Abstract
Based on interviews with guide dog users from Sweden, Estonia and Germany and participatory observation of the teams’ work, the article discusses three kinds of semiotic challenges encountered by the guide dog teams: perceptual, sociocultural and communicative challenges. Perceptual challenges stem from a mismatch between affordances of the urban environment and perceptual and motoric abilities of the team. Sociocultural challenges pertain to the conflicting meanings that are attributed to (guide) dogs in different social contexts and to incompatible social norms. Challenges related to intrateam communication and interpretation of the other counterpart’s behavior are mostly tied to the difficulties of placing the other’s activities in the right context. Germany, Estonia and Sweden differ in their history of guide dog institutions and the organisation of guide dog work, but the challenges of the guide dog users appear to be fairly similar. However, differences appear in the stress laid on one or another type of challenge as well as in the explanations provided by the informants for the background of the challenges. The challenges, as analysed in the article, reflect not only the existing problems of guide dog users, but also their expectations for a social and physical environment, in which the teams would feel welcome.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
The sources for this information are: for Germany Der Blindenführhund 2006, for Sweden interview with the head of guide dogs section by the Swedish National Association of the Visually Impaired Ulrika Norelius Centervik, 5.06.2013, Stockholm and for Estonia communication with the Board of the Estonian Association of Guide Dog Users.
The information is obtained from correspondence with Sabine Häcker and Robert Böhm from German Federation of the Blind and Partially Sighted (DBSV) for Germany; from an interview with Ulrika Norelius Centervik from the Swedish National Association of the Visually Impaired (SRF) (5.06.2013, Stockholm) for Sweden; and from correspondence with the Board of the Estonian Association of Guide Dog Users for Estonia.
Livsmedelsverket. Får man ta med sig sin ledarhund på restaurang eller i en livsmedelsbutik?: http://www.slv.se/sv/Fragor--svar/Fragor-och-svar/Hygien-och-hallbarhet/Far-man-ta-med-sig-sin-ledarhund-pa-restaurang-eller-i-en-livsmedelsbutik/ Accessed 21.09.2014
In conjunction with the Regulation (EC) No 852/2004 of the European Parliament, http://www.miljohalsoskydd.ax/Gemensamt/Filer/Riktlinjer%20egenkontroll%20.pdf
Accessed 21.09.2014
Sozialgesetzbuch (SGB): www.sozialgesetzbuch-sgb.de/ Accessed 21.09.2014
“Betreten von Lebensmittelgeschäften mit Blindenführhund oder Assistenzhund erlaubt” (Bundesministerium für Ernährung und Landwirtschaft): http://www.bmelv.de/DE/Ernaehrung/SichereLebensmittel/Hygiene/_Texte/MitBlindenhundLebensmittelgeschaeft.html?nn=406624 Accessed 21.09.2014
Deutscher Blinden- und Sehbehindertenverband e. V. (DBSV): http://www.dbsv.org/dbsv/unsere-struktur/dbsv-gremien/blindenfuehrhundhalter/rechtsfragen-zum-blindenfuehrhund/ Accessed 21.09.2014
Ühistranspordiseadus, RT I 2000, 10, 58: https://www.riigiteataja.ee/akt/%C3%9CTS Accessed 21.09.2014
Here and hereafter the letter in the brackets indicates the gender of the informant and the number refers to the age of the informant.
Tottmar, Mia Ledarhundar portas från lokaler i stan: ”Det är förnedrande. ” (Guide dogs banned from the facilities in town: ”It’s humiliating.”) Dagens Nyheter, 19.05.2014: http://www.dn.se/sthlm/ledarhundar-portas-fran-lokaler-i-stan-det-ar-fornedrande/ ; Tv4 Nyheterna, Tufft för synskadade med ledarhund (It’s hard for visually impaired people with guide dogs), 26.03.2014 http://www.tv4.se/nyheterna/klipp/tufft-f%C3%B6r-synskadade-med-ledarhund-2585108 Accessed 21.09.2014
Synskadades Riksförbund Överenskommelse angående allergiker och synskadede: http://www.srf.nu/vad-gor-srf-for-mig/ledarhundar/allergiker/ Accessed 21.09.2014
However, it has been noted that the same does not necessarily hold for working animals (guarding, hunting dogs) (Berglund 2014: 546).
Although the umwelt of a pet is in any case already shaped by humans and hence, at least implicitly, the dog has to attend to human meanings as well.
References
Abou El Fadl, K. (2005). Dogs in the Islamic tradition and nature. In B. R. Taylor (Ed.), The encyclopedia of religion and nature (pp. 498–500). London & New York: Continuum International.
Allen, C. (2014). Umwelt or umwelten? How should shared representation be understood given such diversity? Semiotica, 198, 137–158.
Angyal, A. (1958). Foundations for a science of personality. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Berglund, J. (2014). Princely companion or object of offence? the dog’s ambiguous status in Islam. Society and Animals, 22, 545–559.
Calabrò, S. (1999). Der Blindenführhund. Aspekte einer besonderen Mensch-Tier-Beziehung in Geschichte und Gegenwart. Berlin: Wissenschaft und Technik Verlag.
Der Blindenführhund (2006). = Der Blindenführhund als Mobilitätshilfe für blinde und hochgradig sehbehinderte Menschen. 2006. Deutscher Blinden- und sehbehindertenverband e. V.
