Attitudes towards potential animal flagship species in nature conservation: A survey among students of different educational institutions

By J. Schlegel, R. Rupf. 2010

214 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Abstract Using a standardised questionnaire, a total of 415 students from two different Swiss primary schools, grammar schools and agricultural schools as well as students from a Swiss University of Applied Sciences were asked about their attitudes towards 27 different indigenous wildlife animal species. In the questionnaire, six mammal, five bird, two reptile, four amphibian and ten insect species, all with potential flagship quality, were individually presented on a colour photograph without any further background information. The participants were also asked to give individual reasons for species-related affinity or antipathy. In addition, it was ascertained whether they were able to correctly identify and name each species. The survey shows a heterogeneous pattern, whereby butterflies, birds and most mammals are, on average, more higher appreciated than reptiles, insects (excl. butterflies) and amphibians. Furthermore, it becomes evident that attitudes do not only depend on the species themselves, but also on other factors, particularly the type of educational institution attended. In general, there is no significant difference in attitudes to animals between males and females. At species level, females show significantly higher affinity for 'loveable animals' and a lesser degree of affinity for 'fear-relevant animals'. Respondents seem to show higher affinity for species they can identify than for unfamiliar species. The authors postulate that providing targeted background information in educational institutions might help soften rigid thinking patterns by strengthening appreciation for less attractive animals.

Subfields: Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis, Insect Science, Social Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/6baa625b0947c7ed13e2a34989f2a7c0146b581b

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis

1. Jana Fančovičová
2. P. Prokop
3. K. Lafferty

In Insect Science

1. Jana Fančovičová
2. P. Prokop

In Social Psychology

1. Jana Fančovičová
2. S. Godfrey
3. P. Prokop

Citations in the corpus

• A global parasite conservation plan (2020, background): “For non-parasitic invertebrates, public perceptions are largely dependent on experience and familiarity (Schlegel et al., 2015; Schlegel and Rupf, 2010), and one well-known method for familiarizing people with biodiversity is to engage them with anthropomorphized cartoons (Chan, 2012; Tam et al.”
• Holding up a mirror to the society: Children recognize exotic species much more than local ones (2013, background): “Schlegel and Rupf (2010) showed that animal species that could be identified and named, received higher affinity levels and by heightening awareness of nature on their doorsteps, children affinities shifted towards local flora and fauna.”
• Does colour matter? The influence of animal warning coloration on human emotions and willingness to protect them (2013, background): “This finding both adds to the current knowledge of the nature flagship species (Clucas et al., 2008; Schlegel & Rupf, 2010; Ballouard et al., 2011; Barua et al., 2012) and provides practical implication for conservationists.”
• Identifying Cinderella species: uncovering mammals with conservation flagship appeal (2012, unknown): “International NGOs use the same set of flagship species because they are already familiar to the general public, which may make fundraising easier (Schlegel & Rupf 2010; Barua et al. 2011).”
• Applying IUCN criteria to invertebrates: How red is the Red List of European butterflies? (2011, unknown): “A further advantage of butterflies is their attractiveness to the general public, making them suitable ambassadors of biodiversity changes (Kühn et al., 2008; Schlegel and Rupf, 2010).”
• Toward a systematic approach for identifying conservation flagships (2011, background): “…best flagship for a particular campaign involves understanding the target audience and the cultural, political, economic, and social contexts that shape their attitudes and interactions with the flagship species (cf. Kellert 1986; Hills 1993; Knight 2008; Ladle & Jepson 2008; Schlegel & Rupf 2010).”