Human Dimensions of Wildlife: An Introduction

Abstract

This chapter briefly discusses a descriptive typology of attitudes towards wildlife that was quite influential in the pioneering years of research on human dimensions of wildlife. It describes a more recent theory‐driven approach to understanding human relationships with wildlife, guided by the cognitive hierarchy. The theory of cognitive hierarchy stresses that individual behaviour is guided by a hierarchy of interrelated cognitions including values, value orientations, attitudes and norms, and behavioural intentions. Studies using the wildlife value orientation scales suggest that domination orientations are deeply engrained in the cultural transmission process and endure over generations. The usefulness of studying wildlife value orientations depends on the concept's predictive validity. The cognitive hierarchy does not explicitly consider emotions. The concepts and measurements may reflect emotional content, but they are not intended to directly capture emotional dispositions or responses. Future research on human dimensions of wildlife may benefit from the study of both cognitive and emotional responses to wildlife.

Full text

REVISED
Steg—Environmental Psychology: An Introduction
R
8 Human dimensions
of wildlife
Maarten H. Jacobs
Wageningen University, The Netherlands
Jerry J. Vaske
Colorado State University, USA
Tara L. Teel
Colorado State University, USA
Michael J. Manfredo
Colorado State University, USA
CHAPTER OUTLINE
8.1 INTRODUCTION 78
8.2 EARLY WORK: ATTITUDES TOWARDS
WILDLIFE 78
8.3 THE COGNITIVE HIERARCHY 79
8.4 WILDLIFE VALUE ORIENTATIONS 81
8.5 PREDICTING NORMS AND ATTITUDES
TOWARDS WILDLIFE 83
8.6 EMOTIONS TOWARDS WILDLIFE 83
8.7 SUMMARY 85
GLOSSARY 85
SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER READING 86
REVIEW QUESTIONS 86
Steg_6388_c08_main.indd 77 1/19/2012 9:33:19 AM

REVISED
Steg—Environmental Psychology: An Introduction
R
78 ENVIRONMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY: AN INTRODUCTION
HUMAN DIMENSIONS OF WILDLIFE 79
8.1 INTRODUCTION
Imagine walking in a forest and encountering a deer. You might remember this
moment because it is special, perhaps the highlight of the trip. Humans are strongly
attracted to wildlife. Wildlife-based tourism and recreation are increasingly popular
(Reynolds & Braithwaite, 2001) and wildlife TV documentaries attract large audi-
ences ( Jacobs, 2009). Negative relationships with wildlife (e.g. snake phobias),
however, are also common (Öhman & Mineka, 2003). In general, the relationships
between humans and wildlife are complex, as they are closely tied to the evolution
of humans in natural environments, and are also manifestations of socialisation and
past individual experiences. Because the human brain evolved in part to meet wildlife-
related challenges, research into human thought, emotion and action can reveal
insights into the general workings of the human mind. Research into human dimen-
sions of wildlife is also of practical relevance as it helps to understand current opin-
ions and public debates about wildlife-related issues such as the reintroduction of
predators or the killing of species that cause harm to humans or damage crops.
In this chapter, we first discuss a descriptive typology of attitudes towards wildlife
(Kellert, 1976). Subsequent sections describe a more theory-driven approach to
understanding human relationships with wildlife, guided by the cognitive hierarchy.
This theoretical framework differentiates among the various thought processes that
form the basis for human behaviour (Manfredo, Teel, & Henry, 2009; Teel & Man-
fredo, 2009). While research on human dimensions of wildlife has predominantly
focused on cognitive aspects, new avenues are beginning to emphasise the impor-
tance of emotional factors, which will be explored in the last section. To some extent,
the research and theorising discussed in this chapter overlaps with a broader research
domain in which people’s responses to nature and landscapes and views of the rela-
tionship between humans and nature are studied (see Chapters 5, 6, 7 and 14).
However, as we will see, research on the human dimension of wildlife has increas-
ingly generated its own network of experts and literature, and is becoming an inde-
pendent field of research.
8.2 EARLY WORK: ATTITUDES
TOWARDS WILDLIFE
Kellert (1976) presented a typology of attitudes towards wildlife that has received wide
attention. Based on personal interviews and large-scale surveys, Kellert distinguished
nine basic attitudes (Kellert has also referred to these as values) towards wildlife (Box 8.1).
Environmental Psychology: An Introduction, First Edition. Edited by Linda Steg, Agnes E. van den Berg,
Judith de Groot.
© 2012 the British Psychological Society and John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Published 2012 by the British
Psychological Society and John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
78
Steg_6388_c08_main.indd 78 1/19/2012 9:33:20 AM

