The DOI matches its Crossref record; 35 of the 35 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Animal-related attitudes and activities in an urban population
Abstract
We surveyed residents' attitudes toward common urban animals and their participation in animal-oriented activities in the city of Trondheim, Norway. The results show that people most like small birds, squirrels, butterflies, hedgehogs, ducks, geese and dogs, and dislike bats, snails, invertebrate species, mice and rats. Birds of prey, foxes, cats, bumblebees, magpies, pigeons, badgers, gulls, grasshoppers and crows received a neutral ranking. Generally, females more than males liked the popular and neutral species, while males more than females liked the less-preferred animals. A negative association was found between age of respondents and preferences for birds of prey, dogs, cats, badgers, bats, mice and rats. This relation was positive for some invertebrate species, and small and medium-sized birds. A positive correlation was found between educational level of the respondents and preference scores for most of the species listed. Watching television programs about nature (59% often/very often) and watching/feeding birds (41%) were the most frequently reported animal-related activities. When walking in the neighborhood, important animal-related motives for doing this were to observe birds (42%) and to observe mammals (34%). Interest in bird observation and television programs about nature increased with increasing age. Few respondents reported experiencing problems with wildlife, but dogs and cats were more often (36%) considered to create problems. These results indicate that wildlife plays an important role in shaping urban residents' daily experiences, and that both animals and their habitats should have a higher priority in urban planning and management.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The restorative benefits of nature: toward an integrative framework
Kaplan, S. (1995) · Journal of Environmental Psychology · doi:10.1016/0272-4944(95)90001-2 · Cited by 6,923
Stress recovery during exposure to natural and urban environments
Ulrich, R. S., Simons, R. F., Losito, B. D., Fiorito, E., Miles, M. A., & Zelson, M. (1991) · Journal of Environmental Psychology · doi:10.1016/s0272-4944(05)80184-7 · Cited by 5,990
Dunlap, R. E., Van Liere, K. D., Mertig, A. G., & Jones, R. E. (2000) · Journal of Social Issues · doi:10.1111/0022-4537.00176 · Cited by 5,678
(2011) · Wildlife Society Bulletin · doi:10.1002/(issn)1938-5463a · Cited by 5,545
(1993) · Cited by 1,573
The value of life: biological diversity and human society
(1996) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.33-5189 · Cited by 621
Values and Perceptions of Invertebrates
KELLERT, S. R. (1993) · Conservation Biology · doi:10.1046/j.1523-1739.1993.740845.x · Cited by 555
Wildlife and Recreationists: Coexistence through Management and Research
Doerr, P. D., Knight, R. L., & Gutzwiller, K. J. (1997) · The Journal of Wildlife Management · doi:10.2307/3802624 · Cited by 523
Animal Spaces, Beastly Places: New Geographies of Human–Animal Relations
Fudge, E. (2001) · Radical philosophy · Cited by 517
ATTITUDES, KNOWLEDGE, AND BEHAVIORS TOWARD WILDLIFE AS AFFECTED BY GENDER
Christensen, R. (1987) · Cited by 352
Cited by
Human–wildlife interactions in urban areas: a review of conflicts, benefits and opportunities
Soulsbury, C. D., & White, P. C. L. (2016) · Wildlife Research · doi:10.1071/wr14229 · Cited by 565
Vegetation density of urban parks and perceived appropriateness for recreation
Bjerke, T., Østdahl, T., Thrane, C., & Strumse, E. (2006) · Urban Forestry & Urban Greening · doi:10.1016/j.ufug.2006.01.006 · Cited by 279
Self-citationPet Face: Mechanisms Underlying Human-Animal Relationships
Borgi, M., & Cirulli, F. (2016) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00298 · Cited by 129
Metadata
- Authors
- Bjerke, T., & Østdahl, T.
- Venue
- Anthrozoös
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2004-06
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 109-129
- ISSN
- 0892-7936 (ISSN-L)
- 1753-0377
- OpenAlex
- W2009467557
- Cited by
- 254
- References
- 35
- FWCI
- 2.71
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Animal-related attitudes and activities in an urban population. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2752/089279304786991783
- The paper
- Bjerke, T., & Østdahl, T. (2004). Animal-related attitudes and activities in an urban population. Anthrozoös. https://doi.org/10.2752/089279304786991783
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.