Introduction
At The Wildlife Society Annual Conference that I’m sure you’re all tired of hearing about, I met an intelligent and charming young woman named Charmaine Pedrozo. Charmaine is a master’s student at North Carolina State University, and she was presenting a poster on a section of her master’s thesis.
This segment of Charmaine’s thesis dealt with people’s emotional responses to wildlife. Using an adapted tool called the Mood Meter (which Charmaine will describe below), she examined how participants responded to two species of North American wildlife: deer and coyotes (Canis latrans). I was intrigued by Charmaine’s research, so I asked her to participate in a Q&A for this blog. She graciously agreed.
Q&A
First, please tell us a little bit about yourself. How did you initially become interested in wildlife conservation?
When I was a freshman at the University of Florida, I did not know what I wanted to pursue for my career. What I did know was that I wanted to do something with animals, since I spent a lot of time volunteering at local shelters and fostering kittens.
I started exploring career options by joining the Marine Biology Club, where I met friends who introduced me to another club: the Wildlife Society. In this club, I learned about the Wildlife Ecology and Conservation major, and have loved everything I learned since then! I got to explore Florida through various class field trips – learning all about local plants, animals, and ecosystems – and I would say that these experiences out in nature made me feel connected to the environment. I thus developed a passion for conserving nature: especially wild animals.
Building off the previous question, what made you decide to focus on the human dimensions of conservation in general, and people’s emotional reactions to wildlife in particular?
a.) Human Dimensions in General
In relation to wildlife, I completed various research positions where I collected data in the field. I conducted research on: snakes and frogs in Everglades National Park, northern mockingbirds on the University of Florida campus, and insects in several national parks on the west coast (and Peru).
Despite enjoying all that I did, I had a hard time explaining to family and friends exactly what I was doing and why it was important. That meant that I would also have a hard time explaining what I did to someone whom I did not even know: the general public.
With that, I thought that public communication skills were something I should develop so I could effectively communicate my knowledge to people who were not in my field. Therefore, for my Master’s program, I decided to pursue a project where I could focus on the human dimensions of conservation, and look more closely at people’s connections to wildlife and the environment.
b.) Emotional Reactions
One of the factors I am looking into is people’s emotions towards wildlife. Research has shown that human-wildlife encounters are emotionally-charged events. When you are hiking and suddenly come across a snake in your path, what do you automatically do? You jump because you got startled and did not expect to see a snake in front of you. In addition to that, you probably automatically assume that the snake is dangerous (as media almost always portray snakes as evil!), so you end up sweating with a racing heart.
Obviously, other people would react differently to a snake: some would be calmer, and some would even be happier (i.e. herpetologists). The key point is that people’s emotional responses to wildlife provide glimpses into how they truly feel towards a particular species. This, in turn, can affect how people think a certain wildlife population should be managed.
Please describe your research a little bit. What is the Mood Meter, and how does it work?
One of the ways that we think emotional responses towards wildlife could be measured is by adapting Yale University’s Mood Meter.
The Mood Meter is a tool designed by the Yale Center for Emotional Intelligence to increase people’s emotional intelligence. It is divided into four quadrants: red, blue, green, and yellow – with each color representing a different set of feelings. Red feelings are high energy, low pleasantness. Blue feelings are low energy, low pleasantness. Green feelings are low energy, high pleasantness. Yellow feelings are high energy, high pleasantness. For the purposes of our research project, we only chose emotions that we thought could be applicable in describing how people would feel towards wildlife.
A visual representation of the Mood Meter as adapted by Ms. Pedrozo and her colleagues. Image © Charmaine Pedrozo & Dr. Lincoln Larson. 
Another visual representation of the adapted Mood Meter. Image © Charmaine Pedrozo & Dr. Lincoln Larson.
In a survey to determine whether the Mood Meter could be successfully applied to wildlife species, we asked visitors from the North Carolina Museum of Natural Sciences to answer a short survey about how they felt and what they thought about two common mammals in North Carolina: deer and coyote. To determine how they felt towards a specific species, they could click anywhere in the adapted Mood Meter. In the same survey, the visitors also answered questions regarding their wildlife value orientations, and were given the opportunity to type why they chose to answer the ways they did.
