An exploration into the efficacy of public warning signs: A zoo case study

Abstract

Unauthorised feeding and touching of the animals by visitors to zoos and wildlife parks pose serious threats to the health of both animals and visitors alike. We tested the efficacy of four different “do not feed” signs designed to prevent zoo visitors from feeding a group of meerkats. Signs consisted of one of two different written messages and imagery of either a pair of watching human eyes, or meerkat pawprints as a control. Covert observation of visitor behaviour in the presence and absence of the signs was analysed. Visitors were significantly less likely to feed the meerkats when signs were present, than when they were absent. The effect of the signs was specific to the targeted behaviour in that feeding was reduced, but attempts to touch the meerkats increased with the presence of the signs. We did not find that the presence of watching eyes or the different wording on the signs affected the likelihood of visitors feeding the meerkats. We also examined factors that influenced the likelihood of visitors attending to the signs. We found that children were more likely to attend to signs than adults which has important implications for the design of such signs. Together our findings show that signs are effective in reducing the unwanted behaviours they target but may also result in displacement of these negative behaviours and that children are more likely to attend to these signs than adults.

Looking for Visitor’s Effect in Sanctuaries: Implications of Guided Visitor Groups on the Behavior of the Chimpanzees at Fundació Mona

“…In addition to the strict visitor protocol put in place at Fundació Mona, the visitor guides have the important task of passively and actively preventing visitors from disturbing or attempting to interact with the chimpanzees. Parker et al tested [68] the efficiency of “do not feed” signs at zoos and reported that while animal feeding decreased, other behaviors such as attempts to touch the animals increased at the same time. This study showed that visitors, although possibly being informed not to disturb or interact with the animals, when allowed to move freely and unsupervised close to the habitats will most likely cause disturbances for the animals.…”

Animal-Visitor Interactions and the Visitor Experience: Visitor Behaviors, Attitudes, Perceptions, and Learning in the Modern Zoo

“…In contrast, Dancer and Burn (2019) found that signs requesting visitors to be quiet were effective in reducing visitor noise levels. Similarly, Parker et al (2018) found that signs requesting visitors not to feed meerkats were effective in reducing the frequency of visitors feeding the meerkats, but increased attempts to touch the meerkats, which was suggested as a displacement behavior for not being able to feed the animals. However, these latter two studies did not examine visitor attitudes or perceptions; thus, it is unclear whether signs in these studies influenced visitor attitudes and perceptions.…”

“…For instance, Reade and Waran (1996) found visual messages that zoo visitors are exposed to within the zoo environment increased positive perceptions of zoo animals and increased awareness of the benefits of environmental enrichment. Signs at zoos directed at regulating visitor behaviors have been found to have varying effects depending on the wording, specificity and/or visual imagery included or not included Dancer & Burn, 2019;Parker et al, 2018). found that signs used to attempt to regulate potentially fearprovoking visitor behaviors towards little penguins (Eudyptula minor) had a negative effect on visitor attitudes towards some little penguin characteristics.…”

Animal-Visitor Interactions and the Visitor Experience: Visitor Behaviors, Attitudes, Perceptions, and Learning in the Modern Zoo (Preprint)

“…In contrast, Dancer and Burn (2019) found that signs requesting visitors to be quiet were effective in reducing visitor noise levels. Similarly, Parker et al (2018) found that the presence of signs requesting visitors not to feed meerkats were effective in reducing visitors feeding the meerkats but were found to increase attempts to touch the meerkats which was suggested to be a displacement behavior of not being able to feed the animals. However, these latter two studies did not examine visitor attitudes or perceptions thus it is unclear whether signs in these studies influenced visitor attitudes and perceptions.…”

“…For instance, Reade and Waran (1996) found visual messages that zoo visitors are exposed to within the zoo environment increased positive perceptions of zoo animals and increased awareness of the benefits of environmental enrichment. Signs at zoos directed at regulating visitor behaviors have been found to have varying effects depending on the wording, specificity and/or visual imagery included or not included Dancer & Burn, 2019;Parker et al, 2018). found that signs used to attempt to regulate potentially fear-provoking visitor behaviors towards little penguins had a negative effect on visitor attitudes towards positive little penguin characteristics and neutral visitor effects.…”