Araştırma Makalesi
BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster

Clicker Yönteminin Atlarda Duyarsızlaştırma Eğitimine Etkisi

Yıl 2022, , 223 - 232, 30.06.2022

Özlem Gücüyener Hacan , Sibel Danışan , Ceyhan Özbeyaz

https://doi.org/10.30607/kvj.1100512

Öz

Eğitim sırasında verilen görevi kendi istekleriyle yerine getirmeleri, atların refahı ve başarıları açısından oldukça önemlidir. Bu amaçla atların temel eğitimleri sırasında ürkekliklerinin azaltılması ve çeşitli seslere, nesnelere karşı alışmalarının sağlanması için duyarsızlaştırma eğitimlerinde bazı parkurlardan yararlanılmaktadır. Bu araştırmada atların farklı zemin üzerinde yürüme ve nesneler arasından geçme (dar alan, top, şemsiye, halka, branda, yandan engelli kapı ve üstten engelli kapı) gibi bazı görevleri yerine getirmesi sırasında clicker metodunun kullanımının atın parkurdaki başarısına etkisi araştırılmıştır. Bu amaçla 14 baş Arap kısraktan yararlanılmıştır. Atların parkurda görevleri yerine getirme başarıları, kalp atım hızları ve davranışları incelenmiştir. Üstten engelli kapı görevini başarma ortalaması, clicker uygulanan grupta (%100) kontrol grubuna (%43) göre önemli düzeyde (P<0.05) yüksek bulunmuştur. Ortalama kalp atım hızı clicker uygulanan grupta (139.28 adet/dk) kontrol grubuna (109.42 adet/dk) göre önemli düzeyde (P<0.01) yüksek olmuştur. Kontrol grubunda clicker uygulanan gruba göre; ani durma, süratli veya dörtnala kalkma davranışlarının önemli derecede (P<0.01) yüksek olduğu belirlenmiştir. Sonuç olarak, clicker yönteminin atlar tarafından hızla öğrenilen, uygulaması kolay ve maliyeti düşük bir yöntem olması ve aynı zamanda görevlerin başarılmasındaki etkinliği nedeniyle at eğitiminde kullanılması tavsiye edilebilir. Bununla birlikte, clicker metodu kullanılarak atın görevleri kendi isteğiyle yerine getirmesinin hem antrenörün güvenliği hem de hayvan refahı açısından önemli olduğu söylenebilir. 

