ArticlePloS one2023
What can drawings tell us about children's perceptions of nature?
Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The growing disconnect between children and nature has led to concerns around the loss of ecological knowledge and reduced nature connection. Understanding children's perceptions of nature is vital for engaging them with local wildlife and mitigating this growing disconnect. This study investigated children's perceptions of nature by analysing 401 drawings made by children (aged 7-11) of their local green spaces, collected from 12 different English schools, including state-funded and privately funded. We assessed which animal and plant groups were drawn the most and least often, quantified each drawing's species richness and community composition, and identified all terms used in the drawings to the highest taxonomic resolution possible. The most commonly drawn groups were mammals (80.5% of drawings) and birds (68.6% of drawings), while herpetofauna were the least commonly drawn (15.7% of drawings). Despite not explicitly being asked about plants, 91.3% of drawings contained a plant. Taxonomic resolution was highest for mammals and birds, with 90% of domestic mammals and 69.6% of garden birds identifiable to species, compared to 18.5% of insects and 14.3% of herpetofauna. No invertebrates other than insects were identifiable to species. Within plants, trees and crops were the most identifiable to species, at 52.6% and 25% of terms respectively. Drawings from state-school children had higher plant richness than those from private-school children. Animal community composition differed between school funding types, with more types of garden birds drawn by private-school than state-school children, and more types of invertebrates drawn by state-school than private-school children. Our findings indicate that children's perceptions of local wildlife are focused on mammals and birds. While plants feature prominently, plant knowledge is less specific than animal knowledge. We suggest that this skew in children's ecological awareness be addressed through better integration of ecology within national curricula and more funding for green space within schools.
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.