggressive horses in a herd are dangerous for riders Alert horses are often easily scared One has no fun with fearful horses when riding outdoors Sensitive horses accept riders’ aids faster Horses do not have to stand still at the farrier. Positive personality is beneficial in horse training. Calm horses are only suitable for the leisure riding sector When buying a horse, I consider personality features The method of rearing horses influences their personality A horse with a good character is worth more money Horses have to be loaded onto a trailer very quickly Learning ability and motivation are important in horses’ training The behavior of horses in their box is unimportant to me Horses in competitive sport need a difficult personality
3.42 3.54 3.22 3.44 3.87 1.27 4.88 2.15 1.66 1.84 2.21 1.96 3.57 4.74
Age 0.17 0.16 0.17 0.18 0.22 0.11 0.14 0.16 0.15 0.17 0.15 0.13 0.18 0.14
0.01 0.09 0.31 0.19 0.01 0.02 0.07 0.10 0.04 0.16 0.10 0.06 0.11 0.27
Experience
0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.03 0.03
NS *** *** *** NS * *** *** NS *** *** ** ** ***
0.05 0.02 0.10 0.07 0.07 0.01 0.01 0.11 0.04 0.08 0.01 0.04 0.08 0.1
0.04 0.07 0.04 0.04 0.05 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.04 0.07
Gender NS NS ** ** NS NS NS *** NS * NS ** ** **
0.18 0.02 0.14 0.01 0.22 0.14 0.22 0.29 0.15 0.18 0.14 0.02 0.01 0.32
0.07 0.07 0.08 0.08 0.09 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.06 0.06
** NS ** NS * *** *** *** * ** * NS NS ***
SE, standard error; NS, not significant. P > 0.05, ** P > 0.005, and *** P > 0.0005.
*
misbehavior of the horse. Therefore, the behavior during handling is less important for them compared with the willingness to work, sensitivity, and intelligence behavior traits. The latter traits are important for an efficient daily training and successful competition results.
However, these values are estimated and calculated on the basis of the current assessment in stallion performance test, which have been shown to be flawed (Pasing and König von Borstel, 2012).
Personality and temperament (interieur) in horses
Overall, the respondents had limited knowledge about the current procedures in official evaluation of personality and temperament in horses. Those who are informed about the current assessment pointed out that there is a high lack in the quality standard. Therefore, it is unavoidable to improve the procedures. In this point, the participants have a detailed idea how the quality problems could be tackled. All the mentioned possibilities could make the assessment more efficient, and most of them were also suggested and tested by different authors (e.g., Momozawa et al., 2003; Visser et al., 2003; Burger et al., 2007). However, the question remains open in what framework such a new personality assessment could be implemented. The participants have varying opinions about the different statements, resulting for most statements in an overall medium agreement. However, for some statements, clear deviations from the median could be found. For example, a strong agreement was found for the statement that “a positive temperament is a benefit to horse training.” Indeed, earlier research confirmed the importance of temperament to horse training (e.g., Heird et al., 1986; Christensen et al., 2005). Also, the disapproval of the statements that calm a horse suits only the leisure horse sector and that horses for competitions need a difficult character shows a clear deviation from the median. Competition and professional riders, too, prefer calmer horses. In their opinion, calmer horses can just as well win competitions, and with such a horse, both the horse and the rider have less stress. Unsurprisingly, the leisure riders think that a good character is worth more money but surprisingly also competition riders, breeders, and professional riders think so. Loading the horse onto a trailer very quickly is not so important to competition riders compared with leisure riders. On the other hand, learning and motivation are not so important to leisure riders compared with the other groups. The answers of the last questions in the survey thus confirm all the other answers given in the questionnaire.
The term “interieur,” that is, the special term for personality traits, was known by most of the participants. The consensus by more than 70% regarding the underestimation of the importance of horses’ personality in breeding, training, and marketing shows that there is a potential in this sector. Not only in leisure horses but also in sport horses, higher efforts have to be made especially regarding breeding and marketing. For marketing purposes, special labels concerning character and temperament could be established (Rumpf, 2011). In horse breeding, a stringent assessment of character and temperament for all breeding horses is an inevitable step to select the best animals and to improve these traits. This could lead to a genetic evaluation of the character and temperament traits. The dependence of the horses’ training schedule according to their specific personality could lead to a higher success in the training and to more satisfied horses. This should be the aim of every rider, trainer, and breeder. According to the importance of horses’ personality traits, all participants specify a high importance to the traits but with differences between groups of horsemen. During the whole questionnaire, it becomes obvious that the weighting of the traits is closely correlated to the use of the horse. The use of a horse is in turn directly influenced by personality traits. Rumpf (2011) found that independent from the classification in leisure riders and competition riders, personality traits are very important for the purchase decisions. Thus, personality traits are also important for marketing purposes. This is a good argument for a more intensive selection in personality traits, particularly because most of the horsemen are of the opinion that the traits are innate. Therefore, a selection on personality traits could lead to higher profits in selling horses for breeders and horse vendors. The estimations of 66% related to the heritability of the personality traits in our study confirm the widespread general opinion in horsemen and are in the same range with estimates given by breeding authorities (König von Borstel et al., 2013). In contrast, values for heritabilities estimated from performance test data by Schade (1996) are lower and range from 0.3 (temperament) to 0.2 (character), 0.1 (willingness to work), or 0.1 (constitution).
Evaluation of personality and temperament in horses
Conclusion The present survey revealed that diverse opinions regarding equine personality traits exist. Nevertheless, horse experts of different disciplines unanimously considered personality traits as
P. Graf et al. / Journal of Veterinary Behavior 8 (2013) 316e325
highly important. Leisure riders, professional riders, competition riders, or breeders ranked personality traits higher than any other performance trait such as the gaits or conformation traits. The significant differences between the important traits of leisure horses and competition horses show that there is a need in horse breeding to differentiate between the uses of the horses. Especially for marketing purpose, behavior-assessed horse could be a high potential for the future in the leisure horse market. Not only leisure riders but also competition riders note that horses with a balanced temperament simplify the daily work, make more fun, and are more successful in competitions. The current assessment of personality traits in breeding horses, however, is seen as problematic by most respondents. Various strategies such as the evaluation of all breeding animals, creation of new and detailed guidelines and checklists as well as the use of a behavior test to improve the current personality assessment were listed. Hence, it could be concluded that behavior traits are very important to horsemen, that there is a need and a high potential in the behavior assessment of breeding horses, and that a restructuring of the current assessment would be supported by the participants. Acknowledgments The authors thank all the horse enthusiasts who participated in their survey. References Allport, G.W., 1937. Personality: A Psychological Interpretation. Henry Holt, New York, NY. BMVEL (Federal Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Consumer Protection), 2003. Leitlinien für die Veranlagungsprüfung von Hengsten der deutschen Reitpferdezuchten. Brade, W., Distl, O., Sieme, H., Zeyner, A., 2011. Pferdezucht, haltung und fütterungd Empfehlungen für die Praxis (Horse breeding, housing and feedingd recommendations for practice). VTI Agriculture and Forestry Research 353, 192e209 (in German). Burger, D., Imboden, I., Jallon, L., Ionita, J.-C., Rapin, V., Doherr, M., Poncet, P.-A., 2007. Introduction of a behavioural test for Franches-Montagnes horses. In: Hausberger, M., Sondergaard, E., Martin-Rosset, W. (Eds.), Horse Behaviour and Welfare. EAAP Publication 122, Wageningen, NL, pp. 13e22. Christensen, J.W., Keeling, L.J., Lindstrom, N.B., 2005. Response of horses to novel visual, olfactory and auditory stimuli. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 93, 53e65. Christmann, L., 2005. Hannoveraner erlebendPferde für die Freizeit. Der Hannoveraner 9/79, 23-25 (in German). Couzy, C., Godet, J., 2010. Mismatch between breeding elite sport horses and rider amateurs expectations. In: Proceedings of the 61st Annual Meeting of the EAAP, Heraklion, Greece. Dowling-Guyer, S., Marder, A., D’Arpin, S., 2011. Behavioral traits detected in shelter dogs by a behaviour evaluation. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 130, 107e114. Fédération Equestre National (FN), 2011. Jahresbericht 2010, German Equestrian Federation. FN-Verlag, Warendorf, Germany. Gille, C., Spiller, A., 2010. Kundenorientierte Züchtung in der deutschen Reitpferdezucht. Zielgruppensegmentierung im Reitsport: eine empirische Analyse (Customer oriented horse breeding in Germany. Target group segmentation: an empirical analysis). In German with English abstract. Züchtungskunde 82, 229e240. Graf, P., König von Borstel, U., Gauly, M., 2010. Implementation of equine temperament tests in performance tests on station and field. In: Proceedings of the 61st Annual Meeting of the EAAP, Heraklion, Greece. Graf, P., König von Borstel, U., Gauly, M., 2013. Economic evaluation of an objective temperament and personality assessment in horses. In German with English abstract. Züchtungskunde 85/2, 129-142. Górecka-Bruzda, A., Jastrzebska, E., Sosnowska, Z., Jaworski, Z., Jezierski, T., Chruszczewski, M.H., 2011. Reactivity to humans and fearfulness tests: field validation in Polish Cold Blood Horses. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 133, 207e215. Harper, G.C., Makatouni, A., 2002. Consumer perception of organic food production and farm animal welfare. Br. Food J. 104, 287e299. Heird, J.C., Whitaker, D.D., Bell, R.W., Ramsey, C.B., Lokey, C.E., 1986. The effect of handling at different ages on the subsequent learning ability of 2-year-old horses. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 15, 15e25.