Note: The Mood Meter is a side project for my thesis. My overall thesis is looking at the broader impacts of citizen science participation through a project called Candid Critters: a wildlife camera-trapping project conducted throughout the state of North Carolina.
What were the results of your study? Specifically, were there any differences between the ways adults and children responded to the species in your investigation?
As the Mood Meter has never been applied to a wildlife context before, we compared people’s responses to already validated measurements such as the wildlife value orientation scale (anthropocentric to ecocentric) and bipolar scales (positive:negative and tense:relaxed). Additionally, respondents were able to clarify their answers through open-ended responses.
The results are the same whether it is with adults or with kids. Data analysis shows that the Mood Meter could effectively measure people’s pleasant/unpleasant emotions towards wildlife species, but not the intensity of emotions.
A possible explanation is that an emotion’s intensity depends on the situation/encounter. For example, an animal’s distance can affect how intense an emotion can be – an angry coyote located far away is a lot less threatening than an angry coyote only a few feet away. On the other hand, people’s positive or negative feelings towards a wildlife species can stay constant. Using the same example, no matter how far away the coyote is, if a person does not like coyotes, s/he will never claim to like them.
What would you say are the most important implications of your study?
When conducting research on people’s emotional responses towards wildlife, the Mood Meter is an effective tool. The adapted Mood Meter could be used to predict behavioral responses towards wildlife, which could give wildlife agencies glimpses into stakeholders’ feelings about management decisions regarding certain wildlife populations. In addition, educators can use the adapted Mood Meter to gauge how children feel towards wildlife species. This can be factored into lessons related to animals; that is, children will be more engaged in lessons with animals they already like.
Note: The adaptation of the Mood Meter is still in progress and could be better improved in the future.
Closing Thoughts
I’d like to sincerely thank Charmaine Pedrozo for setting aside time to participate in this Q&A. Best of luck with your thesis, Charmaine!
The Jaguar 
Wow! Really interesting Josh. The mood meter is an ingenious idea.
One tangible benefit it can definitely provide is help conservationists and governments improve marketing around animals perceived to be threatening by the general populace. The overall conservation benefits could be humongous.
But wouldn’t the results of the mood meter change based on so many factors – the respondents experience with wildlife, their age, awareness and so on? Could this be used only as a generic assessment instead of a definitive indicator of public opinion? Are there any ideas currently about how to fine-tune the meter for the future?
Also, could you please provide some information about the wildlife value orientation scale? Thanks.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes, the Mood Meter could serve as a great general diagnostic for stakeholders’ opinions towards wildlife. It might not be as fine-tuned an assessment as other measures, for the reasons you pointed out, but in many cases an important indicator of tolerance towards a species is peoples’ beliefs about it. In other words, whether the animal in question is “good” or “bad.” The Mood Meter could likely help to provide data on the general “goodness” of a species, which might be enough for decisions that have to be made NOW. Obviously, the ideal situation would be to have the time to get to understand stakeholders’ views in much more detail.
I’ll get you some links to the wildlife value orientation scale as soon as I’m able :)
LikeLiked by 1 person
Great! Thanks :)
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hi Nisha, I did a quick search for “Wildlife Value Orientation Scale” and everything I found was very sciency – nothing that appears to be specifically for the public. Here’s a link to a study that is freely available, and looks like it might have some good info:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/250613584_Wildlife_value_orientations_A_conceptual_and_measurement_approach
I might also do a post about Wildlife Value Orientations in the future: reading a bunch of papers on the topic and then synthesizing them for the public. It’ll take me at least a month though, if not longer.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Sure not a problem. That’ll be of great help. Thanks.
On another note, I’ve recently published a new post about how female ducks prevent rapes by wilfully changing their physiology. It was really an eye opener. Do check it out when you have the time.
Here’s the link https://storiessowild.com/2019/02/05/the-mysterious-case-of-the-corkscrew-penis-and-the-inverted-vagina/
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks Nisha! I saw that you published a new post, and I’ll check it out soon!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks :)
LikeLiked by 1 person
Oh, this is cool!