Anahtar Kelimeler

At Clicker Metodu Davranış Temelli Eğitim Öğrenme Teorisi duyarsızlaştırma

Kaynakça

  • 1. Anonim. SPSS Statistical Package in Social Sciences for Windows. Statistical Innovations Inc. Chicago, USA, 2022.
  • 2. Bartlett K. Clicker Basics: What is equine clicker training and how do you apply it to horses? http://www.equineclickertraining.com/articles/plus_r_training_page_new.html, 2009.
  • 3. Bornhede M. Training techniques used in training horses (Equus Caballus) - with a focus on positive reinforcement. Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Department of Animal Environment and Health Ethology and Animal Welfare programme, Student report 329, Skara, 2010.
  • 4. Boyd L, Houpt KA. Prezwalski’s Horse- The history and biology of an endangered species. State University of New York Press, New York, 1994.
  • 5. Breland K, Breland M. A field of applied animal psychology. American Psychologist, 1951; 6: 202-204.
  • 6. Breland K, Breland M. Animal behavior. New York: The MacMillan Company. Dennison, 1966.
  • 7. Dai F, Dalla Costa A, Bonfanti L, Caucci C, Di Martino G, Lucarelli R, Padalino B, Minero M. Positive reinforcement-based training for self-loading of meat horses reduces loading time and stress-related behavior. Frontiers in Veterinary Science, 2019; 6: 1-6.
  • 8. Danışan S, Özbeyaz C. The Effect of the Combination of Various Training Methodologies in Horse Training on the Learning Performances of Arabian Horses. Livestock Studies, 2021; 61(2): 66-76.
  • 9. D'Onofrio J. Measuring the efficiency of clicker training for service dogs. Master Thesis. The Pennsylvania State University, Department of Education Psychology, Counseling, and Special Education, Pennsylvania, 2015.
  • 10. Ferguson DL, Rosales-Ruiz J. Loading the problem loader: The effects of target training and shaping on trailer-loading behavior of horses. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 2001; 34: 409–424.
  • 11. Flannery B. Relational discrimination learning in horses. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 1997; 54: 267–280.
  • 12. Freymond SB, Briefer EF, Zollinger A, Gindrat-von Allmen Y, Wyss C, Bachmann. Behaviour of horses in a judgment bias test associated withpositive or negative reinforcement. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 2014; 158: 34–45.
  • 13. Fugazza C. Miklósi A. Social learning in dog training: The effectiveness of the do as I do method compared to shaping/clicker training. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 2015; 171: 146–151.
  • 14. Hall C, Kay R, Yarnell K. Assessing ridden horse behavior: Professional judgment and physiological measures. Journal of Veterinary Behavior, 2014; 9: 22-29.
  • 15. Hendriksena P, Elmgreena K, Ladewigb J. Trailer-loading of horses: Is there a difference between positive and negative reinforcement concerning effectiveness and stress-related signs? Journal of Veterinary Behavior, 2011; 6: 261-266.
  • 16. Hockenhulla J, Creighton E. Unwanted oral investigative behaviour in horses: A note on the relationship between mugging behaviour, hand-feeding titbits and clicker training. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 2010; 127: 104–107.
  • 17. Hockenhulla J, Creighton E. Training horses: Positive reinforcement, positive punishment, and ridden behavior problems. Journal of Veterinary Behavior, 2013; 8: 245-252.
  • 18. Innes L, McBride S. Negative versus positive reinforcement: An evaluation of training strategies for rehabilitated horses. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 2008; 112: 357–368.
  • 19. Keiper R. The assateague ponies. Tidewater Publishers, Centreville, MD, 1985.
  • 20. Kurland A. Clicker training for your horse. Ringpress Books, Lydney, 2001.
  • 21. Langbein J, Siebert K, Nuernberg G, Manteuffel G. The impact of acoustical secondary reinforcement during shape discrimination learning of dwarf goats (Capra Hircus). Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 2007; 103 (1-2): 35-44.
  • 22. Leidinger C, Herrmann F, Thöne-Reineke C, Baumgart N, Baumgart J. Introducing clicker training as a cognitive enrichment for laboratory mice. Journal of Visualized Experiments, 2017; 121: 1-12.
  • 23. Lindsay SR. Handbook of applied dog behavior and training, adaptation and learning. Blackwell Publishing, Iowa, 2000.
  • 24. Lindsay A, Wood MA. Clicker bridging stimulus efficacy. Master Thesis, Hunter College, New York, New York, 2007.
  • 25. McDonnell S, Poulin A. Equid play ethogram. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 2002; 78: 263-290.
  • 26. McDonnell SM, Haviland JCS. Agonistic ethogram of the equid bachelor band. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 1995; 43: 147–188.
  • 27. McGreevy PD, Oddie C, Burton FL, McLean AN. The horse–human dyad: Can we align horse training and handling activities with the equid social ethogram? The Veterinary Journal, 2009; 181: 12–18.
  • 28. McLean AN, Christensen JW. The application of learning theory in horse training. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 2017; 190: 18–27.
  • 29. McLean AN. Overshadowing: a silver lining to a dark cloud in horse training? Journal Applied Animal Welfare Science, 2008; 11: 236–248.
  • 30. Mills DS, Marchant-Forde JN, McGreevy PD, Morton DB, Nicol C, Phillips CJC, Sandøe P, Swaisgood RR. Encyclopedia of applied animal behaviour and welfare (Eds.), CAB International, UK, 2010.
  • 31. Paredes-Ramos P, Diaz-Morales J, Espinosa-Palencia M, Coria-Avila G, Carrasco-Garcia A. Clicker training accelerates learning of complex behaviors but reduces discriminative abilities of yucatan miniature pigs. Animals, 2020; 10: 1-11.
  • 32. Pryor K. Don’t shoot the dog! The new art of teaching and training, 2nd ed. Bantam Books, New York, New York, 1999.
  • 33. Pryor K. Getting started: Clicker training for dogs, Rev. ed. Sunshine Books, Inc., Waltham, MA, 2005; pp. 3–7.
  • 34. Sankey C, Richard-Yris MA, Henry S, Fureix C, Nassur F, Hausberger M. Reinforcement as a mediator of the perception of humans by horses (Equus caballus). Animal Cognition, 2010; 13: 753–764.
  • 35. Seaman SC, Davidson HPB, Waran NK. How reliable is temperament assessment in the domestic horse (Equus caballus)? Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 2002; 78: 175–191
  • 36. Skinner BF. The behavior of organisms. An experimental analysis. Appleton-Century Company, Inc., New York, 1938; pp. 61–74.
  • 37. Skinner BF. How to teach animals. Scientific American, 1951; 185: 26-29.
  • 38. Slater C, Dymond S. Using differential reinforcement to improve equine welfare: Shaping appropriate truck loading and feet handling. Behavioural Processes, 2011; 86: 329–339.
  • 39. Smith SM, Davis ES. Clicker increases resistance to extinction but does not decrease training time of a simple operant task in domestic dogs (Canis familiaris). Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 2008; 110: 318–329.
  • 40. Thorpe WH. Learning and instinct in animals. 2nd ed. Methuen, UK, 1963.
  • 41. Williams BA. Conditioned reinforcement: experimental and theoretical issues. Behavior Analyst, 1994; 17 (2): 261–285.
  • 42. Williams JL, Friend TH, Nevill CH, Archer G. The efficacy of a secondary reinforcer (clicker) during acquisition and extinction of an operant task in horses. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 2004; 88, 331–341.
  • 43. Williams JL, Friend TH, Nevill CH, Archer G. The efficacy of a secondary reinforcer (Clicker) during acquisition and extinction of an operant task in horses. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 2004; 88: 331–341.