325
Hoppe, S., Brandt, H.R., König, S., Erhardt, E., Gauly, M., 2010. Temperament traits of beef calves measured under field conditions and their relationships to performance. J. Anim. Sci. 10, 25e27. Ipsos, 2001. Faszination Zukunft: Neue Perspektiven im PferdesportdFN Marktanalyse (Future fascination: prospects in equestrian sportsdFN market analysis). German Equestrian Federation, Warendorf, Germany (in German). Jones, A.C., Gosling, S.D., 2005. Temperament and personality in dogs (Canis familiaris): a review and evaluation of past research. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 95, 1e53. Kaufmann, A., Bruns, E., 2005. Erfahrungen mit Verhaltenstest zur Interieurbeurteilung (Experience with a behavior test to assess character and temperament in horses). In: Proceedings of the Uelzener Horse-Workshop, DGFZ-Series 38, 13-19 (in German). König von Borstel, U., Pasing, S., Gauly, M., 2011. Towards a more objective assessment of equine personality using behavioural and physiological observations from performance test training. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 135, 277e285. König von Borstel, U., Pasing, S., Gauly, M., Christmann, L., accepted, 2013. Status quo of the personality trait evaluation in horse breeding: judges’ assessment of the situation and strategies for improvement. J. Vet. Behav.: Clin. Appl. Res., 1e9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jveb.2013.04.066. Likert, R., 1932. A technique for the measurement of attitudes. Arch. Psychol. 140, 1e55. Llieva, J., Baron, S., Healey, N.M., 2002. Online surveys in marketing research: pros and cons. Int. J. Market Res. 44, 361e367. Momozawa, Y., Tomoko, O., Fumio, S., Kikusui, T., Takeuchi, Y., Mori, Y., Kusunos, R., 2003. Assessment of equine temperament by a questionnaire survey to caretakers and evaluation of its reliability by simultaneous behavior test. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 84, 127e138. Pasing, S., Christmann, L., Gauly, M., König von Borstel, U., 2011. Analysis of the status quo of personality evaluation in German horse breeding. In: Proceedings of the 62nd Annual Meeting of the European Association for Animal Production, Stavanger, Norway. Pasing, S., König von Borstel, U., 2012. Evidence of grade inflation in personality trait scores from stallion performance tests. In: Proceedings of the 8th International Equitation Science Conference, Edinburgh, UK. Rumpf, C., 2011. Einflussfaktoren beim Pferdekauf und deren Bedeutung für Turnierund Freizeitreiter. Eine empirische Untersuchung auf Basis einer DiscretChoice-Analyse (Influences when buying a horse and its importance to competitions and leisure riders. An empirical study on basis of a discretchoice analysis). In: Proceeding of the Goettinger Pferdetage 2011, Goettingen, Germany (in German). SAS Institute, Inc., 2009. SAS/STAT User’s Guide. Version 9.2. SAS Institute, Inc., Cary, NC. Schade, W., 1996. Entwicklung eines Besamungszuchtprogramms für die Hannoversche Warmblutzucht (Development of an insemination breeding program for the Hanoverian warmblood breed) [PhD thesis]. Georg-August-Universität Göttingen, Germany (in German). Tietze, T.K., 2004. Ökonomische, ökologische und gesellschaftliche Effekte von Pferdesport, -zucht und -haltung. Eine biokybernetische Analyse für Deutschland (Economic, ecological and social aspects of equestrian sports, horse breeding and housing. A biocybernetic analysis in Germany) [PhD thesis]. Leibnitz University Hannover, Germany (in German). Teegen, R., Edel, C., Thaller, G., 2008. Bewertung der Zuchtzielmerkmale des Trakehner Verbandes mit Hilfe der kontingenten Befragungsmethode (Evaluation of the Trakehner breeding goal characteristics with help of contingent valuation method) (“contingent valuation method”, CV). In German with English abstract. Züchtungskunde 80, 99e113. Tönepöhl, B., Appel, A.K., Welp, S., Biermann, A., Voß, B., König von Borstel, U., Gauly, M., 2012. Effect of marginal environmental and social enrichment during rearing on pigs’ reaction to novelty, conspecifics and handling. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 140, 137e145. Visser, E.K., Van Reenen, C.G., Rundgren, M., Zetterqvist, M., Morgan, K., Blokhuis, H.J., 2003. Responses of horses in behavioural tests correlate with temperament assessed by riders. Equine Vet. J. 35, 176e183. Visser, E.K., Van Wijk-Jansen, E.E.C., 2012. Diversity in horse enthusiasts with respect to horse welfare: an explorative study. J. Vet. Behav.: Clin. Appl. Res. 7, 295e304. Witmer, D.F., Colman, R.W., Katzman, S.L., 1999. From paper-and-pencil to screenand-keyboard: toward a methodology for survey research on the Internet. In: Jones, S. (Ed.), Doing Internet Research: Critical Issues and Methods for Examining the Net. SAGE Publications, Inc., Thousand Oaks, CA, pp. 145e161. http:// dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781452231471. Wolframm, I.A., Meulenbroek, R.G.J., 2012. Co-variations between perceived personality traits and quality of the interaction between female riders and horses. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 139, 96e104. Wright, K.B., 2005. Researching Internet-based populations: advantages and disadvantages of online survey research, online questionnaire authoring software packages and web survey services. J. Comput. Mediat. Commun. 10, 11.
Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect
Journal of Veterinary Behavior journal homepage: www.journalvetbehavior.com
Research
Importance of personality traits in horses to breeders and riders Patricia Graf*, Uta König von Borstel, Matthias Gauly Department of Animal Sciences, University of Goettingen, Goettingen, Germany
a r t i c l e i n f o
a b s t r a c t
Article history: Received 11 July 2012 Received in revised form 21 January 2013 Accepted 12 May 2013 Available online 21 June 2013
Especially in horses, personality traits play an important role because horses’ behavior influences their quality as a riding partner. In contrast to that, no objective assessment of horses’ personality traits is available at present. Although initial efforts are made in this field, a successful implementation of behavior tests into horse performance tests depends on the acceptance of the riders and breeders. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to assess the importance of personality traits to breeders and riders as well as the degree of riders’ acceptance of a temperament test as a more objective means of assessing equine personality traits. Using a web-based survey consisting of a 41-item questionnaire, a total of 1087 competition riders (49.3%), breeders (39.0%), leisure riders (37.9%), and professional riders (8.6%) of 13 countries were recruited to participate in the survey. When asked to split 1000 Euro among the different traits listed in the breeding goal, respondents clearly assigned more weight to the personality-related character and temperament traits (least squares mean standard error; P < 0.005: V228.7 17.6) and willingness to work (V123.0 9.6) compared with performance traits, such as the quality of trot (V77.7 6.9) or show jumping (V68.0 12.3). Nevertheless, expected differences in relative weighting of traits between the different groups of riders were confirmed (e.g., character and temperament: V209.3 6.1 [leisure riders] vs. V149.7 5.4 [competition riders], P < 0.0001). When asking why personality traits are so important, the simplification of daily work with the horses (47.9%) and relationship between horse and human (44.9%) as well as a more comfortable and safer handling (31.5%) were most commonly listed. As much as 45.6% of all participants see quality problems with the current assessment and suggested the evaluation of all breeding animals (30.1%), followed by a better standardization of assessment procedures (25.5%) and a move to more objective criteria such as the introduction of a temperament test (20.3%) for solving the problems. The present survey revealed that behavior traits are very important to all groups of riders and breeders, although there are diverse opinions about it. According to the participants, there is a need for and a high potential in the move toward more objective assessment methods of horses’ personality traits, and participants would support a restructuring of the current assessment. Ó 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Keywords: survey personality temperament horse rider breeder
Introduction Behavior traits are of increasing importance in animal breeding. In dogs, extensive research is conducted in this area (e.g., Jones and Gosling, 2005; Dowling-Guyer et al., 2011) because behavior tests for shelter dogs are obligatory in different countries. Also with regard to livestock, consumers develop a growing awareness of animal welfare (Harper and Makatouni, 2002), which leads to alternative housing systems, where the social behavior of the
* Address for reprint requests and correspondence: Patricia Graf, Department of Animal Sciences, University of Goettingen, Albrecht-Thaer-Weg 3, 37075 Goettingen, Germany. Tel: þ49-551-39-5612; Fax: þ49-551-39-5587. E-mail address: [email protected] (P. Graf). 1558-7878/$ e see front matter Ó 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jveb.2013.05.006
animals is more important (e.g., group housing of sows). Therefore, measures such as the development and implementation of temperament test into breeding programs (e.g., Hoppe et al., 2010; Tönepöhl et al., 2012) are undertaken to allow for genetic selection of animals better adapted to such environments. Especially in horses, behavior traits play an important role, even if the background is different. Equestrian sports are one of the most popular sports in Germany, with 1.24 million athletes, 7694 riding clubs (FN, 2011), and overall 8.74 million people interested in horses (Ipsos, 2001). However, more than two-third of these horsemen do not participate in competitions but ride for leisure (Ipsos, 2001). These riders often are inexperienced with horses, and therefore, temperament and personality are important characteristics for them. In contrast to this, most breeders want to produce horses for high-performance sport (Tietze, 2004; Couzy and Godet, 2010).
P. Graf et al. / Journal of Veterinary Behavior 8 (2013) 316e325
For this reason, breeders primarily select for performance traits and less on temperament, personality, and health. Therefore, the needs of the leisure riders are hardly taken into account (Gille and Spiller, 2010). However, also from an economic point of view, selection on temperament and personality is profitable. Some studies showed that riders are willing to pay more for a horse that was tested for temperament traits (Graf et al., 2013) and shows balanced temperament (Teegen et al., 2008; Gille and Spiller, 2010). Accordingly, special programs and marketing concepts for horses with tested personality or temperament in particular become more and more popular (Christmann, 2005). To take the wishes of the riders and horse buyers into account, it is necessary to implement more objective assessment methods for personality traits into horse breeding and selection programs. Therefore, initial efforts for developing temperament or personality tests are made in different countries (e.g., Burger et al., 2007; Górecka-Bruzda et al., 2011; König von Borstel et al., 2011). This is necessary because of a lack of objective guidelines of the today’s temperament and personality assessment in riding horses (Pasing et al., 2011). The current assessment takes place during performance tests on station for stallions and mares, where 5% of the horses per birth cohort are tested (FN, 2011). This assessment, however, is characterized by high means and low standard deviations (SDs) (8.2 0.8) in Germany (Pasing and König von Borstel, 2012). On the basis of this information, no efficient selection can be made. To assess how important personality traits for sport riders, leisure riders, and breeders are, this survey was designed. Personality in this case is defined according to Allport (1937). Temperament is considered as one component of personality. Also the acceptance of temperament and personality tests in performance tests of horses as well as the current knowledge about it was queried. This is an important point for a successful implementation of a temperament test, and therefore, it is important for future research projects in this sector.
Table 1 Question number (NR), questions, question type, number of categories (NC), reference to questions (RQ), and additional information (AI) regarding the type of answer categories (ORC ¼ others with respondent-defined categories; MAP ¼ multiple answers; CN ¼ country name) Part NR Questions
Type
A
Predetermined Open field Open field Open field
12 13 B
C
D
Questionnaire design
a leisure rider cannot be a competition rider the same time, competition riders ride a minimum of 1 competition per year, and professional riders can also be competition riders.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Materials and methods
The questionnaire consisted of 6 parts (A-F) with 41 questions (Table 1). A copy of the questionnaire is available on request from the corresponding author. Part A collected general information of the participants and their relationship to horses. Evaluation of riding horses and purchase decisions were required in part B. Part C contained questions about the judgment of nature and behavior of horses. In part D, general information and definitions of the traits of the horses’ personality were requested, whereas part E gathered information about the assessment of these traits. The last part (F) comprised general questions. Question 16 requests the weighting of different traits of the breeding goal and was developed according to Teegen et al. (2008) to allow for a direct comparison of responses between different groups of practitioners. The different traits of the breeding goal used in this question are characterized in Table 2. The survey was available in German and English. Most questions were semiclosed with predetermined categories and an empty field to enter other respondent-defined categories and answers. Answers to the open questions were categorized by terms that the participants answered. The characterization of the different horsemen groups where the participants can give multiple answers was done in the following ways:
317
E
F
Type of involved with horses Horse-show participation Foals per year Number of years working with horses Riding or breeding discipline Ownership of a horse If yes, number of horses If yes, breed of the horse If no, which horses are used Breed of the horses Weekly time spend with horses Frequency of exercises Preferred housing systems
NC RQ AI 4
ORC, MAP
Predetermined 10 Predetermined 2 Open field Open field Predetermined 2 Open field Open field
ORC, MAP Yes or no
Likert scale Predetermined
14 Breeds of different use Open field 15 Importance of breeding goals Ranking 16 Value of breeding goals Ranking
8 6 8 12 10
17 Assessment of horse nature 18 Desired characteristics of leisure horses 19 Desired characteristics of sport horses 20 Trainability of horses’ characteristics
Likert scale Ranking
12
Ranking
12
21 Familiarity with the term “interieur” 22 Definition of the term “interieur” 23 Degree of agreement with statements 24 Importance of personality 25 Explanation of choice 26 Definition of “character” 27 Definition of “temperament” 28 Definition of “constitution” 29 Definition of “willingness to work”
Predetermined
5-point
MAP V1000 in all 5-point
Likert scale
5-point
3
Open field
MAP
Likert scale
5-point
Likert scale Open field Open field Open field Open field Open field
5-point MAP MAP MAP MAP MAP
30 Temperament assessment in countries 31 If yes, form of assessment 32 Quality problems in assessment 33 Ways to improve quality 34 If no, need for an assessment 35 Suggestion how to assess 36 Heritability of personality 37 Agreement with statements 38 39 40 41
Open field Predetermined 2 Predetermined 12 Open field
Year of birth Gender Educational degree Current profession
6 6 MAP 6 ORC 9 MAP
Predetermined
3
Yes, no, CN
Predetermined Predetermined
3 30 ORC 3 31
Open field Predetermined Predetermined Predetermined Likert scale
32 3 30 4 34 ORC 7 5-point
People from all groups could also be breeders when getting 1 or more foals per year. There were also open, classification, amount, and ranking questions. To assess individual preferences, 5-point Likert scales (Likert, 1932) were also used. Before widespread use, a test survey was given to students (N ¼ 40) of equine and agriculture programs. As a result, a few minor changes were made to enhance clarity of the structure of answers.
