English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Understanding tolerance for wildlife requires accounting for the multiple cognitive antecedents of this concept and its contextual factors. We examined whether direct experience was associated with four antecedent dimensions of tolerance for black bears (antipathy, connection, lethal control [damage], lethal control [danger to self, pets, and economics]), both directly and indirectly via risk perception, self-assessed knowledge, and factual knowledge. We collected data using intercept surveys at trailheads in western Oregon, United States ( n =  210). Risk perception was most strongly related to antipathy (cost-related beliefs) and connection (benefit-related beliefs) toward black bears. Self-assessed knowledge was most strongly associated with an individual’s assessment that bears are a nuisance (lethal control [damage] and a safety concern [danger to self, pets, and economics]). Direct experience was related to all four antecedents, whereas factual knowledge was not related to any dimension. Identifying drivers of tolerance can inform actionable recommendations that promote tolerance for wildlife.

Modeling cognitive antecedents of tolerance for black bears: The roles of direct experience, knowledge, and risk perceptions