The Efficacy of Clicker Method During Desensitising Horse

Yıl 2022, , 223 - 232, 30.06.2022

Özlem Gücüyener Hacan , Sibel Danışan , Ceyhan Özbeyaz

https://doi.org/10.30607/kvj.1100512

Öz

Encouraging horses to do tasks willingly during training relating to their welfare is important. Horses are trained for desensitization using de-spooking tracks. In this study, the efficacy of using the clicker method during desensitization to obstacles and novel objects is investigated. Fourteen Arabian horses participated in the study. Their success in completing the tasks, as well as their heart rate and behaviour were examined. The average achievement for the hanging pool noodle door task was significantly higher (P<0.05) in the clicker group (100%) than in the control group (43%). Average heart rate is highly significant (P<0.01) in the clicker group (139.28 pcs/minute) than the control group (109.42 pcs/minute). In the scope of frightening behaviours, "trot" was determined highly significant (P<0.01) in the control group than the clicker group. Clicker training appears to provide an advantage due to its ease of application, low cost, and fast learning by horses. The findings suggest that this method is advisable because of its efficacy during desensitising of horses using the de-spooking track. Fulfilling tasks willingly during training is also important for the horse’s welfare and trainer’s safety.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Behavioral Training Clicker Method Horse Learning Theory desensitising

