No Animals

Synonyms / Other Terms Used

Animals Not Allowed, No Uncaged Animals, No Pets, Pets Not Accepted, Dogs Forbidden, No Dogs Allowed, No Dogs

Category

General Information, Regulations, Prohibition

Message / Function

To signify places or facilities, where animals are not allowed or which are not dedicated for pets or small animals

	Source	Description
	ÖNORM A 3011	Side view of neutral animal (mix of cat and dog), diagonal negation element
4)	ON Testdesign	Side view of neutral animal (mix of cat and dog), diagonal negation bar
3)	Sramek	Side view of cat with dog tail, diagonal negation bar
	ON Testdesign	Side view of cat, diagonal negation bar
	ON Testdesign	Side view of cat, diagonal negation bar
	ON Testdesign	Side view of animal, diagonal negation bar
2)	ON Testdesign	Side view of dog, diagonal negation bar
	ON Testdesign	Side view of dog, diagonal negation bar
1)	Wiener Linien	Side view of dog, diagonal negation bar
	CNIS	Side view of dog, diagonal negation bar
	DB	Side view of dog, diagonal negation bar
	KFAI	Side view of dog, diagonal negation bar
	SEGD	Side view of dog inside circle with diagonal negation bar
5)	Eco-Mo Foundation	Side view of dog inside circle with diagonal negation bar
	BTA 1989	Side view of dog, diagonal negation bar
	SSRS	Side view of dog, crossed out
	TC	Side view of dog inside circle with diagonal negation bar
	Bolivia	Side view of dog inside circle with diagonal negation bar
6)	Parks Canada	Side view of dog inside circle with diagonal negation bar
	PANYNJ	Side view of dog like animal inside circle with diagonal negation bar
	O'72	Side view of a poodle, partially covered by horizontal line
	ADV	Side view of a poodle crossed out
	Handbuch wien.gv.at	Side view of a dog in outline, diagonal slash
	BVG	Side view of head and neck of a dog in outline, diagonal slash

Note:
Some of the examples shown above were mirrored horizontally to contrast differences.
Colors shown are corresponding to sources and test material used.

Discussion

A look at the collection above illustrates that - except for some of the testdesigns shown - almost no neutral animal or pet is available: the majority of pictograms available are images of dogs, some showing very specific details. In several cases the negation obscures relevant features, and only a few animals displayed are in harmony with the negation elements used.

A few studies present research covering several pictogram variants for this referent. These papers offer some useful information:

Kraft (1976) studied seven pictogram variants for No Animals in an Appropriateness Ranking Test. The pictogram judged as most appropriate was the dog from Wiener Linien marked 1), followed by a dog in outline marked 2) and the cat marked 3). Testdesigns of animals with a round head without any specific details were judged as less appropriate.

In a follow-up Comprehension Test, available for the variants marked 1), 3), and 4) (Brugger, 1977), only 10 % to 26 % of the respondents presented the general answer No Animals. Most answers included the species people thought to recognize, and even for the rather neutral variant marked 4) 68 % answered No Dogs! Some of the senior participants even ignored the red negation bar and just answered Dog or Cat.

In a Japanese study to propose domestically unified graphical symbols based on scientific methods, the pictogram variant for the referent No Uncaged Animals, labeled as Eco-Mo Foundation and marked 5) in the table above, reached a comprehension score of 97.3 on basis of a multiple choice test with just three distractors (Eco-Mo Foundation, 2001), so data probably overestimates real world comprehensibility. No information is available about distractors used for testing this symbol at that time.

Evaluating the Parks Canada’s National Park and National Historic Sites symbols, also prohibition symbols were examined using a Comprehension Test according to ISO 9186. For pictogram No 1-1-001: No Dogs, labeled Parks Canada and marked with 6) in the table above, 80 % of the responses were classified as acceptable. Reporting the results the authors state: 'The largest misperception among those providing an unacceptable response is that the symbol means “no animals/no pets allowed” (18%), indicating that the acceptable criteria for this symbol may be too specific as respondents are successful in demonstrating a general understanding of the symbol' (Ipsos-Reid Corporation, 2003, page 26f).

Recommendations

Non of the variants found is close to perfect. We suggest to use a side view of a rather neutral animal optimized in such a way, that no relevant details interfere with the negation bar.

Tests of pictograms of referent No Animals / No Dogs

Brugger, Ch. (1977): Abschlußbericht über den Erkennungstest. Report to the Austrian Standards Institute, Vienna, 1977-10-04.

Eco-Mo Foundation (2001): Test data of public information symbols in Japan - Procedure for the testing of public information symbols by the Study Committee. ISO: ISO/TC 145/SC 1 N 329.

Ipsos-Reid Corporation (2003): Evaluation of Parks Canada’s National Park and National Historic Sites Symbols – Phase I.

Kraft, E. (1976): Ranking-Test. Report to the Austrian Standards Institute (ON) dated 09/76, Vienna.