Trots att djurs beteenden har intresserat naturvetenskapens forskare under lång tid, och trots att relationer med djur spelar en stor roll för många människor, har forskare historiskt sett inte intresserat sig för relationen och interaktionen mellan djur och människor i någon större utsträckning. Detta gäller även kommunikationen mellan människor och hästar. Skotten mellan naturvetenskaplig forskning om djurs beteenden å ena sidan, och humanistisk-samhällsvetenskaplig forskning om människors sociala handlingar å den andra sidan har dessutom varit närmast vattentäta.

The aim of this study is to enhance the understanding of how sport dressage riders describe rider-horse communication when riding, and to relate these descriptions to current research on human-horse communication. Interviews with 15 amateur dressage riders were analyzed using a qualitative approach. The study shows that the interviewed riders describe the communication with the horses partly in a behavioristic way, applying concepts based on learning theory, which deviate from the description of riders as lacking understanding of these concepts put forth by some researchers. The riders connect the timing of their aids to equestrian feel, which they describe as the most difficult yet the most awarding aspect of the interspecies communication that riding is. Simultaneously, they acknowledge that horses are fully capable of choosing to listen to and cooperate with their requests.

This study investigates interaction during equestrian dressage trainings, focusing on the trainer’s communication with horse and rider. The study is based on interaction analyses of 15 video recorded training sessions, as well as analyses of interviews and field notes. The results reveal a wide variety of non-verbal communication modalities deployed by trainers sharing their practical expertise with the athletes. Equestrian trainers use activity specific onomatopoetic constructions, paralinguistic resources such as rhythm, pace and prosody, as well as a number of embodied resources where they use the space of the riding arena and various communicative configurations of their own body and the co-present bodies of horse and rider to represent the horse, the rider and/or the equipage as a whole.

The study is a part of a larger project about equitation as a communicative and didactic practice, aiming at making the practical, embodied knowledge that riding and equestrian training rests on explicit, thus enabling reflection and discussion among both practitioners and researchers of communication and equestrianism.

Good teamwork ensures the close collaboration and coordination between professional groups and across disciplinary boundaries. This is particularly important in healthcare centres and clinics admitting complicated patient cases, but contrary to what many healthcare organisations seem to believe, effective teamwork does not happen automatically. It needs to be successfully trained and practiced.

Teamwork in Medical Rehabilitation provides a guide to efficient teamwork in professional healthcare. Showcasing the practice of medical rehabilitation in Sweden, the book describes how to create, develop, nourish and organise a team. Medical rehabilitation in Sweden is a discipline filled by not only doctors and nurses, but also physiotherapists, occupational therapists, psychologists, social workers, speech therapists and dieticians. Using these multi-professional teams as clinical case studies, the book contains many practical examples from different rehabilitation care areas.

This book will prove to be invaluable to healthcare professionals and students as effective collaboration is essential to good clinical outcomes. Managers will also find this a worthy read thanks to its understanding of how working conditions affect good teamwork.

In the equestrian sports we agree that the communication between horse and rider forms the core of good riding. This communication is therefore often the main focus of for instance a dressage training session. However, in-depth analyses of how the communication between horse and rider is used as an educational resource in training are scarce. Here, theories and methods from communication and learning science are brought together to show how trainers and riders together address this communication during intermediate level dressage training. The results presented are based on a qualitative, mixed methods study, combining interactional analyses of 15 hrs of video recordings of dressage trainings and phenomenographic analysis of interviews with the participants. Analyses of the interviews show the complexity of these learning situations: the foci of the training sessions vary depending on the riders’ and the horses’ condition and the goals set up by the human participants as well as on the experience of the horse and the rider. Regardless of the didactical focus (on training the rider, training the rider to train the horse or training the horse) and the scope of the training session, the analyses of the video recordings show how all trainers orient towards the horse-rider interaction in essentially the same three ways. The trainers give verbal instructions aimed at modifying the horse-rider communication, they use their own bodies as models and they intervene physically by for instance altering the posture of the rider, the position of parts of the rider’s body or showing the correct degree of pressure to be applied in a certain situation (and combinations of the above). However, trainers do not always set the agenda for the discussions. When given the opportunity, many riders participate actively the discussions. During the presentation, extracts from the video material will be used as illustrations of these findings. By enlightening the complex interaction between the participants as well as the interaction’s intrinsic connections to the goals of the training, it becomes possible to discuss (and further develop) the communication in the horse-rider-trainer triad within both the equestrian and the scientific communities.

