CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 21Veterinary Equine Medical ResearchAnimal Behavior and Welfare StudiesVeterinary Pharmacology and Anesthesia

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 40 of the 40 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Bit use and its relevance for rider safety, rider satisfaction and horse welfare in equestrian sport

Open access
Luke, Karen L., McAdie, Tina, Warren-Smith, Amanda K., Smith, Bradley P.·2023·Applied Animal Behaviour Science
DOI 10.1016/j.applanim.2023.105855
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Using a bit to communicate with and control the horse while riding is one of the longest standing traditions in horse riding. However, horses’ aversion to bits and high levels of bit-induced trauma have led some to question whether this practice is commensurate with modern understanding of animal welfare. This study represents one of the first attempts to compare horses ridden with and without a bit in terms of horse welfare, rider safety and rider satisfaction. Australian recreational and sport horse riders (n = 399, 94.4% female; Mdn age=46.0 years) from a range of riding disciplines were anonymously surveyed online. Only n = 20 (5.0%) participants reported riding without a bit, however, this is likely consistent with the recreational horse-riding population, given riding with a bit is mandated in most equestrian sports. A whole sample analysis and a case-matched analysis were performed where cases were matched based on horse breed and age, discipline, and rider age. Whole sample analyses found horses ridden without a bit have better relative welfare scores for management, and during riding and handling compared to horses ridden with a bit (Mdn 13.0, IQR 2.0 and Mdn 11.0, IQR 5.0; Mdn 35.0, IQR 9.0 and Mdn 32.0, IQR 6.0; and Mdn 24.0, IQR 3.25 and Mdn 23.0 IQR 4.0 respectively, p < 0.05), but did not differ in relation to health. Fewer ridden hyperreactive behaviours (bucking, spooking, rearing and bolting) were reported for bitless horses compared with bitted horses (Mdn 0.0, IQR 1.0 and Mdn 1.0, IQR 4.0, respectively, p = 0.04), however, rider safety and perceived control were similar for both groups. Riders of bitless horses were more satisfied than riders of bitted horses (Mdn 16.0, IQR 2.0 and Mdn 14.0, IQR 4.0, respectively, p = 0.01) and reported better horse-rider partnerships (Mdn 4.0, IQR 0.0 and Mdn 3.0, IQR 1.0, respectively, p < 0.001). More riders of bitless horses had knowledge of learning theory than riders of bitted horses (55.0% and 23.0% respectively, p = 0.003). Results from the case-matched analysis were consistent with the whole sample results, except for rider satisfaction and knowledge of learning theory which were not statistically significant. These findings suggest that bitless riding is not related to reduced horse control or rider safety, but is related to greater rider satisfaction and improved horse-rider partnership. Considering current challenges to the industry’s social licence to operate due to poor horse welfare, increased adoption of bitless riding may present a valuable opportunity to improve horse welfare.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.applanim.2023.105855

Cites

40 of 40 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Hitchens, P.L. (2017). The power of collaboration: improvements to safety and welfare in racing. In H. Randle, N. Waran, & L. Kent (Eds.), Proceedings 13th International Equitation Science Conference (pp. 50–51). International Society for Equitation Science.
  2. Vernam, G. (1972). Man on Horseback. University of Nebraska Press.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 21

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Luke, K. L., McAdie, T., Warren-Smith, A. K., & Smith, B. P.
Affiliations
  • Central Queensland University (AU)
  • New South Wales Department of Primary Industries (AU)
Corresponding author
Luke, Karen L.
ORCID
Venue
Applied Animal Behaviour Science
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2023-02
Volume
259
Pages
105855
ISSN
0168-1591 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.applanim.2023.105855
OpenAlex
W4318562128
Cited by
21
References
40
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 4
FWCI
6.88
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Applied Animal Behaviour Science (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Veterinary › Equine › Veterinary Equine Medical Research
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Animal Science and Zoology › Animal Behavior and Welfare Studies
  • Health Sciences › Veterinary › Small Animals › Veterinary Pharmacology and Anesthesia
Keywords
equestrian sport, equine welfare, rider safety, rider satisfaction, horse handling, horse management, equine welfare assessment

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review