318
P. Graf et al. / Journal of Veterinary Behavior 8 (2013) 316e325
Table 2 List of traits included in the breeding goal of German riding horses and their definitions and criteria for assessment according to the official guidelines (BMVEL, 2003) Traits
Definitions and assessment criteria
Quality of gaits, walk, trot, or gallop
Natural movement in the 3 different gaits Assessment includes potential and correctness of movements; impulsion, and elasticity Suitability as a riding horse Assessment includes rhythm of the gait, suppleness, chewing and mouth activity, posture, balance and willingness to stretch, reaction to riders’ aids, comfort of sitting on the horses’ back, and elasticity Agile, degree of ability and of scope Assessment includes quality of gallop, rhythm and balance, pushoff and technique of the legs, degree of rounding neck and back (bascule), willingness to work, and flexibility during the whole show jumping course Physical appearance; overall impression and development Assessment includes head, neck, forehand, chest, saddle position; frame; body (withers, back, and croup), tail, hindquarters, forelegs, and hindlegs Part of physical appearance that is important for suitability as a riding horse Assessment includes head, neck, saddle position, frame, breed, and sex type Part of physical appearance considering the legs and hoofs Assessment includes correctness of hoofs and legs as well as thickness of the bones Breed and sex type Includes traits such as fitness, vulnerability to disease, and condition of the bones Personality trait Assessment includes affability and social interaction with humans, dealing with a familiarization to new surroundings, posture and behavior, and behavior while grooming and tacking up Personality trait Assessment includes even-temperedness, attention, reactivity, and sensitivity to riders’ aids Assessment includes courage, curiosity, willingness to learn, and eagerness Defined as health, stamina, robustness, and mental strength Importance of the ancestors and their individual performance
Rideability
Jumping ability
Conformation
Riding horse characteristics
Feet and legs
Type Health Character
Temperament
Willingness to work Constitution Pedigree
Procedure For the evaluation, an online version of the survey was created with the IBM Lotus Notes 8.5 software (IBM Corporation, New York, USA). Before starting the survey, participants were informed about the purpose and that data are treated anonymously and confidentially. From July 1, 2010 until May 1, 2011, the questionnaire was available online at the homepage of the Equine Science Master Program of the Georg-August-Universität Goettingen. Different media were used to recruit participants: (1) a press release was sent to 40 horse journals in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland; 6 online portals in Germany; and 50 breeding associations at 20 countries all over the world, (2) a note with the link was published in 5 online forums in Germany, (3) the link was published in social networks, (4) 183 students and alumni received the link via e-mail, (5) 500 flyers designed to inform about the survey were spread at equestrian events, horse performance tests in field, and licensing, and (6) a poster with information about the project, link, and some flyers was posted in 4 different stables. Also 3 topic-related articles including a note of the link were published in horse journals over the time.
By May 2011, 1221 participants took part in the survey. Data of participants who did not complete the survey or who gave nonsensical answers were deleted. After that clearance, data of 1087 persons of 13 countries were available for analysis. Data analysis Statistical analysis was conducted using the Statistical Analysis System SAS, version 9.2 (SAS Institute, Inc., Cary, NC) (SAS Institute, Inc., 2009). Descriptive statistics were used as they best describe the information obtained via a survey. In addition, a mixed model (PROC MIXED) was applied to assess the influence of respondents’ characteristics on their valuing of different traits or specific aspects of personality. The group of horsemen (leisure riders, breeders, etc.), disciplines (dressage, show jumping, etc.), and respondents’ gender were considered as categorical variables. The linear variables, including age and the years of experiences with horses, were tested for significance but removed if they were not significant (P > 0.05). Results Sociodemographic and general information The gender ratio of the participants in this survey was 84.2% females (N ¼ 915) and 15.8% males (N ¼ 172) with an average age (SD) of 35.4 12.3 years. More than 43% of the participants had an academic degree (10.5% bachelor, 26.2% master, and 6.4% PhD), followed by 19.8% with professional education and 37.1% with school graduation. Overall, 49.3% of the participants were competition riders with 10.2 6.7 competitions per year, 37.9% were leisure riders, and 8.6% were professional riders. Of the participants, 39% were horse breeders with an average of 3.5 7 foals per year. All the respondents stated that they perform 1 or more of the common horse disciplines (multiple answers were possible): 30.2% focus on dressage (N ¼ 462), 18.8% on show jumping (N ¼ 742), 9.0% on eventing (N ¼ 221), 5.1% on driving (N ¼ 124), 4.2% on gaited horse riding (N ¼ 102), 3.9% on western riding (N ¼ 96), 2.3% on endurance (N ¼ 57), 2.2% on baroque riding (N ¼ 53), and 3.4% on other disciplines, such as vaulting (N ¼ 2), horse racing (N ¼ 9), and horseback hunting (N ¼ 2). Additionally, 515 participants specify that they ride just for leisure and have no favorite discipline but follow the common English disciplines. Participants stated that they have experience with horses for 21.6 10.2 years. Most of those questioned (90.2%) own 1 to a maximum of 96 horses, resulting in an average of 5.8 10.9 horses per participant. The remaining participants (9.8%) do not own a horse but participate in riding (63.3%), ride a horse from the riding school (10.0%), or train horses for others (26.7%). The weekly time effort for the horse of the participants is on average 23.6 15.5 hours. Most of the questioned persons (88.9%) are spending more than 10 hours per week with horses. The home countries of the participants however had no significant influence on their answers. Preferences to different traits of the breeding goal Detailed results regarding the participants’ weighting of the personality and performance traits listed in the breeding goal (Table 2) are shown in Table 3. Both the monetary and ranking questions show a similar distribution of the importance of the different traits. Clearly, the character, rideability, willingness to work, and temperament traits are the most important ones. In both questions, jumping ability is the least important one. Significant differences between the groups of horsemen for the traits could also be shown (Figure 1). Compared with competition riders, leisure
P. Graf et al. / Journal of Veterinary Behavior 8 (2013) 316e325
319
Table 3 Means (SE) and the effect of participants’ age (SE) (per additional year of age), their experiences with horses (SE) (per additional year of experiences), and their gender (SE) (differences between women and men) for the different traits weighted by scores (1 ¼ very unimportant and 12 ¼ very important) and by the economic weighting in Euro Traits of the breeding goal
Mean
Effects Age
Weighting with a scale
Health Character Willingness to work Rideability Quality of gaits Temperament Conformation Feet and legs Constitution Riding horse characteristics Jumping ability Pedigree
Weighting in Euro
Character and temperament Willingness to work Rideability Riding horse characteristics Quality of gallop Quality of trot Feet and legs Quality of walk Type Jumping ability
9.52 9.51 8.73 8.05 7.91 7.49 6.87 6.86 6.52 6.33 5.02 4.89
0.6 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.6 0.6
228.67 122.98 105.65 92.42 88.51 77.69 75.57 72.16 68.76 67.97
17.6 9.6 10.9 7.5 6.9 6.9 7.8 8.4 7.0 9.3
Experience
Gender
0.22 0.13 0.27 0.21 0.14 0.02 0.12 0.07 0.1 0.07 0.22 0.20
0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1
NS NS ** ** NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS
0.02 0.03 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.03
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS
0.05 0.30 0.09 0.18 0.13 0.48 0.04 0.36 0.02 0.01 1.27 0.14
0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3
NS * NS NS NS ** NS NS NS NS *** NS
7.34 4.28 5.73 1.91 3.27 1.70 2.53 8.61 0.80 16.25
4.2 2.3 2.6 1.6 1.7 1.6 1.9 2.0 1.7 2.9
* ** * NS * NS NS *** NS ***
0.95 0.37 0.31 0.72 0.37 0.02 0.03 0.30 0.09 1.12
0.5 0.3 0.3 1.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3
* NS NS NS ** NS NS NS NS ***
43.97 4.07 0.12 14.85 7.02 1.28 8.86 4.35 8.35 51.6
9.3 5.0 5.6 3.7 3.6 3.6 4.0 4.4 3.6 6.3
*** NS NS *** * NS * NS * ***
SE, standard error; NS, not significant. P > 0.05, **P > 0.005, and ***P > 0.0005; for definitions of the traits, see Table 2.
