首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
     检索      


Research methods and reporting practices in zoo and aquarium conservation-education evaluation
Authors:Sarah Mellish  Jillian C Ryan  Elissa L Pearson  Michelle R Tuckey
Institution:1. Conservation Psychology and Applied Animal Behaviour Centre, School of Psychology, Social Work, and Social Policy, Magill Campus, St Bernards Road, University of South Australia, GPO Box 2471, Adelaide, SA, 5001 Australia;2. Centre for Applied Psychological Research, School of Psychology, Social Work and Social Policy, Magill Campus, St Bernards Road, University of South Australia, GPO Box 2471, Adelaide, SA, 5001 Australia
Abstract:Zoos and aquariums are increasingly incorporating conservation education into their mission statements and visitor experiences to address global biodiversity loss. To advance knowledge and practice in the field, research is being conducted to evaluate the effect of zoo conservation-education experiences on visitor psychosocial outcomes (e.g., knowledge, attitude, emotions, motivations, behavior). Following recent discussions among scholars and practitioners concerning logistical and methodological challenges that likely undermine the conclusions of such research, we identified and reviewed the methods and reporting practices in peer-reviewed articles published in English from May 1998 to June 2016 that focused on adult visitor samples (47 articles, 48 studies). We examined elements of internal, external, construct, and statistical conclusion validity. Methodological quality of quantitative methods and reporting practices was determined using the Effective Public Health Practice Project Quality Assessment Tool. Each study was coded as either strong (no weak ratings), moderate (1 weak rating), or weak (≥2 weak ratings). The quantitative methods of 83.3% of studies were weak. The remaining 16.7% had methods of moderate quality. Using an existing checklist, we also assessed the quality and rigor of qualitative methods and reporting practices and found that some aspects of these methods were reported more comprehensively than others. For example, 69.6% of articles discussed methods for identifying key themes from the data, whereas only 34.8% reported how data verification was performed. We suggest increased application of intensive longitudinal methods (e.g., daily diary) to strengthen self-reported data, experimental and repeated-measures designs, and mixed-methods approaches. Our findings and recommendations could strengthen and guide the research and evaluation agenda for the field and ultimately enhance the contribution zoos make to global biodiversity conservation.
Keywords:Aichi biodiversity  biodiversity conservation  conservation psychology  environmental education  methodological review targets  conservación de la biodiversidad  educación ambiental  objetivos de biodiversidad de Aichi  psicología de la conservación  revisión metodológica  保护心理学  环境教育  方法学综述  生物多样性保护  爱知生物多样性目标
设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号