Animals in Dangerous Postures Enhance Learning, but Decrease Willingness to Protect Animals

Pavol Prokop; Jana Fančovičová

doi:10.12973/eurasia.2017.01000a

Full Text (PDF)

Pavol Prokop ¹ ² ^* , Jana Fančovičová ¹

More Detail

¹ Department of Biology, Faculty of Education, Trnava University, Priemyselná 4, 918 43, Trnava, Slovakia² Institute of Zoology, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Dúbravská cesta 9, 845 06 Bratislava, Slovakia^* Corresponding Author

EJMSTE proudly congratulates its 1000^th paper with this paper.

Abstract

Animals are the most prevalent subjects for photographs in science textbooks. Many of them are potentially dangerous to humans, and visual exposure to potential threat can influence learning outcomes as well as emotional attachment to these animals. We experimentally investigated the influence of animal posture (aggressive-looking vs. neutral-looking) on 10 – 13-year-old pupils’ information retention and willingness to support the protection of these animals. We found that information placed below aggressive-looking animals was retained significantly better than information placed below neutral-looking animals. Survival-relevant information was retained better than survival-irrelevant information. Willingness to protect aggressive-looking animals was lower than willingness to protect neutral-looking animals. This suggests that aggressive-looking pictures receive stronger attention, but do not distract pupils from learning. Aggressive animals may have a negative influence on animal conservation efforts.

Keywords

animals
adaptive memory
pupils
pictures

License

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Article Type: Research Article

EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Ed, Volume 13, Issue 9, September 2017, 6069-6077

