Reassessing public opinion of captive cetacean attractions with a photo elicitation survey.
Reassessing public opinion of captive cetacean attractions with a photo elicitation survey.
复制标题
作者：
Wassermann SN;Hind-Ozan EJ;Seaman J
全球范围内，圈养鲸类动物的吸引力越来越大，其经营者认为娱乐，教育和保护是有益的。赞成和反对发展这些景点的人都得到公众的支持。然而，以前的民意研究几乎没有达成共识，部分原因是在研究设计中引入了影响参与者反应的偏见。那些参与或关注这些景点的开发和许可的人需要更好地理解是什么导致缺乏共识，无法做出社会可接受的决定。我们回顾了以前的研究公众舆论的鲸目动物圈养，注意到可能的偏见来源。调查问题的措辞可能是引入偏见的主要来源，所以我们使用了开放式的照片启发方法。我们向特克斯凯科斯群岛（N = 292）的游客展示了海洋哺乳动物公园（MMP）虎鲸表演和与海豚游泳（SWTD）景点的图像，并要求他们对每个景点的潜在发展提出定性评论。他们还表示，他们有多大可能会访问每一个李克特规模。受访者普遍反对参观MMP虎鲸表演，60.9%的人不太可能参观。SWTD景点更受欢迎; 60.3%的人可能会参观。对于SWTD，美国居民更有可能访问;老年受访者和那些住在全包度假村的人不太可能。那些住在全包式度假村的人也不太可能参观MMP虎鲸表演。绝大多数定性评论集中在娱乐价值或动物福利问题上。对于这些景点的教育或保育价值，即使有评论，也是少之又少。我们的研究结果与之前几项关于公众舆论的研究相矛盾，这些研究没有使用照片诱导。这项调查中对MMP虎鲸表演的支持远低于代表圈养鲸类景点运营商进行的研究所声称的支持。对SWTD的反对也明显低于对野生鲸目动物旅游参与者进行的调查。这种差异可能归因于不同的调查人群和环境，但这种差异也很可能归因于研究人员引入的偏见。虽然照片选择可能会引入偏见，但照片诱导减少了对预先编写的问题和回答的依赖，似乎有效地减少了其他形式的偏见。允许开放式的回应，即参与者对一幅图像做出回应，似乎比封闭式的提问更能代表性地理解公众心中最前沿的东西。这些结论，在这项研究中提出的其他建议，圈养鲸目动物景点的发展决策是根据不精确的数据。展望未来，在为此类决策提供信息时，至少应考虑通过响应者主导的、开放式的、偏差最小化的方法收集的数据。
Captive cetacean attractions are growing in number globally, their operators citing entertainment, education, and conservation as benefits. Those for and against developing such attractions claim public support. Previous public opinion research, however, shows little consensus, partly due to the introduction of biases in study design that influence participants’ responses. Those involved in, or concerned with, developing and licensing these attractions need to better understand what drives the lack of consensus to take socially-acceptable decisions. We reviewed previous research on public opinion of cetacean captivity, noting possible sources of bias. Survey question wording can be a major source of introduced bias, so we used an open-ended photo elicitation approach. We showed tourists in the Turks Caicos Islands (N = 292) images of a marine mammal park (MMP) killer whale show and a swim-with-the-dolphins (SWTD) attraction and asked for their qualitative comments on the potential development of each. They also indicated how likely they would be to visit each on a Likert scale. Respondents were generally against visiting MMP killer whale shows, with 60.9% not likely to visit. SWTD attractions were more popular; 60.3% were likely to visit. For SWTD, USA residents were more likely to visit; older respondents and those staying in all-inclusive resorts were less likely. Those staying in all-inclusive resorts were also less likely to visit MMP killer whale shows. The great majority of qualitative comments centred on either entertainment value or animal welfare concerns. There were very few, if any, comments on the education or conservation value of these attractions. Our findings contradict several previous studies on public opinion of captive cetaceans that did not use photo elicitation. The support shown for MMP killer whale shows in this survey was well below that claimed by studies conducted on behalf of captive cetacean attraction operators. Opposition to SWTD was also noticeably lower than that found in surveys conducted with wild cetacean tourism participants. This difference can likely be attributed to the different survey populations and settings, but this variation is also very likely attributable to researcher-introduced bias. While photo selection can introduce bias, photo elicitation reduces reliance on pre-scripted questions and responses, and seems to effectively reduce other forms of bias. Allowing open-ended responses, where participants responded to an image, seems to have given a more representative understanding of what is at the forefront of the public’s mind than closed questioning. These conclusions, among others made in this study, suggest that development decisions for captive cetacean attractions are being made on imprecise data. Going forward, data collected via responder-led, open-ended, bias-minimising approaches should at least be considered when informing such decisions.