REVISED
Steg—Environmental Psychology: An Introduction
R
78 ENVIRONMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY: AN INTRODUCTION
HUMAN DIMENSIONS OF WILDLIFE 79
Kellert’s typology has been mostly applied to describe the attitudes of different
groups of people. For example, a study among hunters and non-hunters (Kellert,
1978) found that hunters could be divided into three groups based on their attitudes
towards wildlife: utilitarian hunters who supplement their diet by shooting game,
naturalistic hunters with close ties to, and appreciation for, nature, and dominionistic
hunters who seek to dominate animals and nature. Non-hunters could be classified
into a group with humanistic attitudes and a group with moralistic attitudes. A large-
scale survey in the United States showed that women had higher scores than men
on humanistic, moralistic and negativistic attitudes, while men scored higher on
utilitarian, dominionistic, naturalistic and ecologistic attitudes (Kellert & Berry,
1987). Additional research has shown that favourable responses towards predators
were positively related to naturalistic, moralistic and ecologistic attitudes, but nega-
tively related to negativistic and utilitarian attitudes (Kellert, 1985).
By revealing this diversity in public responses to wildlife and wildlife-related issues,
Kellert has opened up the study of human–wildlife relationships. Theoretically,
however, his work is not informed by a clear conceptual foundation and conclusive
evidence about the reliability and validity of the measurement instrument is lacking.
8.3 THE COGNITIVE HIERARCHY
Manfredo and colleagues (Fulton, Manfredo, & Lipscomb, 1996; Manfredo, 2008;
Teel & Manfredo, 2009; Whittaker, Vaske, & Manfredo, 2006) have developed a
BOX 8.1 TYPOLOGY OF ATTITUDES
TOWARDS WILDLIFE
Kellert (1976, 1996) has developed a typology
consisting of nine basic attitudes towards wild-
life, also referred to as ‘values of wildlife’:
• Utilitarian: Practical and material
exploitation of wildlife.
• Naturalistic: Direct experience and
exploration of wildlife.
• Ecologistic-scientific: Systematic study of
the structure, function and relationships
in the realm of wildlife.
• Aesthetic: Physical appeal and beauty of
wildlife.
• Symbolic: Use of wildlife for language
and thought.
• Humanistic: Strong emotional
attachment and ‘love’ for aspects of
wildlife.
• Moralistic: Spiritual reverence and
ethical concern for wildlife.
• Dominionistic: Mastery, physical control
and dominance of wildlife.
• Negativistic: Fear, aversion and alienation
from wildlife.
Steg_6388_c08_main.indd 79 1/19/2012 9:33:20 AM

REVISED
Steg—Environmental Psychology: An Introduction
R
80 ENVIRONMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY: AN INTRODUCTION
HUMAN DIMENSIONS OF WILDLIFE 81
theory for studying human thought and behaviour towards wildlife, labelled the
‘cognitive hierarchy’. Building on insights from social psychology (Homer & Kahle,
1988), this framework stresses that values belong to a hierarchy of cognitions that
form the basis for human behaviour and includes values, value orientations, attitudes
and norms, and behavioural intentions. In this hierarchy, values are the most abstract
cognitions, while behavioural intentions are the most specific cognitions and immedi-
ate antecedents of actual behaviour (see Figure 8.1).
Because values are often formed early in life, are culturally constructed, transcend
situations and are tied to one’s identity (Schwartz, 2006), they are extremely resistant
to change and are unlikely to explain much of the variability in specific behaviours
within cultures. For example, two persons may both find the value ‘freedom’ impor-
tant. In the context of wildlife, one person may project this value onto humans only
and find hunting acceptable, while another person may project freedom onto both
humans and wildlife and find hunting unacceptable. The fundamental value, then,
does not directly explain specific thought and behaviour. Manfredo and Teel (Man-
fredo et al., 2009; Teel & Manfredo, 2009) have proposed that ideologies (e.g. egali-
tarianism) give direction and meaning to values in a given context. The resulting
value orientations are reflected in a schematic network of basic beliefs that organise
around fundamental values and provide contextual meaning to them within a given
domain such as wildlife. Wildlife value orientations thus relate more directly to wild-
life than general values and are therefore more useful in explaining individual varia-
Figure 8.1 The cognitive hierarchy framework.
Reprinted from Vaske, J. J. & Donnely, M. P. (1999). A value–attitude–behavior model predicting wildland
preservation voting intentions. Society and Natural Resources, 12, 523–537, with permission of Taylor & Francis
Ltd (http://www.tandfonline.com).
Behaviours
Behavioural intentions
Attitudes and norms
Value orientations
(basic belief patterns)
Values Few in number
Slow to change
Central to beliefs
Transcend situations
Numerous
Quick to change
Peripheral
Specific to situations
Steg_6388_c08_main.indd 80 1/19/2012 9:33:20 AM

