Cited by 9Museums and Cultural HeritageAnimal Behavior and Welfare StudiesAnimal and Plant Science Education

Romancing the celluloid nature: a review of American zoo exhibits, part I

Kawata, Ken·2011·Der Zoologische Garten

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.zoolgart.2011.08.002

Cites

31 of 31 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Despite a trend towards exhibit naturalism, the dynamic complexity of the natural world has thus far proved challenging to replicate.

    “Despite a trend towards exhibit naturalism, the dynamic complexity of the natural world has thus far proved challenging to replicate (Kawata, 2011).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

3 of the 34 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kawata, K.
Corresponding author
Kawata, Ken
Venue
Der Zoologische Garten
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2011-01
Volume
80
Issue
5
Pages
239-253
ISSN
0044-5169 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1967695465
Cited by
9
References
34
Citations by year
2021: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 2 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 2
FWCI
22.68
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Der Zoologische Garten (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Museology › Museums and Cultural Heritage
  • Health Sciences › Veterinary › Small Animals › Animal Behavior and Welfare Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Animal and Plant Science Education
Keywords
zoo exhibits, captive animal welfare, anthropomorphism, anthropocentrism, large mammals

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review