ArticleScientific reports2019
Interactions with humans shape coyote responses to hazing.
Article in Scientific reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Differential effects of human density, environmental health, and group size on urban coyote detection, boldness, and exploration.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Urban coyote spatiotemporal overlap with humans is associated with environmental characteristics not human sociodemographics.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Coyote (Ecology and evolution · 2025Article
- Urban coyotes were observed rarely and retreated consistently from assertive approaches by volunteers in neighborhoods.PloS one · 2025Article
- Urban Human-Coyote Conflicts: Assessing Friendliness as an Indicator of Coexistence.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2023Article
- Article
- Coyotes in New York City Carry Variable Genomic Dog Ancestry and Influence Their Interactions with Humans.Genes · 2022Article
- Article
- Article
- The evolutionary consequences of human-wildlife conflict in cities.Evolutionary applications · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Medium and large carnivores coexist with people in urban areas globally, occasionally resulting in negative interactions that prompt questions about how to reduce human-wildlife conflict. Hazing, i.e., scaring wildlife, is frequently promoted as an important non-lethal means for urbanites to reduce conflict but there is limited scientific evidence for its efficacy. We used a population of captive coyotes (Canis latrans) to simulate urban human-coyote interactions and subsequent effects of hazing on coyote behavior. Past experiences with humans significantly affected the number of times a coyote approached a human to necessitate hazing. Coyotes that had been hand fed by adults had to be more frequently hazed than coyotes with other or no past experiences with adults. Past experience with children had no impact on the number of hazing events. The number of times a coyote approached an adult or child was reduced across days based on the accumulative number of times hazed, suggesting coyotes learn to avoid behaviors warranting hazing and that this could be used as a non-lethal management tool. However, prior experience and whether the interaction is with an adult or child can alter the outcomes of hazing and must be considered in determining the efficacy of hazing programs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.