Kaynakça

  • 1. Anonim. SPSS Statistical Package in Social Sciences for Windows. Statistical Innovations Inc. Chicago, USA, 2022.
  • 2. Bartlett K. Clicker Basics: What is equine clicker training and how do you apply it to horses? http://www.equineclickertraining.com/articles/plus_r_training_page_new.html, 2009.
  • 3. Bornhede M. Training techniques used in training horses (Equus Caballus) - with a focus on positive reinforcement. Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Department of Animal Environment and Health Ethology and Animal Welfare programme, Student report 329, Skara, 2010.
  • 4. Boyd L, Houpt KA. Prezwalski’s Horse- The history and biology of an endangered species. State University of New York Press, New York, 1994.
  • 5. Breland K, Breland M. A field of applied animal psychology. American Psychologist, 1951; 6: 202-204.
  • 6. Breland K, Breland M. Animal behavior. New York: The MacMillan Company. Dennison, 1966.
  • 7. Dai F, Dalla Costa A, Bonfanti L, Caucci C, Di Martino G, Lucarelli R, Padalino B, Minero M. Positive reinforcement-based training for self-loading of meat horses reduces loading time and stress-related behavior. Frontiers in Veterinary Science, 2019; 6: 1-6.
  • 8. Danışan S, Özbeyaz C. The Effect of the Combination of Various Training Methodologies in Horse Training on the Learning Performances of Arabian Horses. Livestock Studies, 2021; 61(2): 66-76.
  • 9. D'Onofrio J. Measuring the efficiency of clicker training for service dogs. Master Thesis. The Pennsylvania State University, Department of Education Psychology, Counseling, and Special Education, Pennsylvania, 2015.
  • 10. Ferguson DL, Rosales-Ruiz J. Loading the problem loader: The effects of target training and shaping on trailer-loading behavior of horses. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 2001; 34: 409–424.
  • 11. Flannery B. Relational discrimination learning in horses. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 1997; 54: 267–280.
  • 12. Freymond SB, Briefer EF, Zollinger A, Gindrat-von Allmen Y, Wyss C, Bachmann. Behaviour of horses in a judgment bias test associated withpositive or negative reinforcement. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 2014; 158: 34–45.
  • 13. Fugazza C. Miklósi A. Social learning in dog training: The effectiveness of the do as I do method compared to shaping/clicker training. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 2015; 171: 146–151.
  • 14. Hall C, Kay R, Yarnell K. Assessing ridden horse behavior: Professional judgment and physiological measures. Journal of Veterinary Behavior, 2014; 9: 22-29.
  • 15. Hendriksena P, Elmgreena K, Ladewigb J. Trailer-loading of horses: Is there a difference between positive and negative reinforcement concerning effectiveness and stress-related signs? Journal of Veterinary Behavior, 2011; 6: 261-266.
  • 16. Hockenhulla J, Creighton E. Unwanted oral investigative behaviour in horses: A note on the relationship between mugging behaviour, hand-feeding titbits and clicker training. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 2010; 127: 104–107.
  • 17. Hockenhulla J, Creighton E. Training horses: Positive reinforcement, positive punishment, and ridden behavior problems. Journal of Veterinary Behavior, 2013; 8: 245-252.
  • 18. Innes L, McBride S. Negative versus positive reinforcement: An evaluation of training strategies for rehabilitated horses. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 2008; 112: 357–368.
  • 19. Keiper R. The assateague ponies. Tidewater Publishers, Centreville, MD, 1985.
  • 20. Kurland A. Clicker training for your horse. Ringpress Books, Lydney, 2001.
  • 21. Langbein J, Siebert K, Nuernberg G, Manteuffel G. The impact of acoustical secondary reinforcement during shape discrimination learning of dwarf goats (Capra Hircus). Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 2007; 103 (1-2): 35-44.
  • 22. Leidinger C, Herrmann F, Thöne-Reineke C, Baumgart N, Baumgart J. Introducing clicker training as a cognitive enrichment for laboratory mice. Journal of Visualized Experiments, 2017; 121: 1-12.
  • 23. Lindsay SR. Handbook of applied dog behavior and training, adaptation and learning. Blackwell Publishing, Iowa, 2000.
  • 24. Lindsay A, Wood MA. Clicker bridging stimulus efficacy. Master Thesis, Hunter College, New York, New York, 2007.
  • 25. McDonnell S, Poulin A. Equid play ethogram. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 2002; 78: 263-290.
  • 26. McDonnell SM, Haviland JCS. Agonistic ethogram of the equid bachelor band. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 1995; 43: 147–188.
  • 27. McGreevy PD, Oddie C, Burton FL, McLean AN. The horse–human dyad: Can we align horse training and handling activities with the equid social ethogram? The Veterinary Journal, 2009; 181: 12–18.
  • 28. McLean AN, Christensen JW. The application of learning theory in horse training. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 2017; 190: 18–27.
  • 29. McLean AN. Overshadowing: a silver lining to a dark cloud in horse training? Journal Applied Animal Welfare Science, 2008; 11: 236–248.
  • 30. Mills DS, Marchant-Forde JN, McGreevy PD, Morton DB, Nicol C, Phillips CJC, Sandøe P, Swaisgood RR. Encyclopedia of applied animal behaviour and welfare (Eds.), CAB International, UK, 2010.
  • 31. Paredes-Ramos P, Diaz-Morales J, Espinosa-Palencia M, Coria-Avila G, Carrasco-Garcia A. Clicker training accelerates learning of complex behaviors but reduces discriminative abilities of yucatan miniature pigs. Animals, 2020; 10: 1-11.
  • 32. Pryor K. Don’t shoot the dog! The new art of teaching and training, 2nd ed. Bantam Books, New York, New York, 1999.
  • 33. Pryor K. Getting started: Clicker training for dogs, Rev. ed. Sunshine Books, Inc., Waltham, MA, 2005; pp. 3–7.
  • 34. Sankey C, Richard-Yris MA, Henry S, Fureix C, Nassur F, Hausberger M. Reinforcement as a mediator of the perception of humans by horses (Equus caballus). Animal Cognition, 2010; 13: 753–764.
  • 35. Seaman SC, Davidson HPB, Waran NK. How reliable is temperament assessment in the domestic horse (Equus caballus)? Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 2002; 78: 175–191
  • 36. Skinner BF. The behavior of organisms. An experimental analysis. Appleton-Century Company, Inc., New York, 1938; pp. 61–74.
  • 37. Skinner BF. How to teach animals. Scientific American, 1951; 185: 26-29.
  • 38. Slater C, Dymond S. Using differential reinforcement to improve equine welfare: Shaping appropriate truck loading and feet handling. Behavioural Processes, 2011; 86: 329–339.
  • 39. Smith SM, Davis ES. Clicker increases resistance to extinction but does not decrease training time of a simple operant task in domestic dogs (Canis familiaris). Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 2008; 110: 318–329.
  • 40. Thorpe WH. Learning and instinct in animals. 2nd ed. Methuen, UK, 1963.
  • 41. Williams BA. Conditioned reinforcement: experimental and theoretical issues. Behavior Analyst, 1994; 17 (2): 261–285.
  • 42. Williams JL, Friend TH, Nevill CH, Archer G. The efficacy of a secondary reinforcer (clicker) during acquisition and extinction of an operant task in horses. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 2004; 88, 331–341.
  • 43. Williams JL, Friend TH, Nevill CH, Archer G. The efficacy of a secondary reinforcer (Clicker) during acquisition and extinction of an operant task in horses. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 2004; 88: 331–341.
Toplam 43 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil İngilizce
Konular Veteriner Cerrahi
Bölüm ARAŞTIRMA MAKALESİ
Yazarlar