This study is part of a project with the overall aim to improve riding education through a better understanding of the interplay between rider, riding instructor and horse. The rider influences the horse through a combination of weight, leg and rein aids together with the voice. The horse responds to these and the rider receives and interprets these responses. The current study aimed to describe and analyse the riders´ perceptions and views on this communication. Fifteen experienced riders (all female) of intermediate level in dressage were recruited to participate in the study, most of them riding their own horses. The riders received private training from five experienced riding instructors/trainers. One training of each rider was video and audio recorded. Directly after the training, the riders watched 10 minutes from the video recording (stimulated recall) followed by a semi-structured in-depth interview. The riders were asked to give a general description of how they communicated with their horses. They were also asked to describe how they interpreted the horse’s responses to the rider’s signals and how they acted when the horse responded/or did not respond to their signals. The results showed that all riders were well aware of the importance of giving clear and precise signals to the horse and to remove a given signal (aid) as soon as the horse responds. Most riders (12 of 15) agreed that it is essential to check that the horse responds to the rider’s basic signals in the beginning of each training session. The riders also pointed out that it is important to adjust the aids to the character of the horse and to the current physical and mental status of their horse. When the horses responded correctly on the rider’s aids, the riders praised the horse either by using their voice or by petting the horse. When the horse did not respond as the rider wished, the riders generally repeated or strengthened their signals until they received a desired response. Interestingly, a major part of the riders (13 of 15) blamed themselves when the communication with the horse failed. In conclusion, the riders seemed to be aware of the practical application of the basic principles of learning theory, even if they were not familiar with the terminology. However, the riders also reported that in practice they perceived difficulties to control their own bodies and to adequately give and release their signals.

The thesis investigates team talk and team collaboration from a dialogical perspec­tive, and is based on video recordings of 15 multi­professional team conferences involving a pain rehabilitation team. The analyses also draw upon a vast material of interviews, field notes and documents collected during almost a year of fieldwork at the clinic. The main purpose of the thesis is to shed light on some of the distinguish­ing linguistic features of such team confe­ren­ces and on the pragmatic strategies deployed by the team members in order to bring into play the variety of professional perspectives represented in the team. Ana­lyses of their lexical choices and interaction show three areas of responsibility: professional, overlapping and shared. Analyses of phases, activities and participant structures show how the team conferences can be understood as a specific type of institutional interaction, a communicative activity type that makes it possible both to share information and to reach a shared understanding of the patients’ problems. A deeper interactional analysis reveals pragmatic strategies enhancing the team’s multiprofessional com­munication: the identification and sorting of information, in-depth discussions of specific problems and decision-making procedures. The results illustrate central aspects of what is often called interprofessional competence within the field of health care, i.e. the ability to make the most of multiprofessional collabo­ration. The thesis adds to our understanding of team conferences as a communi­ca­tive activity type and increases our understanding of how participants can offer their perspec­tive through conversation, thereby making it possible for the others to adopt this perspective – in short, to achieve what is often referred to as a democratic dialogue.

Måseide (2007) indicates that politeness and carefulness are important aspects of successful intraprofessional negotiations in health care. In this presentation, I will argue that face work (Goffman 1959) is vital to the success also of interprofessional collaboration. Based on analyses of discursive practices in a pain rehabilitation team (see also Lundgren 2009), the presentation focuses on a pragmatic strategy used by the team members, which appears to be one of the keys to the successful collaboration in this particular team.