*
riders assigned more value (standard error) to the character/ temperament (t test: N ¼ 939, V149.72 5.43 vs. V209.30 6.09; P < 0.0001) trait. Nevertheless, the character/temperament trait was also the most important trait for the competition riders. Both, the participants’ age, their experience with horses, and the gender significantly affected their willingness to pay and the weighting by scale for individual traits (Table 3). For example, the older the participants were, the more value they assigned to the character/ temperament (t test: N ¼ 939, V6.83 4.06 per year elder; P ¼ 0.0492) trait, whereas female participants valued that trait higher compared with male participants (t test: N ¼ 939, V173.97 3.53 vs. V129.99 8.57; P < 0.0001). Differences in value assigned to the various traits also appear between the classical English disciplines, special disciplines, and those that have no favorite discipline, on the other hand (Table 4). The character/temperament trait is valued less by show jumping riders than by western riders (t test: N ¼ 939, V154.69 5.80 vs. V213.50 12.69; P ¼ 0.0016), for example. In case of willingness to work, type, rideability, and conformation of extremities, no significant differences could be found.
0.9), while loading on a trailer (2.7 0.9), and when free jumping (3.0 0.9). Additionally, the participants were asked about their opinion regarding differences between sport horses and leisure horses during daily situations. Also the importance of 6 characteristics of temperament and character in leisure and sport horses should be ranked on a scale from 1 (least important) to 12 (most important). In both leisure horses and sport horses, the behavior while riding is the most important aspect for the participants. However, leisure horses’ behavior during grooming, in the box, and toward other horses seems to be more important than for sport horses. For the willingness to work, sensitivity, intelligence, and behavior traits while loading, the ranking is reversed. Especially for leisure riders, the behavior of leisure horses in the box is more important (Figure 2) than for competition riders (t test: N ¼ 1044, 6.18 0.18 vs. 5.44 0.16; P ¼ 0.0208). The intelligence trait seems to be more important to competition riders than to leisure riders in competition horses (t test: N ¼ 1056, 9.31 0.38 vs. 5.04 0.18; P ¼ 0.0104). Personality and temperament (interieur) in horses
Assessment of the personality and behavior of horses The assessment of the personality and behavior of horses is inevitable for all those who work with horses and ensues during various situations throughout the daily lives. Therefore, we asked the respondent to rank everyday situations regarding their suitability for assessing personality and behavior on a scale from very good (1) to very bad (5). In the opinion of the respondents, assessment could be done best while riding (1.6 0.7) and worst while being in the box (3.1 1.0). Other situations ranked as follows in descending order: while walking with the horse (2.0 0.8), when grooming (2.1 0.7), during a calmness test (2.1 0.7), when driving (2.2 0.9), while tacking up (2.3 0.9), on the pasture (2.4 1.1), during the handling by the farrier or the veterinarian (2.6
Altogether 97.4% of the participants knew the word “interieur” (the specific term for personality), whereas just 0.9% were not familiar with the term and 1.7% were unsure about the meaning. When asked to define the term, most of the respondents (63.2%) have the opinion that the term character describes it the best way, followed by inner values (38.5%), the characteristics of the creatures (29.2%), behavior (22.7%), willingness to work (18.4%), temperament (17.8%), and character attributes (11.5%) like courage or sensitivity. Other mentioned attributes were psyche (8.7%), handling of the horse (6.8%), intelligence (5.7%), constitution (see Table 2 for definition) (3.7%), willingness to learn (3.1%), and reaction to the environment (2.1%). A total of 11.2% have the opinion that the horses’ personality is innate. Asked to their opinion how innate
320
P. Graf et al. / Journal of Veterinary Behavior 8 (2013) 316e325
Figure 1. Means of the amounts from splitting V1000 to 10 single traits of the breeding goal (N ¼ 939). a, b denote significant differences within each trait at P < 0.05.
personality in horses is, the participants assume a heritability of 66.1% 19.0% in average. To know why character, temperament, willingness to work, and constitution are so important to riders, breeders and other horsemen were asked to name the reasons. The simplification of the daily work with the horses (47.9%), the relationship between horse and human, as well as fun and pleasure with them (44.9%) were the Table 4 Means (standard error) and differences between the weighting in Euro of the character and temperament (personality traits), quality of gallop (potential and correctness of movements), body (part of physical appearance), and 4jumping ability (agile as well as fullness of ability and scope) traits and different disciplines (J ¼ show jumping, D ¼ dressage, E ¼ eventing, DR ¼ driving, W ¼ western, EN ¼ endurance, B ¼ baroque riding, G ¼ gaited horse riding, ND ¼ no specific discipline)
most essential causes. Also the more comfortable and safer handling was an important reason (31.5%), followed by sporting aspects in combination with success (22.2%). Nevertheless, 15.3% mentioned that these traits are important for a good leisure partner, good horse for children, and inexperienced riders. It was also noted that health risks for horses and humans could be decreased (13.3%) and thereby welfare could be increased (7.6%). The statement “The importance of the horses’ personality in sport and leisure horses is underestimated with regard to breeding, training, and marketing” is agreed (41.2%) or totally agreed (33.2%) by most of the participants, whereas a partial agreement is confirmed by 22.5%. Only 2.7% disagree with this sentence, and 0.3% totally disagrees with it. Evaluation of personality and temperament in horses
Disciplines Traits Character and temperament J D E DR W EN B G ND
154.69 158.87 162.94 185.87 213.50 190.66 229.28 196.84 299.92
5.80a 4.52a 8.41a 11.28a,b 12.69b 16.91a,b 16.70b 12.71a,b 5.55b
Quality of gallop 94.16 98.08 92.11 84.62 87.33 81.26 70.56 79.07 84.17
Riding horse characteristics
2.14a 73.70 2.48a 1.67a 75.15 1.93a 3.10a,b 77.36 3.59a 4.16a,b 86.54 4.82a,b 4.68a,b 103.36 5.42b 6.24a,b 89.49 7.23a,b 6.16b 99.38 7.14a,b 4.69b 85.62 5.43a,b 2.05b 86.67 2.37b
Jumping ability 97.34 54.40 82.96 47.72 26.00 27.52 22.29 15.02 40.21
a, b, and c denote significant differences within each trait at P < 0.05.
