Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40078673›Full record

ReviewCambridge prisms. Extinction2023

Personalised ecology and the future of biodiversity.

Kevin J Gaston, Benjamin B Phillips, Masashi Soga

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cambridge prisms. Extinction, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
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.

Kevin J GastonEnvironment and Sustainability Institute, University of Exeter, Penryn, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7235-7928
Benjamin B PhillipsEnvironment and Sustainability Institute, University of Exeter, Penryn, UK.
Masashi SogaGraduate School of Agricultural and Life Sciences, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The future of biodiversity lies not just in the strategies and mechanisms by which ecosystems and species are practically best protected from anthropogenic pressures. It lies also, and perhaps foremost, in the many billions of decisions that people make that, intentionally or otherwise, shape their impact on nature and the conservation policies and interventions that are implemented. Personalised ecology - the set of direct sensory interactions that each of us has with nature - is one important consideration in understanding the decisions that people make. Indeed, it has long been argued that people's personalised ecologies have powerful implications, as captured in such concepts as biophilia, extinction of experience and shifting baselines. In this paper, we briefly review the connections between personalised ecology and the future of biodiversity, and the ways in which personalised ecologies might usefully be enhanced to improve that future.

Indexed as

behaviourbiophiliabiophobiaextinction of experienceshifting baselines

Identifiers

PMID40078673
PMCPMC11895722

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.