"Bats, snakes and spiders, Oh my!" How aesthetic and negativistic attitudes, and other concepts predict support for species protection

Journal of Environmental Psychology

Volumn 28, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 94-103

  Knight, Andrew J ^a  

^a SUSQUEHANNA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Aesthetics; Animals; Attitudes; Conservation; Endangered species; Endangered Species Act; Preservation

Indexed keywords

ANIMALIA; ARANEAE; PLECOTUS TOWNSENDII INGENS; SERPENTES; THAMNOPHIS HAMMONDII;

EID: 39149105266     PISSN: 02724944     EISSN: 15229610     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvp.2007.10.001     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. Associated Press. (2004). Extinct list for species says Hawaii had the most. The New York Times, April 25, section 1, 30.
2. Barringer, F. (2005). House votes for new limits on Endangered Species Act. The New York Times, September 30, section A, 1.
3. Bjerke T., and Kaltenborn B.P. The relationship of ecocentric and anthropocentric motives to attitudes toward large canivores. Journal of Environmental Psychology 19 (1999) 415-421
4. Bjerke T., Kaltenborn B.P., and Thrane C. Sociodemographic correlates of fear-related attitudes toward the wolf (Canis lupus lupus). A survey in southeastern Norway. Fauna Norvegica 21 (2001) 25-33
5. Blocker T.J., and Eckberg D.L. Gender and environmentalism: Results from the 1993 general social survey. Social Science Quarterly 78 4 (1997) 841-858
6. Brackney M., and McAndrew F.T. Ecological worldviews and receptivity to different types of arguments for preserving endangered species. The Journal of Environmental Education 33 1 (2001) 17-20
7. Burgess B. Fate of the wild. The Endangered Species Act and the future of biodiversity (2001), University of Georgia Press, Athens, GA
8. Clayton S. Models of justice in the environmental debate. Journal of Social Issues 56 3 (2000) 469-474
9. Cooper D.E. Aesthetics and the environment. In: Cooper D.E., and Palmer J.A. (Eds). Spirit of the environment: Religion, value and environmental concern (1998), Routledge, New York, NY 100-112
10. Craske M.G., Antony M.M., and Barlow D.H. Mastering your fears and phobias (2006), Oxford University Press, New York, NY
11. Czech B., and Krausman P.R. The Endangered Species Act. History, conservation biology, and public policy (2001), The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, MD
12. Czech B., Krausman P.R., and Borkhataria R. Social construction, political power, and the allocation of benefits to endangered species. Conservation Biology 12 5 (1998) 1103-1112
13. Dekay M.L., and McClelland G.H. Probability and utility components of endangered species preservation programs. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied 2 1 (1996) 60-83
14. Dietz T., Kalof L., and Stern P. Gender, values, and environmentalism. Social Science Quarterly 83 1 (2002) 353-364
15. Dunlap R.E., Van Liere K.D., Mertig A.G., and Jones R.E. Measuring endorsement of the new ecological paradigm: A revised NEP scale-Statistical data included. Journal of Social Issues 56 (2000) 425-442
16. Epstein S. Integration of the cognitive and the psychodynamic unconscious. American Psychologist 49 8 (1994) 709-724
17. Floyd M.F., Jang H., and Noe F.P. The relationship between environmental concern and acceptability of environmental impacts among visitors to two US national park settings. Journal of Environmental Management 51 (1997) 391-412
18. Freudenberg W.R., Wilson L.J., and O'Leary D.J. Forty years of spotted owls? A longitudinal analysis of logging industry job losses. Sociological Perspectives 41 1 (1998) 126
19. Herzog T., and Kutzli G.E. Preference and perceived danger in field/forest settings. Environment and Behavior 34 6 (2002) 819-835