3.37a 2.62b 4.88a 6.54b,c 7.36c 9.81b,c 9.69b,c 7.37c 3.22b,c
A total of 55.6% were aware about the existence of an official assessment in their home country, whereas 36.1% are not sure if there is one. As much as 7.3% said that there is no official evaluation of these traits. Those who do not have an evaluation in their country mentioned the importance and a necessity (83.3%). Only 5.0% think that personality assessment is not necessary at all. The current assessment of personality and temperament is judged in a positive way by just 16.9%. A problem in the quality of the assessment is seen by 45.6%, whereas 37.6% are not sure if there is a problem. To solve the quality problems, a better standardization and a move to more objective criteria followed by an evaluation of
P. Graf et al. / Journal of Veterinary Behavior 8 (2013) 316e325
321
Figure 2. Participants’ ranking (mean standard error) of the importance of 6 characteristics of temperament and character and 6 daily situations when considering leisure horses (left side; N ¼ 1044) or competition horses (right side; N ¼ 1056) according to the participant’s affiliations (dark gray ¼ professional riders; gray ¼ breeders; light gray ¼ leisure riders; and black ¼ competition riders). a, b denote significant differences within each trait at P < 0.05.
all, rather than just a few breeding animals, were mentioned. The answers are shown in detail in Figure 3. The last question we asked was to what extent the participants agree with 15 statements (Figure 4). In Table 5, the means and the influence of the fixed effects regarding the different groups of horsemen are shown. Especially, riders who have no specific discipline consider primarily personality features, when buying a horse, compared with show jumping riders (t test: N ¼ 1062, 2.3 0.04 vs. 2.6 0.04; P < 0.0001), dressage riders (t test: N ¼ 1062, 2.3 0.04 vs. 2.6 0.03; P < 0.0001), or eventing riders (t test: N ¼ 1062, 2.3 0.04 vs. 2.7 0.06; P < 0.0001). The statement “horses in competitive sports need a difficult personality” is rejected or totally rejected by participants of all disciplines. But riders of the show jumping (4.3 0.04), dressage (4.4 0.03), and
eventing (4.3 0.05) disciplines reject the statement less than western riders (4.7 0.08), baroque riders (4.7 0.1), gaited horse riders (4.7 0.08), or riders who prefer no specific discipline (4.6 0.03). Discussion Method and procedure The advantage of an online survey is the wide range, the time saving in the return, data management (Llieva et al., 2002), and the very low costs for both the researcher and the participants (Witmer et al., 1999). It would have been impossible to have the same participation extent, for example, with a face-to-face survey. On the
322
P. Graf et al. / Journal of Veterinary Behavior 8 (2013) 316e325
Figure 3. Quality improvement of the current personality and temperament assessment named by the participants of the questionnaire (open-field question; N ¼ 507).
other hand, the anonymity could lead to a response distortion and implausible answers (Wright, 2005). To counter this point, the data were sighted and incomplete as well as nonsensical answers were deleted. Sociodemographic and general information The distribution of the participants according to the groups of horsemen and the disciplines as well as their experience with horses shows that we had a representative sample of horse experts (Brade et al., 2011). The gender ratio is also typical for the horse sector in Germany, where a representative survey (Ipsos, 2001) revealed a distribution of 84% female and 16% male horse enthusiasts. The lower average age in our study compared with the standard of riders in Germany (46.4 19.2) (Ipsos, 2001) is reasoned by the distribution within the university and thereby the high percentage of participating students. Both gender ratio and age very closely matched the demographics (84.6% female/15.4% male; average age: 34.2 13.5 years) of a Dutch population of horse enthusiasts participating in an online survey (Visser and Van Wijk-Jansen, 2012). Preferences to different traits of the breeding goal Two similar questions concerning the participants’ preference between the traits of the breeding goal were asked. The intention was to find out if the participants ranked the traits similar, both using scores and the economic weighting. This was the case in 96% of the answers.
The preferences of the participants regarding the traits of the breeding goal are very clear. Both in the weighting with a scale and in the economic weighting, the character, willingness to work, rideability, and temperament traits are more important than the gaits or traits related to conformation or health. The same ranking of traits was found by Teegen et al. (2008) for Trakehner sport horse breeders. Also other authors (Gille and Spiller, 2010; Rumpf, 2011) found similar results, but all of them had lower numbers of participants. The possibility of a bias toward the personality traits because of survey topic and the preceding questions seems therefore unlikely. As a consequence of the importance, many claims about a better implementation of these parameters into breeding programs are arising (Kaufmann and Bruns, 2005; Burger et al., 2007; Graf et al., 2010). The weightings in Euro of the breeding goal traits split by the category of horsemen and the disciplines show clear preferences in case of character/temperament. Competition riders, professional riders, and breeders have weighted this trait significantly lower than leisure riders. Also Gille and Spiller (2010) and Rumpf (2011) found that character and temperament traits are more important for leisure riders. Differences in weighting of the character/ temperament trait according to age and experience with horses could be because of the fact that the older the people are, the more they want to have a more safety handling and riding. The differences between men and women show that women place more importance on personality traits and maybe also take them more into consideration. Rideability seems to be an important trait for each rider or breeder because of missing differences. A horse with a high rideability is easier to ride, educate, and sell. Willingness to work indeed is more important for competition riders than to
P. Graf et al. / Journal of Veterinary Behavior 8 (2013) 316e325
323
Figure 4. Means and standard error of the rating (1 ¼ I strongly agree and 5 ¼ I strongly disagree) of 15 different questions around behavior of horses by group of horsemen (N ¼ 1062). a, b, and c denote significant differences within each trait at P < 0.05.
