Learning to live with black bears: A psychological model of acceptance

Journal of Wildlife Management

Volumn 76, Issue 7, 2012, Pages 1331-1340

  Zajac, Ryan M ^a   Bruskotter, Jeremy T ^a   Wilson, Robyn S ^a   Prange, Suzanne ^b  

^a OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b Ohio Division of Wildlife   (United States)

Author keywords

acceptance; black bear; carnivore; control; Ohio; risk perception; trust; Ursus americanus

Indexed keywords

ANTHROPOGENIC EFFECT; BEAR; CARNIVORE; HYPOTHESIS TESTING; PSYCHOLOGY; RISK PERCEPTION; STAKEHOLDER; WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT;

OHIO; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84865353316     PISSN: 0022541X     EISSN: 19372817     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/jwmg.398     Document Type: Article

References (60)

1. Alhakami, A. S.; and, P. Slovic,. 1994. A psychological study of the inverse relationship between perceived risk and perceived benefit. Risk Analysis 14: 1085-1096.
2. Bjerke, T.; J. Vitterso, and, B. Kaltenborn,. 2000. Locus of control and attitudes toward large carnivores. Psychological Reports 86: 37-46.
3. Bright, A. D.; and, M. J. Manfredo,. 1996. A conceptual model of attitudes toward natural resource issues: a case study of wolf reintroduction. Human Dimensions of Wildlife 1: 1-21.
4. Bruskotter, J. T.; and, D. C. Fulton,. 2012. Will hunters steward wolves? A comment on Treves and Martin. Society & Natural Resources 25: 97-102.
5. Bruskotter, J. T.; and, L. B. Shelby,. 2010. Human dimensions of large carnivore conservation and management: introduction to the special issue. Human Dimensions of Wildlife 15: 311-314.
6. Bruskotter, J. T.; J. Vaske, and, R. H. Schmidt,. 2009. Social and cognitive correlates of Utah residents' acceptance of the lethal control of wolves. Human Dimensions of Wildlife 14: 119-132.
7. Byrne, B. M.; 2009. Structural equation modeling with AMOS basic concepts, applications, and programming. Second edition. Routledge, New York, USA.
8. Cortina, J. M.; 1993. What is coefficient alpha? An examination of theory and applications. Journal of Applied Psychology 78: 98-104.
9. Cvetkovich, G.; and, P. L. Winter,. 2003. Trust and social representations of the management of threatened and endangered species. Environment and Behavior 35: 286-307. (Pubitemid 36261148)
10. Decker, D. J.; C. A. Jacobson, and, T. L. Brown,. 2006. Situation-specific "impact dependency" as a determinant of management acceptability: insights from wolf and grizzly bear management in Alaska. Wildlife Society Bulletin 34: 426-432. (Pubitemid 43993760)
11. Decker, D. J.; and, K. G. Purdy,. 1988. Toward a concept of wildlife acceptance capacity in wildlife management. Wildlife Society Bulletin 16: 53-57. (Pubitemid 19319112)
12. Devellis, R. F.; 2003. Scale development theory and applications. Volume 26. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, California, USA.
13. Diamantopoulos, A.; and, J. A. Siguaw,. 2000. Introducing LISREL. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, California, USA.
14. Dillman, D. A.; 2000. Mail and Internet surveys: the tailored design method. John Wiley & Sons, New York, New York, USA.
15. Don Carlos, A. W.; A. D. Bright, T. L. Teel, and, J. J. Vaske,. 2009. Human-black bear conflict in urban areas: an integrated approach to management response. Human Dimensions of Wildlife 14: 174-184.
16. Eagly, A. H.; and, S. Chaiken,. 1993. The psychology of attitudes. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College Publishers, Fort Worth, Texas, USA.
17. Earle, T. C.; and, G. T. Cvetkovich,. 1995. Social trust toward a cosmopolitan society. Praeger Westport, Connecticut, USA.
18. Enserink, M.; and, G. Vogel,. 2006. The carnivore comeback. Science 314: 746-749. (Pubitemid 44706621)
