Evaluation of Public Engagement Activities to Promote Science in a Zoo Environment

Abstract

Scientists are increasing their efforts to promote public engagement with their science, but the efficacy of the methods used is often not scientifically evaluated. Here, we designed, installed and evaluated the educational impact of interactive games on touchscreens at two primate research centres based in zoo environments. The games were designed to promote interest in and understanding of primates and comparative psychology, as a scaffold towards interest in science more generally and with the intention of targeting younger individuals (under 16's). We used systematic observational techniques and questionnaires to assess the impact of the games on zoo visitors. The games facilitated increased interest in psychology and science in zoo visitors, and changed the knowledge of visitors, through demonstration of learning about specific scientific findings nested within the games. The impact of such devices was greatest on younger individuals (under 16's) as they were significantly more likely to engage with the games. On the whole, therefore, this study demonstrates that interactive devices can be successful educational tools, and adds to the growing body of evidence that conducting research on public view in zoos can have a tangible impact on public engagement with science.

Evaluation of the Pint of Science festival in Thailand

“…Both the survey and qualitative component of the evaluation showed that audience members attended PoST because of their interest in science, its entertainment value and their desire to learn; our study shows that audience members indeed enjoyed the event and perceived that they have increased their knowledge. These findings were consistent with evaluations of similar initiatives as the science café-like programs in Cambodia [6], Hong Kong [8], USA [26, 27], the Netherlands [28] and participation in science festivals in the UK [29, 30].…”

A review of zoo‐based cognitive research using touchscreen interfaces

“…For example, Zoo Atlanta's research program focuses on studying a breadth of cognitive skills in gorillas and orangutans (Diamond et al, ; Tarou, Kuhar, Adcock, Bloomsmith, & Maple, ), whereas Marwell Zoo's Macaque Cognition Project focuses its work primarily on the function of social communication in its multiple macaque species ( Macaca spp. ; Micheletta, Whitehouse, Parr, & Waller, ; Waller, Peirce, Mitchell, & Micheletta, ; Whitehouse et al, , ). There has also been growth in more applied science in zoos using touchscreens, with researchers exploring welfare implications of cognitive testing (Tarou et al, ; Wagner et al, ), preferences (Hopper et al, in press; Perdue, ), personality (Altschul, Wallace, Sonnweber, Tomonaga, & Weiss, ), and mood (Allritz et al, ; Cronin et al, ; Kret, Jaasma, Bionda, & Wijnen, ) in several species.…”

“…We join others who advocate for a growth in comparative studies, where similar protocols are used to study different species, to better understand the phylogenic underpinnings of specific processes. Although some studies have taken advantage of the opportunity to study human subjects in zoo settings (Marsh, Spetch, & MacDonald, ; Pope, Meguerditchian, Hopkins, & Fagot, ; Renner, Price, & Subiaul, ; Subiaul, Vonk, & Rutherford, ; Whitehouse et al, ), there are relatively very few studies that explore human subjects, especially with the opportunity to study humans in comparison to the other taxa available in zoos, as well as the wide variety of age groups that routinely visit zoos across the country (Hopper, ; MacDonald & Ritvo, ). While zoos studies are bolstered by the variety in taxa, a recurring critique is the use of relatively small sample sizes for research studies.…”

Responsible research and innovation indicators for science education assessment: how to measure the impact?

“…This level is often covered by the studies reviewed, mostly through quantitative data collection tools, such as close-ended questionnaires and Likert scales (e.g. Sadler, Romine, Menon, Ferdig, & Annetta, 2015;Savoy, Proctor, & Salvendy, 2009;Whitehouse et al, 2014). A second level expands the assessment of RRI learning outcomes to the acquisition of transversal skills and competences.…”