leisure riders. Competition riders, especially eventing riders, rely on the willingness of the horse for having higher training success and better competition results. The reason of the lower valuing of the jumping ability trait by leisure riders could be the orientation of the leisure riders: most of them did not participate in one of the English disciplines or have any specific discipline at all. As expected, especially show jumping riders and eventing riders valued jumping ability higher, compared with disciplines, such as baroque riding, gaited horse riding, or endurance, where jumping ability plays no role. Assessment of the personality and behavior of horses According to the survey, all the participants assess the personality and behavior of their horses during the daily lives. The low SD showed a rather uniform answer concerning the assessment of behavior. Also, the importance assigned to different
behavior traits is very uniform throughout the participants, categories of horsemen, and disciplines. Therefore, it can be concluded that most of the riders and breeders assess the behavior of their horses consciously or unconsciously during riding and handling. Leisure riders and horse owners in general are more and more inexperienced with horses because of the changes in the structure of agriculture and to the expansion of the horse sport to all social classes (Tietze, 2004). Therefore, it is very important that the horses behave in a way that the inexperienced people can deal with. Furthermore, research suggests that some personality traits of riders and their horses covary and that a higher agreement results in a higher contentment with the horseerider relationship (Wolframm and Meulenbroek, 2012). Therefore, an accurate assessment of behavior traits can lead to improved horseerider pair matches. However, the situation is different in sport horses because professional or experienced riders seem to know how to react to
324
P. Graf et al. / Journal of Veterinary Behavior 8 (2013) 316e325
Table 5 Means (SE), the effect of participants’ age (SE) (per year elder), their experiences with horses (SE) (per year of more experiences), and their gender (SE) (differences between women and men) on the agreement with the statements related to personality in horses (1 ¼ strong agreement to 5 ¼ strong disagreement) Statement
Mean
Aggressive horses in a herd are dangerous for riders Alert horses are often easily scared One has no fun with fearful horses when riding outdoors Sensitive horses accept riders’ aids faster Horses do not have to stand still at the farrier. Positive personality is beneficial in horse training. Calm horses are only suitable for the leisure riding sector When buying a horse, I consider personality features The method of rearing horses influences their personality A horse with a good character is worth more money Horses have to be loaded onto a trailer very quickly Learning ability and motivation are important in horses’ training The behavior of horses in their box is unimportant to me Horses in competitive sport need a difficult personality
3.42 3.54 3.22 3.44 3.87 1.27 4.88 2.15 1.66 1.84 2.21 1.96 3.57 4.74
Age 0.17 0.16 0.17 0.18 0.22 0.11 0.14 0.16 0.15 0.17 0.15 0.13 0.18 0.14
0.01 0.09 0.31 0.19 0.01 0.02 0.07 0.10 0.04 0.16 0.10 0.06 0.11 0.27
Experience
0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.03 0.03
NS *** *** *** NS * *** *** NS *** *** ** ** ***
0.05 0.02 0.10 0.07 0.07 0.01 0.01 0.11 0.04 0.08 0.01 0.04 0.08 0.1
0.04 0.07 0.04 0.04 0.05 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.04 0.07
Gender NS NS ** ** NS NS NS *** NS * NS ** ** **
0.18 0.02 0.14 0.01 0.22 0.14 0.22 0.29 0.15 0.18 0.14 0.02 0.01 0.32
0.07 0.07 0.08 0.08 0.09 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.06 0.06
** NS ** NS * *** *** *** * ** * NS NS ***
SE, standard error; NS, not significant. P > 0.05, ** P > 0.005, and *** P > 0.0005.
*
misbehavior of the horse. Therefore, the behavior during handling is less important for them compared with the willingness to work, sensitivity, and intelligence behavior traits. The latter traits are important for an efficient daily training and successful competition results.
However, these values are estimated and calculated on the basis of the current assessment in stallion performance test, which have been shown to be flawed (Pasing and König von Borstel, 2012).
Personality and temperament (interieur) in horses
Overall, the respondents had limited knowledge about the current procedures in official evaluation of personality and temperament in horses. Those who are informed about the current assessment pointed out that there is a high lack in the quality standard. Therefore, it is unavoidable to improve the procedures. In this point, the participants have a detailed idea how the quality problems could be tackled. All the mentioned possibilities could make the assessment more efficient, and most of them were also suggested and tested by different authors (e.g., Momozawa et al., 2003; Visser et al., 2003; Burger et al., 2007). However, the question remains open in what framework such a new personality assessment could be implemented. The participants have varying opinions about the different statements, resulting for most statements in an overall medium agreement. However, for some statements, clear deviations from the median could be found. For example, a strong agreement was found for the statement that “a positive temperament is a benefit to horse training.” Indeed, earlier research confirmed the importance of temperament to horse training (e.g., Heird et al., 1986; Christensen et al., 2005). Also, the disapproval of the statements that calm a horse suits only the leisure horse sector and that horses for competitions need a difficult character shows a clear deviation from the median. Competition and professional riders, too, prefer calmer horses. In their opinion, calmer horses can just as well win competitions, and with such a horse, both the horse and the rider have less stress. Unsurprisingly, the leisure riders think that a good character is worth more money but surprisingly also competition riders, breeders, and professional riders think so. Loading the horse onto a trailer very quickly is not so important to competition riders compared with leisure riders. On the other hand, learning and motivation are not so important to leisure riders compared with the other groups. The answers of the last questions in the survey thus confirm all the other answers given in the questionnaire.
The term “interieur,” that is, the special term for personality traits, was known by most of the participants. The consensus by more than 70% regarding the underestimation of the importance of horses’ personality in breeding, training, and marketing shows that there is a potential in this sector. Not only in leisure horses but also in sport horses, higher efforts have to be made especially regarding breeding and marketing. For marketing purposes, special labels concerning character and temperament could be established (Rumpf, 2011). In horse breeding, a stringent assessment of character and temperament for all breeding horses is an inevitable step to select the best animals and to improve these traits. This could lead to a genetic evaluation of the character and temperament traits. The dependence of the horses’ training schedule according to their specific personality could lead to a higher success in the training and to more satisfied horses. This should be the aim of every rider, trainer, and breeder. According to the importance of horses’ personality traits, all participants specify a high importance to the traits but with differences between groups of horsemen. During the whole questionnaire, it becomes obvious that the weighting of the traits is closely correlated to the use of the horse. The use of a horse is in turn directly influenced by personality traits. Rumpf (2011) found that independent from the classification in leisure riders and competition riders, personality traits are very important for the purchase decisions. Thus, personality traits are also important for marketing purposes. This is a good argument for a more intensive selection in personality traits, particularly because most of the horsemen are of the opinion that the traits are innate. Therefore, a selection on personality traits could lead to higher profits in selling horses for breeders and horse vendors. The estimations of 66% related to the heritability of the personality traits in our study confirm the widespread general opinion in horsemen and are in the same range with estimates given by breeding authorities (König von Borstel et al., 2013). In contrast, values for heritabilities estimated from performance test data by Schade (1996) are lower and range from 0.3 (temperament) to 0.2 (character), 0.1 (willingness to work), or 0.1 (constitution).
