Animal Activity and Visitor Learning at the Zoo
Abstract
This study investigated the effect animal activity had on information visitors attended to at three bear exhibits. Attention was used as an indirect measure of what information visitors are consciously processing, or learning. It was hypothesized that visitors would be more likely to attend to specific information about animal behavior when bears were active rather than when inactive or out of sight. Visitor conversations were recorded during observations of polar, sloth and spectacled bears. Conversation was coded according to its content (animal-directed, human-focused, behavior, other) and to the corresponding behavior of the bear (active, inactive, pacing, not visible). The energy level of the activity was also considered. The hypothesis was supported for the polar bears, but less so for the other two bears. Behavior conversation was highest and human-directed conversation was lowest in the presence of highly animated polar bears. Behavior content was limited in the presence of the less animated sloth and spectacled bears. However, it was still significantly less frequent, and human content more frequent, when the sloth and spectacled bears were pacing and/or not visible. Therefore, what visitors attended to was influenced by what the bears were doing. The findings suggest that animated activity (rather than the more broadly defined ‘activity’) elicits the most visitor attention to behavior, and this in turn potentially facilitates visitor learning.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
A positive visitor experience as a result of viewing animals engaged in natural, active behaviours has been shown to facilitate learning in zoos.
“Conversely, a positive visitor experience as a result of viewing animals engaged in natural, active behaviours has been shown to facilitate learning in zoos [41,43].”
From The visitor effect on zoo animals: implications and opportunities for zoo animal welfare (2019) · cites this paper as [43]
Cites
Effects of environmental enrichment on reproduction
Carlstead, K., & Shepherdson, D. (1994) · Zoo Biology · doi:10.1002/zoo.1430130507 · Cited by 202 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Animal–visitor interactions in the modern zoo: Conflicts and interventions
Fernandez, E. J., Tamborski, M. A., Pickens, S. R., & Timberlake, W. (2009) · Applied Animal Behaviour Science · doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2009.06.002 · Cited by 311 · see citing works
The visitor effect on zoo animals: implications and opportunities for zoo animal welfare
Sherwen, S. L., & Hemsworth, P. H. (2019) · Animals · doi:10.3390/ani9060366 · Cited by 267 · see citing works
“Conversely, a positive visitor experience as a result of viewing animals engaged in natural, active behaviours has been shown to facilitate learning in zoos [41,43].”
BackgroundDoyle, C. (2018) · The Palgrave Handbook of Practical Animal Ethics · doi:10.1057/978-1-137-36671-9_12 · Cited by 5 · see citing works
- Authors
- Altman, J. D.
- Affiliations
- Washburn University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Altman, Joanne D.
- Venue
- Anthrozoös
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 1998-03
- Volume
- 11
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 12-21
- ISSN
- 0892-7936 (ISSN-L)
- 1753-0377
- OpenAlex
- W1981926853
- Cited by
- 80
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2025: 3 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 4
- FWCI
- 22.79
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Anthrozoös (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Museology › Museums and Cultural Heritage
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Animal and Plant Science Education
- Health Sciences › Veterinary › Small Animals › Animal Behavior and Welfare Studies
- Keywords
- animal activity, visitor attention, polar bear, sloth bear, spectacled bear, animal behavior, zoo animal welfare
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