ReviewPhilosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences2025
Worlds that collide: conservation applications of behaviour and culture in human-wildlife interactions.
Review in Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Knowledge transmission, culture and the consequences of social disruption in wild elephants.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2025Pooled it
- Use of Human Habitat in an Extreme Desert by the Generalist Red Fox: Risk and Energy Considerations.Ecology and evolution · 2026Article
- Cultural processes and demography: implications for conservation and beyond.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2025Article
- Ecology and conservation of socially learned foraging tactics in odontocetes.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2025Review
- Culture and conservation in baleen whales.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2025Review
- Animal culture: conservation in a changing world.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2025Article
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
Abstract
The behaviour of both humans and wildlife is central to the conservation of biodiversity because conservation requires human actions at multiple scales. In species with evidence of socially learned behaviour and culture, the juxtaposition of human and animal culture increases the complexity of human-wildlife interactions and their investigation but also offers opportunities to mitigate negative interactions. In this paper, we consider the language used to analyse human-animal interactions and we review the effect of culture and socially learned behaviours on those interactions. We investigate how knowledge of culture and theory from behavioural studies can be used to negotiate the complex interactions between humans and wildlife, providing specific examples of how culture can be mined for developing policies regarding negative interactions. We highlight that interactions between animal and human culture are central to the conservation of wildlife, and that such human-wildlife interactions are a key target for studies of biodiversity conservation. Integrating culture and social learning into conservation research offers scope to leverage knowledge gaps, misconceptions and concerns into conservation actions that are targeted, relevant and meaningful.This article is part of the theme issue 'Animal culture: conservation in a changing world'.
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.