Evaluation of personality and temperament in horses
Conclusion The present survey revealed that diverse opinions regarding equine personality traits exist. Nevertheless, horse experts of different disciplines unanimously considered personality traits as
P. Graf et al. / Journal of Veterinary Behavior 8 (2013) 316e325
highly important. Leisure riders, professional riders, competition riders, or breeders ranked personality traits higher than any other performance trait such as the gaits or conformation traits. The significant differences between the important traits of leisure horses and competition horses show that there is a need in horse breeding to differentiate between the uses of the horses. Especially for marketing purpose, behavior-assessed horse could be a high potential for the future in the leisure horse market. Not only leisure riders but also competition riders note that horses with a balanced temperament simplify the daily work, make more fun, and are more successful in competitions. The current assessment of personality traits in breeding horses, however, is seen as problematic by most respondents. Various strategies such as the evaluation of all breeding animals, creation of new and detailed guidelines and checklists as well as the use of a behavior test to improve the current personality assessment were listed. Hence, it could be concluded that behavior traits are very important to horsemen, that there is a need and a high potential in the behavior assessment of breeding horses, and that a restructuring of the current assessment would be supported by the participants. Acknowledgments The authors thank all the horse enthusiasts who participated in their survey. References Allport, G.W., 1937. Personality: A Psychological Interpretation. Henry Holt, New York, NY. BMVEL (Federal Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Consumer Protection), 2003. Leitlinien für die Veranlagungsprüfung von Hengsten der deutschen Reitpferdezuchten. Brade, W., Distl, O., Sieme, H., Zeyner, A., 2011. Pferdezucht, haltung und fütterungd Empfehlungen für die Praxis (Horse breeding, housing and feedingd recommendations for practice). VTI Agriculture and Forestry Research 353, 192e209 (in German). Burger, D., Imboden, I., Jallon, L., Ionita, J.-C., Rapin, V., Doherr, M., Poncet, P.-A., 2007. Introduction of a behavioural test for Franches-Montagnes horses. In: Hausberger, M., Sondergaard, E., Martin-Rosset, W. (Eds.), Horse Behaviour and Welfare. EAAP Publication 122, Wageningen, NL, pp. 13e22. Christensen, J.W., Keeling, L.J., Lindstrom, N.B., 2005. Response of horses to novel visual, olfactory and auditory stimuli. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 93, 53e65. Christmann, L., 2005. Hannoveraner erlebendPferde für die Freizeit. Der Hannoveraner 9/79, 23-25 (in German). Couzy, C., Godet, J., 2010. Mismatch between breeding elite sport horses and rider amateurs expectations. In: Proceedings of the 61st Annual Meeting of the EAAP, Heraklion, Greece. Dowling-Guyer, S., Marder, A., D’Arpin, S., 2011. Behavioral traits detected in shelter dogs by a behaviour evaluation. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 130, 107e114. Fédération Equestre National (FN), 2011. Jahresbericht 2010, German Equestrian Federation. FN-Verlag, Warendorf, Germany. Gille, C., Spiller, A., 2010. Kundenorientierte Züchtung in der deutschen Reitpferdezucht. Zielgruppensegmentierung im Reitsport: eine empirische Analyse (Customer oriented horse breeding in Germany. Target group segmentation: an empirical analysis). In German with English abstract. Züchtungskunde 82, 229e240. Graf, P., König von Borstel, U., Gauly, M., 2010. Implementation of equine temperament tests in performance tests on station and field. In: Proceedings of the 61st Annual Meeting of the EAAP, Heraklion, Greece. Graf, P., König von Borstel, U., Gauly, M., 2013. Economic evaluation of an objective temperament and personality assessment in horses. In German with English abstract. Züchtungskunde 85/2, 129-142. Górecka-Bruzda, A., Jastrzebska, E., Sosnowska, Z., Jaworski, Z., Jezierski, T., Chruszczewski, M.H., 2011. Reactivity to humans and fearfulness tests: field validation in Polish Cold Blood Horses. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 133, 207e215. Harper, G.C., Makatouni, A., 2002. Consumer perception of organic food production and farm animal welfare. Br. Food J. 104, 287e299. Heird, J.C., Whitaker, D.D., Bell, R.W., Ramsey, C.B., Lokey, C.E., 1986. The effect of handling at different ages on the subsequent learning ability of 2-year-old horses. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 15, 15e25.
325
Hoppe, S., Brandt, H.R., König, S., Erhardt, E., Gauly, M., 2010. Temperament traits of beef calves measured under field conditions and their relationships to performance. J. Anim. Sci. 10, 25e27. Ipsos, 2001. Faszination Zukunft: Neue Perspektiven im PferdesportdFN Marktanalyse (Future fascination: prospects in equestrian sportsdFN market analysis). German Equestrian Federation, Warendorf, Germany (in German). Jones, A.C., Gosling, S.D., 2005. Temperament and personality in dogs (Canis familiaris): a review and evaluation of past research. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 95, 1e53. Kaufmann, A., Bruns, E., 2005. Erfahrungen mit Verhaltenstest zur Interieurbeurteilung (Experience with a behavior test to assess character and temperament in horses). In: Proceedings of the Uelzener Horse-Workshop, DGFZ-Series 38, 13-19 (in German). König von Borstel, U., Pasing, S., Gauly, M., 2011. Towards a more objective assessment of equine personality using behavioural and physiological observations from performance test training. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 135, 277e285. König von Borstel, U., Pasing, S., Gauly, M., Christmann, L., accepted, 2013. Status quo of the personality trait evaluation in horse breeding: judges’ assessment of the situation and strategies for improvement. J. Vet. Behav.: Clin. Appl. Res., 1e9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jveb.2013.04.066. Likert, R., 1932. A technique for the measurement of attitudes. Arch. Psychol. 140, 1e55. Llieva, J., Baron, S., Healey, N.M., 2002. Online surveys in marketing research: pros and cons. Int. J. Market Res. 44, 361e367. Momozawa, Y., Tomoko, O., Fumio, S., Kikusui, T., Takeuchi, Y., Mori, Y., Kusunos, R., 2003. Assessment of equine temperament by a questionnaire survey to caretakers and evaluation of its reliability by simultaneous behavior test. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 84, 127e138. Pasing, S., Christmann, L., Gauly, M., König von Borstel, U., 2011. Analysis of the status quo of personality evaluation in German horse breeding. In: Proceedings of the 62nd Annual Meeting of the European Association for Animal Production, Stavanger, Norway. Pasing, S., König von Borstel, U., 2012. Evidence of grade inflation in personality trait scores from stallion performance tests. In: Proceedings of the 8th International Equitation Science Conference, Edinburgh, UK. Rumpf, C., 2011. Einflussfaktoren beim Pferdekauf und deren Bedeutung für Turnierund Freizeitreiter. Eine empirische Untersuchung auf Basis einer DiscretChoice-Analyse (Influences when buying a horse and its importance to competitions and leisure riders. An empirical study on basis of a discretchoice analysis). In: Proceeding of the Goettinger Pferdetage 2011, Goettingen, Germany (in German). SAS Institute, Inc., 2009. SAS/STAT User’s Guide. Version 9.2. SAS Institute, Inc., Cary, NC. Schade, W., 1996. Entwicklung eines Besamungszuchtprogramms für die Hannoversche Warmblutzucht (Development of an insemination breeding program for the Hanoverian warmblood breed) [PhD thesis]. Georg-August-Universität Göttingen, Germany (in German). Tietze, T.K., 2004. Ökonomische, ökologische und gesellschaftliche Effekte von Pferdesport, -zucht und -haltung. Eine biokybernetische Analyse für Deutschland (Economic, ecological and social aspects of equestrian sports, horse breeding and housing. A biocybernetic analysis in Germany) [PhD thesis]. Leibnitz University Hannover, Germany (in German). Teegen, R., Edel, C., Thaller, G., 2008. Bewertung der Zuchtzielmerkmale des Trakehner Verbandes mit Hilfe der kontingenten Befragungsmethode (Evaluation of the Trakehner breeding goal characteristics with help of contingent valuation method) (“contingent valuation method”, CV). In German with English abstract. Züchtungskunde 80, 99e113. Tönepöhl, B., Appel, A.K., Welp, S., Biermann, A., Voß, B., König von Borstel, U., Gauly, M., 2012. Effect of marginal environmental and social enrichment during rearing on pigs’ reaction to novelty, conspecifics and handling. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 140, 137e145. Visser, E.K., Van Reenen, C.G., Rundgren, M., Zetterqvist, M., Morgan, K., Blokhuis, H.J., 2003. Responses of horses in behavioural tests correlate with temperament assessed by riders. Equine Vet. J. 35, 176e183. Visser, E.K., Van Wijk-Jansen, E.E.C., 2012. Diversity in horse enthusiasts with respect to horse welfare: an explorative study. J. Vet. Behav.: Clin. Appl. Res. 7, 295e304. Witmer, D.F., Colman, R.W., Katzman, S.L., 1999. From paper-and-pencil to screenand-keyboard: toward a methodology for survey research on the Internet. In: Jones, S. (Ed.), Doing Internet Research: Critical Issues and Methods for Examining the Net. SAGE Publications, Inc., Thousand Oaks, CA, pp. 145e161. http:// dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781452231471. Wolframm, I.A., Meulenbroek, R.G.J., 2012. Co-variations between perceived personality traits and quality of the interaction between female riders and horses. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 139, 96e104. Wright, K.B., 2005. Researching Internet-based populations: advantages and disadvantages of online survey research, online questionnaire authoring software packages and web survey services. J. Comput. Mediat. Commun. 10, 11.