Visitor effects on zoo-housed Sulawesi crested macaque (Macaca nigra) behaviour: Can signs with ‘watching eyes’ requesting quietness help?

Dancer, Alice M. M.; Burn, Charlotte C.

doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2018.12.005

Cited by 24 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, siamangs appeared to respond to some human behaviours as they would to hostile behaviours from their own species.[106]Siamang, white-cheeked gibbonNumberBehaviourOn days of higher visitor numbers, both siamangs and gibbons spent more time in areas away from the public and were less visible. There were no differences in rate of aggressive or affiliative interactions under different visitor numbers.[85]Sulawesi macaqueNumber and noiseBehaviourConducted at five sites: As visitor numbers and noise increased, locomotion, vigilance and foraging increased and social huddling and resting decreased.[159]Western lowland gorillaVisual contact *BehaviourReducing visual contact with visitors resulted in lower levels of conspecific-directed aggression and stereotypies.[12]Number and NoiseBehaviour and GCHigh numbers of visitors and higher noise levels increased staring and charging at visitors and decreased food-related behaviour. No effects on GC concentration.[61]Visual contact *Behaviour and GCWhen privacy screens were in place, staring and charging at visitors decreased.…”

Section: Table A1mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Visitor Effect on Zoo Animals: Implications and Opportunities for Zoo Animal Welfare

Sherwen

Hemsworth

2019

Animals

186

204

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Achieving and maintaining high standards of animal welfare is critical to the success of a modern zoo. Research has shown that an animal’s welfare is highly dependent on how various individual animal factors (e.g., species traits, genetics, temperament and previous experience) interact with environmental features (e.g., social grouping, enclosure design and sensory environment). One prominent feature of the zoo environment is the presence of visitors. Visitor contact can be unpredictable and intense, particularly in terms of auditory and visual interaction. Depending on an animal’s perception of this interaction, visitors can have either negative, neutral or positive impacts on zoo animal behaviour and welfare. This paper reviews the literature on the implications and potential opportunities of human-zoo animal interactions on animal behaviour and welfare, with the aim of stimulating interest, understanding and exploration of this important subject. The literature to date presents a mixed range of findings on the topic. It is possible this variation in the responses of zoo animals to visitors may be due to species-specific differences, the nature and intensity of the visitor interactions, enclosure design, and individual animal characteristics. Analysing these studies and better understanding animal preferences and motivations can provide insight into what animals find negatively and positively reinforcing in terms of visitor contact in a specific zoo setting. This understanding can then be applied to either safeguard welfare in cases where visitors can have a negative impact, or, conversely, it can be applied to highlight opportunities to encourage animal-visitor interaction in situations where animals experience positive emotions associated with visitor interaction.

show abstract

Section: Table A1mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Visitor Effect on Zoo Animals: Implications and Opportunities for Zoo Animal Welfare

Sherwen

Hemsworth

2019

Animals

186

204

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Moreover, during opening hours, visitors also increased the sound levels (Quadros et al, 2014; de Queiroz, 2018), and this could be disruptive for animals. Indeed, several zoo studies suggested that animals were negatively affected by visitor noise, with increased vigilance (Birke, 2002; Dancer & Burn, 2019; Larsen, Sherwen, & Rault, 2014), stereotypy (Sellinger & Ha, 2005), hiding (Farrand, 2007), and cortisol level (Owen, Swaisgood, Czekala, Steinman, & Lindburg, 2004). As the presence of visitors is one of the major differences between the zoo and the wilderness or laboratory (Hosey & Druck, 1987), it is imperative that their noise pollution be taken into account when dealing with animal welfare.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Zoo soundscape: Daily variation of low‐to‐high‐frequency sounds

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, signs were found to be ineffective in regulating potentially fearprovoking visitor behaviors (Chiew, Butler et al, 2019;. 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.…”

Section: Visitor Attitudes and Perceptionsmentioning

confidence: 95%

“…There have also been a handful of studies that have shown the importance of visual messaging and signage, which can impact visitor perceptions, attitudes, behavior, and experience (Dancer & Burn, 2019;Fogelberg, 2014;Kratochvil & Schwammer, 1997;Reade & Waran, 1996). 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.…”

Section: Visitor Attitudes and Perceptionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…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.…”

Section: Visitor Attitudes and Perceptionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

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

Learmonth¹,

Chiew²,

Godinez³

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Animal-Visitor Interactions (AVIs) have become commonplace in zoological institutions and facilities globally. However, most AVI research focuses on the effects of visitors on the welfare of animals, with considerably less studies examining the visitor experience itself. Furthermore, robust evaluations of the efficacy of zoo education programs and engagements for increasing visitor awareness of conservation issues, and for fostering long-term pro-conservation behavior changes in them, are under researched. This paper reviews the current literature that pertains to the effects of zoo visitation and AVIs on visitor perceptions, beliefs, and attitudes. We briefly note some of the known effects that zoo visitors have on zoo animals, and conversely explore the effects that factors such as enclosure design, animal visibility and behaviors, and AVIs can have on visitors’ overall experience whilst attending the zoo. We suggest that future research needs to more closely examine the relationships and interactions between zoo visitors and zoo animals; why some zoo visitors maintain repeat visitation over others; what the differences in beliefs and attitudes may be between “zoo visitors” and “non-zoo visitors” (i.e., other general public); and to make a concerted effort to understand: (1) what visitors are doing after they leave the zoo, and (2) whether visitors are adopting long-term pro-conservation behaviors into their daily lives. We further suggest that future research needs to start investigating indirect measures related to the visitor experience, such as: (a) individual conservation support outside of the zoo; (b) internet activity; (c) changes in sustainable purchasing practices related to knowledge gains; (d) financial investment in sustainable or ethical companies after knowledge gains; (e) and the longitudinal effects of zoo visits.

show abstract

Visitor effects on zoo-housed Sulawesi crested macaque (Macaca nigra) behaviour: Can signs with ‘watching eyes’ requesting quietness help?

Cited by 24 publications

References 26 publications

The Visitor Effect on Zoo Animals: Implications and Opportunities for Zoo Animal Welfare

The Visitor Effect on Zoo Animals: Implications and Opportunities for Zoo Animal Welfare

Zoo soundscape: Daily variation of low‐to‐high‐frequency sounds

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

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About