We measure emotional response at my work, but toward random (and often useless) things. This is great tho!
I must say, my emotional response, just to seeing that snake pic was to nearly run away, screaming… :D
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes, it is cool! What sorts of emotional responses do you measure at work? Are they related to products that people are supposed to buy?
Haha, that’s partially why I included that snake pic; I knew it would get a reaction out of people, and I’m evil :D
LikeLiked by 1 person
Haha, yea, good old market research. The classic “how happy does this roll of toilet paper make you feel?” and such 😂
Evil indeed. What’s next? A snake with his spider buddy? 🙈
LikeLiked by 1 person
That toiler paper makes me feel a lot better down there than a pineapple would. If it wasn’t for market research, maybe we’d be using pineapples for toiler paper? Or nails? So there’s still value in what you do :)
Lol, have you heard of the spidra? It’s a cobra with eight legs that can climb walls.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Haha, now that you put it that way… i certainly wouldn’t like a pineapple either :D
LOL. Also, ew :D
LikeLiked by 1 person
:D
LikeLike
Fascinating! Thanks for posting.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks! I’m glad you liked it :)
LikeLike
Her research is spot on. I had never thought about that before, about how our emotional reaction to animals might make us not so very keen on conservation efforts to their benefit. The snake example got me!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yep, and this is only a small part of Charmaine’s research! Me like snakes :D
LikeLike
You. Like. Snakes? 👀
I really want to like them. Truly. It would make my life as an outdoorsy woman in Georgia so much easier. But you see…in my country we don’t really have snakes and the ones we have are usually tiny or blind and none are venemous.
But you see…Georgia…Georgia snakes are venomous. 6 of them! 👀
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes, I like snakes very much! I don’t know much about them, but I hope to learn more one day.
I think there’s only one or two venomous snake species in Ohio though, and none of them live as far north as me. So my perception may be skewed..
LikeLiked by 1 person
That’s one of the reasons I would move north—to get away from the snakes, lol. I felt so safe hiking in Alaska! I would rather see a bear than a snake.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Haha! A brown bear is probably more dangerous than any snake!
LikeLike
I only saw black bears, but I’m sure they’re all dangerous in close quarters. I saw the black bears from at least 40 feet away.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yea, it’s best to keep your distance from any bear. Black bears tend to be pretty timid though, but they should still be treated with respect. In other words, don’t run up in their faces to take pictures like many people do at Yellowstone.
LikeLiked by 1 person
People actually do that? Tristan and I made a U-turn and marched right back up the hill lol
LikeLiked by 1 person
Oh yes, Yellowstone tourists are notoriously dumb and disrespectful. Do a quick Google search for “stupid Yellowstone tourists” and you’ll find plenty of examples!
Walking AWAY from a bear is usually the best move.
LikeLike
LoL. I don’t have to. I’ve seen them in the news. Falling over steep inclines taking selfies and such. But, I didn’t think of the bears 😆😅
Also, I finally found your review on Amazon. Thanks for taking the time to do a full write-up on the book, even though you ruined my perfect 5-star streak 🤣😂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Lol I felt bad about breaking your 5-star streak, but I had to be honest! People can spot ‘fluffy’ reviews. Besides, I wanted me review to be constructive in some way. The Moreau Witches was amazing for your first novel, and you have the potential to produce even better books in the future.
LikeLike
LoL. The Moreau Witches is book number 39, not the first novel. Several of the others have also been through the beta review process, the revisions and the editing. I just chose not to make them publicly available. So, by that standard, I’m way behind where I should be after 18 years of writing novels. Ah well! Can’t win them all! 🙃
LikeLiked by 1 person
Number 39?! I thought it was your first? I’m not sure how I got so confused. If The Moreau Witches if your first publicly-released novel though, then you could call it your first “official” book.
LikeLike
I’ve never called it my first or debut novel. Check the author interview at the back of the book. 🙃
LikeLiked by 1 person
Oops…
LikeLike