Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38833186›Full record

SynthesisAmbio2024

Living with wolves: A worldwide systematic review of attitudes.

Magnus Barmoen, Kim Magnus Bærum, Kristin E Mathiesen

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Ambio, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Magnus BarmoenFaculty of Applied Ecology, Agricultural Sciences and Biotechnology, Inland Norway University of Applied Sciences, Campus Evenstad, 2480, Koppang, Norway.
Kim Magnus BærumNorwegian Institute for Nature Research, Fakkelgården, 2426, Lillehammer, Norway.
Kristin E MathiesenNorwegian Institute for Nature Research, Fakkelgården, 2426, Lillehammer, Norway. kristin.mathiesen@nina.no.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3276-1088

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This systematic review of peer reviewed articles on attitudes towards gray wolves (Canis lupus), shows that attitudes are mainly measured either by mean values of attitudes or by proportional differences in attitudes. This may impact on how attitudes are perceived and interpreted across studies and areas. However, independent of method used, we found that people living in areas where wolves always have existed, are more negative towards wolves compared to people living in areas where there are no wolves, or where wolves have recovered after years of absence. People who express fear, or being directly affected by having wolves, such as farmers and hunters, report more negative attitudes compared to other groups of respondents. For wolf conservation we recommend politicians and management authorities to prepare local societies of the different consequences of living in wolf areas. We recommend using dialogues and conflict management methods to minimize the level of conflicts.

Indexed as

AttitudeConservation of Natural ResourcesWolvesAnimalsHumansHuman dimensionsInteraction modellingLarge carnivoresToleranceWildlife conflictWolf

Identifiers

PMID38833186
PMCPMC11383909

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.