ReviewFrontiers in psychology2020
The Role of Animal Cognition in Human-Wildlife Interactions.
Review in Frontiers in psychology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 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
29 citing papers in PubMed.
- Fluctuations in direct human presence, not predictable weekly cycles, influence avoidance behaviour in ravens.Movement ecology · 2026Article
- Fecal virome at the human-animal interface: a one health perspective on an uncharted frontier.Animal microbiome · 2026Review
- Human vocalizations impact skink risk assessment depending on human exposure.Current zoology · 2025Article
- Quick on their paws: mice living in human-disturbed areas are faster problem-solvers than mice in strictly protected areas.Animal cognition · 2025Article
- Herring gulls respond to the acoustic properties of men's voices.Biology letters · 2025Article
- Beyond criterion: cognitive flexibility in wild striated caracaras.Biology letters · 2025Article
- Rethinking raptors: caracaras as a model for avian cognition in the wild.Animal cognition · 2025Review
- Urban coyote spatiotemporal overlap with humans is associated with environmental characteristics not human sociodemographics.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Breeding barn swallows recognize householders from strangers.Animal cognition · 2025Article
- Adaptation in the Alleyways: Candidate Genes Under Potential Selection in Urban Coyotes.Genome biology and evolution · 2025Article
- Evaluation of the social-economic impacts of hyena attacks on humans and livestock in the Nyang'whale district of Tanzania.BMC ecology and evolution · 2024Article
- Review
- Remote islands as natural laboratories: human-food association increases attraction to humans and novelty exploration in a seabird.Biology letters · 2024Article
- Responses to novelty in wild insular birds: comparing breeding populations in ecologically contrasting habitats.Animal cognition · 2024Article
- Sensory integration of danger and safety cues may explain the fear of a quiet coyote.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2023Article
- Llamas use social information from conspecifics and humans to solve a spatial detour task.Animal cognition · 2023Article
- The endangered brain: actively preservingRoyal Society open science · 2023Review
- Wild mockingbirds distinguish among familiar humans.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Human impact on the recent population history of the elusive European wildcat inferred from whole genome data.BMC genomics · 2022Article
- Interacting lethal and nonlethal human activities shape complex risk tolerance behaviors in a mountain herbivore.Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Humans have a profound effect on the planet's ecosystems, and unprecedented rates of human population growth and urbanization have brought wild animals into increasing contact with people. For many species, appropriate responses toward humans are likely to be critical to survival and reproductive success. Although numerous studies have investigated the impacts of human activity on biodiversity and species distributions, relatively few have examined the effects of humans on the behavioral responses of animals during human-wildlife encounters, and the cognitive processes underpinning those responses. Furthermore, while humans often present a significant threat to animals, the presence or behavior of people may be also associated with benefits, such as food rewards. In scenarios where humans vary in their behavior, wild animals would be expected to benefit from the ability to discriminate between dangerous, neutral and rewarding people. Additionally, individual differences in cognitive and behavioral phenotypes and past experiences with humans may affect animals' ability to exploit human-dominated environments and respond appropriately to human cues. In this review, we examine the cues that wild animals use to modulate their behavioral responses toward humans, such as human facial features and gaze direction. We discuss when wild animals are expected to attend to certain cues, how information is used, and the cognitive mechanisms involved. We consider how the cognitive abilities of wild animals are likely to be under selection by humans and therefore influence population and community composition. We conclude by highlighting the need for long-term studies on free-living, wild animals to fully understand the causes and ecological consequences of variation in responses to human cues. The effects of humans on wildlife behavior are likely to be substantial, and a detailed understanding of these effects is key to implementing effective conservation strategies and managing human-wildlife conflict.
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.