26/01/2026
Anche i cavalli, oltre ai cani, provano l'ansia da separazione?
What we label as “separation anxiety” in horses is not a flaw in character, a lack of confidence, or disobedience. At its core, it is an adaptive survival response in a highly social prey species.
Horses evolved to live in groups where safety is shared. Proximity to others means more eyes scanning, faster detection of threat, and greater chances of survival. From an evolutionary and neurobiological perspective, sudden isolation does not register as a neutral event. It can register as loss of protection. When a horse becomes distressed on separation, the autonomic nervous system is not malfunctioning. It is doing what it was designed to do.
This response is largely physiological, not cognitive. The moment perceived safety drops, sympathetic arousal can rise, vagal tone can decrease, and the stress axis (HPA axis) can activate. Heart rate increases, breathing changes, muscle tone rises, attention narrows, and the drive to reunite becomes urgent. In social mammals, proximity to familiar companions is also associated with social buffering effects, including lower cortisol levels and greater nervous system stability. Research in horses shows synchronisation of heart rates and emotional states within bonded pairs and herds. This is not sentimentality. It is biology.
Early experience matters. How foals are weaned, how separations are introduced, whether attachment figures disappear abruptly or predictably, and whether the nervous system learns that distance can be tolerated and safety reliably returns, all shape later responses. Trauma, sudden losses, repeated forced isolation, or inconsistent handling can sensitise this system further. What looks like “over-attachment” is often a nervous system that never learned that connection can stretch without becoming life-threatening.
At the same time, not all horses respond identically. Genetics, temperament, breed tendencies, and individual neurobiology all influence separation thresholds. Some horses are naturally more exploratory and flexible, others more vigilant and proximity-seeking. Variation is normal in any species. Distress on separation is not always trauma-based, but it is always state-based.
Herd dynamics also play a role. Certain individuals provide powerful regulatory cues to others. Their presence can lower arousal, stabilise attention, and create a felt sense of safety. Removing such a companion does not only remove “company.” It removes a source of nervous-system regulation. The resulting agitation is not psychological dependence in a human sense, but loss of social buffering in a prey nervous system.
This is where many conventional approaches go wrong. Forcing stillness, flooding with prolonged isolation, or punishing attempts to reconnect may reduce outward behaviour, but they do not necessarily restore regulation. Suppressed expression is not the same as a settled nervous system. Overwhelm can lead to shutdown or to patterns that resemble learned helplessness. The body may become quiet, but the alarm has not been resolved.
This does not mean that separation tolerance is unnecessary or that training is irrelevant. Horses must sometimes cope with distance for veterinary care, transport, emergencies, and practical management. The distinction lies in how that capacity is built. Evidence from learning theory and neuroscience supports gradual exposure that stays within the horse’s window of tolerance, where arousal can rise without tipping into panic, and where the horse can still breathe, orient, respond, and recover, rather than abrupt flooding that overwhelms the system.
True independence in a social prey animal is not created by proving that isolation must be endured. It develops when the nervous system repeatedly experiences that separation is survivable, temporary, and safe. Regulation comes before resilience. A horse that can pause, soften, and think when alone is not one that has been forced to “toughen up.” It is one whose body has learned, through experience, that aloneness does not equal danger.
When we view separation distress through this lens, it stops being a behavioural problem to suppress and becomes a biological system to support. Independence is no longer something imposed. It is something that emerges when safety is felt, not when fear is overridden.