Foltz, R. (2006). Animals in Islamic tradition and Muslim cultures. Oxford: Oneworld.
Gibson, J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Gillham, B. (2005). Research interviewing. The range of techniques. Berkshire: Open University Press.
Ginsburg, G. P. (1990). The ecological perception debate: an affordance of the journal for the theory of social behaviour. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 20(4), 347–364.
Grandin, T., & Johnson, C. (2006). Animals in translation: Using the mysteries of autism to decode animal behavior. Fort Washington: Harvest Books.
Hännestrand, B. (1995). Manniskan, samhallet och ledarhunden: Studier i ledarhundsarbetets historia (Acta universitatis upsaliensis: Uppsala studies in economic history 36). Uppsala: Academiae Ubsaliensis.
Haupt, H. (1958). Die Geschichte des Blindenführhundes. Der Kriegsblinde, 9(5), 11–13.
Heft, H. (1989). Affordances and the body: an intentional analysis of Gibson’s ecological approach to visual perception. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 19(1), 1–30.
Hocken, S. (2011). [1977] Emma & I: The beautiful Labrador Who saved My life. London: Ebury Press.
Hoffmeyer, J. (2008). The semiotic niche. Journal of Mediterranean Ecology, 9, 5–30.
Imrie, R. (2001). Barriered and bounded places and the spatialities of disability. Urban Studies, 38(2), 231–237.
Karndacharuk, A., Wilson, D., & Dunn, R. (2014). A review of the evolution of shared (street) space concepts in urban environments. Transport Reviews, 34(2), 190–220.
Kaufmann, L., & Clément, F. (2007). How culture comes to mind: from social affordances to cultural analogies. Intellectica, 46, 1–29.
Leiten, G. (2012). Juhtkoera roll vaegnägija elukvaliteedi säilitamisel ja arendamisel. Tallinn University, Institute of Social Work, BA thesis.
Lestel, D. (2011). What capabilities for the animal? Biosemiotics, 4, 83–102.
Lewontin, R. (2000). The triple helix: Gene, organism, and environment. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Magnus, R. (2014). The function, formation and development of signs in the guide dog team’s work. Biosemiotics, 7(3), 447–463.
Malm, M. (2012). 20 aastat juhtkoerte koolitamist Eestis. Sinuga, 2, 26–29.
Martinelli, D. (2010). A critical companion to zoosemiotics: People, paths, ideas. New York: Springer.
McHugh, S. (2011). Animal stories: Narrating across species lines. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Miklósi, Á. (2011). Dog behaviour, evolution, and cognition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Moody, S. and Melia, S. (2013) Shared space: Research, policy and problems. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers – Transport. In Press, http://eprints.uwe.ac.uk/17937/8/tran1200047h.pdf
Rehmann, S. (2000). Über das Deutsche Blindenführhundewesen: Ausbildungsstätten und Prüfungen für Blindenführhunde. Ludwigs-Maximilians-Universität München, Inauguraldissertation aus dem Institut für Tierhygiene, Verhaltenskunde und Tierschutz.
Richter, K. (1995). Zur Bedeutung des Blindenführhundes für Menschen mit Sehbeeinträchtigungen. Diplomarbeit: Univeristät Erfurt.
Shared Space. Local Transport Note. 1/11 October 2011. London: The Stationery Office.
Sherman, S. M., & Wilson, J. R. (1975). Behavioral and morphological evidence for binocular competition in the postnatal development of the dog’s visual system. Journal of Computational Neuroscience, 161, 183–196.
Steinbach, C. (1988). Mobilität für Blinde: Systematische Führhundausbildung. Historische und international vergleichende Untersuchungen. Dissertation, Universität Düsseldorf.
Stork, R. (1988). Der Blindenführhund: Aufkommen und Rückgang in Deutschland. Geschichtliche und international vergleichende Untersuchung. Universität Düsseldorf: Diss. med. dent.
Tønnessen, M. (2011). Umwelt Transition and Uexküllian Phenomenology. An Ecosemiotic Analysis of Norwegian Wolf Management. (= Dissertationes Semioticae Universitatis Tartuensis 16). Doctoral dissertation. Tartu: Tartu University Press.
Tønnessen, M. (2014). Umwelt trajectories. Semiotica, 198, 159–180.
von Uexküll, J., & Kriszat, G. (1934). Streifzüge durch die Umwelten von Tieren und Menschen: Ein Bilderbuch unsichtbarer Welten. Berlin: Springer.
Weber, A. (2004). Mimesis and metaphor: the biosemiotic generation of meaning in Cassirer and Uexküll. Sign Systems Studies, 32(1/2), 297–307.
Wegner, W. (1979). Kleine Kynologie. Konstanz: Terra Verlag.
Windsor, W. L. (2004). An ecological approach to semiotics. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 34(2), 179–198.
Acknowledgments
I would like to thank all the guide dog users who contributed to this study. This research was supported by the European Union through the European Regional Development Fund (Centre of Excellence CECT, Estonia), the Norway Financial Mechanism 2009–2014 under project contract no EMP151 and by research grant IUT2-44.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Transcripts
36 interviews with guide-dog users. Digital sound files, transcripts. Author’s archive, 432 p
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Magnus, R. The Semiotic Challenges of Guide Dog Teams: the Experiences of German, Estonian and Swedish Guide Dog Users. Biosemiotics 9, 267–285 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12304-015-9233-4
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12304-015-9233-4