19. Finucane, M. L.; A. Alhakami, P. Slovic, and, S. M. Johnson,. 2000. The affect heuristic in judgments of risks and benefits. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making 13: 1-17.
20. Gehrt, S. D.; S. P. D. Riley, and, B. L. Cypher,. 2010. Urban carnivores: ecology, conflict, and conservation. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
21. Gigliotti, L.; D. J. Decker, and, L. H. Carpenter,. 2000. Developing the wildlife stakeholder acceptance capacity concept: research needed. Human Dimensions of Wildlife 5: 67-82.
22. Gore, M. L.; B. A. Knuth, P. D. Curtis, and, J. E. Shanahan,. 2006. Stakeholder perceptions of risk associated with human-black bear conflicts in New York's Adirondack Park campgrounds: implications for theory and practice. Wildlife Society Bulletin 34: 36-43.
23. Gore, M. L.; B. A. Knuth, P. D. Curtis, and, J. E. Shanahan,. 2007. Factors influencing risk perception associated with human-black bear conflict. Human Dimensions of Wildlife 12: 133-136. (Pubitemid 46716993)
24. Herrero, S.; A. Higgins, J. E. Cardoza, L. I. Hajduk, and, T. S. Smith,. 2011. Fatal attacks by American black bear on people: 1900-2009. Journal of Wildlife Management 75: 596-603.
25. Hristienko, H.; and, J. E. McDonald, Jr.; 2007. Going into the 21st century: a perspective on trends and controversies in the management of the American black bear. Ursus 18: 72-88. (Pubitemid 46996538)
26. Hu, L.; and, P. M. Bentler,. 1999. Cutoff criteria for indices in covariance structural analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling 6: 1-55.
27. Huurne, E. F. G.; and, J. M. Gutteling,. 2009. How to trust? The importance of self-efficacy and social trust in public responses to industrial risks. Journal of Risk Research 12: 809-824.
28. Kline, R. B.; 2005. Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. Second edition. The Guilford Press, New York, New York, USA.
29. Lefcourt, H. M.; 1991. Locus of control. Pages 413-500 in, J. P. Robinson, P. R. Shaver, and, L. S. Wrightsman, editors. Measures of personality and social psychological attitudes. Volume 1. Academic Press, San Diego, California, USA.
30. Levenson, H.; and, I. Mahler,. 1975. Attitudes toward others and components of internal-external locus of control. Psychological Reports 36: 209-210.
31. Levenson, H.; and, I. Mahler,. 1981. Differentiating among internality, powerful others, and chance. Pages 15-59 in, H. M. Lefcourt, editor. Research with the locus of control construct. Volume 1. Assessment Methods edition. Academic Press, New York, New York, USA.
32. Linnel, J. D. C.; J. E. Swenson, and, R. Andersen,. 2001. Predators and people: conservation of large carnivores is possible at high human densities if management policy is favourable. Animal Conservation 4: 345-349. (Pubitemid 33586575)
33. Lischka, S. A.; S. J. Riley, and, B. A. Rudolph,. 2008. Effects of impact perception on acceptance capacity for white-tailed deer. Journal of Wildlife Management 72: 502-509. (Pubitemid 351273025)
34. Loehlin, J. C.; 2004. Latent variable models: an introduction to factor, path, and structural equation analysis. Fourth edition. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, New Jersey, USA.
35. Manfredo, M. J.; D. C. Fulton, and, C. L. Pierce,. 1997. Understanding voter behavior on wildlife ballot initiatives: Colorado's trapping amendment. Human Dimensions of Wildlife 2: 22-39.
36. Manfredo, M. J.; J. Vaske, and, T. L. Teel,. 2003. The potential for conflict index: a graphic approach to practical significance of human dimensions research. Human Dimensions of Wildlife 8: 219-228.
37. McDaniels, T.; L. J. Axelrod, and, P. Slovic,. 1996. Perceived ecological risks of global change. Global Environmental Change 6: 159-171.
38. McKnight, P. E.; K. M. McKnight, S. Sidani, and, A. J. Figueredo,. 2007. Missing data: a gentle introduction. The Guilford Press, New York, New York, USA.
