Human–wildlife conflicts (HWC) are complex conservation challenges that impair both wildlife populations and human livelihood. Research on HWC, however, has traditionally approached ecological and human components separately, hampering a broader understanding of connections between ecological drivers and human dimensions of conflicts. We developed a model that integrates ecological and human components of HWC to investigate how the amount of remaining native forest (forest cover, a key ecological variable known to influence species occurrence and abundance) affects human experiences with wildlife (contact with species and attacks on livestock) and how such experiences influence tolerance via beliefs, emotions, and attitudes. We tested the model with piecewise structural equation modeling and data on human interactions with 3 mammals with different rarity and body size: opossum (Didelphis aurita), crab‐eating fox (Cerdocyon thous), and puma (Puma concolor). Data were obtained by interviewing 114 landowners across 13 Atlantic Forest landscapes (10–50% forest cover). Forest cover was associated with high chance of attacks on livestock, and thus with low tolerance, only in the case of the puma. Effects of distinct experiences with wildlife on beliefs and emotions varied across species. Beliefs and emotions toward wildlife influenced tolerance toward all species, but negative emotions affected tolerance toward only with the puma. Conflicts with large carnivores, such as pumas, can then be understood as disservices provided by forests, indicating the relevance of framing HWC more broadly to consider trade‐offs with ecosystems services. For some species, positive experiences with wildlife may counteract the negative effects of attacks on livestock in shaping tolerance. Models such as ours—that link ecological and human dimensions—can help identify more effective leverage points to improve HWC mitigation.

1. Unravelling the psychological processes determining landowners' support towards forest conservation is crucial, particularly in rural areas of the tropics, where most forest remnants are within private lands. As human-nature connections are known to shape pro-environmental behaviours, the intention of preserving forest remnants should ultimately be determined by the ecological context people live in.2. Here, we investigate the pathways through which the ecological context (forest cover), via direct contact with forests and ecosystem services and disservices, influence the psychological antecedents of conservation behaviour (beliefs, attitude and intention of preserving forest remnants). We conceptualized a model based on the Reasoned Action Approach, using the ecological context and these three forest experiences as background factors, and tested the model using Piecewise Structural Equation Modelling. Data were collected through an interview-based protocol applied to 106 landowners across 13 landscapes varying in forest cover in a consolidated rural region in the Brazilian Atlantic Forest.3. Our results indicate that: (a) ecosystem services are more important than disservices for shaping intention of preserving forests, particularly non-provisioning services; (b) contact with forest has an indirect effect on intention, by positively influencing the frequency of receiving ecosystem services; (c) people living in more forested ecological contexts have more contact with forests, receive ecosystem services more frequently and, ultimately, have stronger intention of preserving forests.4. Hence, our study suggests a dangerous positive feedback loop between deforestation, the extinction of forest experiences and impairment of human-nature connections. Local demands across the full range of ecosystem services, the balance 2017), willingness (e.g. to conserve animal biodiversity; Soga,