20. Herzog T., and Miller E.J. The role of mystery in perceived danger and environmental preference. Environment and Behavior 30 4 (1998) 429-449
21. Herzog T., and Smith G.A. Danger, mystery, and environmental preference. Environment and Behavior 20 3 (1988) 320-344
22. Jalonick M.C. Critics cite other statistics. CQ Weekly March 20 (2004) 685-686
23. Kellert S. Social and perceptual factors in endangered species management. Journal of Wildlife Management 49 2 (1985) 528-536
24. Kellert S. Perceptions of animals in America. In: Hoage R.J. (Ed). Perceptions of animals in American culture (1989), Smithsonian Institute Press, Washington, DC 845-855
25. Kellert S. Values and perceptions of invertebrates. Conservation Biology 7 4 (1993) 845-855
26. Kellert S. The value of life: Biological diversity and human society (1996), Island Press, Washington, DC
27. Kellert S.R., Black M., Rush C.R., and Bath A.J. Human culture and large carnivore conservation in North America. Conservation Biology 10 4 (1996) 977-990
28. McCool S.F., Benson R.E., and Ashor J.L. How the public perceives the visual effects of timber harvesting: An evaluation of interest group preferences. Environmental Management 10 3 (1986) 385-391
29. Metrick A., and Weitzman M.L. Conflicts and choices in biodiversity preservation. Journal of Economic Perspectives 12 3 (1998) 21-34
30. Milne J.M., Garrison C.Z., Addy C.L., McKeown R., Jackson K.L., Culiffe S.P., et al. Frequency of phobic disorder in a community sample of young adolescents. Journal of American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry 34 (1995) 1202-1211
31. New York Times. (2005). An endangered law. Retrieved on October 9, 2005, from 〈http://www.nytimes.com/20005/10/09/opinion/09sun2.html〉.
32. Ohman A., and Soares J.J.F. Unconscious anxiety: Phobic responses to masked stimuli. Journal of Abnormal Psychology 103 2 (1994) 231-240
33. Pooley J., and O'Connor M. Environmental education and attitudes: Emotions and beliefs are what is needed. Environment and Behavior 32 5 (2000) 711-723
34. Skogen K. Who's afraid of the big, bad wolf? Young people's responses to the conflicts over large carnivores in Eastern Norway. Rural Sociology 66 2 (2001) 203-226
35. Stanford Environmental Law Society. The Endangered Species Act (2001), Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA
36. Stern P.C., Dietz T., and Guagnano G.A. The new ecological paradigm in social-psychological context. Environment and Behavior 27 6 (1995) 723-743
37. Summit J., and Sommer R. Further studies of preferred tree shapes. Environment and Behavior 31 4 (1999) 550-576
38. Tarrant M.A., and Green G. Outdoor recreation and the predictive validity of environmental attitudes. Leisure Sciences 21 (1999) 17-30
39. Thomas C.W. Habitat conservation planning: Certainly empowered, somewhat deliberative, questionably democratic. Politics and Society 29 1 (2001) 105-130
40. Thorpe S.J., and Salkovskis P.M. Animal phobias. In: Davey G.C.L. (Ed). Phobias. A handbook of theory, research and treatment (1997), Wiley, Chichester, UK 81-106
41. Ulrich R.S. Biophilia, biophobia, and natural landscapes. In: Kellert S.R., and Wilson E.O. (Eds). The biophilia hypothesis (1993), Island Press, Washington, DC 73-137
42. Wilson M.A. The wolf in Yellowstone: Science, symbol, or politics? Deconstructing the conflict between environmentalism and wise use. Society and Natural Resources 10 (1997) 453-468
43. Zajonc R.B. Feeling and thinking: Preferences need no inferences. American Psychologist 35 2 (1980) 151-175
44. Zinn H.C., Manfredo M.J., Vaske J.J., and Wittman K. Using normative beliefs to determine the acceptability of wildlife management actions. Society and Natural Resources 11 (1998) 649-662
45. Zinn H.C., and Pierce C.L. Values, gender, and concern about potentially dangerous wildlife. Environment and Behavior 34 2 (2002) 239-256