39. Needham, M. D.; and, J. Vaske,. 2008. Hunter perceptions of similarity and trust in wildlife agencies and personal risk associated with chronic wasting disease. Society and Natural Resources 21: 197-214. (Pubitemid 351267179)
40. Needham, M. D.; J. J. Vaske, and, M. J. Manfredo,. 2004. Hunter's behavior and acceptance of management actions related to chronic wasting disease in eight states. Human Dimensions of Wildlife 9: 211-231.
41. Noar, S. M.; 2003. The role of structural equation modeling in scale development. Structural Equation Modeling 10: 622-647.
42. Organ, J. F.; and, M. R. Ellingwood,. 2000. Wildlife stakeholder acceptance capacity for black bears, beavers and other beasts in the east. Human Dimensions of Wildlife 5: 63-75.
43. Petty, R. E.; and, J. A. Krosnick,. 1995. Attitude strength: antecedents and consequences. Volume 4. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, New Jersey, USA.
44. Poortinga, W.; and, N. F. Pidgeon,. 2003. Exploring the dimensionality of trust in risk regulation. Risk Analysis 23: 961-972. (Pubitemid 37193553)
45. Preacher, K. J.; and, A. F. Hayes,. 2004. SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers 36: 717-731. (Pubitemid 40251423)
46. Riley, S. J.; 1998. Integration of environmental, biological, and human dimensions for management of mountain lions (Puma concolor) in Montana. Dissertation, The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, USA.
47. Riley, S. J.; and, D. J. Decker,. 2000a. Risk perception as a factor in wildlife stakeholder acceptance capacity for cougars in Montana. Human Dimensions of Wildlife 5: 50-62.
48. Riley, S. J.; and, D. J. Decker,. 2000b. Wildlife stakeholder acceptance capacity for cougars in Montana. Wildlife Society Bulletin 28: 931-939. (Pubitemid 32113742)
49. Shindler, B.; M. W. Brunson, and, K. A. Cheek,. 2004. Social acceptability in forest and range management. Chapter 14 in, M. Manfredo, J. Vaske, B. Bruyere, D. Field, and, P. Brown, editors. Society and natural resources: a summary of knowledge. Modern Litho Press, Jefferson, Missouri, USA.
50. Siegrist, M.; 1999. A causal model explaining the perception and acceptance of gene technology. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 10: 2093-2106.
51. Siegrist, M.; 2000. The influence of trust and perceptions of risks and benefits on the acceptance of gene technology. Risk Analysis 20: 195-204.
52. Siegrist, M.; and, G. Cvetkovich,. 2000. Perceptions of hazards: the role of social trust and knowledge. Risk Analysis 20: 713-719.
53. Siegrist, M.; G. Cvetkovich, and, C. Roth,. 2000. Salient value similarity, social trust, and risk/benefit perception. Risk Analysis 20: 353-362. (Pubitemid 30644704)
54. Sjoberg, L.; 2001. Limits of knowledge and the limited importance of trust. Risk Analysis 21: 189-198. (Pubitemid 32679247)
55. Slovic, P.; 1987. Perception of risk. Science 236: 280-285. (Pubitemid 17061043)
56. Spencer, R. D.; R. A. Beausoleil, and, D. A. Martorello,. 2007. How agencies respond to human-black bear conflicts: a survey of wildlife agencies in North America. Ursus 18: 217-229.
57. Vaske, J.; J. D. Absher, and, A. D. Bright,. 2007. Salient values similarity, social trust and attitudes toward wildland fire management strategies. Human Ecology Review 14: 223-232. (Pubitemid 47185572)
58. Vaske, J.; N. R. Timmons, J. Beaman, and, J. Petchenik,. 2004. Chronic wasting disease in Wisconsin: hunter behavior, perceived risk, and agency trust. Human Dimensions of Wildlife 9: 193-209.
59. Wu, C.; and, D. R. Shaffer,. 1987. Susceptibility to persuasive appeals as a function of source credibility and prior experience with attitude object. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 52: 677-688.
60. Zinn, H. C.; M. J. Manfredo, and, D. J. Decker,. 2008. Human conditioning to wildlife: steps toward theory and research. Human Dimensions of Wildlife 13: 388-399.