↓ Skip to main content

Visual laterality in the domestic horse (Equus caballus) interacting with humans

Overview of attention for article published in Animal Cognition, July 2009
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (90th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Citations

dimensions_citation
71 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
152 Mendeley
Title
Visual laterality in the domestic horse (Equus caballus) interacting with humans
Published in
Animal Cognition, July 2009
DOI 10.1007/s10071-009-0260-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kate Farmer, Konstanze Krueger, Richard W. Byrne

Abstract

Most horses have a side on which they are easier to handle and a direction they favour when working on a circle, and recent studies have suggested a correlation between emotion and visual laterality when horses observe inanimate objects. As such lateralisation could provide important clues regarding the horse's cognitive processes, we investigated whether horses also show laterality in association with people. We gave horses the choice of entering a chute to left or right, with and without the passive, non-interactive presence of a person unknown to them. The left eye was preferred for scanning under both conditions, but significantly more so when a person was present. Traditionally, riders handle horses only from the left, so we repeated the experiment with horses specifically trained on both sides. Again, there was a consistent preference for left eye scanning in the presence of a person, whether known to the horses or not. We also examined horses interacting with a person, using both traditionally and bilaterally trained horses. Both groups showed left eye preference for viewing the person, regardless of training and test procedure. For those horses tested under both passive and interactive conditions, the left eye was preferred significantly more during interaction. We suggest that most horses prefer to use their left eye for assessment and evaluation, and that there is an emotional aspect to the choice which may be positive or negative, depending on the circumstances. We believe these results have important practical implications and that emotional laterality should be taken into account in training methods.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 152 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 146 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 30 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 23 15%
Student > Master 21 14%
Researcher 16 11%
Other 13 9%
Other 26 17%
Unknown 23 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 63 41%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 22 14%
Psychology 16 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 1%
Other 10 7%
Unknown 33 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 13 January 2021.
All research outputs
#2,682,624
of 22,660,862 outputs
Outputs from Animal Cognition
#541
of 1,439 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#8,785
of 95,457 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Animal Cognition
#6
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,660,862 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,439 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 33.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 95,457 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.