REVISED
Steg—Environmental Psychology: An Introduction
R
80 ENVIRONMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY: AN INTRODUCTION
HUMAN DIMENSIONS OF WILDLIFE 81
tion in wildlife-related attitudes and behaviours. Wildlife value orientations mediate
the relationship between general values and attitudes or norms in specific situations
involving wildlife (Manfredo et al., 2009).
8.4 WILDLIFE VALUE ORIENTATIONS
Two predominant wildlife value orientations have been identified: domination
(previously referred to as utilitarianism) and mutualism (e.g. Fulton et al., 1996; Man-
fredo, 2008; Manfredo et al., 2009; Teel & Manfredo, 2009). People with a domination
wildlife value orientation believe that wildlife should be used and managed for
human benefit and are more likely to prioritise human well-being over wildlife.
Those with a mutualism wildlife value orientation see wildlife as part of an extended
family, deserving of care and rights like humans. Teel and Manfredo (2009) argue
that mutualism entails the belief that wildlife is capable of relationships of trust with
humans, reflecting an egalitarian ideology, in which all living things are treated as
having equal worth. A measurement instrument consisting of 19 survey items (Box
8.2) has been developed to assess these orientations. The domination value orienta-
tion is based on two basic belief dimensions: appropriate use beliefs and hunting
beliefs. The mutualism value orientation is also based on two basic belief dimensions:
social affiliation beliefs and caring beliefs. Composite indices are constructed from
the basic belief items to reflect the extent to which a respondent holds a domination
and/or mutualism orientation towards wildlife.
Research in the United States (Manfredo et al., 2009; Teel & Manfredo, 2009) and
the Netherlands (Vaske, Jacobs, & Sijtsma, 2011) has demonstrated the reliability of
this measurement instrument. Conclusive evidence for the cross-cultural existence
of domination and mutualism is largely absent, although qualitative studies in the
Netherlands ( Jacobs, 2007), China (Zinn & Shen, 2007), Estonia (Raadik & Cottrell,
2007), Mongolia (Kaczensky, 2007) and Thailand (Tanakanjana & Saranet, 2007), as
well as an exploratory quantitative study (that included a subset of the 19 items) in
10 European countries (Teel et al., 2010), suggest that these orientations may exist
in various cultures.
According to Inglehart (1997), modern societies are undergoing a shift from mate-
rialist values (focus on economic well-being and safety) to post-materialist values
(focus on quality of life, belonging and self-actualisation), associated with increasing
urbanisation, income and education levels. Research suggests that these societal-level
trends are contributing to an intergenerational shift from domination to mutualism
wildlife value orientations in the United States (Manfredo et al., 2009; Teel & Man-
fredo, 2009). Data collected in 19 Western states revealed that the percentage of those
with a mutualism orientation was higher in states with a higher average state-level
income, education and urbanisation, suggesting that ongoing demographic changes
could contribute to a shift in wildlife value orientations from domination to mutual-
ism. Because the findings also revealed a strong relationship between wildlife value
Steg_6388_c08_main.indd 81 1/19/2012 9:33:20 AM

