Critique of a Critique: Do Zoos and Aquariums Promote Attitude Change in Visitors?

Abstract

Marino et al. (2010) recently published a critique of a three-year National Science Foundation-funded investigation of the impact of zoo and aquarium visits on the public's understanding of animals and their attitudes toward conservation (Falk, Heimlich, & Bronnenkant, 2008;Falk, Reinhard, Vernon, Bronnenkant, Deans, & Heimlich, 2007;Heimlich, Bronnenkant, Witgert, & Falk, 2004). This critique of that critique will show that Marino et al. seriously misrepresent both the intent of the research and the methods used. The methods used by Falk and his colleagues were consistent with current, accepted research practice and their conclusions regarding impact were congruent with a growing body of scientific research (National Research Council, 2009;Ballantyne et al., 2007) showing that visits to zoos and aquariums almost always result in enhanced scientific understanding and strengthened beliefs in the value of nature conservation.

The Educational Claims of Zoos: Where Do We Go from Here?

“…Dawson and Jensen [] are equally critical, stating that “Moreover, Falk et al did not develop valid and convincing evidence of ‘what visitors did in the institution' or of ‘long‐term meaning' (p.10); as such, this headline conclusion from the MIRP study is questionable at best” (p.136). Falk et al [] provide a defense of their research, claiming that Marino et al misrepresented the intent of the research and the methods used. Falk et al [] conclude by criticizing Marino et al's more general assertion regarding the universal lack of evidence regarding zoo visitor impact, stating that they “seriously question the authors' [Marino et al] use of this single, flawed critique, however, as the basis for their sweeping conclusion that there is no evidence that zoos and aquariums impact their visitors” (p.418).…”

“…Falk et al [] provide a defense of their research, claiming that Marino et al misrepresented the intent of the research and the methods used. Falk et al [] conclude by criticizing Marino et al's more general assertion regarding the universal lack of evidence regarding zoo visitor impact, stating that they “seriously question the authors' [Marino et al] use of this single, flawed critique, however, as the basis for their sweeping conclusion that there is no evidence that zoos and aquariums impact their visitors” (p.418). However, it is likely that some damage will have been done to the credibility of the original work (rightly or wrongly) simply because the work has been being targeted by published criticism.…”

Fantasy or Fiction: Waking Up to the Public's Lack of Understanding

“…zoos and aquariums each year, and research suggests that they come away better informed, feeling more connected to nature, and seeing themselves as part of the solution in conservation (Falk et al, 2007). …”

Who is Visiting the Zagreb Zoo: Visitors’ Characteristics and Motivation

“…They showed that zoos in general give people a chance to observe wildlife that they may otherwise never see (Carr and Cohen, 2011;Randler et al, 2007). Visitors believe zoos play an important role in conservation, animal care and education, and that they experience a stronger connection to nature as a result of their visit Carr and Cohen, 2011;Falk et al, 2007). During a three year period, Falk et al (2007) studied more than 5 500 visitors in 12 zoos and aquariums using various quantitative and qualitative methods, like questionnaires, interviews and tracking studies.…”

“…Visitors believe zoos play an important role in conservation, animal care and education, and that they experience a stronger connection to nature as a result of their visit Carr and Cohen, 2011;Falk et al, 2007). During a three year period, Falk et al (2007) studied more than 5 500 visitors in 12 zoos and aquariums using various quantitative and qualitative methods, like questionnaires, interviews and tracking studies. They found that zoos and aquariums can enhance visitors' knowledge and understandings of wildlife and conservation, as well as their con-nection to nature, prompting individuals to reconsider their role in environmental problems and conservation actions.…”