The strategy, which I call “testing the waters”, is based on a specific five part construction: 1) announcement, 2) response, 3) elaboration, 4) initiation of discussion and 5) conclusion. It may be initiated in three different ways: by a) indicating a lack of certainty, b) making a reflection or c) sending out a feeler. The first three parts of the construction is similar both to Maynard’s description of the beginning of news delivery sequences in physician-patient interaction (Maynard 2003) as well as to the questioning sequences in workplace meetings described by Ford (Ford 2008). However, there are also important differences which will be addressed in the presentation.

By “testing the waters”, any team member can raise a potentially problematic issue at virtually any point of the team conference. Simultaneously, “testing the waters” enables discussions that may be sensitive, without threatening the face of the colleagues (or of the team member raising the issue). The discussions often lead to a review of previously made decisions, or a decision about a previously undiscussed point. According to the team members, these discussions can be understood as the team’s raison d’être, since they allow them to make the most of the variety of professional perspectives represented in the team and thereby to reach a genuinely shared understanding of the patient’s problems.

The results are based on discourse analyses of 15 video recordings of team conferences in the pain rehabilitation team.

References:- Ford, C. E. 2008. Women Speaking up. Getting and using turns in workplace meetings. New York: Palgrave. - Goffman, E. 1959. The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. New York: Doubleday. - Lundgren, C. 2009. Samarbete genom samtal. En samtalsanalytisk studie av multiprofessionella teamkonferenser inom smärtrehabilitering. [Team Talk: Collaboration through Communication in Meetings of a Multiprofessional Pain Rehabilitation Care Team] Linköping Studies in Arts and Science 483. Linköping: Linköping University. - Maynard, D. W. 2003. Bad News, Good News: Conversational order in everyday talk and clinical settings. Chicago: Chicago University Press. - Måseide, P. 2007. Discourses of collaborative medical work. Text and Talk, 27 (5/6): 611-632.

Inom medicinsk rehabilitering har behovet av nära samarbete mellan olika personalkategorier ökat starkt. Denna bok ger grundläggande kunskaper för ett fungerande multiprofessionellt teamarbete inom medicinsk rehabilitering. Den vänder sig till såväl vårdpersonal som till administrativ personal och beslutsfattare inom sjukvården.Läs merBoken tecknar inledningsvis teamarbetets och rehabiliteringsmedicinens utveckling fram till dagens situation. Den belyser vidare olika sätt att organisera teamet och fördela arbetsuppgifterna och ansvaret. Skapandet och vården av ett team samt faktorer som påverkar teamarbetet är andra ämnen. I texten finns invävt exempel på varianter av teamarbete med de förutsättningar som gäller inom primärvård, företagshälsovård och kommunal rehabilitering. Den teoretiska framställningen kompletteras med fallbeskrivningar från bland annat smärtrehabilitering.

Multi-professional teams have become an established part of the health care sector, where professionals such as psychologists, occupational therapists and physiotherapists work together with doctors and nurses to solve the patients- problems. This has resulted in new modes of communication, mediated through the team conference where the different professional groups make joint decisions in an increasingly complex environment. The paper is based on analysis of video recorded team conferences held in a multi-professional team at a Swedish clinic for rehabilitation medicine. The team-s discussions during the conferences concern, among other things, the work (in)ability of twelve patients participating in the team-s Evaluation Program. The recordings are part of an ethnographically oriented material collected during six months of fieldwork at the clinic. Two key aspects shaping the team-s communicative practice are identified and analysed in relation to the context of the team-s work: 1) the split recipiency of the team-s work and 2) the fact that the information necessary in the decision making process is scattered among the team members. Two imperatives corresponding to these two aspects influence the team-s communicative practice: a) acknowledge rather than ignore the complexity of the double recipiency situation and b) put forth or request any information that may be relevant to the decision making process, regardless of whether it is part of your area of expertise. 