REVISED
Steg—Environmental Psychology: An Introduction
R
82 ENVIRONMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY: AN INTRODUCTION
HUMAN DIMENSIONS OF WILDLIFE 83
BOX 8.2 MEASUREMENT OF WILDLIFE VALUE
ORIENTATIONS
Research has identified two predominant wild-
life value orientations: domination and mutual-
ism (Manfredo et al., 2009; Teel & Manfredo,
2009). To measure these value orientations, an
instrument has been developed that measures
the degree to which individuals agree with
the beliefs that are typical for the orientations.
For each wildlife value orientation, two belief
domains are distinguished. The items for each
value orientation and belief domain are listed
below. Response options range from 1 = strongly
disagree to 7 = strongly agree.
Domination: Appropriate use beliefs
• Humans should manage fish and wildlife
populations so that humans benefit.
• The needs of humans should take
priority over fish and wildlife protection.
• It is acceptable for people to kill wildlife
if they think it poses a threat to their life.
• It is acceptable for people to kill wildlife
if they think it poses a threat to their
property.
• It is acceptable to use fish and wildlife in
research even if it may harm or kill some
animals.
• Fish and wildlife are on earth primarily
for people to use.
Domination: Hunting beliefs
• We should strive for a world where there
is an abundance of fish and wildlife for
hunting and fishing.
• Hunting is cruel and inhumane to the
animals (reverse-coded).
• Hunting does not respect the lives of
animals (reverse-coded).
• People who want to hunt should be
provided the opportunity to do so.
Mutualism: Social affiliation beliefs
• We should strive for a world where
humans and fish and wildlife can live
side by side without fear.
• I view all living things as part of one big
family.
• Animals should have rights similar to the
rights of humans.
• Wildlife are like my family and I want to
protect them.
Mutualism: Caring beliefs
• I care about animals as much as I do
other people.
• It would be more rewarding to me to
help animals rather than people.
• I take great comfort in the relationships I
have with animals.
• I feel a strong emotional bond with
animals.
• I value the sense of companionship I
receive from animals.
Steg_6388_c08_main.indd 82 1/19/2012 9:33:20 AM

REVISED
Steg—Environmental Psychology: An Introduction
R
82 ENVIRONMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY: AN INTRODUCTION
HUMAN DIMENSIONS OF WILDLIFE 83
orientations and wildlife-related attitudes and behaviours (Teel & Manfredo, 2009),
these changes may additionally result in continued declines in public acceptance of
traditional forms of wildlife management that are typically acceptable for those with
a domination orientation (e.g. hunting, lethal control of wildlife).
8.5 PREDICTING NORMS AND
ATTITUDES TOWARDS WILDLIFE
The usefulness of studying wildlife value orientations depends on the concept’s
predictive validity. Wildlife value orientations should predict people’s attitudes,
norms and behaviours towards wildlife in specific situations. Research has shown that
wildlife value orientations are effective in predicting reported behaviours such as
participation in wildlife-related recreation activities (e.g. hunting, wildlife viewing)
and support for wildlife management interventions across various issues and situa-
tions (e.g. Bright, Manfredo, & Fulton, 2000; Dougherty, Fulton, & Anderson, 2003;
Fulton et al., 1996; Teel & Manfredo, 2009; Whittaker et al., 2006). These studies
have consistently revealed that mutualists are more likely to participate in wildlife
viewing, whereas those with a domination orientation are more likely to be hunters
and anglers. Those with a mutualism value orientation are less likely than individuals
with a domination orientation to support management interventions that harm
wildlife or favour human interests over wildlife protection (e.g. Teel & Manfredo,
2009). Overall, the two wildlife value orientations have been shown across studies to
explain approximately half of the variability in attitudes, norms and behaviours (e.g.
Fulton et al., 1996; Jacobs et al., 2011; Whittaker et al., 2006).
8.6 EMOTIONS TOWARDS WILDLIFE
The cognitive approach described above does not explicitly consider emotions. The
concepts and measurements may reflect emotional content (e.g. attitudes and values
are often emotion-laden), but they are not intended to directly capture emotional
dispositions or responses. While fear towards wildlife has occasionally been empiri-
cally addressed (Johansson & Karlsson, 2011; Kaltenborn, Bjerke, & Nyahongo,
2006; Öhman & Mineka, 2003), research on emotions towards wildlife is far less
extensive than research on cognitions. Yet emotions can play a key role in our
experiences with, and responses to wildlife and reflect basic reactions to wildlife and
the natural environment (Herzog & Burghardt, 1986; Manfredo, 2008; see also
Chapter 7). Emotions influence other mental phenomena, such as perception and
Steg_6388_c08_main.indd 83 1/19/2012 9:33:20 AM

