IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0216777.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Perception of the ethical acceptability of live prey feeding to aquatic species kept in captivity

Author

Listed:
  • Lucy Marshall
  • Wanda D McCormick
  • Gavan M Cooke

Abstract

Previous research into public perceptions of live prey feeding has been focused on terrestrial animals. The reasons for this likely relate to the difficulty humans have in being compassionate to animals who are phylogenetically distantly related. In order to test these assumptions, the general public (two groups; one who had just visited an aquarium; and one group who had just visited a zoo), aquarium professionals in the UK/US and terrestrial zoo animal professionals (UK) were investigated to see how they would differ in their responses when asked about feeding various live aquatic animals to one another. Likert based surveys were used to obtain data face to face and via online social media. Demographics in previous research identified a lower acceptance of live prey feeding by females, however in aquatic animals this was not reflected. Instead, separations in perception were seen to exist between participants dependent on whether they had just visited a zoo or aquarium, or worked with animals.

Suggested Citation

  • Lucy Marshall & Wanda D McCormick & Gavan M Cooke, 2019. "Perception of the ethical acceptability of live prey feeding to aquatic species kept in captivity," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(8), pages 1-17, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0216777
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0216777
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0216777
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0216777&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0216777?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0216777. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.