Multi-professional teams have become an established part of the health care sector, where professionals such as psychologists, occupational therapists and physiotherapists work together with doctors and nurses to solve the patients- problems. This has resulted in new modes of communication, mediated through the team conference, where the different professional groups make joint decisions in an increasingly complex environment. The paper is based on analysis of video-recorded team conferences held in a multi-professional team at a Swedish clinic for rehabilitation medicine. The team-s discussions during the conferences concern, among other things, the work (in)ability of twelve patients participating in the team-s Evaluation Programme. The recordings form one part of the ethnographically oriented material collected during six months of fieldwork at the clinic. Two key aspects shaping the team-s communicative practice are identified and analysed in relation to the context of the team-s work: 1) the split recipiency of the team-s work and 2) the fact that the information necessary in the decision-making process is scattered among the team members. Two imperatives corresponding to these two aspects influence the team-s communicative practice: a) acknowledge rather than ignore the complexity of the double recipiency situation and b) put forth or request any information that may be relevant to the decision-making process, regardless of whether it is part of your area of expertise.   

Decision making in a multi-professional rehabilitation care team This talk presents results from one study conducted within a larger project describing talk-in-interaction during team conferences in a multi-professional rehabilitation care setting. The results from the project as a whole will be reported through a series of coming articles. Introduction Team work is an established way of organising the work in knowledge intensive organisations, and this is also the case within health care settings. This is not only an attempt to meet the increasing economical pressure on the health care sector, but also an attempt to meet the growing demand for -single gateways- into the health care system (Övretveit et al 1997). The number of studies on institutional talk (Drew & Heritage 1992) is constantly growing, but many studies are still concerned with the classical questions of asymmetry and power that faces participants in talk between experts and laypersons. Few studies have explored the professional talk among peers (intra-professional talk), and fewer still have engaged in studies between professionals belonging to different professions (inter-professional talk) (Hydén & Mishler 1999, Sarangi & Roberts 1999). Rehabilitation care has a long tradition of multi-professional co-operation, and was one of the first medical specialities where team work became a common way of organising the work. It was also one of the first specialities where these teams consisted not only of doctors and nurses, but also of other professional groups such as medical social workers, occupational therapists, physio therapists and psychologists (DeLisa & Gans 1998). Therefore rehabilitation care settings provide a very rich and interesting milieu for studies of professional talk-in-interaction. Aims of the study The aims of the decision making study have partly been formulated in dialogue with the team members. The first aim, which covers an aspect of the team-s work that the team members themselves express a great interest in, is to gain knowledge of institutional constraints affecting the decision making process. The second aim is to describe the joint decision making of the team (Huismann 2001). This aim reflects the discrepancy between the traditional descriptions of team work in health care settings, which stress formal hierarchy as the fundamental constraint on the decision making process (e.g. Soothill et al 1995), and the practice of this particular team. Data and method The collected data consist mainly of recordings of team conferences held at a rehabilitation clinic at a large Swedish hospital. These 50 hours of video recordings equal fifteen team conferences. The conferences are held weekly and can be described as -sitting rounds- (Atkinson 1995), i.e. no patients participate and the main goals are to share information and make joint decisions. Twelve out of the fifteen meetings are recorded consecutively, which gives a unique opportunity to follow the teams- discussions about single patients as they unfold over time. The ethnographic data (interviews, observations of both team conferences and work outside of the conferences as well as documents describing, regulating and recording the teams- work) form a background against which the analysis of the talk-in-interaction during the team conferences can be understood as a part of a wider discourse of health and illness. The ethnographic data also allows for a deeper understanding of the organisational constraints forming the talk-in-interaction in this particular community of clinical practice, although there is no reason to believe that the results are not applicable in a wider context. The decision making study is based on a subset of this large data collection, to be precise video recordings and transcriptions made of the discussions of patients involved in the Evaluation