https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2017.01000a

Publication date: 23 Aug 2017

Article Views: 3244

Article Downloads: 1418

Open Access References How to cite this article

References

Balas, B., & Momsen, J. L. (2014). Attention “blinks” differently for plants and animals. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 13(3), 437-443.
Barrett, H. C., & Broesch, J. (2012). Prepared social learning about dangerous animals in children. Evolution and Human Behavior, 33(5), 499-508.
Bjerke, T., & Østdahl, T. (2004). Animal-related attitudes and activities in an urban population. Anthrozoös, 17(2), 109-129.
Carney, R. N., & Levin, J. R. (2002). Pictorial illustrations still improve students’ learning from text. Educational Psychology Review, 14(1), 5-26.
Ceríaco, L. M. (2012). Human attitudes towards herpetofauna: The influence of folklore and negative values on the conservation of amphibians and reptiles in Portugal. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine, 8(1), 8.
Gunnthorsdottir, A. (2001). Physical attractiveness of an animal species as a decision factor for its preservation. Anthrozoös, 14(4), 204-215.
Harp, S. F., & Mayer, R. E. (1997). The role of interest in learning from scientific text and illustrations: On the distinction between emotional interest and cognitive interest. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89(1), 92-102.
Herzog, H. A. (2007). Gender differences in human–animal interactions: A review. Anthrozoös, 20(1), 7-21.
Hidi, S., & Baird, W. (1988). Strategies for increasing text-based interest and students’ recall of expository texts. Reading Research Quarterly, 23(4), 465-483.
Chapman, H. A., Johannes, K., Poppenk, J. L., Moscovitch, M., & Anderson, A. K. (2013). Evidence for the differential salience of disgust and fear in episodic memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 142(4), 1100-1112.
Johansen, J. P., Cain, C. K., Ostroff, L. E., & LeDoux, J. E. (2011). Molecular mechanisms of fear learning and memory. Cell, 147(3), 509-524.
Johansson, M., Sjöström, M., Karlsson, J., & Brännlund, R. (2012). Is human fear affecting public willingness to pay for the management and conservation of large carnivores?. Society & Natural Resources, 25(6), 610-620.
Knight, A. J. (2008). “Bats, snakes and spiders, Oh my!” How aesthetic and negativistic attitudes, and other concepts predict support for species protection. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 28(1), 94-103.
Leivas Pozzer, L., & Roth, W. M. (2003). Prevalence, function, and structure of photographs in high school biology textbooks. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(10), 1089-1114.
Lenzner, A., Schnotz, W., & Müller, A. (2013). The role of decorative pictures in learning. Instructional Science, 41(5), 811-831.
Levie, W. H., & Lentz, R. (1982). Effects of text illustrations: A review of research. ECTJ, 30(4), 195-232.
Levin, J. R. (1987). On empirically validating functions of pictures in prose. In: Willows, D.M. and Houghton, H.A., Eds., The Psychology of Illustration: Basic Research. Springer, New York, 51-85.
Lindemann‐Matthies, P. (2005). ‘Loveable’mammals and ‘lifeless’ plants: how children’s interest in common local organisms can be enhanced through observation of nature. International Journal of Science Education, 27(6), 655-677.
Link‐Pérez, M. A., Dollo, V. H., Weber, K. M., & Schussler, E. E. (2010). What’s in a Name: Differential labelling of plant and animal photographs in two nationally syndicated elementary science textbook series. International Journal of Science Education, 32(9), 1227-1242.
LoBue, V., & DeLoache, J. S. (2008). Detecting the snake in the grass: Attention to fear-relevant stimuli by adults and young children. Psychological Science, 19(3), 284-289.
LoBue, V., Bloom Pickard, M., Sherman, K., Axford, C., & DeLoache, J. S. (2013). Young children’s interest in live animals. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 31(1), 57-69.
Masataka, N., Hayakawa, S., & Kawai, N. (2010). Human young children as well as adults demonstrate ‘superior’rapid snake detection when typical striking posture is displayed by the snake. PLoS One, 5(11), e15122.
McGaugh, J. L. (2000). Memory--a century of consolidation. Science, 287(5451), 248-251.
Nairne, J. S. (2010). Adaptive memory: Evolutionary constraints on remembering. Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 53, 1-32.
Nairne, J. S., & Pandeirada, J. N. (2010). Adaptive memory: Ancestral priorities and the mnemonic value of survival processing. Cognitive Psychology, 61(1), 1-22.
Nairne, J. S., Pandeirada, J. N., Gregory, K. J., & Van Arsdall, J. E. (2009). Adaptive memory: Fitness relevance and the hunter-gatherer mind. Psychological Science, 20(6), 740-746.
Nairne, J. S., Thompson, S. R., & Pandeirada, J. N. (2007). Adaptive memory: survival processing enhances retention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 33(2), 263-273.
New, J., Cosmides, L., & Tooby, J. (2007). Category-specific attention for animals reflects ancestral priorities, not expertise. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 104(42), 16598-16603.
Öhman, A., Flykt, A., & Esteves, F. (2001). Emotion drives attention: detecting the snake in the grass. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 130(3), 466-478.
Penkunas, M. J., & Coss, R. G. (2013). Rapid detection of visually provocative animals by preschool children and adults. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 114(4), 522-536.
Prokop, P., & Fančovičová, J. (2010). Perceived body condition is associated with fear of a large carnivore predator in humans. Annales Zoologici Fennici, 47(6), 417-425.
Prokop, P., & Fančovičová, J. (2013a). Does colour matter? The influence of animal warning colouration in human emotions and willingness to protect them. Animal Conservation, 16(4), 458-466.
Prokop, P., & Fančovičová, J. (2013b). Self-protection versus disease avoidance. Journal of Individual Differences, 34(1), 15-23.
Prokop, P., & Fančovičová, J. (2014). Seeing coloured fruits: Utilization of the theory of adaptive memory in teaching botany. Journal of Biological Education, 48(3), 127-132.
Roth, W. M., Bowen, G. M., & McGinn, M. K. (1999). Differences in graph‐related practices between high school biology textbooks and scientific ecology journals. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(9), 977-1019.
Rubens, P. (2002). Science and technical writing: A manual of style. Routledge, New York & London.
Sanchez, C. A., & Wiley, J. (2006). An examination of the seductive details effect in terms of working memory capacity. Memory & Cognition, 34(2), 344-355.
Schraw, G., & Lehman, S. (2001). Situational interest: A review of the literature and directions for future research. Educational Psychology Review, 13(1), 23-52.
Simion, F., Regolin, L., & Bulf, H. (2008). A predisposition for biological motion in the newborn baby. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 105(2), 809-813.
Soga, M., Gaston, K. J., Yamaura, Y., Kurisu, K., & Hanaki, K. (2016). Both direct and vicarious experiences of nature affect children’s willingness to conserve biodiversity. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 13(6), 529.
Souchet, J., & Aubret, F. (2016). Revisiting the fear of snakes in children: the role of aposematic signalling. Scientific reports, 6, 37619.
Štefaniková, S., & Prokop, P. (2015). Do we believe pictures more or spoken words? How specific information affects how students learn about animals. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 11(4), 725-733.
Tolman, M. N., Hardy, G. R., & Sudweeks, R. R. (1998). Current science textbook use in the United States. Science and Children, 35(8), 22-25.
Treves, A., & Naughton-Treves, L. (1999). Risk and opportunity for humans coexisting with large carnivores. Journal of Human Evolution, 36(3), 275-282.
Treves, A., & Palmqvist, P. (2007). Reconstructing hominin interactions with mammalian carnivores (6.0–1.8 Ma). In: Nekaris, K. A. I. & Gursky, S. L. (Eds.), Primate anti-predator strategies. Springer, New York, USA, 355-381.
Vollmeyer, R., & Rheinberg, F. (2006). Motivational effects on self-regulated learning with different tasks. Educational Psychology Review, 18(3), 239-253.
Yorzinski, J. L., Penkunas, M. J., Platt, M. L., & Coss, R. G. (2014). Dangerous animals capture and maintain attention in humans. Evolutionary Psychology, 12(3), 534-548.

How to cite this article

APA

Prokop, P., & Fančovičová, J. (2017). Animals in Dangerous Postures Enhance Learning, but Decrease Willingness to Protect Animals. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 13(9), 6069-6077. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2017.01000a

Vancouver

Prokop P, Fančovičová J. Animals in Dangerous Postures Enhance Learning, but Decrease Willingness to Protect Animals. EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Ed. 2017;13(9):6069-77. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2017.01000a

AMA

Prokop P, Fančovičová J. Animals in Dangerous Postures Enhance Learning, but Decrease Willingness to Protect Animals. EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Ed. 2017;13(9), 6069-6077. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2017.01000a

Chicago

Prokop, Pavol, and Jana Fančovičová. "Animals in Dangerous Postures Enhance Learning, but Decrease Willingness to Protect Animals". Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education 2017 13 no. 9 (2017): 6069-6077. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2017.01000a

Harvard

Prokop, P., and Fančovičová, J. (2017). Animals in Dangerous Postures Enhance Learning, but Decrease Willingness to Protect Animals. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 13(9), pp. 6069-6077. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2017.01000a

MLA

Prokop, Pavol et al. "Animals in Dangerous Postures Enhance Learning, but Decrease Willingness to Protect Animals". Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, vol. 13, no. 9, 2017, pp. 6069-6077. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2017.01000a