ArticleZoo biology
Impact of Animal Encounter Modality and Species on Zoo Visitor Knowledge, Concern, and Conservation Intent.
Article in Zoo biology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
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
Zoos fill an important role in connecting humans with nature, especially given an increasing rate of both urbanization and biodiversity loss. With the advent of new technologies, however, there are many alternatives to experiencing biodiversity firsthand. We tested if the type of animal encounter at a zoo (in-person animal viewing without touch, in-person animal viewing with touch, or video-recorded animal viewing) and/or animal species (elephant or stingray) affected zoo visitor knowledge, emotional affect, empathic concern, and/or conservation intent. A total of 300 zoo members were randomly assigned to 6 different animal encounter conditions. We found that participants who viewed video-recordings of animals had significantly lower scores on all outcomes, except knowledge, than those who viewed animals in-person. There were no significant differences between in-person animal viewing without touch and in-person animal viewing with touch. Moreover, we found that stingray participants had lower scores on all outcomes compared to elephant participants. We suggest extensions of this study and discuss potential implications for the future role of zoos.
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.