REVISED
Steg—Environmental Psychology: An Introduction
R
84 ENVIRONMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY: AN INTRODUCTION
HUMAN DIMENSIONS OF WILDLIFE 85
memories. Most people can easily recall intense positive and negative emotional
wildlife experiences (e.g. being delighted to see a deer in the wild, being afraid of
snakes).
Emotional responses are characterised by valence (e.g. positive or negative, good
or bad) and may comprise: (a) expressive reactions (e.g. smiling), (b) physiological
reactions (e.g. increased heartbeat), (c) behavioural tendencies or coping (e.g.
approaching, avoiding), (d) thoughts (e.g. interpreting the situation, identifying a
supposed cause of the emotion), and (e) emotional experiences (e.g. feeling happy)
(Cornelius, 1996). These components of emotional responses can be influenced by
biological factors as well as by cultural and individual learning (Jacobs, 2009). In
the course of biological evolution, emotional bodily reactions emerged as automatic
adaptive responses to situations of life-importance, and facilitated the survival and
well-being of animals and humans (Damasio, 2001; LeDoux, 1996). For example,
an increased heartbeat as part of a fear reaction to a predator prepares a human
for optimal fight or flight reactions (see also Chapter 3). Many bodily reactions are
automatic; if the person had to think about increasing the heartbeat the optimal
bodily condition for an immediate adequate reaction would set in too late. How
people interpret feedback from bodily reactions into an emotional experience is
influenced by past experience and knowledge. The knowledge that a bear behind
bars in a zoo cannot attack, for example, might block out an automatic fear response.
Thus, knowledge can influence emotional experiences via feedback from the cogni-
tive to the emotional system and can even suppress an initial emotional bodily fear
reaction.
Different psychological mechanisms can cause emotional responses to wildlife
(Jacobs, 2009). First, humans have innate preferences for watching biological move-
ment over non-biological movement, as demonstrated by experiments with newborn
babies (Simion, Regolin, & Bulf, 2008). Consequently, people are genetically inclined
to attend to and respond to animals. Second, some emotional responses towards
wildlife species relevant for survival (e.g. fear responses to snakes) are learned
quickly and unlearned slowly because of innate quick learning programs (Öhman
& Mineka, 2003; see also Chapter 7). Third, people have mental dispositions to
respond emotionally to wildlife that result from conditioning. Through condition-
ing, a previously neutral stimulus is associated with an emotional stimulus and then
becomes an emotional stimulus as well. For example, scavengers such as crows and
ravens tend to be seen in places associated with death and might thus become fear
triggers for some people (Marzluff & Angell, 2005). Fourth, we tend to react emo-
tionally to the emotional expressions of wildlife; for example, animals that behave
calmly tend to make us feel calm ( Jacobs, 2009). Fifth, knowledge about animals
may reinforce or transform the way a bodily emotional reaction to an animal is
interpreted into a conscious experience (Lazarus & Alfert, 1964). For example, as
pointed out before, seeing a bear in the zoo and knowing that it can do no harm
may convert an initial fear reaction into a positive fascination. Sixth, acquired knowl-
edge about wildlife can prompt emotional reactions. For instance, birdwatchers
enjoy encountering a bird that is rarely seen because they know it is a special event
(McFarlane, 1994). Different emotional responses to wildlife may be caused by
Steg_6388_c08_main.indd 84 1/19/2012 9:33:20 AM

