Balancing Objectivity and Welfare: Physiological and Behavioural Responses of Guide Dogs During an Independent Certification Protocol

Abstract

Guide dogs are essential in supporting the autonomy of blind and visually impaired individuals. Austria is the first country to implement a legally mandated, two-stage certification protocol for the official recognition of guide dogs, assessed by an independent authority. The first stage includes two evaluation phases: the dog guides its familiar trainer (Phase 1) and then an unfamiliar blind tester (Phase 2). While Phase 2 ensures an objective assessment of guiding performance, it may also introduce stress due to the unfamiliar handler and separation from the trainer that could impact welfare and behaviour. This study aimed to evaluate whether Phase 2 of the Austrian evaluation protocol elicits higher stress than Phase 1 in guide dogs and, hence, needs to be refined in this regard by comparing physiological and behavioural responses between the two test phases. Fourteen guide dogs were assessed during real evaluations. Salivary cortisol was collected before the evaluation day and at several time points on the evaluation day (before and after each phase). Behavioural responses were coded from video recordings of the first 5 and 15 min of each phase, including stress-related behaviours, task-related performance behaviours, and handler behaviours. Cortisol levels did not differ significantly between the phases. Dogs turned around significantly more often in Phase 2, potentially seeking reassurance, but showed a non-significant trend toward fewer stress-related behaviours. Verbal praise occurred more frequently with the unfamiliar tester. These findings suggest that the current evaluation protocol does not induce substantial physiological or behavioural stress when dogs are guided by an unfamiliar tester, supporting its continued use as a welfare-conscious and objective certification approach that could also potentially serve as a model for other countries.

Keywords: behaviour analysis; blind handlers; certification protocols; dog welfare; guide dogs; independent evaluation; salivary cortisol; stress assessment; task performance; working dogs.

Figure 1

Description of saliva sampling on pre-evaluation day and evaluation day. S = sample, circles = baseline derived from calculating the average of the measured salivary cortisol levels from the sampling of PES1, PES2, and PES4 (design by PresentationGO.com and adjusted by Viola Färber-Morak).

Figure 2

Box plot illustrating the time course of salivary cortisol concentrations (ng/mL) across the six sampling points. Cortisol levels declined from baseline (mean of PES1, PES2, and ES4; n = 14 individuals) through to ES5 (start of evaluation with Trainer; n = 14; ° = outliers), ES6 (end of evaluation with Trainer; n = 13), and reached their lowest point at ES7 (start of evaluation with Tester; n = 14). Levels then increased again during ES8 (end of evaluation with Tester; n = 14) and ES9 (post evaluation; n = 14). Although these changes followed a clear descriptive pattern, statistical analysis revealed no significant differences in cortisol concentrations across time points.