Özlem Gücüyener Hacan 0000-0001-6340-1117

Sibel Danışan 0000-0002-2621-4555

Ceyhan Özbeyaz 0000-0002-3748-9992

Yayımlanma Tarihi 30 Haziran 2022
Kabul Tarihi 27 Mayıs 2022
Yayımlandığı Sayı Yıl 2022

Kaynak Göster

APA Gücüyener Hacan, Ö., Danışan, S., & Özbeyaz, C. (2022). The Efficacy of Clicker Method During Desensitising Horse. Kocatepe Veterinary Journal, 15(2), 223-232. https://doi.org/10.30607/kvj.1100512
AMA Gücüyener Hacan Ö, Danışan S, Özbeyaz C. The Efficacy of Clicker Method During Desensitising Horse. kvj. Haziran 2022;15(2):223-232. doi:10.30607/kvj.1100512
Chicago Gücüyener Hacan, Özlem, Sibel Danışan, ve Ceyhan Özbeyaz. “The Efficacy of Clicker Method During Desensitising Horse”. Kocatepe Veterinary Journal 15, sy. 2 (Haziran 2022): 223-32. https://doi.org/10.30607/kvj.1100512.
EndNote Gücüyener Hacan Ö, Danışan S, Özbeyaz C (01 Haziran 2022) The Efficacy of Clicker Method During Desensitising Horse. Kocatepe Veterinary Journal 15 2 223–232.
IEEE Ö. Gücüyener Hacan, S. Danışan, ve C. Özbeyaz, “The Efficacy of Clicker Method During Desensitising Horse”, kvj, c. 15, sy. 2, ss. 223–232, 2022, doi: 10.30607/kvj.1100512.
ISNAD Gücüyener Hacan, Özlem vd. “The Efficacy of Clicker Method During Desensitising Horse”. Kocatepe Veterinary Journal 15/2 (Haziran 2022), 223-232. https://doi.org/10.30607/kvj.1100512.
JAMA Gücüyener Hacan Ö, Danışan S, Özbeyaz C. The Efficacy of Clicker Method During Desensitising Horse. kvj. 2022;15:223–232.
MLA Gücüyener Hacan, Özlem vd. “The Efficacy of Clicker Method During Desensitising Horse”. Kocatepe Veterinary Journal, c. 15, sy. 2, 2022, ss. 223-32, doi:10.30607/kvj.1100512.
Vancouver Gücüyener Hacan Ö, Danışan S, Özbeyaz C. The Efficacy of Clicker Method During Desensitising Horse. kvj. 2022;15(2):223-32.

13520    13521       13522   1352314104

14105         14106        14107       14108