REVISED
Steg—Environmental Psychology: An Introduction
R
84 ENVIRONMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY: AN INTRODUCTION
HUMAN DIMENSIONS OF WILDLIFE 85
various combinations of these mechanisms ( Jacobs, 2009). For example, many
ancient and contemporary myths depict spiders and snakes as symbols of danger
and evil (e.g. Shelob the spider in Lord of the Rings and Voldemort’s snake Nagini
in Harry Potter). Cultural learning thus reinforces our biologically constituted ten-
dency to fear spiders and snakes.
8.7 SUMMARY
Wildlife can evoke strong positive and negative thoughts, feelings and actions in
people. In this chapter, we reviewed theories and corresponding empirical evidence
on these human dimensions of wildlife. In particular, the cognitive hierarchy frame-
work stresses that human cognitions exist on different levels of abstraction and
comprise the concepts of values, value orientations, attitudes and norms, and behav-
ioural intentions (values being the most abstract and behavioural intentions the most
specific cognitions in the continuum). Wildlife value orientations are patterns of basic
beliefs that give direction and meaning to fundamental values in the domain of
wildlife. Research has revealed two primary wildlife value orientations: domination
and mutualism. People with a domination wildlife value orientation believe that
wildlife should be used and managed for human benefit and are more likely to pri-
oritise human well-being over wildlife. Those with a mutualism wildlife value orien-
tation see wildlife as part of an extended family, deserving of rights and care. These
value orientations predict attitudes and norms towards wildlife-related activities and
management issues, as well as wildlife-related behaviours. Along with cognitions,
emotions are important components of human behaviour towards wildlife. Emo-
tional responses to wildlife can be caused by general (e.g. conditioning) and specific
(e.g. innate quick learning programmes) psychological mechanisms. In general,
future research on human dimensions of wildlife may benefit from the combined
study of both cognitive and emotional responses to wildlife.
GLOSSARY
attitudes mental dispositions to evaluate an attitude object (i.e. a person, place, thing, or event)
with some degree of favour or disfavour.
basic beliefs thoughts about general classes of objects or issues within a given domain (e.g.
wildlife).
cognitions mental dispositions that are used in perceiving, remembering, thinking and
understanding.
cognitive hierarchy theoretical framework that stresses that cognitions exist on different levels
of abstraction that are causally related, including values (most abstract), value orientations,
attitudes, norms and behavioural intentions (most specific).
Steg_6388_c08_main.indd 85 1/19/2012 9:33:20 AM

REVISED
Steg—Environmental Psychology: An Introduction
R
86 ENVIRONMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY: AN INTRODUCTION
REVIEW QUESTIONS
1. Which core concepts are included in the cognitive hierarchy framework? How are they defined
and differentiated?
2. Name and describe the two primary wildlife value orientations.
3. What are the components of emotional responses and can you give examples pertaining to
responses to wildlife?
4. Some emotional dispositions towards wildlife are shared by all humans while other emotional
dispositions vary across humans. Give examples of both kinds of dispositions.
domination a wildlife value orientation that comprises beliefs that wildlife should be used and
managed for human benefit and that human well-being is more important than wildlife.
emotional response positive or negative response that is characterised by expressive reactions,
physiological reactions, behavioural tendencies or coping, specific emotion-related thoughts
and emotional experiences.
ideologies consensually held beliefs that enable people who share them to understand meaning,
to know who they are, and to relate to one another.
mutualism a wildlife value orientation that comprises the beliefs that wildlife is part of an
extended family, deserving of care and rights like humans.
norms what is commonly done or (dis)approved.
value orientations schematic networks of basic beliefs, reflective of cultural ideologies, that
give direction and meaning to fundamental values in a particular domain (e.g. wildlife).
values desirable trans-situational goals varying in importance, which serve as guiding principles
in the life of a person or other social entity.
wildlife non-domesticated fauna.
SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER READING
Jacobs, M. H. (2009). Why do we like or dislike animals? Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 14(1),
1–11.
Manfredo, M. J. (2008). Who cares about wildlife? New York: Springer.
Teel, T. L., & Manfredo, M. J. (2009). Understanding the diversity of public interests in wildlife
conservation. Conservation Biology, 24(1), 128–139.
Vaske, J. J. & Manfredo, M. J. (in press). Social-psychological aspects of wildlife management. In
D. J. Decker, S. Riley, & W. F. Siemer (Eds.), Human dimensions of wildlife management. Baltimore,
MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
Steg_6388_c08_main.indd 86 1/19/2012 9:33:20 AM